If scripts could talk

Genius.

In any other industry people would be getting sued for not giving credit

Looking forward to more from The Growler

User ID not verified.

Bunty – please? Original screenplays ‘invent themselves’ without input from directors & producers – those who do this are known as storytellers.
Insisting on the caveat in your last foray into the creative realm that any & all screenplays submitted must have a director attached perfectly illustrates just how far out of the loop SPAA really is.

User ID not verified.

Writers are treated like dirt. So are actors. We’re told we have to suffer for our art and we are expected to work for free. We’re told the people who operate cameras, lights, booms, editing suites are the one who must be paid because they have expensive equipment that costs money to buy. Writers and actors have faces, voices and words, this stuff costs nothing so it has no value, apparently. But a word to all the producers and directors out there who think this way: (and I’ve met plenty of them over the years) no matter how good the camera work, the lighting, the sound recording and the post production is, the audience will only warm to a film is the dialog is well written and the actors are engaging, convincing and likeable. Without a decent script and decent performances, all you can ever have is a magnificently polished turd. Script writers and actors deserve way more respect than they get because they can seriously make or break your film. In fact, I’d say that’s a definite.

User ID not verified.

It’s hugely ironic that, while SPAA lists the names of the people who INTEND to produce and direct these projects, the names of the people who have so far actually done something creative (writing the bloody scripts) are the ones who are omitted. Did anyone at SPAA involved in putting out the press release query this for a moment? Obviously not.

By the way, who DID write the scripts? Still none the wiser in this regard

User ID not verified.

lol… like all great comedy writing, there’s a dark truth to it.
Keep up the good work Growler (and AWG…)!

User ID not verified.

This is a process of neglect that is nurtured at film school all the way through to every level of higher production. I wrote a script a few years back, won a bunch of awards, no mention of myself in any of the press releases, nothing. In script ‘development” meetings my ideas, the same ideas that had bought everybody to the meeting in the first place were often neglected and derided by a “senior producer” with an appalling track record. The whole experience was an utter joke. We suck at comedy..why..producers end up writing most of the “jokes”. Thats how TV works, writers plug away and the producers have the final say, so anything that is original or funny gets trimmed out of fear or sheer stupidity. This industry is controlled by people with shockingly suspect track records, (getting something up is enough to command respect) little experience with actual writing..but somehow know what is effective writing and what the audience will want. Time and time again I meet Producers who have all this “narrative knowledge” looking at their CV’s I wonder how they keep networking to these positions to do such lasting damage. You can produce utter shit in this industry and then shop it around like a piece of Bling telling everybody how shiny and special your career is..when in fact its really just a cheap and dull imitation of what a successful and intelligent career should resemble. Mention how unimpressed you are with somebody’s track record is career death. We have created an industry where logic and reason is shameful..the two very tools any writer worth his salt relies upon to work his/her trade…we’ve actually become so timid and afraid that we’ll tolerate all manner of rudeness and hack opinions.
Wankers of little talent run this industry and those that are talented choose collaborators wisely. So if you’re a young writer looking for a break, be prepared to work with the dickhead element for a long long time…its what makes up 90% of the industry.

User ID not verified.

I’m not sure why anyone would even want one of their screenplays to be handled by SPAA and produced here in Australia. The industry is so backwards if anything good gets made it is a stroke of luck.

Case in point: I wrote a spec feature screenplay. Everyone say’s you have a 1 in 1000 chance of it even being optioned, since there’s so many scripts out there but so what. I send it to 100’s of agents and producers across the world, most in the US. Within 2 weeks the script was optioned by a producer that wants to get it made. Maybe it will, maybe it won’t, that’s not the point.

The point is, if I had taken the typical Australian ‘Screen Australia route,’ my script would still be sitting on my hard drive and I’d have an empty bank account. To get a script even considered for funding over here it has to jump through so many hoops, the worst of which is the totally unqualified readers that are seemingly stuck indefinitely in every government film body. I’d have to fill out journals and application forms, and beg for someone to give my script a chance. Then, if SPAA’s recent performance is anything to go by, I wouldn’t even get credit for my work!

