/Prolog/
Life beats movies—because we can’t afford them.
/Scene 1/
Where there is nothing, even God does not ask…
In a country where declarations sustain culture more than budgets, the National Film Center reminds us yearly that Moldova still finances films. This year, with 13.3 million lei (€678,500), the Center financed exactly nine films. But there’s a catch: only two are national productions, while seven are minority co-productions. The hope? That foreigners might do better than we and bring results. Moldova’s film money goes abroad, and the rights belong to foreign production companies.
Sure, the Moldovan state supported two national films. It is a positive step. Congratulations to Moldova—and to Moldovans—for two more “Made in Moldova” movies.
Still, this situation makes me wonder: are we truly incapable of supporting one another? Why not trust our strengths? Why not invest in the passion of local creatives who, even if not successful at first, will eventually make a strong national film? A film that might be different, more artistic, more specific—but one that will belong to all of us as a people and a country. A movie to which we’ll buy tickets to see, one that will earn both applause and criticism. A film that proves Moldova can still make cinema.
This year, 19 of 27 eligible applicants passed the second round and met the funding threshold. The state allocated 6.4 million lei to two national films and 6.9 million to foreign co-productions. The remaining projects fall into the category: “Dreams with artistic potential, unrealized due to lack of funding.”
The other categories remain just dreams—no short films, no projects in development, none in post-production—and received a single penny despite requesting modest amounts.
Let me be clear: I don’t blame CNC Moldova. The institution had a small budget—initially 10 million lei, later “generously” increased by 3.3 million. But even with this injection, the entire national competition budget equals the amount CNC Romania gives for just one feature film: €692,000 (over 13.5 million MDL). This year, Romania funded 38 films across six categories. Moldova stopped at nine.
Is that a lot? Is it too little? It depends on whom you ask. An official will call it a “significant effort,” perfect for Facebook and press releases. A young director who spent a year writing a script, got approved, and received zero funding will likely answer using more colorful language.
On paper, we are Europeans—we align, negotiate, implement, and reform. In practice, we avoid vision, refuse to learn, fear taking risks, and lack trust. It’s not the winners’ fault. It’s the system’s fault—a system that fails to understand film as a cultural identity marker. When we prioritize minority co-productions, whose identity are we promoting? Or are we, once again, too scared to own our culture, to grow it, and instead remain service providers—cheap locations and underpaid tech crews?
In conclusion:
It’s good that we have a competition.
It’s bad that we fund films rarely, selectively, and mostly for others’ benefit.
It’s good that the Ministry of Culture reports “efforts.”
It’s bad that they ignore rising production costs, which outpace inflation.
It’s worse that they didn’t understand an extra 10 million lei would have funded all winning projects, and 19 films instead of nine. At least half of them could have been national productions.
/Scene 2/
We are working on the job
For years, filmmakers have envisioned a Film Fund. They wake up, discuss it, and debate how to improve it.
Last year, press releases and behind-the-scenes conversations revealed that a bill had emerged. Everyone talks about it, even though no one has seen it. One day, hope sparked—officials announced a press conference to launch the Fund. But officials canceled it an hour before it began.
Lawmakers should consult the people, especially the filmmakers, when drafting laws to serve them. But they didn’t. Now, filmmakers wait awkwardly for a verdict. The draft law sits under review while filmmakers watch the calendar, wondering if Parliament will pass it before the spring-summer session ends.
/Scene 3/
Drink beats culture
Since independence, almost all of Moldova’s 48 movie theaters have closed. Only three remain—two saved by investors driven by patriotic madness.
In Romania, cinema numbers have doubled thanks to a strategy focused on industry growth and the impact of culture on values, education, heritage, and identity. Italy and France go further: they subsidize cinema tickets to support this vital cultural domain. And we haven’t even mentioned Russian soft power and its media influence…
Moldova remains the only European country that favors the HORECA sector with reduced VAT (6–8%) while taxing cinemas with the full 20% VAT. Elsewhere in Europe:
- Romania: 5%
- Ukraine and Turkey: 0%
- France: 5.5%
- Germany: 7%
- Italy: 10%
- Croatia: 5%
- Ireland: 9%
- Spain: 10%
- Netherlands: 9%
- Poland: 8%
- Slovenia: 9.5%
You can read the full information HERE. I’ll gladly prepare a pro bono fiscal impact analysis if decision-makers want to help cinema flourish.
/Scene 4/
We want Moldova in Creative Europe—as soon as possible
I highlighted the importance of joining Creative Europe in the Manifesto – “We want Moldova in Creative Europe—as soon as possible.” Creative Europe is the EU’s main funding program for the cultural and audiovisual sectors. For 2021–2027, the program offers €2.44 billion, some of which could support Moldovan institutions.
We heard at the Festival of Creative Industries: “… Moldova is not ready yet…” The only solution is to beg our Brussels friends to convince us to be ready.
Tomorrow is always tomorrow—it never comes. Today is the time to act. Let’s take responsibility for our country, streets, schools, economy, and culture. Let’s show that we belong to European civilization. We can read, learn, create, and build a modern society.
Joining Creative Europe matters today. Not next year. Not after we miss another opportunity.
FOR THE MOST IMPORTANT NEWS, FOLLOW US ON TWITTER!
/Scene 5/
Here, the words have run out. Television without vision…
On April 11, 2025, the Ministry of Culture launched a competition for Media Subsidy Fund grants under Law 50/2024. Discussions, criticisms, and comments followed. I won’t revisit them—they lack vision and objectivity.
I’ll say only this:
- This competition is no solution to the media crisis. The Fund might be helpful in peacetime, but not during a “war” (I’m not referring to Ukraine). In its current form, the Fund doesn’t address real challenges.
- The 500,000 lei allocated covers 25–40% of a national TV station’s monthly budget. Regional stations get 250,000 lei—barely enough to make a dent.
Without vision, we won’t have television. It’s that simple: vision → action → television.
/Epilog/
I won’t name names. Those responsible know who they are.
We, behind the window, the door, or at the other end of an email, have gotten used to this. We’ve learned to wait and let things sort themselves out. We’ve gotten used to not being consulted. We’ve gotten used to your fear of taking initiative. We’ve adjusted our expectations and stopped having disappointments. We now joke about our futile efforts, the short fuse of hope, and the “tomorrow” that never comes. We’ve nearly adapted to doing without you. We’ve learned not to rely on you. Not to notice you.
Every mentoring book says that action is essential for results.
My media career began with “Speak your mind!” A slogan that never helped much. If anything, it entangled us further in the struggle for the freedom to speak, create, be ourselves, love our country, and make it modern and European.
I know Moldova can—when it chooses to.
When Moldova decides to act, it can shape a vision, take initiative, and deliver results.
Too bad so many people stand in the way.