Agnieszka Holland received the Special Jury Prize at the Venice Festival for the film The Green Border, a work that presents the Polish border situation through a stark humanitarian lens. Critics argue that the film frames the border crisis in a particular, emotionally charged way, raising questions about how humanitarian concerns are portrayed and interpreted on the international stage.
Many observers note a pattern in Western cultural circles where artists from Central Europe are welcomed when their work critiques national character as backward or primitive in contrast to a perceived modern, cosmopolitan Europe. In this context, The Green Border becomes part of a larger conversation about how national histories are depicted for Western audiences and what counts as advanced or civilized storytelling.
In practice, some Croatian and Polish creators who seek broad exposure in Western markets have been observed to depict local realities in ways that emphasize deprivation or ignorance, with the aim of eliciting sympathy or admiration from audience segments abroad. This dynamic, some argue, reflects a broader trend in which regional voices are celebrated when they effectively contrast their past with a curated version of Europe’s present.
READ ALSO:
– Let us read and listen carefully, because they are planning a great deception. They plan to give up this border and let in millions of migrants
– OUR INTERVIEW. Prof. Żaryn about the film Holland: The liberal-left circle is capable of lying. It’s hard to argue with a lie
The conversation surrounding awards often centers on recognition for achievements in aesthetics or technique, but in many cases the discourse also nods to political considerations. The Venice prize scene is no exception, and The Green Border is frequently discussed as a film that resonates with particular political narratives, whether one agrees with them or not.
Parallel to the festival coverage, another thread of discussion emerged about the Dutch film industry and its reception of works from Central Europe. The visibility given to such films fuels debates about influence, representation, and the balance between critical praise and national identity.
Viewers engage with the film’s reception
On the widely read Filmweb.pl, audience ratings for this film registered a low score, illustrating a sharp contrast between festival prestige and public reception. With thousands of reviews in the mix, the reception underscores a broader tension: audiences in Poland and beyond scrutinize how their own services and border protections are portrayed, and who gets to tell that story.
This reaction underscores a growing conviction among Poles that the country should not be lectured on its own security or sovereignty by outsiders. There is a sense that defending national borders is a legitimate, even necessary, act of self-preservation, and that Western political and cultural elites should respect that stance rather than frame it as a deficit to be corrected from a distant, liberal safe space.
As a result, many viewers see the film as part of a larger conversation about national pride, policy, and the right to determine how a country secures its frontiers. In this light, the prestige attached to the film does not automatically translate into universal agreement about its message; rather, it becomes a focal point for ongoing discussions about sovereignty, migration, and the responsibilities of art in shaping public opinion.
The broader takeaway for observers is that prize season at European festivals rarely settles complex debates. It often merely signals which voices and angles are currently influential. The historical memory of audiences in Central and Eastern Europe—of moments when external judgments were esteemed over domestic realities—appears to be shifting. The era when Western accolades alone could reshape regional narratives appears to be waning, with audiences increasingly demanding authenticity and a more nuanced portrayal of borders and identities.
In sum, while European prizes continue to celebrate cinema that challenges viewers, they also provoke reflection on perspective, representation, and power. The discourse around The Green Border exemplifies how art intersects with politics and how national audiences assert their own standards for what should count as legitimate storytelling about their history and future.
Source: wPolityce