In the US, if a script is good, someone will buy it. Over here it seems the scripts quality isn’t paramount, it is a lot of politics and rubbish. Hell, I’m Tasmanian and recently looked into some development funding from Screen Tas. I wouldn’t be considered for ONE reason – what was it? – I hadn’t attended a Screen Tas workshop in the past 12 months. Absolutely laughable, and I dare say criminal. Screen Tas ship in E-grade writers (“I have a credit on 2 eps of Home & Away and 1 ep of Blue Heelers, listen to me!”) and expect you to ‘learn’ from them. I’m sorry but in 2011 I have the internet at my disposal, countless geniuses of the craft provide information and advice that just dwarves whatever Screen Tas is offering (and charging ~$600 for), often for free on their blogs.

Sorry this rant has gone so long, but it is a rant-worthy topic for me. I know Screen Aus and the state bodies want what is best for the Aussie film industry, unfortunately they are causing more problems than they cure. Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to go and do a re-write on my script (so I can be paid a nice five figures). If my script was picked up by SA, I’d be expected to do these rewrites for free. And that just about sums up why our industry is stuck in neutral.

User ID not verified.

While I don’t in any way condone the ommission of writer’s names anywhere (particularly writers who slog at it for years, draft after draft unpaid, and all those in between contributing writers, script editors and script doctors that often get scripts producable, but never get credited) …

The behaviour is not atypical when it comes to credits … in any venu.

Producer’s names almost never get listed on festival programs or websites.

It was only about 2 years ago that Cannes started to list producers on their program …. despite listing every other department head, sales agent, distributor and/or press contact.

The truth of the matter is – that track record doesnt mean very much with writing (other than some indicator that the writer knows what they are doing, giving it a higher priority to get read amongst the masses of scripts out there).

Each script and story is individual and new – and should be viewed as such.

I’ve seen trashy scripts from some of the most acclaimed writers (which led me to wonder how many script doctors had contributed to those acclaims), and scripts by total unknowns which are pure genius.

Each guild/association/event has its own agenda and will promote it’s “own”.

SPAA (no, I’m not a member) will be promoting producers (their “own”) and serving the needs of their “own” ie what gets the distributors/financiers excited.
the package ie directors, cast and script.

Frankly the distributors/sales agents and financiers dont care who wrote the script – they just want it to be “great”.

By the same token, they dont give a rats who is producing it – so long as it’s made properly (usually with a solid line producer behind the production and post production supervisor there to get it thru to delivery).

If anyone imagines that producers in this country are any better paid than writers during development – then I suggest they read the funding guidelines that make no provision for a producer “fee” (other than a token amount that might cover phone calls a few months).
If a project gets development funding – at least the writer gets a fee.

Script development funding tunaround times are so obscenely long that an option will expire before more than a couple of drafts can get processed, approved, contracted and completed … then the producer’s left with the burden of repaying the development debt**.

As well as never being able to recoup the costs++ of attending international film markets, costs of casting directors, option fees, accounting, overheads etc etc

These (** & ++) are the primary reason why local producers are reluctant to take on new writers work. Anyone who can solve these problems should get the Nobel Prize.

Everyone else should just take Simon’s advice.

LfO

PS if you ever get the chance to speak to the producers of The Kings Speech, The Hurt Locker, I-Robot, Catch Me If You Can etc etc … they all have the same message – those successes have not helped them get their next films financed. It’s pretty grim.

User ID not verified.

@ Simon & LfO.
What I find really frustrating is the lack of entreprenurial vision amongst local producers? Whereas I’ve always considered ‘commercial film’ as a profit driven enterprise – these people view it as art. Mention commercial concepts & business strategies in your initial pitch & they freak out – start telling you how good ‘they’ are -happend many times – apparently screenwriters aren’t supposed to know the commercial side of the environment in which they operate?

User ID not verified.

