Spinning out of control

I know James Ricketson, his determnation and wild manner is a result of frustration, in this case, frustration with authority.
I say go for it James, persistence has been, is and always will be, the weapon we independant producers must wield if we are to prevail!

I’m another like James and I put my hand up to say that some of those, I repeat, some of those who have landed a nice job within the bureaucracy, have never been in our shoes, as some behave and reason as if they know nothing of what a film maker’s life can be like – and they certainly don’t know the craft. So we have to take matters into our own hands sometimes. The main thing to be vigilant about is the taste of sour grapes. I know the industry is tough. I don’t mind “practical-tough”, but it shouldn’t be “stupid tough”! John “bloody” Meagher

Hands up everyone who’s happy they live in Victoria.
Persist, James. And keep us all entertained.

Guys, I am going to stick up for Screen NSW and the team. I declare my interest that I have recieved minor fund from Screen NSW (on the public record) I have found the the team responsive and flexible. To attack the organisation like this is unfair and unwarranted. James, you are a producer, too.Have you been an applicant? Do you understand the process? .If so, you might like to review your attacks.

Stuart

My ‘attack’ has nothing to do with my being a producer or an applicant but to do with my desire, as a journalist (another hat I wear) to enter into a dialogue with Ashley Luke (or anyone at Screen NSW, for that matter) about the pros and cons of screenwriting workshops such as Aurora. it is odd indeed that you should refer to my asking of questions as an attack. Given that we all acknowledge, in our different ways, that the one area we fall down in badly as an industry is in the development of good screenplays there cannot, in my view, be too much dialogue. The lack of desire on the part of Screen NSW to enter into dialogue about this is a worry. That you, as an experienced filmmaker, should see the desire to engate in dialogue as an ‘attack’ is likewise a worry!

I think you are simply wrong abut the4ir willingness to enter into dilaogue and be accountable. But t think going to and fro in this arena will not help much so I won’t keep adding to it. Suffice to say, I don’t disagree (and I don’t think that the Screen NSW people or anyone else would disagree) that a process of analysis and debate is valuable. I do think it shold be kept on a professional level. The emotive language of your article detracts from proper debate in my view. Why not suggest that someone from Screen NSW presents to the NSW chapter of SPAA.They have done before and would, I assume, be happy to again. How do they choose? Who does the choosing? Fair questions but I have never found them hard to get answered. I am a journalist too. All my life. But this sort of public whipping of peo-le who are public servants and cannot individually defend themselves is out of order.

Stuart

Imagine this: I am running a screenwriter’s workshop for a government funding body. You, wearing your journalist’s hat, request an interview with me for an article you are writing in which you seek the thoughts, opinions and feedback from various stake-holders – directors, producers, screenwriters and film funding bodies. I don’t respond to your request. Instead you get a series of emails from the publicist of the funding body I work for saying, in effect, that no interview with James Ricketson is going to take place? What do you do next? Do you just give up and write nothing because James Ricketson, in his capacity as a public servant, is not able to respond?

Your suggestion, if applied elsewhere, would result in the death of investigative journalism and of that form of journalism that seeks to give voice to different perspectives on any topic in the interests of public debate.

How would you, wearing your journalist’s hat, ever get to publish anything even vaguely challenging or controversial if you gave up researching your article or decided not to publish it on the grounds that those you are writing about are not in a position to respond? Screen NSW has been in a position to respond for months now! How long should I wait? How long would you wait?

You and I are engaged in a dialogue here. We have different opinions. Good. Let them be aired for anyone interested. This is all I sought to do in seeking my interview with Ashley Luke regarding Aurora.

I would be delighted to know what you would do if you were in my journalistic shoes! James Ricketson won’t answer any questions. The tax-payer funded organization he works for uses its publicist to stonewall? What’s Stuart Scowcroft’s next move?

OK. Let’s put me in those shoes. James Ricketson won’t answer my question. So let me re state it.

Have you been an applicant to the Aurora workshop? If so, how many times? Have you been successful or not? Let’s have full disclosure here. Every journalist declares interests for the sake of transparency.

I have been an applicant and not been successful. You have been a producer for a long time. Have you applied to Screen NSW for money for any of the programmes and specifically, have you been an applicant for Aurora. If you won’t answer that question, I agree, it is a real worry.

Stuart

I have applied to the Aurora program once and been knocked back but I fail to see what this has to do with my writing of an article about the Australian Film Industry! Are you suggesting that Screen NSW, by virtue of my lack of success with Aurora (one time) is thereby justified in refusing to enter into a dialogue with the film industry (through a journalist) about a tax-payer funded initiative!

