Iceland: Future of Hope – A Parable of Modern Documentary Making

Take this for commitment: two Britons set off for Iceland in 2009 in the wake of the financial crisis there, when traffic was heading the other way, looking to understand what impact it would have on that country. Without financing, but hoping to make a documentary, they go first for a five-day research trip and then set up base there in a caravan for eight weeks till they find a more secure accommodation. A fund-raising website allows them to raise the money, local Icelandic filmmakers, musicians and artists collaborate with them and the result is the recently released documentary, Iceland: Future of Hope.

Director Henry Bateman and producer Heather Millard knew little of the country other than that it was a “country up North somewhere that was cold, expensive and had lots of fish”. The first trip made it clear that the stereotypical films and media reports of Iceland, “a country of fishermen turned bankers, a nation that believes strongly in the hidden people and a fantastic tourist destination”, were banal and misleading. Now they say they have fallen in love with the country and have “no huge desire” to return to England.

The film focuses on the “positive and inspirational things to come out of Iceland since the economy crash and intends to improve the reputation and image of Iceland on a global scale and also give hope to many individuals throughout the world that are faced with an uncertain economic future”. There are stories of environmental innovations and experiments with a sustainable life style. It focuses on stories of individual hopes and aspirations rather than resignation in the aftermath of the knockout crisis.

The film is a tribute to the courage and commitment of the two documentary makers and sheds light on what sacrifices go into the making of this genre. Nevertheless, there is some disquiet with the approach of the documentary. The recent public protests in Iceland indicate that anger at least runs as deep as stoic rebuilding.

This is a particularly insightful comment on the Facebook page for the documentary:

“As a Brit in Reykjavik, I dragged a couple of other travellers. We loved the various stories, and the general thrust of the film, but felt that it left us feeling both mournful and complacent. These people are already doing stuff, so we - as viewers - don't have to?

"Also, it'd have been nice to get a bit more detail on ...the collaborations in the abandoned powerplant, some of the citizens' crowdsourcing convention, and the initial wave of protests ... it seemed like there was more focus on hope than any real anger or agency - as if the film was shunning the details of direct action in its aspiration to respectability.

"Also, the interviewees seemed to be at the mercy of forces outside their control, however much they might have been trying to take responsibility for their lives and circumstances. Overall, though, we enjoyed it a lot, and left talking about the issues, which has to be a good thing. And ace cinematography, editing and animation really helped tie it together. Kudos.”