I think it’s a problem when people think of making art as a right rather than a privelige that has to be earned. Some of the greatest film directors who ever lived considered themselves good business men as well as good artists. I’ve proven to myself that I can make money from art. It’s not even a complicated thing to do. But I definitely think the script is the greatest asset. If you’ve got a strong script, you’ll do well. If not, forget it. No amount of razzle dazzle with save a lousy story.

User ID not verified.

Funding bodies need a radical rethink of how they fund productions and view “experience” in the film industry. Until this happens, until they stop listening to the same old drones that hand out advice on funding boards across the country, we will continue to have a system that is one dimensional, nepotistic, illogical, greedy, delusional and ignorant. Everybody will continue to get angry and annoyed at a government funded industry that promotes transparency, but has little interest in actually applying it and treats a large proportion of aspiring filmmakers with contempt. There is a disconnect, it is real, it is valid and its happening to the vast majority of us and it needs to be acknowledged and a perspective change (ie government policy) needs to take place. You can’t spend $45,000 on a party and then turn around and say..all is okay..sorry we got it wrong…we have a new leader now and expect trust and respect to evolve from there. That event is a symptom of a greater rot eating at the foundations of a system set up to support creative minded individuals not to look on at them with sniggering contempt.
Their needs to be radical change..the needs of the filmmaker are changing, the platforms of content delivery are evolving and here we sit with this very closeted view of what a film can be, how they should be made and what distribution should look like. Until we start backing some wild card talent we will still have this system that see’s talent burning out before it can get going. It is a grim financing climate out there..so whats the solution? Rather than just saying “oh Fuck it..its all gone to the dogs!” React and rethink the model to fit the new scenario. How do we stimulate more grass roots and risky filmmaking. Crowd sourcing..with funding bodies matching dollar for pledged dollar for projects that meet the criteria? Why isn’t this happening? Setting up a VOD platform for Australian productions..promoting and distributing Australian film in radical ways? So much can be done that isn’t. If we can’t provide more radical opportunites why are we still promoting education in the film industry as a viable option? Is it so we can have more student debt..or do we actually believe that the education we fund and offer can actually have some kind of sustainability and longevity. AFTRS aggressively promotes itself as an educational institution that can provide a certain skill set. What use is that skill set in an industry that has little interest in innovation and radical thought and the quality of an idea having importance above and beyond nepotism and petty politics? A change in perspective..go on give it a go! it won’t hurt…well it might hurt all those with tired old ideas that have had their snouts in the public trough for the last 30 years…they might feel the pinch. I’d say you’ve had your time..stand aside.

User ID not verified.

Hi ‘Writing Writers into the picture’,

I dont find it so much a lack of entreprenurial vision – it all comes down to how many producers have been able to sustain themselves within the system.

The AU govt system historically has not given any profit participation to producers – so producers have taken their fee – which was all they’d ever see – and try and move onto the next film (and next fee) ASAP. There was never any incentive to make anything commerical – ie something that would breakeven and make a profit.

Success within the system was associated with “festival wins” not profits.

This has led to many of our local investors being so badly burnt in the past that many will never again invest in film.

MOreover, any producer who tried to make a commercial film was told to buck off because the system didnt make “commerical” aka “hollywood” pictures. So with time, “commerically minded producers” – have found themselves “forced” to make make sh*te they didnt even like themselves, in order to survive.

There are very few producers in this country with
1) any commercial training (aka financing, production aka manufacturing, distribution, marketing etc) … Many are artists (actors, writers, directors & other crew) who have fallen into producing because they couldnt get their films up thru other producers.
2) An international perspective – which can only be gotten by attending international film markets to see what gets financed and with what attachments and at what budget levels. Australian films are grossly overpriced.

Any producer who doesnt take on a “well thought out” business plan (or outline) with unbiased research and solid strategies for financing or marketing, either
1) doesnt have the mindpower to understand the content of the presentation, or
2) has a serious chip on their shoulder, and doesnt want to be shown up for their inadequacies, or is desperately trying to cover for them,
3) is simply too busy to take on a new project.

