Natalie Portman, Justine Triet and Jacques Audiard are among more than 350 film professionals who have signed an open letter condemning the cultural boycott of Israeli director Nadav Lapid. The filmmaker, known for his criticism of Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, has lived in voluntary exile in France since 2021. His most recent film, “Yes”, has been described as a scathing attack on Israeli nationalism.
The controversy gained strength with Lapid’s expected participation as a judge at FID Marseille, an international festival that takes place between July 7th and 12th. The event director, Tsveta Dobreva, explained that the initial invitation was motivated solely by the recognition of his cinematographic work. However, pressure quickly mounted, with calls calling for the withdrawal of participation.
Pressure leads to director’s withdrawal
Given the escalation, the festival proposed a reduced version: Lapid would only present his debut feature “Policeman”, from 2011, in a public session with an autograph session. Even so, around ten filmmakers withdrew their films from the selection. Lapid decided to completely cancel his presence to avoid further difficulties for the event.
Le Monde published two tribunes defending the director. One of them, signed by Portman, Triet, Audiard, Rebecca Zlotowski and Michel Hazanavicius, among others, classifies the boycott as “an intellectual bankruptcy”. The text argues that Russian, Israeli and Iranian filmmakers should not be erased as a form of atonement for the actions of governments that they themselves frequently criticize.
Arguments against excluding artists
The signatories question at what point public funding transforms a work or its author into a government spokesperson, even when the artist is critical. They argue that continued engagement, not exclusion, is the most effective form of political pressure. They cite the example of Russian director Andrei Zvyagintsev, who used the Cannes award to demand an end to the war in Ukraine.
A second letter, entitled “Cinema is not an embassy”, denounces a “campaign of intimidation” and challenges the logic of equating the presence of a filmmaker on a jury with the official representation of a State. Producers who worked with Lapid on “Synonyms” and “Yes” also signed the text.
Lapid’s funding and background
Critics of Lapid’s participation mention the Israel Film Fund’s partial support for the 2025 film “Yes”, seeing it as an arm of the State. In practice, the fund is the main source of financing for Israeli and Palestinian productions, operates independently from the government and has a history of supporting liberal and critical voices, such as “Waltz With Bashir”, by Ari Folman, and “Lebanon”, by Samuel Maoz.
Lapid, winner of the Golden Bear in Berlin with “Synonyms” and the Jury Prize in Cannes with “Ahed’s Knee”, reinforced in an interview with Le Monde that he agreed to withdraw so as not to harm the festival, but expressed frustration with the intensification of pressure. He warned of an effect of self-censorship in cultural institutions, which begin to avoid certain films or names for fear of controversy.
What changes in practice for the sector
The case exposes tensions in the debate over cultural boycotts amid the conflict in Gaza. Lapid, who supports real political sanctions against Israel, sees in the boycotters’ actions a feeling of impotence and frustration in the face of political inaction. He avoids treating colleagues who removed films as enemies, but warns that the result could be the opposite of what was intended: less visibility for debates and films that disappear.