Taking the temperature: Section 2 – the screen agencies
Results from Encore Magazine‘s industry-wide survey into the mood of the sector and the EncoreLive panel discussion that followed.
How strongly do you agree with the following statements about public funding available to screen creatives:
Strongly disagree = 1 Strongly agree = 5
Funding is equally available to anyone with a good idea – 0.8
Funding is restricted to those with experience – even if they haven’t delivered strong results, making it difficult for emerging people to break through – 2.8
Funding decisions should be more transparent then they currently are – 3.1
Funding bodies should be publicly questioned about results of the projects they’ve supported – 3.2
Comments:
“Major funding SHOULD be restricted to those with experience – emerging talent has to pay its dues.”
“Too many filmmakers are only concerned with getting their project ‘in the can’ and are unwilling to invest in their business management.”
“Funding currently appears to be available, mostly, to established artists or artists/companies who have backing support, and occasionally emerging writers or directors. It does not appear – or at least be well known – that there is much funding for management, technical designers (incl. emerging DOP’s and Camera dept.), production/costume designers, or short films.”
“Public funding is essential to keep our industry going but they should be more accountable.”
How strongly do you agree with the following statements about the Federal Government?
1 = poor, 5 = excellent
Is committed to the growth of the screen industry – 1.2
Is responsive to industry issues – 1.1
Is proactive about new screen initiatives – 1.0
Ignores the industry and is not engaging with it beyond the absolute necessary – 2.4
How would you rate the following?
1 = poor, 5= excellent
Screen Australia – 2.4
Your state agency (Screen NSW, Film Victoria etc) – 2.6
Your state minister for the Arts – 2
Minister for the Arts Simon Crean – 1.9
Comments:
“Labor always listens in to the call of the arts. Plus, having Greens power in Melbourne is a bonus for the arts.”
“I LOVE Screen Australia – its website is a massive resource…and don’t forget DFAT!
“I use the Screen Australia website in teaching and highly recommend it as a resource to young and emerging filmmakers.”
Your role in the industry?
Film production – 61.1% Education & training – 9.4%
TV production – 52.8% Writing – 20%
Documentary production – 26.4% Marketing – 7.1%
TVC production – 52.8% Financing – 3%
Post production services – 10.9% Legal – less than 1%
VFX & animation – 3.7% Equipment sale & hire -3.7%
Music & sound – 7.9% Other – 11.6%
What are the open doors to new practitioners, if there aren’t a lot of opportunities from a screen agency?
Tony: Can I just take issue with that. It’s hard to support that proposition when you have a film, by a woman, in Cannes who has never directed a film before, and I’m talking about Julia Leigh in Sleeping Beauty who is a novelist of some distinction but parachutes into a feature film with the support of Screen Australia through the Government funding process. I see evisceration at a state level for Screen NSW at certain entry-level productions but I don’t see a blanket antagonism to new people through, at least, funding by Screen Australia. It’s selective but you’d expect them to be. But I don’t see a preponderance. Yes there’s Mental and P.J but there’s also Sleeping Beauty and Julia Leigh, so it’s more complex than that.
Peter: I tend to agree. There’s a hell of a lot more competition and that means it’s harder for people. They have to do other jobs while they develop stories and network. The networks are still there, they are still available, all the guilds are still there, they’re still open to assist, there’s just a never increasing pool of money for an ever-increasing pool of ideas. I think we’re just seeing better content bubble up out of a much tougher competition for a smaller pool of money. I think we’re in a position where if we keep pushing we will survive and strive but I really do think in terms of production it’s the value of the dollar – it’s gone from 53 cents to 107 cents in the American dollar in 24 months and it’s killing it for the professional end of the industry.
Tony: We were very unfortunate with apocalyptic events of the last 12 months because I think were it not for the Queensland floods and the related ecological fallout we would have had a very strong opportunity in the most recent budget to not only get the PDV, post production incentive increase but also what we call the footloose incentive that attracts these larger budget, non-Australian pictures to Australia to compensate for the Australian-US dollar parody. Hopefully a year from now we will be brought into play in the budget.
Chris: There is a bit of a defeatist attitude within the sector but I think maybe if we go a little more down the Roger Corman angle – and you’d understand this Tony. The idea is make the film, get a good script, work on finding a different way to finance that script and keep making these low budget films, keeping a lot of people employed on a regular basis you will have the skillset a few years down the track. I’m sure Tony a lot of the films you’ve produced has similar crews on it? Just get the film made and don’t rely on one source of income to do it. You have to think outside the box. The filmmaking process stays the same – it’s still about a good script and the balls of someone to go out and make that film.