There is the flip-side … the plan presented may indeed have quite a number of shortcomings, not the least of which is presenting a skewed/biased POV – which screams of inexperience.

I think you’d be surprised to see how many local producers crave to do something truely commercial (aka profitable) so they can survive for a couple of decades without grovelling to the govt agencies.

However, we wont be able to use the govt agency money to make truely profitable films until we can make bankable star cast offers that can be executed in a timely manner. Top actor agents wont put their talent on hold for more than a couple of months … not enough time to get a funding application processed within the current system eg deadlines once every quarter, 2mths processing time, another 2mths contracting time … if it’s a copro, add another 8 weeks onto that eg 9mths!!!!

Since I’m on the casting wagon …

MEAA needs to stop this stupid campaign to deter / penalise the use of international cast. Pretending it’s going to put all Aussie cast out of work.
Total BS !!

There is not a single Aussie actor out there who has international star status that didnt first get cast and noticed alongside an international star.

“Star-less” films dont get sold internationally and dont breakeven, let alone make profit. Particularly since the GFC – international agents & distributors are scared and not taking any risks.

Penalising the use of international stars in our films will kill our local industry, and effectively put all our budding feature actors out of work.

Anyone who says otherwise knows nothing about the commerical side of the film industry.

LfO

User ID not verified.

Its very interesting what LFO is writing here and well done for being so honest.

“I dont find it so much a lack of entreprenurial vision – it all comes down to how many producers have been able to sustain themselves within the system.
The AU govt system historically has not given any profit participation to producers – so producers have taken their fee – which was all they’d ever see – and try and move onto the next film (and next fee) ASAP. There was never any incentive to make anything commerical – ie something that would breakeven and make a profit.”

I think the above is very telling. Killing off innovation..thats what we do..and we do its so well. We force Producers to polish the middle ground, offering up TV productions that most of the public despise, but watch because its on the box. We then collect the ratings and say “its popular”, when really its far from it. So mediocrity replaces quality, standards drop and Producers become addicted to getting the greenlight on poorly developed productions, because they can survive. We then start to view our own culture as being a dumping ground for consistent mediocrity, viewing our audience with simplistic contempt. So if we have created a system that is anti-innovation and makes it impossible for producers to sustain themselves..who benefits and why? Why would we as a government funded industry kill innovation, kill creativity and make it impossible, for the majority of not just producers but writers, directors etc to make decent living out of their skill set. So if there is no incentive to make anything commercial..what kind of industry are we trying to build?

“MOreover, any producer who tried to make a commercial film was told to buck off because the system didnt make “commerical” aka “hollywood” pictures. So with time, “commerically minded producers” – have found themselves “forced” to make make sh*te they didnt even like themselves, in order to survive.”

I hear this time and time again..forced to make shite in order to survive. I mean why are we forcing this hand, why are we creating an industry that is ill informed, political, frustrating for the majority and utterly illogical? WHY DO WE THINK SO LITTLE OF OUR AUDIENCE? I mean this is no joke. THIS IS THE INDUSTRY WE HAVE, its no theory its the reality. People are constantly saying to me that if the government only knew how bad it is..how impossible it is..they’d be shocked into realising that this is an industry in crisis..its not a theory its a fact and its happening now! We devalue the importance of our own creative merit at our own cultural peril.

