Memorandum submitted by the Directors'
Guild of Great Britain
THE CONTRIBUTION
OF THE
FILM INDUSTRY
TO THE
UK ECONOMY
The economic contribution of the film industry
goes beyond the already substantial impact it has on the leisure
industries. Film products are on sale in many markets internationally
and the industry has a large number of freelance personnel and
technical facilities that regularly attract foreign investment.
If nurtured correctly, it has the potential to be one of the UK's
growth industries, which will be much greater with substantial
government investment.
Is it important to seek to preserve a capacity
to make British Films about Britain in the UK?
British talent and expertise is highly prized
worldwide, but these talented individuals frequently have to find
employment outside of the UK. Both the 2002 Montreal International
Forum on Directors' Organisations and the Bastia Declaration have
highlighted the importance of preserving a national cultural identity—because
the English language is widely spoken does not mean that British
culture is also represented in the global arena. Internationally,
all directors are seeking to counter the harmful aspects of globalisation,
in particular, control and reduction of choice for the individual.
The agriculture and ecology sectors have felt a need to come together
and act internationally to protect their specificity and ensure
the population has access to a large diversity of species and
products.
Are agriculture, ecology and culture waging
the same battle? They are all facing standardization, conformity,
reductionist standards and downward-levelling industrialization.
All feel the same need to value and protect the creative imagination,
local products, biodiversity and cultural diversity, whilst ensuring
that the work, the creation, is visible and open to the world.
Can a film be very specifically British and
still succeed in the international market-place? In the majority
of cases, yes. A story well told is what everybody wants.
What is the relationship between the film industry
and the rest of the creative industries, including the broadcasters?
What should the relationship be between British broadcasters and
the film industry?
Does the film industry merit support from Government,
if so, how can existing support be improved?
The relationship with the broadcasters is of
huge importance, from production through to distribution. In other
countries the connection is much closer. Currently, UK broadcasters
are withdrawing their production links with the film industry,
though the distribution arm is still a significant element (FilmFour
for example).
From the point of view of training and development,
this relationship is key. Historically, most of the creative talent
was nurtured through the broadcasting industry. Training was given,
risks were taken with new talent, skills and expertise were transferred,
establishing a more secure economic environment for creative individuals
to work and produce. This patronage has faded. Some of the changes
were unavoidable, even welcome, but broadcasters can still play
a huge role in the development of a sustainable film industry,
particularly as there is currently more broadcast time available
than previously (more channels, digital technologies, etc).
Broadcasters can support low and medium budget
film-making (important for nurturing talent) by providing production
funds, specialized facilities and equipment and also by aiding
distribution of the material. A film no longer just has a theatrical
release—many films may not be shown in cinemas, particularly
if they are made in digital formats, but they can have a very
successful life on specialist channels. Films can reach many markets
by many different routes and in different times: festivals, theatrical
release, video/DVD rental/sales, broadcasting release (terrestrial,
cable and digital), internet release, corporate use (in airlines/hotels),
computer/video games version.
The industry's links with the other creative
industries is flourishing. There is a regular exchange of creative
artists and technical personnel/facilities and also a substantial
link with support products from other industries: music releases
(soundtrack), interactive media (games), publications/press, advertising/commercials,
internet sales/products, merchandise, leisure activities (New
Zealand established a special government department "of Middle
Earth" to make the best use of the secondary activities that
were generated by the success of The Lord of the Rings films!).
The influence that the film industry has on
the other creative arts and vice versa, visual and performing
arts in particular, is often underestimated. Novels and plays
(even news stories) are frequently made into films, art installations,
theatre installations, film/theatre and film/music fusions. We
acknowledge in cultural criticism a film vocabulary—film
semantics, film aesthetics. There are courses on film philosophy
and film criticism, which have become as important as the more
traditional literary criticism degree courses. The exciting possibility
of a creative career in film is possibly the driving inspiration
behind the explosion of university media courses.
How effectively has the Film Council contributed
to a sustainable film industry since 2001? Does the Council have
the right strategy and approach?