Tony: Another thing that did come out of a very difficult budget was the drop in the offset threshold for feature films from $1 million to $500,000. It’s not easy to raise $500,000 either directly or indirectly but it’s substantially easier than it is to raise $1 million. There really is an opportunity for entry-level people to come in with projects that can be easily achieved efficiently at that lower budget level. I mentioned the film once, I’ll mention it again, a film like The Jammed which took probably two years plus to get the funding together and that was only at the 4-500,000 level. Nothing’s easy but it would be a much simpler process today with the offset threshold at 500,000. There’s opportunities to go out there and work – With collectives and groups working on each other’s pictures, one of those pictures might break through and away you go. You shouldn’t wait. If you have a story that you think is right then you should find a way to make it. If you can do it in a way that doesn’t bankrupt you as well, and it works, great. If it doesn’t then you try again or decide, ‘hey, I better be a lawyer.’
I think the real tragedy of this industry is the amount of talent that simply turns away from it or moves OS in search of a career, most don’t make that move, they become so disenchanted with trying to find a way forward they give up, usually that might shoulder a massive HECs debt to cap off that sense of defeat. And yeah there is a defeatist attitude in the sector, because put simply its impossible to make a living in this industry for the majority..that’s a fact..it might not be a fact people want to hear..but its a fact none the less. A novelist parachuting into a directing role isn’t really reflective of an industry that is standing with its eye’s wide open..
“It’s hard to support that proposition when you have a film, by a woman, in Cannes who has never directed a film before, and I’m talking about Julia Leigh in Sleeping Beauty who is a novelist of some distinction but parachutes into a feature film with the support of Screen Australia through the Government funding process. I see evisceration at a state level for Screen NSW at certain entry-level productions but I don’t see a blanket antagonism to new people through, at least, funding by Screen Australia”
The fact that she is a woman is irrelevant, actually in the eyes of most funding bodies, being predominately staffed by women, this is a major plus ( and no I’m not playing a card here just noting a fact). This novelist of some distinction also has another book/screenplay being produced “The Hunter”, so its not like she’s shot out of nowhere. And now that we’ve all had time to watch Sleeping Beauty, i think we can confidently say..where did this film go? What was it trying to be?
I love the fact that SA is willing to and ultimately does give the nod to somebody with no discernible experience with directing film..but will that nod and the mentor program that was rolled out for Sleeping Beauty be continued..highly unlikely..seeing as Sleeping Beauty bombed with critics and bombed at the box office..but in the eyes of Dr Ruth Harley getting into Canne is success enough, maybe it is.. it is strange seeing as I never really thought we were simply in the festival business, I thought we were in the business of making films that could connect with audiences and hopefully build the careers of filmmakers who have dedicated an enormous amount of time..a kind of cultural exchange
Chris: if you can point to anybody how they can go down that Roger Corman path I’m sure everybody is all ears..seriously how does one find that path and how does one get that path to be sustainable? I think most filmmakers in this country see that funding bodies have an impossible job with limited funds and a real tide of apathy rolled up in some miss directed anxiety is being thrown the way of Funding Bodies, they’re an easy target (fueled by a few recent crappy films and 45k good bye parties). So if the Roger Corman path is a possibility..what does it look like and how do you make it happen?
I think there’s lots of good scripts around and people with the balls..but even balls needs some cash..and that doesn’t seem to be around. I really don’t think you understand how skint most filmmakers are..as in.. on the poverty line!!
User ID not verified.
Skint Film maker here.
Have secured a small amount of private investment, and I’m getting a personal loan to make my first feature.
Great post Doug.
I will not be wasting my time trying to get funding. This is not a bitter comment, just a realistic one.
I don’t believe that first time/emerging film makers should be getting large grants.
But many small emerging film makers being given smaller grants and production equipment services in kind type subsidies to feed such a Roger Corman style approach would be a real boon for our entire industry I believe.
That said, nor do I believe that if you have in the past received significant funding and have been in the industry for many years, yet you are still not able to produce content capable of attracting investment or turning a profit, that your “experience” deems you as more worthy of being funded. I find such an idea ludicrous. Surely it should be the other way around.
It’s a statistical fact that a very experienced director actually has no more chance of having a box office hit than a first time director. Such is the difficulty of the art form we are in.
I have no agenda with my post. It’s my dream to actually one day be able to subsidise other film makers myself, not to be top of the funding food chain.
User ID not verified.
I agree with your comments Doug. But at the end of the day, anyone can make a film…it’s getting it into the cinema that’s the tricky part. What I would like to see from the bodies like Film Vic and Screen Australia is assistance in getting distribution.
User ID not verified.