Comments on: Guest post by Marcus Westbury: Flotillas vs. flagships

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 08:41:08 +0000

Thanks, Fine. When I get time to watch it, I might do a post. Since it’s on a theme close to home as it were!

By: Marcus Westbury

Marcus Westbury — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 08:37:43 +0000

Can i just hijack this thread to plug the fact that i’m on Q+A on ABC1 tomorrow night!?

If anyone wants to try and throw a curve ball in the program’s general direction the link is here:

http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/

By: Fine

Fine — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 08:09:40 +0000

Quite coincidentally there’s an article about ‘All My Friends Are Leaving Brisbane’ in Screenhub today. I can’t link to it because it’s subscription only. But basically it says that it was self-funded at a cost of $42,000 for the shoot. The AFC then invested in it so it could be post-produced. That would be another couple of hundred thousand, I imagine. It’s doing well, but is yet to show a profit. So, more power to them.

By: Fine

Fine — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 23:22:46 +0000

I think we should be making every sort of film. Genre and non-genre. Art house, rom com etc.

Korea and Denmark both heavy government subsidy and Korea has quotas for their films in cinemas as well. But, I don’t know exactly how their system works.

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 14:17:21 +0000

I don’t know about Denmark, and I haven’t a clue about whether there’s any state subsidisation (or protectionism) in Korea, but perhaps it goes back to another of Mark’s points - what we’re interested in making, or in our case because we’re talking higher budget films, subsidising the making of. There are Korean horror films, martial arts films, cop films, art house films, romantic dramas, etc.

By: Fine

Fine — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 13:47:24 +0000

The funding bureaucracies are well aware of these strategies. How they choose to handle them is a different issue. There’s no doubt that the Producers Rebate is meant to produce higher budget films. What happens to the ultra-low budget? Well, I guess everyone gets smarter about using new distribution methods.

What would be interesting is to look at how fims are made in countries like Denmark and Korea. In those countries, local films make up about 25% of the local box office gross. What makes the difference?

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 13:23:06 +0000

Yep!

It would be interesting to know if there’s much awareness of this sort of strategy among the powers that be in the film funding bureaucracy. Going back to Mark’s points at 9 and the previous discussions we’ve had about “what happens anyway” compared to the aims of cultural policy - some inspired by Marcus’ stuff.

By: Fine

Fine — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 13:16:55 +0000

Well, I hope it does well. sounds like an interesting film and good on anyone who’s out there trying.

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 13:11:18 +0000

I noted that it’s been released internationally on DVD, Fine. Whether or not that means it will sell or be rented in the UK and the US where it’s available, I don’t know! It appears to have been shown at a festival in the States.

Anyway, you won’t waste your money if you rent it! It’s a cute film - reminded me a little of some recent English and Scottish efforts in a similar vein - it was a hell of a lot better than Cashback - which had a similar theme - and without the overt boy “artsy” objectification of the female body!

http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0460740/

By: Sir Lord Sidney Snott

Sir Lord Sidney Snott — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 13:06:23 +0000

Provided the arts community doesn’t put out the begging bowl for taxpayer funding I’m happy. It’s headache enough that every time the Olympic circus pops up we have sweaty athletes and those who earn dollars through them demanding fiscal indulgences.

By: Fine

Fine — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 13:03:47 +0000

Obviously, $700 means no-one got paid. That’s absolutely okay. But if it’s only an Australian DVD release, it means that everyone works at a loss.

By: Fine

Fine — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 13:00:46 +0000

It would be interesting to drill down into those figures Mark. I don’t know anything about this film, but I can play with a few figures, which may or may not be relevant for this film. If a film takes 1 million theatrically, it means that the exhibitor has taken their cut, which is 30 - 40% of the gross box office, the distributor has taken their slice which is also about 30% - 40%. Prints and advertsing has had to be paid for. That’s abour $100,000 - $200,000 for a small release. The producers would have worked on it for a couple of years. They may well still have credit cards to pay off. Or cast and crew may have worked on a deferral basis and need to be paid out of the returns. Or they may have investors who will get their money back first. If that’s the model, they’re not making any money on their release. The problems is then after everyone has busted their gut to produce and distribute the film, is that they only get a tiny return and then they need you get their next film made. It’s that cash flow problem that sinks a lot of people if they don’t approach it really strategically. For low budget films, straight to DVD is actually a lot smarter, if they have an international market.

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 12:56:31 +0000

Google helped me find the other art house film I referred to - it’s The Actress. According to IMDB, it took $700 at the box office, which must have been its showing at MUFF and other festivals around Oz:

http://www.muff.com.au/2005/content/bestof.html

I saw it on dvd, and again it was there in multiple copies at Blockbuster. I don’t know enough about the economics of it to know what sort of dvd business you’d need to cover costs, but obviously it’s a dvd/festival driven business model.

Not a bad film at all, btw. Nothing profound, but rather neat.

http://www.afc.gov.au/filmsandawards/recentfilms/cannes06/feature_158.aspx

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 12:30:29 +0000

Meant to add the IMDB link for All My Friends Are Leaving Brisbane:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0818897/

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 12:29:42 +0000

Just to add to this theme, in some instances dvd is a viable business model for “art house” themed very low budget Oz films too, which might get a minimal theatrical release tied to a festival circuit. All My Friends Are Leaving Brisbane is a recent example - took about $1 million at the box office, but is all over my local Blockbuster at the moment. A more obscure one I saw a while back - whose name I can’t recall - but basically a bunch of Melbourne and Victorian film students making a film set in Perth - also got significant exposure through dvd and from memory was made for less than 50k.

