Alberto Barbera Explains Late Venice Slot for Gaza Documentary ‘NAZA’

Alberto Barbera, the 76-year-old artistic director of the Venice International Film Festival, discussed the late scheduling of NAZA, a documentary about the Gaza-Israel war, at the event’s halfway point. The interview also covered artificial intelligence, U.S. studio films and Oscar prospects during the 83rd Venice festival. Deadline

The historical parallel

Venice’s 2023 Special Jury Prize winner Green Border, a scripted feature about the Poland-Belarus border crisis, became a political target after its Polish theatrical release: senior government figures attacked it and the government sought to show a countervailing clip before cinema screenings. Like NAZA, it brought an unresolved, divisive conflict to a major Venice platform. But NAZA is a Gaza documentary; no prize, release plan or comparable reaction has been established for it.

Impact assessment

A late festival slot may concentrate attention on NAZA close to Venice’s conclusion, but can also compress the time available for its filmmakers and prospective distributors to arrange meetings, assess demand and turn festival interest into an acquisition or further bookings. In the days after the screening, that timing could strengthen the filmmakers’ bargaining position if industry interest results in concrete release discussions; otherwise, momentum may have to be rebuilt at later festivals or through other exhibition channels.

The scheduling issue also exposes Venice programmers to immediate scrutiny over how the festival places work about an active conflict. For people outside the festival, access to the documentary and the opportunity for sustained post-screening discussion may depend on subsequent distributor and exhibitor decisions.

Scenarios

Our outlook (informed speculation):

Most likely: If NAZA remains in its late Venice slot, the screening produces a concentrated end-of-festival window and its filmmakers pursue additional screenings or release arrangements in the following weeks. This is the baseline because Venice provides a prominent platform, even though the late placement narrows the time for market activity before the festival ends. A scheduled screening followed by named bookings, acquisition discussions or a distributor would strengthen this path; withdrawal, substantial rescheduling or a stated barrier to circulation would weaken it.

Upside: If the Venice screening creates strong industry interest, distributors may seek further festival and theatrical engagements over the next six to 12 months. Wider exhibition would expand access beyond Venice and give the filmmakers more leverage over release terms. A named distributor, release date or additional cinema and festival bookings would support that outcome; the absence of further screenings after the festival cycle would cut against it.

Downside: If NAZA gains broader visibility and later encounters organized political or institutional opposition, exhibitors could alter presentations or reduce bookings, pushing distribution toward venues seen as lower risk and narrowing access. The Green Border precedent shows how Venice visibility for a conflict-related work can be followed by political pressure, though its Polish election-period context and scripted format materially differ from NAZA. Uninterrupted screenings and releases would undermine this scenario.

What to watch next

Venice’s confirmation of NAZA’s screening date and programme placement; any announcement of a distributor, release date or additional bookings; and attributable responses from officials, exhibitors or organized groups as the film moves beyond the festival.