However, from 2025 BIFF will officially add a competitive section.
This decision is a strategic move to discover new talent and raise the festival's international standing.
Meanwhile, concerns about artistic freedom and independence remain.
"Breaking a non-competitive tradition to embrace new awards"
History is testimony.
BIFF took its first step in 1996.
Since then it has grown rapidly and is counted among Asia's top three festivals.
In its early years it kept a non-competitive character, valuing diversity and experimental work.
However, the 2025 change cracks that long-held tradition.
BIFF runs for about ten days around the Busan Cinema Center and Centum City (major cultural and commercial hubs in Busan).
During that time it discovers Asian emerging directors and connects films with audiences and the industry.
Many films have used this platform to attract international attention and open distribution doors.
In the process, BIFF expanded as both an industry marketplace and a cultural space.
Why introduce competition?
The purpose is clear.
From 2025 the new "Busan Awards" will present five categories: Grand Prize, Best Director, Jury Special Prize, Best Actor, and Artistic Contribution.
This institutional change is a strategic move to elevate the festival's stature internationally.
At the same time it reflects a desire to systematize discovery of emerging and experimental films.
Competition attracts attention, and attention draws capital and distribution interest.
With formal judging and awards, comparisons between films become institutionalized.
That can increase chances for films to gain both commercial and critical value.
However, it also means the festival will be shaping new norms and standards.
The principles of judging will strongly influence the festival's direction.
Pro: Status, opportunity, and structure
The possibilities are large.
Introducing competition can quickly raise BIFF's international profile.
Winning at a festival gives directors and actors credibility on the global stage.
Consequently, visibility and distribution opportunities for Asian films could expand significantly.
With a formal support system, directors' and actors' job stability can improve.
For example, awards can attract follow-up investment and distributor interest, helping producers and teams preparing to launch new projects.
Awards also become references for film schools and training programs, which can strengthen industry education.
Over time this flow can provide self-sustaining resources for local startups and the production ecosystem.
When evaluation and rewards connect, creative work becomes more sustainable.
In this light the Busan Awards can have economic and cultural ripple effects beyond a trophy.
Judging and awarding help the market recognize a film's value.
Therefore, investment attraction and international co-productions at regional and national levels can increase.
Con: Loss of tradition and new risks
Concerns are tangible.
Introducing competition raises worries that the festival's experimental and diverse character could erode.
When the freedom of a non-competitive program is measured by competitive standards, experimental forms may be sidelined.
Also, commercial pressures can steer creative direction toward market-friendly choices.
The 2014 "Diving Bell" controversy (a Korean documentary that sparked political dispute and industry boycotts) showed how political pressure and censorship can affect a festival.
That episode revealed how vulnerable festival independence and freedom of expression can be.
With a competitive system, questions about fair judging and unseen pressures become more acute.
Who sits on juries, whether criteria are public, and how selections are made are all crucial.
Moreover, bias based on country, genre, or production background may arise.
Well-funded productions with strong distribution networks may have an advantage.
The culture of competition can also shift filmmakers' goals toward winning rather than risk-taking.
Checks, balances, and transparency
Principles are essential.
For competition to work positively, institutional safeguards must come first.
That includes diverse juries, disclosure of the selection process, and conflict-of-interest rules.
Also, internal norms protecting political independence and freedom of expression are indispensable.
To enhance fairness, organizers could introduce independent oversight or a citizen observer panel.
Judging criteria should be documented and published, and records kept on how jurors reached consensus.
Such procedures create trust in selections and form a bulwark against political interference.
At the same time, post-award support must be linked to practical outcomes.
Clear plans for follow-up investment, distribution assistance, and education partnerships are needed.
With these links, competition becomes a sustained growth engine rather than a one-off event.
Public reaction and online voices
Responses are mixed.
Online and industry reactions mix hope with caution.
Many welcome talent discovery and a chance for Asian cinema to leap forward, while others guard artistic independence.
Memories of past controversies fuel calls for transparency and protection of freedom.
Forums and social media post expectations about the industry's boost from award-winning films.
Meanwhile advocates insist on protecting artistic experimentation.
Ultimately, public opinion will depend on how well the festival balances these concerns in its rules.
Conclusion: Finding balance
Balance is the key.
BIFF's move to add competition brings clear goals and legitimate worries.
As supporters predict, new status and opportunities can be created.
On the other hand, warnings about independence and diversity deserve attention.
Policy steps should include transparent judging, protections for political independence, and a post-award support system.
Also, the festival should build sustainable growth through jobs, investment, and education links.
Crucially, even with competition, BIFF must preserve space for diverse voices and experimental films to thrive.
BIFF's choice could mark a turning point in Asia's film ecosystem.
However, for that potential to become real, careful rules and broad social agreement are required.
How do you evaluate BIFF's shift to competition?
