HuffPost Social Reading
Jon Spira

GET UPDATES FROM Jon Spira
 

How to Save the British Film Industry

Posted: 25/01/2012 00:00

So, we finally have a road map to saving the British film industry. The culture minister Ed Vaizey commissioned it, Lord Chris Smith chaired the panel that produced it and I shall now pooh-pooh it. That's my involvement. Just doing my bit.

You're probably a busy person who might not have the time or inclination to read all 110 pages of the report, so here's a brief summary for you - There are lots of words. Some are just normal looking, really, others are in bold and the words next to pictures tend to be italicised. The pictures are pictures from films - predominantly British films, but sometimes just other films.

The poster to the film Paul is in there. I guess Simon Pegg and Nick Frost are British. I'm not sure if the film is. It might be. I saw it. I'd kind of rather the Americans claimed it, to be honest. Alongside the words and the pictures there were some charts, some graphs, that kind of thing. Some bullet points. Um, what else... there was, uh, some little section divider title page kind of things, they were okay. Foot notes. Um. Some of the words were in different colours - that made it look quite vibrant. Yeah. Really just 110 pages of words and pictures and graphs and bullet points.

I'll be honest, it lost me in the first paragraph in which it proclaimed 2011 exceptional, even in the company of other 'golden' years, whilst holding the film Johnny English Reborn up as a constituent part of that success.

The whole thing is entitled 'A Future For British Film' which is odd. I don't like it when people talk about building, making or securing a future for something so ethereal. Everything automatically has a future. For most of us, that future is, well, a few more years farting about and then an eternity as dust. When people ask "Does British film have a future?" the answer can only be yes. It will have a future, whatever happens. I guess I'd just rather it wasn't shaped by this government and Julian Fellowes (or as I call him 'The Ghost of British Film Past')

When you get to page 91, they sum the report up for you - 56 bullet recommendations for the future of British film. Some of them are fine. Nothing contentious, nothing radical, blah, blah, blah. All that time and money and just some recommendations.

The thing is that, to me, this report is the PDF embodiment of irony because the problem with the British film industry is the allocation of funding and energy into projects like this sodding report. When the UK Film Council was scrapped last year, I practically sang Ding Dong The Witch is Dead (you can read my response to that here but I'd read it after you've finished this one, it'll just spoil the ending) because, as a film-maker, film tutor and film fan, I'm sick of seeing this bureaucratic gravy train rattling roughshod over the chance of real talent emerging. We have to stop putting the money allocated for British film into overpaid executives, endless 'development' schemes and reports. The report is full of the words 'develop' and 'network' which translates, really, as 'pay people to have meetings.'

Stop trying to develop filmmakers. Either let them develop or help them develop by supporting them. Leave them alone. Let them trust their instincts. The irony of all this talk of 'development' is that one thing that left film funding over a decade ago was the greatest concept - 'development money', a sum of money which meant the filmmaker could take a couple of months off work and focus all of their efforts on getting their film sorted. That same money now goes into the pockets of the 'execperts' to come in and begrudgingly develop the filmmakers for them.

So. Here are my bullet points. Here's how I'd save the British film industry...

  • Create grants to get people with promising showreels into film school.

  • Invest in film schools and hold them to a high educational standard

  • Only ever employ actual film-makers to make any funding decisions

  • Have those film-makers watch the graduation films of every student and choose the most promising ones.

  • Give each of those promising graduates a small sum of money, or practical support to make a feature film.

  • Offer tax breaks to film industry companies and professionals who help these films get made.

  • Offer tax breaks to cinemas who will screen these films.

  • Make it conditional that the graduates who got to make these films will have to contribute back to the system in the future (by making another film to generate money if they become successful or by mentoring the next wave of film-makers)

Obviously it's not that simple, but a straightforward scheme which offers a clear route into the industry, an emphasis on education, quantifiable support, minimal bureaucracy, industry participation and rewards hard work and practical contribution is just logical. This way, every year, we'd get a wave of new British film-makers and films, out of which some would sparkle and go on to success and others would find roles in the film industry and be a real part of it. Good films are commercial films. Once a film-maker is commercial, they should cease to be a drain on public money.

Wouldn't it be better to waste this money on giving film-makers a chance to show the world what they've got rather than endless meetings, reports, lunches and salaries for people who just simply aren't making films?

 

Follow Jon Spira on Twitter: www.twitter.com/videojon

So, we finally have a road map to saving the British film industry. The culture minister Ed Vaizey commissioned it, Lord Chris Smith chaired the panel that produced it and I shall now pooh-pooh it. Th...
So, we finally have a road map to saving the British film industry. The culture minister Ed Vaizey commissioned it, Lord Chris Smith chaired the panel that produced it and I shall now pooh-pooh it. Th...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 6
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
23:20 on 25/01/2012
Here is an idea, instead of asking for government handouts and suckling of the state subsidy teat, how about making popular films people actually want to go and see. Thats films that do not include manic melancholy French suicide types living in basements, or alcoholic manic depressive's crying over ex love affairs. Make films that people can enjoy and the UK film industry will prosper by itself.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Jon Spira
23:30 on 29/01/2012
You seem to be saying two things - firstly that film shouldn't be subsidized and secondly that you think people can't enjoy films which aren't typically 'Hollywood'.

I disagree on the first point. Film's an art form and hugely culturally significant, therefore worth funding and preserving.

On your second point, you seem to be advocating that anybody who wants to use film to make something artistic, intelligent or for the purposes of documentary or social commentary should instead be aspiring to make commercial fluff. That's just bollocks. There are people who want to see films which include 'manic melancholy French suicide types living in basements, or alcoholic manic depressive­'s crying over ex love affairs', those people enjoy films like that. Maybe they like to be challenged or see something a little more poetic. Maybe those kind of films, and their ethos of making their audience think add something to a society full of mulitplex crap which do the opposite - absolve people of thought and allow them to bask in mindless consumerism, machismo and lazy stereotyping.

There are plenty of - as you'd define them - 'films people actually want to go and see' being made and released every week. and it's precisely because of their dominance that government should be funding programmes to protect our national cultural heritage and support people trying to make films which are not brainless monoliths to consumerism.

I think we have very different views of what 'prospering' is. For me, it's not monetary.
11:16 on 30/01/2012
It as been a well proven fact, all subsidized industries eventually fail, why? subsidy creates dependency, dependency creates addiction, that's addiction to funding from tax payers money.
09:57 on 25/01/2012
Minimal bureaucracy? Definitely an idea whose time has come. It should be a cinch to administer student grants, feature film funding and tax breaks to filmmakers and cinemas without the need for all that pesky paperwork. Just do it all through Paypal, sending automated notifications by email. And no need to design a fair system of checks and balances. All those well meaning filmmakers ploughing through graduation films will muddle along somehow, in between working on their own careers. I foresee a bright future for these ideas.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Jon Spira
23:32 on 29/01/2012
Wait a moment.... was that... sarcasm?