Town Hall 2025: The future of documentary co-productions in the Nordic countries

In just five years since its instigation in 2021, the annual Town Hall meeting in Malmö during the Nordisk Panorama days has become a true highlight, possibly of the year, for those engaged in the Nordic documentary industry. It was established in its current form as part of Nordisk Film & TV Fond’s first ever theme year, “Documentary”. Since then the event has been moderated by Karolina Lidin, who works as the Fund’s Senior Advisor Documentary.

Lively, focused discussions on the current state of affairs are at the forefront on podium and floor alike, where national, neighbouring and international filmmakers, producers, broadcasters and film institute representatives serve food for thought to the packed locale.

Sugar-coating is a practice that permanent and very hands-on Mistress of Ceremonies Lidin fervently keeps out of any conversation. Exposure of any elephant or naked emperor roaming the room is heartily encouraged. Optimism is permitted when applicable: “It may look like we’re in a golden age, but it’s a corporate age,” it has been established. “We’re hanging on to boomer strategies in the Millennial/Gen Z world,” it has been reprimanded. “Winter is coming,” it has been warned. “After winter, there’s always spring,” it has been reminded. “The situation is hopeless, but not serious,” is a reoccurring and reassuring post-session takeaway, coupled with a “See you all next year”. And you will.

“The Future of Co-productions in the Nordic Countries” read this year’s hot topic. With or without sugar-coating, the Nordic model has had its praise sweetly sung in foreign places where cinema is celebrated and cultivated. Regarded as an exceptional, almost super power, it’s been written and spoken of in the trade papers and envied in less-fortunate regions. And though the 2025 Town Hall meeting aimed to address the uncertain prospects of this time-honoured cooperation in an era of global instability, a sincere sense of pride and faith was tangible.

“Here are some of the words that you, the professionals, used when characterising the documentary community,” Lidin said in her opening talk, referencing French film scholar Etienne Foucault’s research Q&A for his thesis on the conditions of documentary film production in the Nordics:

“You actually use the word ‘community’. You would also use words like ‘collegiality’, ‘loyalty’, ‘tight-knit’, ‘close-knit’, ‘open’, ‘collaborative’, ‘supportive’, and ‘with high ethical standards’.”

Lidin proceeded by employing the "magic Nordic triangle" diagram, illustrating the interdependent relationship between 1) public service broadcasting, 2) national film institutes, and 3) independent creators.

“The broadcasters and film institutes are the foundation on which the independent community can build and grow. I’ve learned a new word too, ‘coopetition’, competing and collaborating at the same time. That's us.”

She was just as quick to point out some complications.

“The political shifts that are weakening our business, the diverging institutional goals for documentaries, the market pressures, and the workload issues. So room for improvement indeed. But I’ve always heard that the triangle is the strongest structure – even in turbulent times when the powers that be are slashing budgets and the cultural sectors are bleeding, and when corporate algorithms are rigging the game. So public service is struggling both with public and with service. Luckily we're not alone. We're not only five minuscule countries in the north. We actually have each other – or do we?”

For a reality check on these and related issues, representatives from each triangle “point” had been invited to deliver a status report on visions, responsibilities, and stumbling blocks, and make suggestions of concrete steps for maintaining and, if possible, simplifying the process.

Broadcasters: Strategies, struggles and miracles

Mikala Krogh, Head of Documentaries at DR, had done more than that. Together with her DR colleague, Anders Bruus, she had organised and summoned to a special strategy meeting, held earlier that same day, September 21, gathering stakeholders into the same room to find compromises, collaborate on projects, and discuss further and concrete steps for working together.

“On the one hand I still think we’re in a golden age. People really want to see good documentaries. Last year, DR had lots of titles with more than one million viewers. That's a good thing. We’re really talented at making documentaries up here. We see this at Sundance, Tribeca, at the Oscars. And we also have very good support systems, even though we are struggling.”

“On the other hand, we’re living in tough times. Politically, but also in our industry, with the financing, everybody's struggling. So we’d like to do something with our strong Nordic connection that we can benefit even more from and improve.”

Present at the meeting were Nordic broadcasters, film institute and film fund representatives, and producers. Nordisk Film & TV Fond also partcipated. The Fund arranges yearly strategic meetings for all its parties from institutes and broadcasters. CEO Liselott Forsman says: “We are working on a concrete level around documentary strategies along the year with our parties. At this meeting it was very good to also have the producers on board, and in the end some concrete suggestions were reached here too to continue from.”

