What's happening to Europe?

[Paul Bruening]

Hello European posters,

 

I was looking through IMDB's list of Techniscope productions when I was reminded of just how productive the Italian movie industry once was. Then, I recalled how the Brits and French used to grind out some steady product. While I've asked this question here before, I am still amazed that no one has accounted well enough for why Europe is not knocking out more product than it currently does. There are more ticket buyers, there, now, than in the sixties and seventies. Production costs are relatively the same in cost-to-sales ratio. I just don't get it. I understand that in America, the mom and pops, small town and city neighborhood theaters kept small producers and distributors alive in America up until the eighties. Then, the multiplexes and fewer distributors drove the small producers out. Likewise, the centralization of video distribution by a handful of national chains like Blockbuster squeezed out the few who were trying to produce for the home consumption, mom and pop video stores. The growth of fewer large corporations controlling all channels of distribution is the principle reason for the demise of the small producer in America. But, has that halted most of the normal production in Europe as well? Or, are there other reasons? I really want to understand this. It just doesn't makes sense to me why production has fizzled out there.

[Freya Black]

Hello European posters,

 

I was looking through IMDB's list of Techniscope productions when I was reminded of just how productive the Italian movie industry once was. Then, I recalled how the Brits and French used to grind out some steady product. While I've asked this question here before, I am still amazed that no one has accounted well enough for why Europe is not knocking out more product than it currently does. There are more ticket buyers, there, now, than in the sixties and seventies. Production costs are relatively the same in cost-to-sales ratio. I just don't get it. I understand that in America, the mom and pops, small town and city neighborhood theaters kept small producers and distributors alive in America up until the eighties. Then, the multiplexes and fewer distributors drove the small producers out. Likewise, the centralization of video distribution by a handful of national chains like Blockbuster squeezed out the few who were trying to produce for the home consumption, mom and pop video stores. The growth of fewer large corporations controlling all channels of distribution is the principle reason for the demise of the small producer in America. But, has that halted most of the normal production in Europe as well? Or, are there other reasons? I really want to understand this. It just doesn't makes sense to me why production has fizzled out there.

 

 

There isn't just one answer I'm afraid but if we are looking at Europe as a whole and at the cinema industry in paticular then the reasons are:

 

Europe was decimated during the second world war which allowed Hollywood to step in and fill in the gap.

 

America became somewhat coveted during the post war era because it was still afluent while in Europe everything was rationed so it seemed like a fantasy land.

 

Hollywood is very good at playing up to peoples fantasies.

 

The cinemas became controlled by chains that had a monopoly on screenings.

 

America is a huge unified market with a single dominant language. Productions can go into profit just on US sales alone and foreign sales are the icing on the cake. In Europe you have to actually think about the American market if you want to be able to sell a film.

 

America succesfully lobied european governments to remove quotas and give free reign to the Hollywood monopoly.

 

America preety much has a monopoly on peoples minds these days and people are used to american stuff and things have become preety "americanized" over here. In fact that's not even a word people really use any more in the U.K. as these days it sounds rather odd.

 

Theres probably a lot of other reasons that I can't remember right now. You would have to ask more specific questions to get better answers tho. :)

 

I'm also coming at things from a u.k. perspective where obviously the problem is much more severe.

 

love

 

Freya

[Guest]

I'm also coming at things from a u.k. perspective where obviously the problem is much more severe.

 

Well 1% of movies on the big screen in English Canada are Canadian, yes 1%.

 

Hollywood dominates the entire industry here, just like it now does in Europe. It's so much cheaper for exhibitors and distributors to simply buy off the shelf US product vs producing home grown product.

 

In the mid 80s the Canadian government attempted to impose a quota system on the theaters here to get more Canadian product onto screens. Jack Valentie at the MPAA had a poop fit. He went to Ronald Reagan, ex Hollywood actor, and demanded that the USA impose trade tariffs on Canadian products coming into the USA. Well you can guess what happened to Canada's film quota system, it went bye bye real fast.

 

So the US government directly intervened to keep Canadian product off the screens here.