The Film Council has exisisted for less than
two years and it is far too soon to reach a verdict on its contribution
to the film industry. It has quite correctly recognized that it
cannot do everything at once and has therefore decided to concentrate
on particular areas. The production funds are intended to encourage
diversity, from the commercial to the more art house venture,
which is laudable. The lack of well-trained film development consultants,
which has been identified by the Council as one of the problems
of the UK film industry, combined with unavoidable bureaucracy,
will no doubt improve with time. However, the fact that the Council
has only just begun to address one of the major problems within
the UK film industry, namely, distribution, has raised some concern.
This is not merely an issue of how many prints should go to how
many screens, where in the UK and for how many weeks, but also
how to compete with the marketing Goliath of Hollywood productions.
Miramax usually equals its production budget for a film with its
marketing budget, especially if that film has any chance in the
Oscars! Even if the budgets will never equal that, training in
film marketing should also be addressed. We currently await the
Council's distribution initiatives. The recently announced positive
initiative concerning digital projections is encouraging.
The UK Film Talent Skills report is extremely
important. The training of film professionals is currently somewhat
unregulated. Film courses and media departments have proliferated
without any substantial professional regulation or control. Skillset
(especially with accreditation and standards) and The Film Council
(with new training initiatives) are attempting to make sense of
what appears at the moment to be a very fragmented, incomplete
and under trained industry. The UK has a very considerable pool
of world famous skilled and talented film professionals, both
creative and technical, but this needs to be maintained. There
is a danger that as these older people move on, their expertise,
if not transferred, will be lost. Mentoring and observer schemes,
plus apprenticeships, are cost effective initiatives, which will
guarantee continuity in the industry for the future.
What has the Council contributed to education
about, and access to, the moving image? What should the Council
do with the bfi and the Museum of the Moving Image?
You cannot have a film industry without a film
culture. It nurtures the future film-makers and supplies the audience,
maximising the consumers, in trade terms, for the home-grown product.
A film culture can be encouraged and not imposed. The bfi,
particularly with the preservation of the archives, Film Education,
Film Council (First Light initiative) and the Museum of the Moving
Image have a huge responsibility. It is also important that the
Council works with the broadcasters in the promotion of a film
culture, through their programming policies. Broadcasting, with
its access to the living room, can influence the film culture
of an audience that rarely visits the cinema. A good diet of diverse
films, from classics to lesser known masterpieces, from popular
to arthouse, from Hollywood to World cinema, coupled with realistic
scheduling, can create a new generation of film enthusiasts. The
Council will need to develop initiatives that engage with younger
people and their interests, particularly in relation to the internet.
MTV, for example, has now gone into film production. Given its
popularity with the younger constituency, it clearly assumes there
to be a MTV film audience.
For any of these initiatives to be successful,
they should seek to inform, inspire and educate but never patronize
the audience.
For The Directors' Guild, the training of directors,
the raising of professional standards, for example the Guild's
recent substantial contribution to Skillset's work on directors'
standards, the nurturing of new talent and the transfer of skills
across media and generations, are at the core of its activities.
The Guild would therefore expect to see more
directors involved in the policy-making of an organisation like
the Film Council, given that they are the professionals who have
the widest possible overview of the totality of the film production
process. They have a complete vision of the film. They are, in
effect, responsible for it. It is very encouraging that practitioners
like Alan Parker (Film Council) and Anthony Minghella (bfi)
have become so actively involved in the development of these
organisations. It is, however, important for more directors to
be involved in the development of a film at an early stage. Writers,
for example, usually work better when they have a director's feedback.
Film funding, which at the moment is mostly open only to producers,
should also be available to directors.
Young directors learn by doing the job and need
support to do this. They should be allowed to grow in an environment
where they can take on ambitious projects. A healthy, nurturing
UK film industry can provide such an environment.
The erosion of the role and authority of the
director is a recent phenomenon, which can be linked, in part,
to the development of the globalisation of the audiovisual markets.
This has led to the disappearance of respect for both the work
and its creator and a disregard for the need to take sufficient
time to think, although thought is the hallmark of all great works.
The Directors' Guild feels very strongly that the creative work
and its author should be placed firmly back at the centre of film
production.
May 2003
|