The discussions Immediate Assessments were very positive, and the plan is that there will be follow-ups.

“We’ve had some very good initiatives already today. We will continue working, and we will work fast, we hope.”

When asked about her broadcaster responsibilities, Krogh read out a bulky little agenda.

“First of all, we have a responsibility towards our audience members who pay us the taxes. We have a responsibility towards the public service agreement. We have a responsibility towards the industry and all the talents. So we have a lot of responsibility.”

Regarding obstacles, some culprits were soon identified: time to receive a reply (too long), risk-taking (too low), and money (too little).

With her own extensive background as filmmaker and producer, Krogh aired her empathy and frustration over the treatment filmmakers can feel they’re getting from a broadcaster.

“During my 20 years as independent filmmaker, I’ve been there myself. I’ve often had this feeling when coming up with some very good ideas, of just meeting a wall. And nobody's trying to suggest anything along the lines of developing something together, creator and broadcaster. We could definitely be better at that. On the other hand, we have so many proposals and very little money, and we are busy… And if we’re going to have to make a quick decision, we just say no. Yeah, I think we could improve a few things.”

“I think one of the broadcaster’s biggest challenges is that we went from flow TV to streaming, and that demands some other type of films than what we were used to. Previously, we could add very special small documentaries on DR2 late at night, and people would watch them. But now when they choose from a demand service, they don't find these films. This is our biggest challenge. Because it’s difficult for us to spend money on things that nobody watches.”

Krogh also pointed out some cross-Nordic discrepancies.

“We have different support systems in the different countries. We may feel that we’re similar, but we’re not. One country’s film institute will support series, another country’s film institute won’t. There are still many and big differences between our countries.”

Several of Krogh’s Nordic colleagues, present both at the strategy meeting and in the room, confirmed the situation. “Struggle” was a word that seemed to connect all five Nordic countries, regardless of support system

Fredrik Færden, NRK, noted that the audience has changed, and the struggle is to find new ways of collecting content they "actually want and need". Margrét Jónasdóttir, RÚV, who, like Krogh, has a vast background in production, said: “And now that I'm on the other side... It’s a struggle. Of course we have to plan and set up our strategies so that things work out. At times it’s like playing Domino.”

Lidin also brought up The Gullspång Miracle (Miraklet i Gullspång, 2023), a relevant catalyst in the discussion. Would this Swedish-Norwegian-Danish co-production and surprise hit about two sisters who buy a flat from a woman who is the spitting image of their long-deceased big sister, have been made in a climate where decision makers rather say no when they have to make quick decisions?

“Of course you want successes in order to reach audiences. But how to define success? One title I've noticed all of you broadcasters have been highlighting is The Gullspång Miracle, which we all love. But who would have predicted this, right? We fell in love with it right away. But if we don't take these risks, how will we get those surprises?”

Erkko Lyytinen, Yle, attempted to paint a big picture of a situation in which the long-runners are king and the “singles” are pawns.

“First of all, among the domestic broadcasting companies, there's a kind of inside competition around who actually gets the biggest media attention, which creates a challenge when you deal with ‘single’ films.”

He emphasised that, as a public service entity using taxpayer money, Yle’s priority is serving the "full spectrum of different kind of films". Yle also faces "domestic or inside competition" and the need for "bigger audience films at least a few times a year" to "brag about those numbers" to the management.

“Because they look at the figures, and we can’t change that kind of attitude. But at the same time, yes, we do have a cultural agenda, which is part of our existence. So it's controversial. I think everyone in this room can agree on the challenges, but also be fully aware of the reason why we exist.”

Helena Ingelsten, SVT, gave an optimistic Swedish take:

“Of course I see the big problems that we all struggle with, but at the same time on SVT we have lots of documentaries with a great big audience. I can only agree that we had a good talk, and I look forward to more.”

Lidin reminded the others that the Yle tag line reads “Gemensamt för alla, unikt för mig” – “Shared by all, unique to me”.

“It’s a tagline I really love. There is that locomotive of a huge film that everybody saw, but there is also that weird little thing that your specifically nerdy brain loves, and it's there for you. Thank you, Yle. I hope you still have that tagline.”

Film institutes: Not just talk – some concrete proposals

Charlotta Denward, Head of Production at the Swedish Film Institute (SFI), came well prepared, and provided most if not every key insight into the opportunities and challenges for Nordic collaborations, echoed by several if not most in the room. She also presented a comprehensive list of sharpened proposals, focusing on how to create better conditions for filmmakers and producers.