 

The hilarious thing is that the USA already has a 99% share of Canadian screens, the fight is now over the remaining 1% :blink:

 

And many in Hollywood are demanding that they get that as well.

 

I wonder what would happen if the situation where reversed?

 

R,

[Guest Glen Alexander]

There isn't just one answer I'm afraid but if we are looking at Europe as a whole and at the cinema industry in paticular then the reasons are:

 

Europe was decimated during the second world war which allowed Hollywood to step in and fill in the gap.

 

America became somewhat coveted during the post war era because it was still afluent while in Europe everything was rationed so it seemed like a fantasy land.

 

Hollywood is very good at playing up to peoples fantasies.

 

The cinemas became controlled by chains that had a monopoly on screenings.

 

America is a huge unified market with a single dominant language. Productions can go into profit just on US sales alone and foreign sales are the icing on the cake. In Europe you have to actually think about the American market if you want to be able to sell a film.

 

America succesfully lobied european governments to remove quotas and give free reign to the Hollywood monopoly.

 

America preety much has a monopoly on peoples minds these days and people are used to american stuff and things have become preety "americanized" over here. In fact that's not even a word people really use any more in the U.K. as these days it sounds rather odd.

 

Theres probably a lot of other reasons that I can't remember right now. You would have to ask more specific questions to get better answers tho. :)

 

I'm also coming at things from a u.k. perspective where obviously the problem is much more severe.

 

love

 

Freya

 

Ha ha, reminds me of that song by Rammstein, Amerika... get it have a listen.

 

If the EU had any decent films they would be successful, don't blame the US, they have a product to market, no one watches their crap movies either. I tried to watch a german/french film with subtitles in spanish and it was nearly unwatchable. This movie was worse than Manos: Hands of Fate, ha ha ha I do know french, german, and spanish.

 

 

1. EU 17% to 19% VAT

2. weak USD

3. 4-day week rental in EU vs 3-day week in US

4. too many languages

5. no common distribution chain

6. work ethic much less in EU, causing much longer shoot times.

 

It is actually cheaper to get gear shipped in from NYC, pay FedEx overnight and rent for TWICE as long as any place in EU. Same gear from UK would cost another ~30% so UK, forget it, GBP plus VAT plus shipping, I don't consider anything from UK.

 

cheers

glen

[Freya Black]

Ha ha, reminds me of that song by Rammstein, Amerika... get it have a listen.

 

If the EU had any decent films they would be successful, don't blame the US, they have a product to market, no one watches their crap movies either. I tried to watch a german/french film with subtitles in spanish and it was nearly unwatchable. This movie was worse than Manos: Hands of Fate, ha ha ha I do know french, german, and spanish.

 

Glen you make it sound like you have only ever seen one film from Europe! ;)

The EU and Europe as a whole has made loads of great films:

 

The Third Man

The Red Shoes

Strangers on a train

Black Narcissus

Orlando

Dirty Preety things

Alien

The Wicker Man

Kind Hearts and Coronets

The Man in the white suit

Quatermass

Repulsion

The Life of Brian

Brazil

Odd Man Out

The Italian Job

The nine lives of thomas katz

The Ipcress File

Passport to pimlico

 

The Good the bad and the ugly

A fistful of dollars

Once upon a time in the west

For a few dollars more

 

Dasies

Farenheit 451

Black Sabbath

Black Sunday

The Whip and the body

Alice in the cities

Fear eats the soul

 

Taxi

Subway

Amelie

City of Lost Children

Delicatessan

 

Some people think Hitchcock was quite a good film director but in the end he went with it and moved to the states.

 

People do watch the crap Hollywood movies because they are bundled with other movies when they are sold and they have huge amounts of marketing money behined them. In fact today I bought 5 movies bundled together. One was Kingdom of heaven by riddley scott which I have never seen, there is also a Granada production "Henry VIII" which I was curious about, but I had to take a copy of "Garfield" and "the girl next door", we both know already these will be terrible movies.

 

Daredevil is a terrible movie for example but it got a wide release over here. We have loads of awful american movies foisted on us here.

