A Digital Archive for Perspectives from the Global Majority

Cinelogue is a platform dedicated to screening movies by filmmakers from the Global Majority who have been historically marginalised by colonialism and imperialism. By creating space for regional perspectives, Cinelogue fosters critical dialogue and examines the structures, histories and realities of colonialism, as well as the legacies of anti-colonial struggles, through the visual medium. Born out of frustration with the erasure of cinematic histories from the Global Majority on mainstream platforms, founder Rehana Esmail started Cinelogue as a digital archive that challenges colonial frameworks.

Operating with a decentralised approach, its curation is rooted in collaborations with regional filmmakers, artists, and academics, with lived experience and an understanding of the local histories and realities. Currently, Cinelogue is streaming programs such as Letters to the Future, a selection of video essays from Southeast Asia curated by Forum Lenteng, and films including Tableau Ferraille (1997) by Moussa Sène Absa. Beyond its distinctive curational approach, Cinelogue also implements a profit-share model: 50% of subscription revenue goes directly to the filmmakers or distributors. In this way, each subscription directly supports the growth of film industries beyond the Western-centric cinema landscape.

Ahead of Cinelogue’s first show at Refuge Worldwide on 23 September, founder Rehana Esmail reflects on the important of building a digital archive of decolonial cinematic histories – by filmmakers from, and for audiences of, the Global Majority.

What were some films or memories that shaped your understanding of cinema?

Rehana Esmail: During my formal education, probably European postwar classics by Godard and Antonioni as well as Chantal Akerman. Also films like Patricio Guzmán’s The Battle of Chile – filmmakers who were deeply aware of cinema’s transformative potential. I did a master’s degree at the New Media school in New York City and while that was very formative, I quickly realized how Eurocentric the education around cinema was, and how much had been erased. I had to re-educate myself to learn about different cinema histories, cultures, and approaches to what the medium can be. Some influential works were by Ousmane Sembène, Djibril Diop Mambéty, Sarah Maldoror, Hussein Shariffe, Omar Amiralay, Assia Djebar, and of course Satyajit Ray. Cinema is a wonderful medium to engage with another reality – abstract or concrete – moving through time and space while remaining in a very intimate setting.

You mentioned that a lot of this was knowledge that you had to gather yourself because of the narrow Eurocentric curriculum of most film schools. How did you find these alternative cinema histories and films?

At that time, I was immersed in post-colonial thought and became more conscious through political movements like Black Lives Matter, which were unfolding around 2013–14. That was also when the war in Syria was happening. Those developments pushed me to look at cinema from various regions as a way to learn about their histories and societies. I was especially drawn to films from the 60s–80s and kept a long list of “films to watch” based on my research – but access to those films was extremely limited. Some platforms like MUBI had titles I was looking for, but I felt those films didn’t receive the thoughtful curation they deserved.

How did you then get to the point of deciding to start your own streaming platform?

During the pandemic, when life was on pause for many, I grew frustrated with the lack of streaming options for the films I wanted to see. Eventually, I asked myself: why don’t I create a platform that provides access to the films I want to see? Through my research, I had built a catalogue of works that were almost entirely absent from streaming. Cinelogue emerged from that personal need – for different cinematic perspectives that were missing from mainstream platforms.

When I started Cinelogue, I wasn’t reinventing the wheel – there was already a strong body of work and curatorial thinking that inspired me. My initial focus was post-colonial cinema of the 60s and 70s. I was fascinated by film as a means of reclaiming the right to one’s own image, showing marginalized perspectives, and building solidarity through storytelling. Bringing this approach into the streaming space felt like a unique contribution. 

You launched Cinelogue in 2022. What were some of the initial hurdles, and how has the platform evolved since then?

 It’s not easy to build something completely new without external funding or guidance. The first three years were really trial and error. We launched in January 2022 with a pilot program called Cinema After Liberation, which was essentially our prototype. It featured films from the first one to two decades after formal independence across Africa and Asia – the kind of cinema at the heart of Cinelogue’s vision. In hindsight, it was a tough program to begin with. Most of these historic, often restored films are not in the hands of their original creators or families but are instead in the hands of Western institutions and foundations. Out of a list of 200 films, we managed to secure only five. That experience immediately exposed me to the neo-colonial structures governing film preservation. I’m grateful it happened early, because it shaped Cinelogue’s market model and pushed me to first start working more directly with filmmakers, collectives, and local archives.

You describe the way you collaborate as decentralised. What exactly does that mean for Cinelogue? 