“Success is judged by “Festival Wins” this is no joke.. Ruth Harley saw the success of Sleeping Beauty as revolving around entry into Canne. Entry was obtained, job done..success all round, that was the simplistic yardstick of success. THAT IS UTTER MADNESS and if that is the kind of industry you see as being successful Dr Harley could you please quit now? the disconnect is mind boggling. That perspective is no laughing joke. It is real, it is factual and it is the kind of perspective that is making an utter mockery of our:
Education system
The careers of thousands
The inherent talent of thousands
And an industry that survives on compromise, hope and passion.
And that sense of compromise, hope and passion is dying fast.
The brain drain is killing our industry..right across the creative landscape.
What kind of career could you realistically carve out for yourself in this current climate?
This is a system that can see a film like A Heartbeat Away actually considered for funding, actually considered, appraised, approved by many.. and put into actual production, only to find out “Ooops we’ve made an embarrassing disaster”. Its a system that rewards mediocrity (so mates can survive) and suspect talent, breaking the rules of its own “proven criteria” while those with innovation and commercial minded products are forced to be judged and scrutinised as dreamers and outliners in an industry where they should have the driving seat. This is a culture war..and its happening now. Its a war that’s being fought around the battlefield of “what our culture should look like to foreigners and ourselves”. Peoples careers are being sacrificed and suffocated via neglect so an idea of Australia culture can be projected to the world that really is a mirage. The reality is we are a culture that talks big but we think very very small. We like the idea of promoting a diverse version of Australian culture from Snowtown to a A Heartbeat Away (maybe they should go on a double bill for the G’day day in LA). The reality means we have a political agenda well entrenched before the assessment of an idea can begin or before it can be developed. I ask why have we created an industry that inflicts so much stress and misery on creative minded individuals and has film festival acceptance above and beyond sustainability. I think its time we ripped the whole thing down and started again. This isn’t a joke its a nightmare and its happening to your career..NOW!!

User ID not verified.

Doug every time you get into rant mode it always seems to be the same stuff said: ‘nepotism,’ the funding bodies are corrupt, and rip it all down so we can start again.

I just find it hard to take what you say seriously when you are so fatalistic. Sure things aren’t great, but maybe some positivity with some realistic suggestions would help this dialogue, rather than the ‘woe is our industry’ speech that probably does more harm than good.

I’d love to hear from Screen Australia to see how they rationalise their mistakes, but I doubt they’ll come anywhere near us when you’re ranting like a looney. Just my 2c

User ID not verified.

Fatalistic? Wow..I think I/we have writen a variety of diverse comments for all to consider.. trying to keep an open dialogue that doesn’t resemble some well manicured press release. I don’t expect to hear from SA and have said multiple times they aren’t the total problem. I think adding to the debate, expressing collective opinions are a positive.. if we are to slowly reshape what should be a sustainable industry..just my 3c

User ID not verified.

Kid you not – that lack of “entreprurial vision amongst AUS producers” blog was an observation formed over many years – not a work of fiction – or frustration.

Whenever I become disillusioned I imagine how I would sell (pitch – write) the “google” concept to these people?

“A means of navigating an imaginary world wide electronic web via a mouse that directs an engine called google”.

Its my considered opinion that until a basic re examination of the what constitutes “commercial filmaking” is undertaken in this country – were not going anywhere.

User ID not verified.

Oh just.. Poo.. to everything!!

User ID not verified.

The problems Australian film (both culture and industry) confront have been well articulated here @ Encore on many occasions, by many contributors – including the responses to this excellent piece. Solutions to our problems, however, have been thin on the ground. There is one that I suspect most in the industry would agree on if we were capable of speaking with one voice. To quote Doug’s politely put question: “Dr Harley could you please quit now?”

(Edited under Encore’s comment moderation policy)

Getting rid of Ruth Harley necessitates that the industry, speaking with one voice, says to Simon Crean, “Please, Minister, look at the mountain of letters of complaint you have about Ruth Harley, take the film industry’s complaints seriously, take Screen Australia spin with a huge grain of salt and provide the organization with a new CEO as soon as possible.”

User ID not verified.

We all may disagree on a few of the details but we all agree that there is a structural problem that needs to be addressed – namely that the funding bodies are failing, with their various policies, to develop and provide production investment in films that Australian and international audiences want to see. Radical change is required but I don’t agree that the whole system needs to be ripped down and that we need to start again from scratch. And it is not going to happen anyway, so it’s pointless to act as if this is some kind of viable solution.

(Edited under Encore’s content moderation policy)

User ID not verified.

re “Lack of entreprenurial vision”
It’s pervasive across the industry in Australia.

When Australian Producers were out there proposing to produce the first 3D feature in this country (circa just pre-Avatar) the post production company management were telling them they were idiots, time wasters and to get lost.