 

We used to have an amzing tv industry over here too. At one time they said it was the best television in the world. Maybe they were right, maybe they were wrong but you could say it without people looking at you like you were out of your mind or bursting into hysterical laughter. However this was all kiiled off by cheap imports, reality tv, and interferance from the u.k. government.

 

Now everything is almost completely wiped out, we don't have the talent pool here anymore to really make a lot of quality productions, not that we don't have incredibly talented people, of course we do, but we don't have skilled people and as I'm talking on a cinematography board you will know what I mean about being skilled. All that stuff you learn from working on shoot after shoot, on trying things out etc.

 

With no local market, you have to focus on the american market. I remember being impressed in the movie "chicken run" that there was stuff that only british people would understand and would just pass by elsewhere, it was noticeable as an exception that proved the rule.

 

The truth is that you could easily make a great movie in the u.k. and virtually nobody would get to see it.

 

love

 

Freya

[Guest]

The truth is that you could easily make a great movie in the u.k. and virtually nobody would get to see it.

 

Ha! Ha! Come to Canada, same story here. You have to sell your movie to a US distributor so it can be shown in Canada!!

 

Now have a look at South Korea, they put in place an aggressive quota system to keep out US movies. Now South Korean movies make up 50% of their box office! Audiences see the S. Korean movies of their own free will, once the government made it possible for the product to be seen in the first place.

 

Problem is that with the US trade deficit running at record high levels, the export of Hollywood movies around the globe is one of the few bright spots. The US gov't will use it's considerable power to make sure Hollywood doesn't lose market share.

 

Right now the US gov't is trying to break the S. Korean quota system so that more Hollywood movies get in there. The US is doing what it always does...attaching movies to other parts of trade pacts. This is very effective since most foreign countries won't choose the indigenous film industry over auto exports to the USA.

 

Mexico totally sold out their film industry in order to join NAFTA. Film production of Mexican made features dropped like a rock.

 

R,

 

Notes:

 

South Korea?s program, in place since 1966, is often cited as a successful model. According to the Korean Film Council, the domestic-market share of South Korean films mushroomed from 15.9 percent in 1991 up to an impressive 62 percent in the first half of 2004 and maintained 50 percent the next year. Hallyu, or the Korean-wave films that swept over Asia this past decade, is proof of that triumph.

 

Conversely, the repealed Mexican program is a cautionary tale. After signing NAFTA in 1994, the Mexican government reduced the screen quota from 30 percent to 10 percent. The Mexican film industry, which produced 100 films per year in the 1980s, hit record lows and has produced only about 30 films or less per year after the reduction.

[Freya Black]

Well 1% of movies on the big screen in English Canada are Canadian, yes 1%.

 

It doesn't in the least bit surprise me!

 

I'm intrested in the fact you mention English Canada!

What about the situation in French canada?

Is it a lot of French imports?

Is there more of a balance?

 

It amused me that Glen listed the languages as being one of the problems here in Europe when in fact it is the language difference that actually helps stave off the american product on the mainland and stops things from getting decimated the way they are in the u.k.

 

The English speaking world stands no chance against the hollywood machine. ;)

 

love

 

Freya

[Freya Black]

Ha! Ha! Come to Canada, same story here. You have to sell your movie to a US distributor so it can be shown in Canada!!

 

I can imagine, and they will be like "This is set in Toronto but couldn't we just say it's set in New York instead, I mean Toronto is often used as a stand in for New York, nobody will notice". Or "it's really intresting but the people talk funny and we are worried nobody will be able to understand them", so what are these garabaldi biscuit things, do you think you could replace them with oreo cookies so everyone will understand?

 

love

 

Freya

[Guest]

It doesn't in the least bit surprise me!

 

I'm intrested in the fact you mention English Canada!

What about the situation in French canada?

Is it a lot of French imports?

Is there more of a balance?

 

It amused me that Glen listed the languages as being one of the problems here in Europe when in fact it is the language difference that actually helps stave off the american product on the mainland and stops things from getting decimated the way they are in the u.k.