Cinelogue is decentralised both in curation and in its revenue model. All of our films are tied to themed programs curated by cinema and visual art initiatives or individuals with a focus on specific regions. Curators can freely contribute their ideas through the programs and films they choose as part of it. Our goal is to establish new tri-continental connections across Asia, Africa and Latin America. With our 50% subscription revenue share model with independent licensors, we’re creating an ecosystem that is collaborative, transparent, and sustainable for the filmmakers whose work is on our platform. 

How do you find the people to curate the different programs? 

I invite curators based on intuition – on how their ideas connect with what we’re already streaming, but also on what’s happening socially and politically. Over time, I’ve built a wide network of cinema initiatives and collectives, from grassroots organisers to scholars working with archival and contemporary films. Because of our decentralised approach and explicit Global Majority focus, we tend to connect with people who share the same drive in terms of the audiences they want to reach and represent.

Still from "Come to Me, Paradise" by Stephanie Comilang from the "Letters to the Future" program

Cinelogue platforms films that turn a critical and political lens on the world we live in – past and present – and that use cinema as a means to create solidarity and internationalist connections. What makes cinema such a powerful tool for doing that?

For so long, images of the Global Majority have been shaped through a colonial lens – or erased entirely from Western media landscapes. I think cinema allows people to narrate their own realities and imaginations, and for others to engage with and learn from those realities. True solidarity can only emerge when we encounter these realities within their broader historical and social contexts. Yet, despite this potential, there is still no real infrastructure for streaming truly global, independent cinema.

What have digital archives and streaming changed for film, looking at films from the Global Majority in particular?

Digital recording devices and online platforms have opened up film to a much wider range of makers and audiences. Film became a medium from below – a way to capture truths ignored by mainstream media, even a way to televise revolutions. Streaming lets people engage with realities they might otherwise never encounter. While there is a lot of appreciation for bringing all these different thoughts and regions in one digital global space, I also see the hesitation of people arguing that cinema is really about the collective experience of watching films together. I don’t see streaming as a substitute for this experience, but rather as a complementary access component. That’s precisely why Cinelogue aims to complement screenings with critical editorial work and offline partnerships.

Do you see film also as a tool to connect struggles, not just regionally but also intergenerationally? 

Definitely. I think cinema from previous generations is vital to understanding our histories and each other’s histories in order to make sense of where we are now and how we got here. Cinema is a powerful medium to engage with a place but also with a different time and generation, and to form intergenerational connections. 

Cinelogue really makes a point to give back to the filmmakers. You, for example, have a 50-50 revenue share. How does that streaming model work?

Our 50-50 model is a direct response to the way the market exploits filmmakers and how licensing structures often function as gatekeeping. Revenue is shared equally and distributed quarterly among all independent licensors – whether filmmakers, distributors, or small production houses – whose work is on Cinelogue. This happens regardless of a film’s so-called “commercial value” or streaming performance. The model is designed to support local and independent cinema culture over the long term. Of course, its full potential depends on growing a strong subscriber base.

Looking at other digital media platforms, do you feel the landscape has changed?

There’s a lot of progressive media culture emerging, trying to represent diverse voices. But representation alone isn’t enough. Too often, there’s a misalignment between the films streaming services show and their own positioning or economic models. It’s hypocritical to showcase films about liberation struggles while avoiding a stance on those same struggles today. Take No Other Land, for example. If a platform chooses to show a film about colonial legacies, occupation, and ongoing genocide, it has a responsibility to take a clear stand against that violence. Otherwise, it risks commodifying liberation movements for profit. 

"Ainsi Meurent les Anges" (And So Angels Die) by Moussa Sène Absa

On 23 September, you are joining Refuge in the booth for a radio show. What can we expect from the show?

Listeners can expect a one-hour conversation about Cinelogue: the platform, how it works, and what we stand for. Nora, who leads Cinelogue’s marketing and partnerships, will join me. We’ll discuss the origins and ideas behind Cinelogue, why it matters, and how our approach differs from other platforms. We’ll also highlight some of the films currently streaming on Cinelogue, especially those where music plays a role.

Which film currently streaming on Cinelogue would you recommend to the Refuge Worldwide audience and why? 

I would recommend Slingshot Hip-Hop. The documentary traces the rise of Palestinian hip-hop in the early 2000s – a movement that shaped Arabic hip-hop more broadly. The film shows how artists from different occupied territories came together through music and culture. Especially now, as genocide continues, it is vital to engage with Palestinian voices and histories. Showing this film in Germany, where representation, education, and activism around Palestine are being policed and criminalised, is also a form of resistance. It creates space for critical dialogue and connections, which is at the heart of what Cinelogue seeks to do.

---

Check out the full program currently streaming on Cinelogue and tune in on 23 September to find out more.