This stance continued during the whole of Avatar’s post period, and even after its release.

Go figure.

User ID not verified.

@3D-P.

Did the figures – do them annually – latest being local Prods took 4.5% of their own $2bill local market – entrepreneurs are out there – just that commercial films got a bad (deserved?) reputation. Problem right now is how do we change it?
Irony being if commercial film was seasonal – this would be our spring – mainstream cf always flourishes in uncertain times (escapism).

User ID not verified.

@Lfo.

Read your comments again – thank you & to all others bloggers – reassuring that there are other likeminded people out there that know & appreciate how the current system operates – don’t come here for an ego trip – just that as an often lonely writer you sometimes really wonder is it “just me”? What the hells going on within this industry? Right now were taking a mere 4.5% of our own $2 bill annual market? Imagine the jobs jobs being pissed away by this no growth policy? We also run the risk of disillusioning some of our best young creative minds by training them for jobs in a stagnant industry that’s simply incapable of accomodating them.
You however may take comfort in the knowledge that the current head of SA is paid more than both her own minister & the PM – & look what a mess it is.
Then again – we are supposed to be creatives – fountain heads of change.

User ID not verified.

My plan to change things is to just keep writing (good) scripts. But after that, it is out of my control…

Hopefully there are more producers/directors/DOPs/soundies/writers/everything out there that aren’t happy with the state of the industry and want to make more features of a higher quality that an audience will flock to.

Film-making is such a collaborative effort, it requires the concerted effort of a number of people from different groups to see change in our stagnant film and TV industry.

User ID not verified.

B – don’t keep writing ‘good scripts’ – find a genre & period you feel confident & comfortable in – then research its ‘endless good stories’.
Writers visit once – storytellers see the vistas.

User ID not verified.

Its taken 2 weeks for my comment to be moderated, censored and added to this debate. Where do I find Encore’s ‘moderation policy’? Nothing I wrote in my uncensored comment was libellous and certainly not as in your face as some of the things our good friend Doug has to write. Whats going on here!

User ID not verified.

I’ve had the same problem as ‘new captain needed’ (whatever that means !) and would like to know what Encore’s moderation policy is and why is seems to apply to some commentators and not others. Publishing a comment two weeks after the discussion has finished defeats the purpose of making it in the first place.

User ID not verified.

One mans moderation is another mans censorship, I guess.

‘new captain needed’ was a reference to the captain of the ship (the ship being Screen Austalia) and certain people being asked to walk to plank.

My light hearted observation was cut but anyone who wants to read the unexpurgated version of it can do so on James’ Ricketson’s blog:

http://jamesricketson.blogspot.....rship.html

User ID not verified.

Know where your coming from cap’n – some of mine in same vein get deleted?
Colloquailly known as political correctness. (journalism).

User ID not verified.

Morning Folks..
I think all the answers we are looking for can be found here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X07tDSrCQO0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rubX8NSJaeU
At least they’re honest about it, its all just soft diplomacy and having a voice in the global-scape of things and thats what our industry is about…to some people in power..for now. I think I’ve always tried to throw up a variety of views on this blog. I think its a vital element of any creative process that people are encouraged to express a variety of passionate views and feelings, especially when they feel that the system that has been created around this very influential and expressive medium might be unfair or punching well below its weight. I will always believe that we are a highly creative nation that could do much more if we were to nurture talent more effectively. Somehow we’ve created a system that see’s creative vision swamped by red tape and a variety of competing interests. It could always be worse and the system we have isn’t as bad as most of us think, no matter how illogical and confusing and unfair we think it might be. I have enormous hope for the future and I do think that those that work at funding bodies do try and do the best job they can, even if they do feel that $45,000 is best spent on champers (had to slide that in sorry). We all know of stories regarding the politics of the system and these politics can be very wearing on the passionate and sometimes disillusioned soul at times, especially at a time when the industry isn’t firing on all its potential cylinders. I’d like to see a political system that really did value the creative wealth of this nation like it values iron ore. The human mind and its infinite capacity to dream can be a great commodity for export and it doesn’t leave a massive hole in the ground for future generations to clean up. Filmmaking is a nice way to spend your life, frustrating, but insightful. I wish you all the best in the future, keep the opinions and passion flowing, and to all those that are confronted, disgusted, annoyed, shocked and insulted by what others write here on this blog..I say “lighten the F$%K up you bunch silly self satisfied stiffs..provocation is half the reason we watch films and half the reason you step out the front door to interact in that confusing little experiment called “your life”..so good luck to you all with that.