 

The English speaking world stands no chance against the hollywood machine. ;)

 

love

 

Freya

 

Yes, French Canada has its own thriving film industry. Well thriving largely as a result of massive amounts of tax money given to them by English Canada so they won't "separate." Combine this with their language barrier to Hollywood movies, and you have a successful local film industry. Many Quebec made movies routinely beat Hollywood movies at the box office, only in Quebec of course.

 

English Canada gets bugger all in help, we are told to compete in the "free" market, except the market is hardly in any way "free." A few years ago Alliance Atlantis announced it was no longer making movies, they would only distribute them. And by "them" they mean Hollywood movies in Canada.

 

The English Canadian movies that do get government help are 9/10 non-commercial movies.

 

Many of us in English Canada are pissed off over this situation and we have a right to be.

 

As for:

 

"The English speaking world stands no chance against the hollywood machine. ;)"

 

You are 110% CORRECT!! It's part of the reason the quota systems in S. Korea, France, and Argentina, work at all.

 

I wish a Canadian oil tycoon would spend more to out promote a Canadian film over a Hollywood one just to say it's been done.

 

R,

[Freya Black]

Mexico totally sold out their film industry in order to join NAFTA. Film production of Mexican made features dropped like a rock.

 

R,

 

Conversely, the repealed Mexican program is a cautionary tale. After signing NAFTA in 1994, the Mexican government reduced the screen quota from 30 percent to 10 percent. The Mexican film industry, which produced 100 films per year in the 1980s, hit record lows and has produced only about 30 films or less per year after the reduction.

 

The mexican tale is an especially sad one because they could have been in with a chance to really have something going what with the growing spanish language population in the states and the world market for spanish film.

 

Of course how could they not sell out their little film industry when there was so much at stake on the table but then it isn't just the film industry it's their cultiural identity. Sadly that is of course something that people value little, well at least when it is their own.

 

Maybe they should have held out till they removed border controls and had a free flow of people in the "free" market. ;)

 

love

 

Freya

[Max Jacoby]

Yep, more European countries should introduce a quota system. The French system, which raises a tax on every ticket sold and pumps that money back into the local film industry is very good also. It is not a coincidence that they have the most commercially successful film industry in Europe.

 

Really, the reason people watch mostly Hollywood films is not because they are better, but simply because they spend more money in marketing, raising awareness for their products, creating stars, etc...

[Freya Black]

The English Canadian movies that do get government help are 9/10 non-commercial movies.

 

Many of us in English Canada are pissed off over this situation and we have a right to be.

 

I have to confess at this point that I do actually like some of Guy Maddins films.

There I've said it, it's out in the open.

 

I've come across Canadians who get very angry about Guy Maddin but you see Guy Maddin is not the enemy, his films are actually okay, they get some distribution around the world and some people are actually intrested in them. It's a bit like when they used to fund the films of Derek Jarman and Peter Greenaway and Sally Potter etc here in the u.k. I expect people got upset about that but actually that was kind of okay, not commercial movies in the classical sense but it's good to have these films too.

 

These people are not the enemy however. Not in the least, it is the faceless ones who are the enemy.

 

It's funny and ironic that you bought this up, as a short while ago in this very thread, I mentioned a really terrible hollywood movie I have just aquired but not yet seen. Till you mentioned government funding I had forgotten about it but that same Hollywood movie received large amounts of money from the film fund that is local to where I live. Yes that's right they pumped a load of scarce government money into a Hollywood movie because Hollywood movies need our funding!

 

So if you feel upset about them funding some weird non commercial movies then watch out because if they were to fund more commercial films you just know that Hollywood would step in and say "can we have some of that money?" just as Rupert Murdoch is presently doing to the BBC! Those faceless people would hand it right over too, you know they would!

 

I could tell you a lot of stories but obviously I have to be careful (and I'm saying too much already) but you are better off without that government money and you know what, it's good that it is going to those weird non commercial films because they can keep the skills there that are needed for commercial films by giving work to cinematographers etc.

 

Believe me it could be a lot worse as it is here!

 

love

 

Freya

Edited May 11, 2008 by Freya Black

[Freya Black]

Yes, French Canada has its own thriving film industry. Well thriving largely as a result of massive amounts of tax money given to them by English Canada so they won't "separate." Combine this with their language barrier to Hollywood movies, and you have a successful local film industry. Many Quebec made movies routinely beat Hollywood movies at the box office, only in Quebec of course.

