charlieb wrote: Mon, 05/06/2006 - 07:09

Another useless effort at stopping British talent going to Hollywood. MAYBE that whopping 300k will help get a handful of scripts developed.. but how likely are they to then get made, seen and actually be good? Even if all of the above do actually go as hoped, the talent will still go overseas as soon as humanly possible because there are still more opportunities and more money over there. 300k is a drop in the ocean in terms of what is spent on development in the US. Putting together yet another development fund is a good thing in terms of helping establish new talent.. but it certainly isnt going to stop those people that want to work in the US from going. Spending more money on marketing British films more effectively so that more people actually go to see them would be more of a step in the right direction - that way, people that do work on British films might feel that their efforts weren't a big waste of time, and could see some point in staying to work here.

LL wrote: Mon, 05/06/2006 - 10:51

I think I'm inclined to agree about these figures. They break down thus, for the fund's first 12 months:

$280,000 (£150,000) from the UK Film Council
$140,000 (£75,000) from BBC Films
$140,000 (£75,000) from Pathe

I'd be worried if I thought any of these parties needed to break a sweat to come up with these sums.

It's better than nothing, though, I guess, and it's always nice to see people working together!

Zara wrote: Mon, 05/06/2006 - 14:40

As you've both said, it's always a good thing to have a new fund.

But more funds won't solve the problem, as charlieb said, there needs to be more investment in marketing. Name a couple of UK funded features, that didn't win a big award to make them reknown, that you went to see in the last year... for the average cinema goer, that's a tough one!

And of course the other reason why a lot of filmmakers flee to the States is because the internationally big names are there. We do have some great talent here, and that's not in question, but I doubt Chris Nolan would have gotten to where he is now if he hadn't moved!

charlieb wrote: Mon, 05/06/2006 - 22:47

You're absolutely right Zara; issues of quality aside.. I really dont think the UK has a problem in terms of the number of films it puts out in any given year. The real problem is that most of those films never get seen, either in theatres or at home.

Yes, it's important to foster home grown talent, but that talent will never have the incentive to stay "at home" if the "industry" can't provide the same professionalism as can be found in the states. The problem isnt with a lack of talent, behind or in front of the camera, the problem lies with the business side.
As far as i can tell, most new money invested in the film business in the UK goes into development. What we dont need right now is to be paying more writers to turn out more scripts that turn into more films collecting dust on shelves.
What we need is to be able to make sure people are actually aware of the films that do exist and then maybe they will actually pay to see them - otherwise all that most people in the business are doing is spinning wheels.. these are films, not paintings that one person is going to hang on their wall at home.

Zara wrote: Tue, 06/06/2006 - 10:07

I totally agree charlieb!

Maybe they could subsidise the cost of a cinema ticket of British films, or have a regular day per month when it's cheaper to see a Brit film than any other... structurally a bit like an OAP night, except instead of subsidising an age range, it's subsidising national cinema... then again that would probably cause outrage on the international market.

Something does need to be done to get people to watch Brit films, and investing in marketing would make a huge difference.

When you moved over to the States, did you find there to be a huge jump in the attitude towards being part of the industry?

charlieb wrote: Tue, 06/06/2006 - 22:23

I think those are very good ideas Zara, and certainly along the right lines of thinking.

After all, France for example has a much more productive and succesful industry than the UK and it has received what i consider to be effective help from the government in terms of ensuring that french films have a place in cinemas there.

I will admit that i dont know all the ins and outs of the business side of their industry and i'm not going to research it all right now - but the important thing is that they turn out completely french films that people are eager to see in theatres there; and many actually do well.

They make the typical artsy type of films, but they also make all kinds of popular genre movies (action, thriller, comedy) with well known french actors. Some of the films they turn out are what you could refer to as being hollywood b-movie knockoffs, such as the ones that luc besson produces, but even those are well made and can be sold internationally.

France is not alone, Spain, Germany and Italy to differing degrees turn out well made, popular, succesful films that outgross high-budget hollywood fare. So why cant we do the same on a consistent basis?

It's not ideal to have a business that needs support from the government because it cant stand on its own two feet. But if we are receiving help the most important thing is to not squander it and become reliant on that support. Take the help and then get to a point at which you can take off the training wheels and take care of yourself.

And in response to your question Zara, yes i absolutely found a difference in terms of people's attitudes towards the film industry in the US. It's not to say that everyone that works here is so much better and cleverer than people in any other country, but there is an established industry here which you obviously learn from once you are part of it. Working in the movie business here is a viable option for people looking for a (relatively) professional career, as working in banking or advertising might be in the UK, and once you have worked here you become used to that more efficient/professional attitude, that quite frankly is hard to come by in the UK basically because there is no one, or very few people at least working here to lead by example. As i said before, what we lack in the UK is not the technical expertise, but the business expertise.

Zara wrote: Wed, 07/06/2006 - 11:17

Absolutely Carlos (charlieb).

You mention a great example - France really has its act together when it comes to distribution. From my time there I got to grips with some of the legislation imposed by the government on cinemas - in order for a cinema to be open to the public, it must show x percentage of national films (normally more French films must be shown than international ones). And they don't mean in the smallest screen either - French films must spend some time in the biggest Screen - the government would rather the cinema lost potential money on a big international film if it meant that a national film had the opportunity to sell more seats by putting it in Screen 1 - but that notion is completely alien here.

And a second thing, the French (public) are so proud of their cinema! I know people (not in the industry obviously) who are actually put off seeing a film if it's British. That is something that would rarely happen in France.

But, arguably, it's easier for them to value their cinema. Dubs and subtitles are annoying - certainly when I lived in Paris I saw a lot of French films - not so much because I wasn't interested in others, but I just didn't want to be distracted by subtitles, and dubs wreck a film for me.

Then again, if the UK had an incredible no.1 film that had beaten all BO records, the UK would be hugely supportive of it. Unlike what happened in Venezuela last year.

Secustro Express, in 8 weeks, broke all BO records for a Venezuelan film. It was seen by the thousands there, and was made using Venezuelan cast and crew. But, because the film depicted a society rife with kidnapping and violence, The National Autonomous Center of Cinematography of Venezuela blocked it from being submitted for consideration at the Oscars (see their petition ). I think the government even tried to ban it from being seen!

So on the bright side, we could be worse off? At least when we're successful we are supported! It's just being successful on a large scale that's the problem!

Zara wrote: Tue, 13/06/2006 - 12:58

According to France’s National Cinema Center (CNC), French Box Office figures are up by 22% for the first 5 months of 2006 compared to last years’, which means that 91.12m tickets were sold.

French films have 49.3% of the market, compared with 41.2% of US films. Now there’s something you don’t find in the UK!

I’m having trouble finding UK figures to compare this with – does anyone have them?

Alec Bruce (not verified) wrote: Tue, 13/06/2006 - 16:39

For information on UK Cinema Stastitics, check out data published by the RSU Team at the UKFC
http://www.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk/information/statistics/rsuwork/

charlieb wrote: Tue, 13/06/2006 - 18:24

yeah god knows how british films compare with those figures - and thanks for that link Alec

Zara wrote: Wed, 14/06/2006 - 10:25

Indeed! Thanks for the link Alec! I'll have a read through of some of the RSU's work over the weekend.

Zara wrote: Sun, 18/06/2006 - 21:19

So from the RSU there were 73.8m admissions (August-December 2005 - this is the most recent 5 month period I could find the stats on) in the UK in total... substantially less than France's 91.12m... I'll research further when I can to find out the UK production market share of the admissions.