“Nordic cooperation has a long history. Especially since the Nordisk Film & TV Fond was established, we have worked closely together, exchanging not just money, but above all, creative talent. I bet nobody ever heard a producer say ‘My project got worse because I had to co-produce with another country’. We know that you producers want to collaborate, and we know collaboration strengthens the projects.”

“Cross-national collaboration is essential. As we know, film institutes and broadcasters don't have the same mission. We don't even always speak the same language, and I'm not talking about Finnish or Danish, but how we talk about documentary films. We don't have the same goals, and sometimes we don't even agree on what a documentary is. Film institutes aim for artistic and creative excellence, and in honesty, this sometimes means we become blind to the audience aspect.”

“For broadcasters, reaching an audience is top priority. We feel that you broadcasters could sometimes take more artistic risks, but without you, there wouldn't be much of an audience at all. It's important to respect these differences and still find ways to work together. We are 100% dependent on each other, and with that comes shared responsibility for both successes and obstacles to success. We simply must find common ground, and we can choose to see that either as a burden or as an amazing possibility to make the most of. Because it's when these two viewpoints and driving forces come together that we see truly powerful projects.”

“And for filmmakers, several strong sources of funding are an advantage, but they're also in bed with two enormous giants; film institutes and broadcasters, who can easily roll over and suffocate them, simply crush them in bed. I think our focus as well as the broadcasters’ focus should always be on what's best for those at the centre of everything we do. The goal should always be to give filmmakers and their projects the best possible conditions.”

To the tune of these discerning reflections, she read her “very concrete” list of proposals, “in order to make life easier for producers”.

Film institutes, she started out, should adopt similar rules and approaches across the Nordics.

“As a former producer, I’m no fan of deadlines. Different deadlines from different funders create issues with schedules and financing. Not helpful.”

She also suggested a “repertoire”, jointly discussed and agreed upon by film institutes and broadcasters.

“We're well aware of the different ideas and wants from broadcasters versus film institutes. But if we, the SFI, support 15 to 20 full-length documentaries per year, maybe we could have some kind of discussion on that pile of projects. Maybe half of them should be more audience oriented, and then 2-3 of them should be experimental films? A kind of give-and-take idea? We at SFI will work more on audience-related material for you broadcasters at SVT, and then in return, please be fast with your decisions and also take creative risks.”

“And it’s also important that the film institutes learn from the broadcasters and start thinking more actively about audiences. This is already happening in Sweden, and I think we have a really good discussion between SVT and SFI.”

Film institutes, she continued, should make earlier funding decisions, commitments, and letters of commitment for minority co-productions, without giving deadlines – “that would, I think, benefit producers a lot”.

“And broadcasters should not wait too long before making their commitment. We want you to take part in the creative risk at an earlier stage, at least in some projects.”

“I also think that the film institutes should be prepared to provide more substantial development support, and I think this is something the national film institutes should do. I don't think it's a good idea to have even more film commissioners with opinions in the specific project. No need for more cooks in the creative kitchen.”

She requested a flexibility towards formats.

“The institutes want feature-length films. TV wants 58-minute versions or series. By treating this as one single project that we co-finance together without requiring separate budgets and financing plans, we could make life easier for producers.”

“Also, I think as a film institute, we should raise levels of production support for national films with lower budgets, and not force them to co-produce for purely economical reasons when there is no real creative gain.”

CEO of the Norwegian Film Institute Kjersti Mo, in warm agreement with the previous speaker, went in a partly different direction, philosophically and poignantly bringing up a Nordic quality not related to money or production bureaucracy – artistic freedom.

“Nordic filmmakers can tell stories that cannot be told elsewhere, and we can do so without censorship or fear. It's not written in stone that it's going to be like that forever. So we have to really guard this, because it's not only a privilege, it's also a responsibility.”

In her “quite simple vision”, she stressed that it was time to “not just talk” about the Great Nordic Co-operation.

“We must have a bolder practice, and support even bolder films. We need to lift the midsize projects that struggle to break through. And we have to keep using our shared values and trust and our networks to tell stories that matter, stories that can only come from our countries. It has never been more important than today to keep up this Nordic collaboration, artistically, politically and economically. The world as we know it is about to fall apart, and we have to make sure that the next decade of Nordic documentary filmmaking is defined not by what separates us, but by the strength of what we can create together.”