By: Marcus Westbury

Marcus Westbury — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 12:03:57 +0000

Film is not my strong point but horror is a perfect example. I’m not over the details of the intricacies of the funding structure for film (struggling with arts and TV thus far), but i recall that it was strongly emphasised at 2020 that a key priority was to decouple funding for “screen” work from any mechanism dependent on a particular mode of distribution.

Mark Ryan: i’d be interested to have a chat with you about your research. Any chance of emailing me? My firstname.lastame at gmail if you can.

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 07:23:57 +0000

I think the ‘prestige festival’ model is also there to give politicians a buzz. They love hanging out on red carpets.

One hypothesis I’ve heard suggested about the proliferation of arts festivals of all kinds in Brisbane up to the early 2000s and their subsequent rationalisation is a particularly opening night loving Arts Minister, replaced by a more shy and retiring one (yes, folks, there are such pollies!)…

By: Fine

Fine — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 02:53:09 +0000

“Yet the new Producer Rebate which is being lauded as the new saviour of the Australian film industry shuts out films below a threshold of $1 million and stipulates that a qualifying film must have a cinema release - which may encourage unviable economic models.”

This is something which really worries me about the Producer’s Rebate. It seems to set up a model that doesn’t acknowledge the realities of changing of distribution patterns. There’s definitely a push to encourage larger production houses with slates with this legislation and there’s strong arguments about why this is the way to go as well. Strength in numbers, using the Rebate to set up viable business models etc. No-one really knows what’s going to work. But you’re pointing to the downside of this model.

I think the ‘prestige festival’ model is also there to give politicians a buzz. They love hanging out on red carpets.

MIFF has done an interesting thing in having a strong sidebar on Ozploitation. It’s an interesting irony that none of these films would have got into MIFF in the firt place.

I wonder if you have any ideas about how low budget non-genre films would go using DVD distribution. I think there’s a real opportunity for documentaries to use these foms of distribution.

Anyway, thanks for the info.

By: Mark David Ryan

Mark David Ryan — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 02:28:10 +0000

Hi, this is Mark Ryan, Terry’s PhD student who has recently finished a PhD on the ‘industry’ of contemporary Australian horror production, which has been eloquently summarised by Terry above. First of all this is great discussion! Picking up on many of these issues, my study has found that there have been over 60 Australian horror films (and hybrid horror/genre films) produced between 2000 to 2007. However, with the exception of Wolf Creek, Rogue, Undead, and the runaway film “Saw” most people don’t even realise Australia makes horror films. In a similar vein to what Marcus is saying above, markets for these films are international. A large proportion of underground titles with budgets below $50, 000 receive international DVD release without a domestic release and ironically Australian audiences have to import these titles. However, mainstream and underground horror production are not completely disconnected. Underground titles can emerge from the underground (produced with low-cost digital video, unpaid cast and crews and financed with limited private finance) but still receive cinema release and essentially become mainstream titles. Moreover, indie filmmakers beginning careers with low-budget horror titles can cross-over into the mainstream to become mainstream filmmakers. For example, The Spierig Brothers who self-financed the relatively low-budget zombie film Undead (2002) have now completed a $25 million vampire film Daybreakers (2008) funded by Lion’s Gate.

In terms of policy though, currently funding structures miss a lot of this production and mandate particular economic models. Many Oz horror films are turning towards straight-to-DVD release as their primary source of recoupment and many of the most successful titles are produced less than $1 million. Yet the new Producer Rebate which is being lauded as the new saviour of the Australian film industry shuts out films below a threshold of $1 million and stipulates that a qualifying film must have a cinema release - which may encourage unviable economic models. Finally, the limitations of cultural policy objectives are clearly highlighted by Aussie horror films.
Cultural policy for the Australian film industry mandates a particular film culture, circumscribes notions of value (emphasising Australianness and films for local audiences, social realism and favours more prestigious art-house films over commercial, non-cultural specific films) and tends to marginalise genre films. Horror films do not present positive depictions of an Australian cultural identity, they are not prestigious films or material for prestigious festival awards, they target niche youth/horror audiences around the world rather than mass audiences or prestigious festival audiences, most are B-grade products and video titles - all of which are to an extent in opposition to the type of Austrlaian film industry Australian cultural policy attempts to develop. Policy should look at fostering grassroots films (through festivals), and aid indie filmmakers in stepping up to the next level (i.e. moving onto films with budgets of $1 million) but also recognising that films can be made on low-budgets these still with the ability of cinema release, and in many cases international rather than domestic releases.

By: Ben Eltham

Ben Eltham — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 07:17:45 +0000

Marcus, another great post. Just a quick note in regards to your musings over the fragmenting of consensus and the evolution of gatekeepers - here is a link to an interesting article about Amazon’s user reviewers.
>
One idle speculation is that the Amazon debate is interesting, I think, because it shows how the marketplace itself tends to parasitise or co-opt these consensus structures.