 

Richard,

Could you make a movie in French Canada under that system?

 

How about "Vampire. the lost blood line" about ancient vampires that have travelled from france to quebec somehow and have slept undisturbed but become awoken during building work to develop a multi storey car park?

 

Do you think they would let you do that?

It would have to be almost entirely in French of course!

 

love

 

Freya

[Andy_Alderslade]

Ha ha, reminds me of that song by Rammstein, Amerika... get it have a listen.

 

If the EU had any decent films they would be successful, don't blame the US, they have a product to market, no one watches their crap movies either. I tried to watch a german/french film with subtitles in spanish and it was nearly unwatchable. This movie was worse than Manos: Hands of Fate, ha ha ha I do know french, german, and spanish.

 

 

1. EU 17% to 19% VAT

2. weak USD

3. 4-day week rental in EU vs 3-day week in US

4. too many languages

5. no common distribution chain

6. work ethic much less in EU, causing much longer shoot times.

 

It is actually cheaper to get gear shipped in from NYC, pay FedEx overnight and rent for TWICE as long as any place in EU. Same gear from UK would cost another ~30% so UK, forget it, GBP plus VAT plus shipping, I don't consider anything from UK.

 

cheers

glen

 

Maybe if you try watching some European films with English subtitles you would find that there are some excellent European films! And they produce a large number of good films considering the low total output.

 

Regarding point 6, though generally working hours are greater in the U.S. than in Europe (because of the free reign US co-operations are given) this does not apply to the film industry or the broadcasting sector.

 

In-fact in the UK, over-time is considerably less-well paid and subsequently considerably more common. UK films crews, weather they are making American or British films are working longer and longer hours.

 

 

The problem with the original thread question is it is assuming that Europe is one country - which it most certainly is not.

 

Europe is made up of lots of contrasting nations, all with their own strengths and weaknesses, problems and successes. For example Italy has a strong a national identity but has a weak and convoluted infrastructure, it lacks political drive to have Italian films shown to the public rather than dubbed American films. The UK in contrast lacks a strong national identity, it shares the same language as the market leader (the U.S.) which makes it successful at providing facilities to international productions but subsequently the UK is unable to make home-grown productions which can compete side by side by the better funded US equivalents.

 

Alternatively France and Spain both have relatively healthy outputs, on certain levels at least.

[Phil Rhodes]

All you need to know is that American films are not in "World Cinema" at the retail outlets.

 

I've said it a million times but you could go to the movie theatre in the town where I live every week of the year and see local product on display perhaps twice. There's a quaint assumption that I'm exaggerating here for comic effect. I'm not. It is literally 5% of product, maximum.

 

The market has been set up to make it impossible for local product to compete; packaging of worthless tat alongside the good stuff means we are not just beaten by Hollywood, we are completely erased, vapourised, just summarily deleted from existence by Hollywood. It has now been like this for so long that our technical ability to produce world-class cinema is being adversely affected; almost nobody in the UK works like the average IA600 camera crewmember, day after day, week after week, honing skills.

 

It is now so hopelessly obvious that strict regulation is required, so crushingly axiomatic that this is the case, that the lack of same is evidence if any was needed that the politicians really work to win elections so they can work to win the next election and not, heaven forfend, for the purpose of actually giving a poop about anything.

 

P

[Guest Glen Alexander]

Yep, more European countries should introduce a quota system. The French system, which raises a tax on every ticket sold and pumps that money back into the local film industry is very good also. It is not a coincidence that they have the most commercially successful film industry in Europe.

 

Really, the reason people watch mostly Hollywood films is not because they are better, but simply because they spend more money in marketing, raising awareness for their products, creating stars, etc...

 

Sorry Max have chip in here..