signing off

all the best

.. Doug

User ID not verified.

Very good Doug – LOL!

“I am not only witty myself – but the cause of that wit is in other men”. WS.

User ID not verified.

Caught both those links – whereas SC understood & talked the big picture talk (getting thru his bereaucratic minders is something else) Dr.RH talked festivals…

User ID not verified.

Oh dear, Mr (‘telling our stories to the rest of the world”) Crean! How many millions of Australian tax-payer dollars are going into the making of Australian films such as THE GREAT GATSBY and A VIEW FROM THE BRIDGE?

I agree with Doug that there should be a free flow of provocative ideas in the creative venture that is filmmaking. The more passionate debate (heated if need be at times) the better! Just as we filmmakers know what it’s like to get a bad review for our films, so too should film bureaucrats be prepared to get bad reviews for their policies.

I think that this forum @ Encore is a terrific one and understand why it is that Encore might feel the need, at times, to censor comments. The last thing a magazine like Encore needs is the threat of a defamation suit from a funding body or an individual working within it. I really don’t think this is going to happen. Imagine how silly they would appear to the industry (and the public) to pursue such a path. Filmmakers don’t sue for defamation when they get bad reviews and nor should film bureaucrats. A bad review is an invitation learn from your mistakes; to do better next time. I think you are being over-cautious, Encore.

Any filmmakers with comments that can’t be published @ Encore, in accordance with its ‘content moderation policy’, please feel free to do so on my blog – intended as supplementary to Encore and not in competition with it.

PS Would love to hear from Encore just what its ‘content moderation policy is?

User ID not verified.

J M – I’ve been deleted too – with no grudges – reckon you should give him (them) a break? What we consider free thought & not libellous others obviously do – understand its their neck & brand out there in lawless www land & right now this place is crawling with oppurtunist lawyers? + he’s new at the job. Maybe you can mentor him – go half in costs when somebody wants at 6.30 current affairs gig – sues their (your) collective arses? Noticed also they did give you free publicity for your own blog + publish a lot or your insightful articles? Don’t bring the House down – publishing is a vital part of the structure of Commercial Filmaking.

User ID not verified.

As a lawyer with experience in defamation I suggest encore not worry so much about censorship. For a comment to be found defamatory, one of the Beauracrats we love to hate in these comments would have to take civil action.

A comment is only defamatory if it is untrue. Let’s be honest, even the most conservative judge in the land would see the truth in a statement like “heartbeat away stunk!”

But seriously, there also has to be harm caused to one’s reputation (and for significant monetary damages, they would need to show a loss of earning potential). To establish such reputation damage the defamatory comment has to be from a source a reasonable person would be influenced by. As far as I’m aware, no common law nation has ever found an online comment to be defamatory. Anonymous commentators just don’t have enough sway to indicate defamation.

So encore, let the hate fly! And sorry for the pretty off-topic post. For what it’s worth I wish we had more Aussie comedies!! (and by ‘more’ I mean one. The last good comedy I can remember was Kenny, and before that….the castle….)

User ID not verified.

No one ever comments on anything I say here anyway, but I’ll take another shot at it. I think Australia has everything it needs for a great film industry, it’s all there waiting, and we need to access it and harness it. I really don’t think there’s any point moaning about bad films or funding bodies. If a film is good or bad is up to the viewer, film makers can make popular stuff if they make a few films and get to grips with the medium and what the audience responds to. They need to just have the chance to do the work. What we need is the support to get connected with the creative people and resouces to make films and get more happening. IMO!

