What IS Screen Australia For?

You Have To Wonder

I can't link to this article by Anthony I. Ginnane because it's privileged content so I'll just have to quote bits and hope I don't piss off the good folks at Screen Hub.

The first part of the article talks about factors that have devastated prospects for feature film funding in Australia. He cites:

1. The Disappearance of Presales from Distributors


2. Reduction of actual films in theatres in the last 2 years which means fewer slots.


3. The specialty distributors have gone into retreat, leaving just Fox Searchlight and Focus. The newer outfits are too small to factor in as a force.


4. The big European Free-To-Air broadcasters are buying less. This is because Free-To-Air everywhere is in dire straits as markets decline globally.


5. The GFC has essentially made banks more cautious, which naturally beat them out of the film markets.


6. The GFC has forced the Germans an aggressive funds out of the market also.

That's it in a nutshell. Mr. Ginnane doesn't think the Off-set has been taken up as much as initially projected when it was drawn up. His anecdotal-account -based guess is less than 50% of the target.

Plus, the 10BA thing disappearing, with the rollback of Screen Australia's direct funding means there's basically very little money to do anything significant in the market place.

So here's the bit I quote Mr. Ginnane, because you'll be surprised with it as I was when I read it:

All of these complexities crashed into focus 2 weeks ago at Screen Australia’s most recent Board meeting when, without industry consultation and without pre-warning producers with theatrical projects before the meeting, the Board elected to amend its terms of trade and reduce from $5 million per project to $3 million (or $3.5 million in exceptional circumstances – what those circumstances might be were not elaborated on).

Apart from specific and significant hiccups resulting for projects at that meeting, the bigger question raised is what future is there for larger budget feature film production in Australia that is not studio driven but is driven by local producers attempting to step up into a world that is acutely tough right now.

Screen Australia has a number of issues on its plate here and those issues will remain, even if SPAA or other lobby groups collectively succeed in the run up to the 2010 election to get it increased funding and/or to encourage government to provide some limited additional one-off funding outside of Screen Australia and its budget. These issues include:

• Should Screen Australia fund fewer films at a higher budget, or more films at a lower budget or at a lower amount of participation?
• Given that subjective judgments are now being applied by project investment managers, consultants and the Board, is there an argument for reintroducing some kind of parallel market place door?
• The extent to which the marketplace alone can be expected in the current climate to fully, or largely, fund higher budget titles and the continuing importance of the last 20% or so of budget being available from soft sources either Screen Australia or perhaps a separate stimulus fund.

Oh My God.

He's telling me now that they HADN'T thought about these problems BEFORE they rolled the FFC and  the AFC into one organ? The GFC has been in full force since August 2007, when the "credit-crunch" as we know it reared its ugly head. That was well before Screen Australia started. The real chaos came up last year in September, about a month before the Americans headed for the polls.

You HAD to figure that international money was going to dry up and whatever plans they might have drawn up in 2005-2007 were going to be unworkable.

Mr. Ginnane goes on to say:

So my suggestion to Screen Australia, once they select someone with distribution expertise to fill 1 of the 2 open Board slots, is to choose 2 or 3 titles per year where you in fact invest $5 to $10 million – films with mainstream multiplex potential – but make sure that investment has major worldwide distribution attached and that your recoupment position is a smart gross or adjusted gross recoupment position world wide pari passu an on favored nations definitions with key creatives. This kind of investment cannot be in any way subordinated.

If ever there was a time where the majors may be prepared to consider treating Australian sourced investment as something different to what they called the German investment funds (i.e. “stupid money”) it’s now.

This would buy Screen Australia 2 or 3 blue sky shots per year – a $100 million or more jackpot.

So they fail. So what? Most Australian films fail and the collective annual loses far exceed 2 or 3 times $5 to $10 million per year every year. So what’s the downside in taking a shot because there’s an awful lot of upside?

Look at the US and international weekly theatrical box office this year and last. It’s huge. It’s getting huger. And we are not part of it. We can be. We should be. And entrepreneurial Australian producers in partnership with Screen Australia, should be leading the charge.

Producers can lobby to increase Screen Australia funding and procure additional short term non Screen Australia funding but ultimately some of Screen Australia’s investments need to be in breakout hits.

Well, that's been the position of this blog for quite some time. If anything, most Australian producers I know WANT to be doing exactly that: making films for the largest parts of the International market.

I don't know if I should be appalled or be asked to consult for these monkeys-with-extra-chromosomes at Screen Australia. For Fuck's Sake.