 

Ugh, crap movies are crap movies in any language. ha ha. :-)

 

I don't watch or see any current movies, all of the FX crap from the US. The last film I saw which was made in the EU with a french actor was Jean Rochefort in "Lost in La Mancha" doco about the Terry Gilliam movie about Don QuiXote which was 'abandonment'...because of rain, horses, and a bad actor. Great movie for those wondering what's it's like on remote film sets and what happens when the EU tries to make a big production without 'hollywood' money. Makeup in UK, actors everywhere in Italy, Spain, France, etc...

 

The last really good movie made in the EU was Ronin with Frankenheimer in Paris, but I got to 'loiter' around the set so I am biased ha ha.

 

I tried to watch the Finnish film about the Olympic skier, Matti, who won a medal, later servered prison time, etc, was horrible.

 

Canal+ was setting up for a big shoot today near Concorde, all that money is going towards people hanging out having coffee at the bistro's ha ha ha.

 

But Sahk. will be cutting that budget as well, just like the money for museums.

[Guest Glen Alexander]

Maybe if you try watching some European films with English subtitles you would find that there are some excellent European films! And they produce a large number of good films considering the low total output.

 

Regarding point 6, though generally working hours are greater in the U.S. than in Europe (because of the free reign US co-operations are given) this does not apply to the film industry or the broadcasting sector.

 

In-fact in the UK, over-time is considerably less-well paid and subsequently considerably more common. UK films crews, weather they are making American or British films are working longer and longer hours.

 

 

The problem with the original thread question is it is assuming that Europe is one country - which it most certainly is not.

 

Europe is made up of lots of contrasting nations, all with their own strengths and weaknesses, problems and successes. For example Italy has a strong a national identity but has a weak and convoluted infrastructure, it lacks political drive to have Italian films shown to the public rather than dubbed American films. The UK in contrast lacks a strong national identity, it shares the same language as the market leader (the U.S.) which makes it successful at providing facilities to international productions but subsequently the UK is unable to make home-grown productions which can compete side by side by the better funded US equivalents.

 

Alternatively France and Spain both have relatively healthy outputs, on certain levels at least.

 

I don't need english subtitles, my german is really good, french is good, and spanish is passable.

 

UK film do quite well, Notting Hill, elizabeth, a fish called wanda, 4 weddings/funeral, train spotting, full monty... MONTY PYTHON... I will say NI to you again , if you do not obtain for us....... a shrubbery.... with a path down the middle.... and not too expensive...

Edited May 11, 2008 by Glen Alexander

[Freya Black]

Europe is made up of lots of contrasting nations, all with their own strengths and weaknesses, problems and successes. For example Italy has a strong a national identity but has a weak and convoluted infrastructure, it lacks political drive to have Italian films shown to the public rather than dubbed American films. The UK in contrast lacks a strong national identity, it shares the same language as the market leader (the U.S.) which makes it successful at providing facilities to international productions but subsequently the UK is unable to make home-grown productions which can compete side by side by the better funded US equivalents.

 

I think you are right about the u.k. not having a strong national identity but in the past the countries of the u.k. had a much stronger national identity which has been watered down by the influx of Hollywood media and ideas.

 

I should point out that you are almost assuming the u.k. is one country where it too is made up of contrasting nations. ;) This too may make it harder to see what national identites there are.

 

I don't think it's because the UK doesn't have a strong national identity that it can't compete, but that instead it is because it hasn't been able to compete that it now doesn't have a strong national identity.

It is a symptom and not a cause. You only have to look at the films of the past from Britain to see that there is a very strong and clear national identity in the vast majority of them, and it's still true to some extent to this day which actually becomes a little bit of a problem because distributors in the american market will complain that it is too british!

 

It's also not just that the Hollywood films are better funded as films but more to do with the Hollywood control over distribution and the cross marketing of product, as well as having larger marketing budgets. Hollywood films are also subsidised by the large american market so they can thus dump product cheaply onto foreign markets undermining them severely.

 

Hollywood basically has a monopoly.

 

love

 

Freya

[Guest Glen Alexander]

I think you are right about the u.k. not having a strong national identity but in the past the countries of the u.k. had a much stronger national identity which has been watered down by the influx of Hollywood media and ideas.

 

I should point out that you are almost assuming the u.k. is one country where it too is made up of contrasting nations. ;) This too may make it harder to see what national identites there are.