I have been both successful and unsuccessful in my applications to Screen Australia for funds also. Which of these gives me the right to write an article (and hence ask questions) and which necessitates that I make full disclosure!? I have been writing occasional pieces about the Australian Film Industry for more than 30 years and never once mentioned my own films or my personal relationship with funding bodies as they are irrelevant to the context of what I was writing!

I have heard back from Richard Sheldrake. The news is good and bad.

In my correspondence with Premier Keneally I mentioned a couple of other concerns that I have – to do with the anonymous nature of Screen NSW’s assessment processes. Not just me, I should add. The Writers Guild shares these concerns and has been lobbying also. Mr Sheldrake, referring to a Review his department has undertaken, writes:

“This review has now been finalized with recommendations made to improve:
– The availability of information to potential applicants
– Consistency in the assessment process and
– Communication and feedback to both successful and unsuccessful applicants

Screen NSW is being consulted on the implementation of these recommendations and you will be further advised when this process is completed.”

This, to me, is good news. Hopefully there will now be a debate amongst NSW filmmakers as to how the assessment process can best serve our industry and culture. A public debate – with different views aired and considered. The same applies with AURORA. A lot of money is spent on this particular initiative. David Michod speaks highly of his experience with Aurora and insofar as the initiative helped enhance the screenplay for ANIMAL KINGDOM it is to be praised. But are AURORA and other intensive workshop initiatives providing us with better screenplays than the individual efforts of screenwriters working alone or in conjunction with a director, producer and/or script editor?

The bad news is that Mr Sheldrake does not address the issue of my requested interview and (what I consider to be) the farcical lengths that Screen NSW has gone to, to make this interview impossible. C’est la vie.

NSW screenwriters (and other filmmakers) may well be aware that it is possible for them to obtain copies of assessments of their projects through FOI (GIPA) legislation. The Premier’s department is recommending to Screen NSW the following:

“I confirm the Review includes a recommendation that such documentation should be made routinely available to unsuccessful applicants without the necessity to make an application under the GIPA Act.”

In terms of transparency and accountability this will be a positive step in the right direction.

James, well done for making your thoughts public. Encore, well done for printing them. James, you are making a stand on a system that we know is the death of the Australian film industry. It still amazes me why sloppy producers who comment on sucking up to the funding bodies the way they do don’t understand what’s really happening. Screen Australia, Film Victoria, SPAA are all part of this corruption. There is no transparency here.

So as an example of why our industry is not worth putting tax payer money into is this: Recently after opening my New York, LA and Mexico offices of Wingman Pictures, I received a total of 20 scripts from all across America. After 4 weeks and $140 Million dollars we have several of those in production between now and March, major deals with the studio’s being signed all with A-list cast and crew and I did this from the comfort of my Ballarat home.

You will hear a lot more about my company’s massive success in Hollywood in the coming weeks and what you will notice is that there is no Australian films to be seen. Why? Because the Australian industry don’t support it’s writers or filmmakers. It has taken me 15 years of trying in Australia only to be shoved away or hidden. Three weeks in the U.S and my company slate in triple the years Screen Australia budget for ALLLLLLL AUstralian films.

To all directors, producers and writers…. my advice is this. Move! Screen Australia can’t even address the issues of internal boys club hand outs let alone supporting the writers who could literally bring together some great works.

Like always, I have always said that I want to build a new industry here in Australia. Well I’m doing it. We have several films shooting in Australia (Smallest budget is 7 Million U.S) all with A-List cast and yet our funding bodies couldn’t care less.

My suggestion is this. If you are an accomplished writer, contact me at mattnorman@wingmanpictures.com and send me a script that has nothing to do with Australia (as the reality is that International investors don’t go near Aussie productions because they are all aware of the issues here) and if I like it and my development team think it’s a goer then we’ll talk.

We’re looking for writers that write. Not directors that want to make their film. Writers that try to make a living out of writing. It needs to be based in ANY country in the World except Australia. To make life easier, Base it in the USA. Don’t send through re-hashed garbage or ideas of films that have been done a million times. Also don’t be scared to write without thinking of the budget. In this country I have learnt that you should never write a script that will cost over $200,000 to make as the chances are it will never get made.

We have several major investors, studios, distributors working very closely with us and we are happy for the sake of giving Aussie writers permission to shine, have a look at their scripts.

