SPAA 08: Key Learnings from the Gold Coast
by: Mark Poole
Published on Screen Hub
Monday 17 November, 2008
Perhaps appropriately this year’s Conference logo was a hand of cards combined with a roulette wheel, symbolizing what a gamble the film industry always is, especially as we take a punt on a new way of doing business.
As always producers strutted busily around in an attempt to convince people, especially themselves, that their business is indeed viable. The occasional spark flew but there was always someone hovering with a fire extinguisher to hose down the discontent before a bush fire could spring up.
Unlike some past SPAAs there were few ‘creative’ writers or directors, and some big name producers were also conspicuous by their absence. Maybe they were too busy to attend.
But the mood was upbeat and people came away which a slightly different world view than when they arrived.
These are the learnings that I came away with:
1. The producer offset is real and happening.
2. Chris Adams is a cool dude.
3. Screen Australia needs a miracle.
4. Emerging filmmakers are going to have to make it on their own.
5. Our industry is large and viable and has a shitload of cash.
he production offset is real and happening
As Ian Robertson confirmed, 2 feature films, 7 docs and 1 other project have received the final certificate under the Producer offset scheme. As well, someone in the audience at one session reported that 2 docs have already submitted their tax returns to the ATO and received the moolah.
Hallelujah! The producer offset isn’t a mirage, it’s real!
A prominent producer told me that US producers are agog at our offset, that it is 40% for features and relatively simple, compared to the complexity of their offset schemes.
Colin South explained that he had cashflowed the offset via a sympathetic bank at the interest rate of 8.9%. Hallejulia again! This particular bank may not be interested in cashflowing budgets much larger than a million or so, but on the other hand Heather Ogilvie suggested that once a few such deals have been successfully put to bed, the banks will begin to view them as ‘situation normal’ rather than ???*!
Chris Adams is a cool dude
When making a documentary you’re always thankful when an American blips up on your radar, as they are almost always fantastic interview subjects – outgoing, articulate, and not afraid to talk the subject up a couple of notches. Chris Adams, co-founder of Participant Media and now working with Australian producer Steve Kearney, possesses these qualities by a factor of ten. Onya Chris!
Of course the reaction to his presentations was mixed. Some felt that Chris was a little too forthright in promoting his own company for their liking. For my money, Chris’ comments – and he participated in three different sessions – were challenging and stimulating, and his throwaway jibes at Australian filmmakers’ reluctance to acknowledge marketplace realities is something that we would do well to consider After all, he has the pulse of US markets. Surely we can learn from such a guy. Or not. The choice is ours.
Only the few will score $500k
During the conference it became increasingly clear that only a handful of producers or production entities will access the up to $500,000 a year for three years that is the Holy Grail of the Enterprise program strand of the proposed Screen Australia guidelines. This being the case, it may well be producers, especially those below the top level, who stand the most to lose in the changes. There was widespread feeling that things have to change and we have to rid ourselves of that layer of filtering, interfering and downright meddling that is blanding out our screen works.
Screen Australia doesn’t get it
Deputy Chair of Screen Australia Ian Robertson addressed a packed crowd who had assembled at the ungodly hour of 8:30 am, and it was depressing as hell.
With so many important issues to be discussed, with the guidelines still in draft, you would have thought that Screen Australia could have devoted more than half an hour to talk about them, and to take the opportunity of having many of the industry’s key figures in the audience to actually engage with the issues.
Instead, the session seemed intent on snowing us into submission, beginning with the pronouncement that Scroz would commence shedding staff in the New Year, making the point that only a handful of producers would score Enterprise program development money, sounding a warning that the industry could no longer expect Scroz to advocate for the industry as the AFC and FFC has done so effectively over the years, and ending with the admonition that resources are scarce and emerging filmmakers were going to be left out in the cold.
Call me a long-haired hippy with a certain nostalgia for protest marches and heated meetings where opinions are genuinely voiced, but I can’t help feeling that it would have been really useful to have a real exchange of views here.
As Jonathan Olsberg said in a later session, the draft Scroz guidelines are loose and lacking in detail, and don’t tell you how much money will be devoted to what, making it really difficult to get a sense of how they will impact the industry. Yet the industry is expected to sign off on them.
We filed out of this session in a stupefied state, our optimism about the producer’s offset and merged agency dimming fast. We are left with the hope that Dr Ruth Harley will emerge as a bureaucratic superstar, who will deftly and speedily separate the incompetents from the savvy from our stock of producers, fast-track the most likely successes already in the pipeline while simultaneously saving short films and carving a pathway for the next generation of filmmakers. No easy task.
Emerging filmmakers are on their own
Throughout the conference there was a tantalizingly delicious undercurrent of discontent about Screen Australia’s decision to drop funding for short films and also cease funding new or less experienced filmmakers.
Ian Robertson firmly told emerging filmmakers to take a number in the queue for training programs, for they weren’t going to be eligible for the main game. Alternately they can approach their State agencies for support. However these agencies are not in a position to take on such programs unless the Feds supply the funding, which to date has not been forthcoming.
We seem to collectively fail to notice that a viable industry needs up and coming talent. It’s not a matter of charity or even cultural resonance, but pure economic need - the need to nurture developing filmmakers. It isn’t good enough to hope that organizations like Tropfest or the States or someone else will pick up the slack. As when years ago the AFC forced the Australian Film Institute to stop distributing independent films, the assumption was that someone would emerge to take over. But nobody did.
Our industry is large, viable and has a shitload of cash
The Sheraton Mirage is an appropriate venue for asking whether the industry is real or a mirage, created by smoke and mirrors to simulate reality. Well this year’s SPAA did an excellent job of demonstrating that the industry is real. For example the substantial kids TV sector was here in force, citing acknowledgement from overseas that we make really good kids’ TV.
Scores of producers had shown up from all over Australia to pay a grand for registration and another grand for accommodation and flights. Would they do that if there was no money to be had?
Marcus Gillizeau mentioned in a session that he had done a study of the industry and totted up $9.9 billion of production across all screen sectors. Sure overall economic activity is set to decline, but when things turn south the entertainment sectors tend to shine, as people need to take their minds off the doom and gloom of unemployment and uncertainty.
So let’s not sit in our homes and offices talking ourselves down, rereading articles from The Australian about how bad our films are. Our films aren’t bad. They were usually made for cultural reasons rather than commercial ones. As Geoff Brown says, if we want to make money we need to operate at a different budget level. We tend to forget that Hollywood was carefully nurtured and protected by the US Government until it achieved a position of dominance in world markets.
Remember that even studios are having difficulty making money off anything other than their huge tent-pole films, their Mamma Mias or Dark Knights. As Chris Adams said, the smart people are making high budget or low budget films as the mess is in the middle. Unfortunately the producer offset’s threshold of $1 million for features consigns us to the middle, but hopefully the industry will be able to successfully lobby for this to be reduced to $500k.
Mark Poole
|
