I got a fax from Pleiades today with an article about Dr. Ruth Harley and her outlook on the Australian Film industry, which I would love to link to but can't - it's behind their registration wall. I will however quote some bits from it, that caught my eye:
"It's not a basket case," Harley says in her first expansive interview since commencing November 17. "I think it's enormously vibrant. People keep asking me will 'Australia' rescue the film industry. Well, it doesn't need rescuing. The right question, is how can films get to Australian audiences much more effectively."
Australian filmmakers are on notice. It is no longer OK to spend public funds obtained as either direct investment, tax breaks or state incentives on films that appeal only to immediate family and good friends.
"Connect with audiences" is the new catchphrase mouthed by Harley but originally mandated by arts minister Peter Garrett.
I got that far and went for my vomit bag. Seriously folks, I've been saying this for years, and it's like the establishment that hands out money has never taken notice of its importance until their job securities were threatened. It was only then that they thought having an audience tat actually liked the films they kept dishing up was a good idea. It's a nice thing that their jobs were threatened, and that motivated them to think straight for once, but this stuff is 20 years behind the curve.
I don't know what's more disappointing: that it has taken this long for these people to realise that it's show business that they're in and that they need to put on shows that the market likes; or the fact that they think the previous bunch of filmmakers who made these boring films that alienated the audiences are suddenly going to be capable of delivering these audience-friendly product.
Isn't it more te case that having shunned the talent to make commercial films for oh, TWENTY FIVE YEARS or so, that they're now wanting a commercial kind of talent to matter. Well the commercially talented have given up on the film bureaucrats years ago and only talk to them to see if they can sneak in something commercial under the guise of something that is inherently NOT. How perverse is that?
Still, brand Australia has some barriers to overcome. A survey by the FFC found most people consider Australian Films something they have to watch at School. The beginning og hte effort to overturn this prception is the release this week of Screen Australia's investment guidelines, thefirst announcement overseen by Harley.
Of Screen Australia's total appropriation of$ 103million it will spend 60 million funding films, television, children's drama, and documentaries, and $10million will be allocated to project development, which has long been viewed as the weak spot of the film sector in particular.
Back in the day, I never thought it was bad to have to watch an Australian film at school. It was quite the treat. It was exciting and a world full of promise, whether it was 'FJ Holden', 'Breaker Morant', 'Sunday Too Far Away', "Gallipoli', or 'The Year of Living Dangerously'. The industry used to make relevant, interesting films. Somewhere along the way, successive generations of film bureaucrats strangled the industry to the point where we are starting all over again.
It happens, and I'm okay with it - provided they don't keep making the same mistakes. The definition of stupidity is repeating the same procedures and expecting different results.
I'm just waiting to see a sign that "it ain't so, Joe".
UPDATE:
Of course the bit that I forgot to mention was this little bit:
Without the release of Baz Luhrmann's 'Australia', total domestic box office share would be 0.9%. it's lowest ebb since records began in 30 years ago.
Ouch. If the domestic market is willing to support you at less than 1%, then you have to say that there's something wrong not only with the product but the marketing as well as brand recognition.
I've been pondering some of this for a day and I have to say it comes back down to 30years of mismanagement by the people who controlled the money flow into the business.
Now, I understand that ATO hated 10BA because it helped make shonky films that never saw the light of day - because they were always meant to be loss-leaders. And the Funding bodies never got asked to be accountable for Box Office returns for the better part of the same 30years.
That really doesn't leave us with the picture of a thriving industry trying to make a buck - and heaven forbid that artist-types should want to succeed, or for that matter, make entertaing movies - because that would show up just how bad the government-sanctioned boring filmmakers really are.
It's almost worth nuking and starting again.
No comments:
Post a Comment