For those that think it’s impossible… think again. I’m doing it every day. Australian films aren’t taken seriously in the U.S unless it becomes a cult classic. Screen Australia are to blame on this because they are the ones that choose which film to hand out at major festivals, which films to add to their catalog and which films to fund. The boys club are the only ones getting this TAX payer money. Across the board, if you want to make a career out of it then pull up your sleeves and be honest in what you want to achieve. I stake my own career on it everyday.

Aussies filmmakers like me who just wanted to tell Australian stories and to help give Australian’s jobs etc need to take a big step back and look around for a moment. The only films being made are indi films that are self funded. When funding is thrown at people, they are the same old people every time. So do as I did and GIVE UP. Not on your career, on trying to stay loyal to a country that spits on your face for decades because they can.

I’m looking for outstanding writers with International appeal. If that’s you then come and say g’day.

If only our funding bodies were as honest as I am being. Maybe… MAYBE we would have something worth selling to the international audiences. The SPIN that our funding bodies like to weave when one of our BIG films sells in America is that we have a great film industry succeeding overseas. When you see it written that a film has sold overseas from this country, go find out how many screens, what was opening weekend? The honest truth is that most Aussies films get released straight to DVD and if they are lucky enough (or helped by screen australia) to get a theatrical release then it usually open on several crap screens with total box office of $40k. hmmmm awesome industry we have….

James, as always Im proud of you for being one of very few willing to WANT change.

Matt, there’s no shortage of filmmakers (producers, writers, directors and others) who want change. The problem is that many do not want to bite one of the few hands that might feed them and so keep their complaints private.

William Goldman was speaking truth when he wrote, “No-one knows anything.” We are all, in our various capacities, (including film bureaucrats) trying to second guess what audiences will want to see in two years time. Given that there is probably only one Australian filmmaker whose guesses are almost always right (George Miller) the rest of us need to be a iittle humble and not to presume that we are necessarily right in our judgements.

Unfortunately film funding bodies all too often work on the presumption that their judgements are invariably correct. So certain are they of their judgements that they need not engage in dialogue with filmmakers – despite the wealth of evidence that they are wrong more than they are right.

Other than open dialogue and debate about all aspects of our industry I think it important also that there be mechanisms in place whereby the bureaucratic decision-makers are assessed on the basis of their track record. At present they are not.

Screen NSW’s refusal to enter into a dialogue with me, wearing my journalist’s hat, is just a symptom of the larger problem we have as an industry.

Yes agreed. Maybe we should setup a proper film forum that discuss the real needs in this industry and invite all of them to be a part of it. Give them equal time to tell their side of the story and then quiz them on their actual ability to deliver. After that we ask them why they have a track record of dodgy deals being done with the same people and getting away with Murder by film every year. Then we should put them in a woodstock and throw tomatoes at them until they resign.

This mini-drama has reached a conclusion of sorts. It transpires that NSW state government policy does not allow conversations or dialogue of the kind I had hoped to have with Ashley Luke. All questions must be submitted in writing an will be responded to in writing.

On a positive note, this was communicated to me in a lengthy telephone conversation with the very pleasant Director of Communications, State and Regional Development and Tourism – Mr Peter Cripps. We engaged in precisely the kind of dialogue (tossing around ideas) that it is not possible to have with Screen NSW about the Aurora program. A strange state of affairs but there you go!

On another positive note, a letter from Mr Richard Sheldrake, Director General, Industry and Investment. This will be good news for screenwriters who wish to know a little more about why their projects were knocked back:

“Screen NSW has been consulted on the recommendations and will implement the following processes to enhance its current assessment practices:

– Screen NSW will provide a letter outlining the reasons for a funding decision to all unsuccessful applicants and provide assessment sheets upon request.

– Screen NSW will include references to its Feedback, Review and Formal Complaints Procedure in the formal notification of funding decisions to unsuccessful applicants.

– Screen NSW will implement a process whereby a sample of recommendations for one genre of development applications will be dual blind assessed every six months.

– Screen NSW’s web page will be reviewed to ensure it allows easy access to available assistance measures by potential applicants.

I believe these changes will assist Screen NSW in its communication with applicants and to deliver its funding programs in a more transparent manner.”

Thank you, Mr Sheldrake

I’ve obviously come a bit late to this discussion but I like Matt Norman’s suggestion of a forum organized by people actually earning a living (or trying to) making films – to which the bureaucrats who make up the rules by which the industry must operate would also be invited to attend. Everyone should be there on equal terms with no one group occupying the stage, making pronouncements, then inviting the ‘audience’ to queue up behind a microphone to ask questions. Everyone present there on equal terms to discuss problems that we all confront.