Screening With The Enemy: Exhibiting film in a hostile environment

The arts hold a profound power to connect us, reflecting our shared humanity and amplifying the voices of those too often silenced. 

For 17 years, African Odysseys, a programme hosted by BFI Southbank, has become an important place for African diasporic storytelling in the UK film industry. With its future now uncertain, conflicting narratives have emerged: the programme founder, David Somerset, has accused BFI of planning its closure, while the BFI denies these claims. 

“The Programme has been a lifeline for authentic Black representation in film. Its closure would be a devastating blow” - David Somerset (Screen Daily)

However, BFI CEO Ben Roberts has admitted to cutting back on funding, citing financial constraints (bfi.com, 2024). This raises a pressing question: what does this mean for the programme, and what does it signal about the priorities of one of the UK’s most influential cultural institutions? 

While the BFI denies outright plans to close African Odysseys, scaling back resources sends a troubling signal about how the institution values the programme. Without sufficient support, African Odysseys risks losing its impact and accessibility, severing the vital connection it has built with its audiences. 

The loss of African Odysseys would mean the loss of a hub for mentorship and a rare avenue for Black filmmakers to thrive. For instance, filmmaker Ngozi Onwurah credits the programme for giving her early exposure to industry connections as it was “instrumental in connecting (her) to industry opportunities” (Change.org Petition, 2023). 

The most recent development stated that BFI refused to conduct a Race Equality Impact Assessment before implementing budget cuts that will effectively end African Odysseys. This received backlash from experts in race equality, film, and literature, with at least 20 notable figures, including Professor Gus John, Mia Morris, OBE, etc. lending their voices to a growing petition demanding transparency and accountability. 

Despite Ben Roberts’ declaration in 2020 that the BFI is an anti-racist institution and publicly stated that BFI is not planning to close African Odysseys, the refusal to engage in a formal impact assessment raises questions about the sincerity of this commitment. 

Conflicting statements from the BFI compound the issue. In June 2024, the institution assured the public that it had “no desire or intention” to end African Odysseys. Yet, as of January 2025, there is no mention of African Odysseys in the latest BFI brochure, no scheduled events for the programme, and no formal engagement with its Steering Committee, which had planned 13 events for the year. The budget cuts and staff redundancies have left the programme with no means to operate, despite its last three events selling out in advance. The key programmer behind these successes is now at risk of redundancy, paradoxically as part of BFI’s support efforts to “promote diversity and cut costs.” (Black History Walks, 2025)

If BFI does decide to go ahead with the closure, it may provide an opportunity to refocus its efforts on contemporary African cinema rather than broader historical or cultural programming. Yet, this potential pivot comes with risks. A narrowed focus on contemporary cinema could inadvertently exclude the historical and cultural dimensions that make African Odysseys so unique and impactful. At the end of the day, BFI’s duty is to provide access for upcoming filmmakers and provide a platform where they are able to speak about the systemic barriers faced by minorities in the film industry and in this case, it seems that the BFI has failed to do so. 

While the African Odysseys programme has made significant contributions to showcasing Black cinema and its closure will have a major impact on Black filmmakers, it is not without its shortcomings. One of the key concerns regarding the programme is accessibility for filmmakers. The programme’s selective collaboration with a limited number of Black-led organisations may inadvertently reinforce the systemic gatekeeping that already exists within the film industry. 

However, in response to growing criticism and the looming possibility of closure, African Odysseys is now reaching out to Black-led groups and communities for support. While this shift may indicate a recognition of past fallibility, it also highlights the programme’s need for sustained meaningful engagement rather than reactive outreach. Also, perhaps there is a lesson to be learnt from depending on a sole white employee of a British institution to gain access to space meant for all - which, in the wrong light, has ‘plantation overseer’ overtones. 

The tale of African Odysseys at BFI Southbank is both a cautionary tale and a call to action. BFI must provide clarity regarding its intentions and demonstrate a commitment of sustaining programmes that elevate African diasporic storytelling, as well as amplifying diverse voices in mainstream media.

The legacy and importance of African Odysseys is too crucial to be dismissed as a financial casualty. Whether through revived funding, innovative reimagining, or a recommitment to its principles, the programme’s ethos must endure. Only then can the film industry truly honour the richness of Black cinema - and its power to transform our shared cultural narrative.