Present in the room was also the CEO of the Finnish Film Foundation Lasse Saarinen, who gave an impromptu report (“it would be very nice to say that I know what’s happening”) on the current political situation in Finland.

“Our government just decided to cut our funding by one third for next year. If that happens – we are struggling and fighting against it a lot right now – I have no hopes for the government, but I have some hopes for the parliament; that they could change this decision. But if it so happens, as stated in next year's budget, that all of that money vanishes from film production because we have many other things we are supporting, it would halve the production support for next year. We already lost three million euros during the 2020s, but we have not made any cuts on documentaries, because they really need all the money they can get. But if this terrible cut happens, it will also affect documentary filming in Finland. And then of course the co-productions are even more important than ever before.”

On the subject of the latter, he took the opportunity to deliver a friendly, but pointed remark.

“I’ve now served nine years as head of the Finnish Film Foundation, and I have noticed that in Nordic co-production, things aren’t very even. As it happens, we have given much more money as minor co-producers on the Finnish side to the other Nordic productions than other Nordic countries give to Finnish productions. And that will stop if we lose our money. I'm sorry.”

Independent Creators: Extreme sports and political stance

The final segment featured the "pivotal individuals linking the extremities of the field", as Lidin dubbed the independent creators, again quoting from Etienne Foucault’s aforementioned thesis. Producers Ingvil Giske, Norway, and Signe Byrge Sørensen, Denmark, have taken risks and struggled, and along the way turned out The Painter and the Thief (Kunstneren og tyven, 2020), The Remarkable Life of Ibelin (Ibelin, 2024), The Act of Killing (2012), and Flee (Flugt, 2021) between them.

“You survived, and even thrived,” mused Lidin in her presentation, in which she quoted Danish producer Malene Flindt Pedersen, who referred to her profession as “an extreme sport”.

“Thrived? I’m not sure,” smiled Giske, partly tongue-in-cheek.

She reminded anyone concerned that several festival hits also are also broadcaster successes, again mentioning The Gullspång Miracle, but she could also have named one of her own productions. Byrge Sørensen brought another reminder: Nobody knows a success. She described a long and winding road from idea to realisation, lined with hard work, persistence and lots of luck. “And the moment it’s a success, everyone says ‘of course it was a success’. But it really wasn't. Until five minutes ago.”

She then picked up the baton from Kjersti Mo and evaluated the current state of the world, mentioning the US, Ukraine, Russia, and Palestine.

“We make films about the real world and about real people, and they change their lives all the time. It's complicated. And that's fair enough. That's what we're interested in, and that's what we want to do.”

“At the moment, this reality is shifting under our feet, and it's doing it to a degree that is the wildest I've ever experienced. It's going really, really fast.”

“We have to ask ourselves at this moment in time: What are the most important stories we want to tell? The most important subjects we need to cover? Which audiences do we want to reach? And why? And because there are such limited resources, these questions are so extremely important. Every day as a producer and director is a political standpoint.”

“We were asked in this meeting earlier today to come up with our visions. My vision in this: At the moment, Trump is asking all of Europe to spend many more percentages on military stuff than they've done thus far. I think our vision should be that film funding, and especially documentary film funding, should try to get part of those percentages.”

“Because whatever we could make with film in Europe for the cost of what a Fighter Jet 35 costs, could actually be much better for peace in the long run than any weapon ever would be.”

(The price of a “Fighter Jet 35” aka Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II, is between 109 and 117 million dollars, depending on branch.)

“And when we talk about reaching audiences, it's not about getting this high rating or that high rating. It's about getting audiences to talk about important issues.”

Signe Byrge Sørensen got the biggest applause of the night, and the multi-awarded Norwegian director Håvard Bustnes immediately asked for the microphone.

“I'm so emotionally touched, and I think what you're saying really makes sense, but I also want to say that although the political situation is extreme, we can't only make film about politics. We are also artists.”

To which Signe Byrge Sørensen immediately replied:

“I didn't mean we should only make film about politics. I think we should make artistic films, also about politics.”

The meeting concluded on a determined note, affirming "good intentions set forward" and "practical measures actually suggested".

Charlotta Denward got the second biggest applause when she informed that SFI from January 2026 on will have two documentary commissioners.

Karolina Lidin closed off with a Chinese proverb: "When the winds of change blow, some people build walls and others build windmills." Her final charge was to "dare to imagine and act on the change that promises independent voices, artistic innovation, and critical thinking – because we need that more than ever".

See you all next year.