User ID not verified.

Adrian

Don’t feel unloved! I read your comments (and I am sure many do) and agree that we have everything we need to make great films – other than bureaucratic processes that encourage the making of great films. Of course the bureaucrats are not trying to actively discourage the making of great films. It is just that there are too many people within them, in creative decision-making positions, thinking like bureaucrats; too many who seem to have little or no understanding of the creative process and, clearly, a collective inability to recognize the serious flaws to be found in most screenplays for Australian films – films that the funding bodies invest in despite the serious script flaws.

I’m with ‘Lawyer’ on the censorship/defamation question but disagree with his ‘let the hate fly’ comment. The expression of diverse opinions can only happen, productively, in the absence of ‘hate’ – with respect for ideas that may be diametrically opposed to your own. To quote Chairman Mao: “”Letting a hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend is the policy for promoting progress in the arts…” The Chairman didn’t actually remain true to his promise but then nor do our funding bodies. Read any of their mission statements, guidelines etc – filled with ‘let a 100 flowers blossom’ sentiments. These read well but are, for the most part, spin.

And WWIP, no grudges here against Encore. Publisher Tim Burrows and I agree to disagree on the censorship question. Tim writes: “I’m delighted to hear you’ve started the blog. There aren’t enough passionate voices on the industry being heard. I look forward to reading it regularly.”

Anyone interested, my latest piece has to do with Screen Australia’s refusal to engage in online dialogue/debate with the readers of Encore online:

http://jamesricketson.blogspot.....ge-in.html

User ID not verified.

Queensland’s QPIX Kino Pravda Funding Guideline Quote: “…if one of the projects selected by QPIX draws broadcaster involvement, the applicant will probably lose all but a nominal role in its production.” How is this encouraging and promoting new talent in our broadcast industry?!! Whilst this abhorrent disregard for filmmaker integrity and blatant medieval exploitation of practice is continued within the broadcaster environment, endorsement by our local funding body surely guarantees death to innovation and new blood! This is seriously outrageous!

User ID not verified.

@ SL.

Don’t understand – could you clarify your QPIX guidelines blog? “broadcastor involvement” This TV – Features – or both?

User ID not verified.

Love the blog James and love encore. It’s local online communities like this that make trying to break in to such a closed off industry more bearable.

User ID not verified.

@ JR.

Suspect your pissin in the wind with this one brother – attempting reason with an illogical situation – logic to a dysfuctional organisation. Right now head of SA is paid considerably more than out national CEO (PM) – go figure implications of that one? Their all on long term ‘non performance based’ legally binding contracts – therefore you can’t embarrass – confront or reason with them at eitheir state of federal level – truth is they’ve never had it so good & they couldn’t give jack shit about the likes of us.

User ID not verified.

Thanks James. The issue of script flaws…I just want to say, American/Hollywood cinema evolved over time and their films were shaped by successes and failures. I think we too can evolve, but we need to make films and keep on making them for Aussie cinema to evolve. This process needs to happen in order to get the great scripts and films we all want to see. Script flaws are just a symptom. Good or bad, we need to make stuff. We can improve more by doing, than planning.

User ID not verified.

Yes TV Documentary specifically. I have received an email from QPIX today saying they have added an amendment to their guidelines for clarification to alert/warn emerging filmmakers.

User ID not verified.

Sure US film evolved over time – but I don’t see any value in repeating this same process when we can learn from their mistakes? & your right – the best place to start is our own home market of which local producers are currently taking a mere 4.5% of $2bill + gross revenue…(figure does not include overseas sales).

User ID not verified.

JR – posted on your blogspot & now its gone? (post not blog).

User ID not verified.

WWIP, not sure why your contribution to my blogspot should disappear? I certainly didn’t make it disappear.! Indeed, I never saw it. Try again. Will be posting another piece tomorrow – on censorship and other matters:

http://jamesricketson.blogspot.....rship.html

User ID not verified.