 

I don't think it's because the UK doesn't have a strong national identity that it can't compete, but that instead it is because it hasn't been able to compete that it now doesn't have a strong national identity.

It is a symptom and not a cause. You only have to look at the films of the past from Britain to see that there is a very strong and clear national identity in the vast majority of them, and it's still true to some extent to this day which actually becomes a little bit of a problem because distributors in the american market will complain that it is too british!

 

It's also not just that the Hollywood films are better funded as films but more to do with the Hollywood control over distribution and the cross marketing of product, as well as having larger marketing budgets. Hollywood films are also subsidised by the large american market so they can thus dump product cheaply onto foreign markets undermining them severely.

 

Hollywood basically has a monopoly.

 

love

 

Freya

 

your marketing analysis of US film distro, is incorrect.

 

typically international distribution works something like this, based on how well the film did in the US, gross, overseas markets will bid on it.

 

the distributors will attach really crappy bombs that no one would pay for, so to get the big blockbuster films, they have to take the bombs for a certain amount of time.

Edited May 11, 2008 by Glen Alexander

[Freya Black]

Sorry Max have chip in here..

 

Ugh, crap movies are crap movies in any language. ha ha. :-)

 

True but the point is that crap Hollywood movies get distributed and seen whereas good British films probably won't be.

 

The last really good movie made in the EU was Ronin with Frankenheimer in Paris, but I got to 'loiter' around the set so I am biased ha ha.

 

The Nine lives of thomas Katz was made 2 years later.

Dirty pretty things 4 years later.

 

Both are really good british films.

Neither has been seen much, in fact the director of thomas katz became very depressed and stopped making films until recently because the film did so badly. It's very popular in Germany tho for some reason.

 

love

 

Freya

[Guest Glen Alexander]

recently because the film did so badly. It's very popular in Germany tho for some reason.

 

yes but so is david hasselhof HA HA HA HA HA

 

explain that one.

[Freya Black]

your marketing analysis of US film distro, is incorrect.

 

typically international distribution works something like this, based on how well the film did in the US, gross, overseas markets will bid on it.

 

the distributors will attach really crappy bombs that no one would pay for, so to get the big blockbuster films, they have to take the bombs for a certain amount of time.

 

I mentioned that earlier but I don't see how that conflicts with anything you just quoted by me, or what you think is incorrect? Perhaps you meant my summary was incomplete rather than incorrect, which is definitely true as obviously you could say a lot more about it all, what with companies often owning the DVD labels, DVD distribution, tv stations etc.

 

love

 

Freya

[Freya Black]

yes but so is david hasselhof HA HA HA HA HA

 

explain that one.

 

He is a Hollywood celebrity so he is part of the machine! ;)

His surname sounds vaguely German too causing them to identify more strongly with him.

 

Maybe it's to do with the German sense of humour too! ;)

 

love

 

Freya

[Adam Frisch FSF]

Yep, more European countries should introduce a quota system. The French system, which raises a tax on every ticket sold and pumps that money back into the local film industry is very good also. It is not a coincidence that they have the most commercially successful film industry in Europe.

 

Quotas is the worst idea. Every attempt at regulating markets always ends up with inferior superficially sustained products that wouldn't survive on their own. It also introduces politics into filmmaking - which if we like it or not - affects the subjects and the stories and the production unfavorably. Just look at the old British quota quickies. Or the extremely politically correct French and Swedish films.

 

Subversion is vital to filmmaking - and it never happens in state funded films. Love or hate films like for instance Death Wish, but they're important in a healthy film-producing society.

 

But on the subject of American films; My experience from having both worked in LA and visited the US numerous times is that the American public devours and consumes film on a much bigger scale than Europeans. It's part of the national fabric. People of all ages and all classes go to the movies in the US - they don't here. My American GF's parents, both in their 60's, go to the movies regularly. My mum in Sweden goes to the movies every 5th year at best.

[David Mullen ASC]

The American film industry succeeds because there is a business climate here that promotes risky investment in film, unlike countries which are more conservative with their capital, and it is a system designed to allow a few successes pay for a mountain of failures. Few other countries produce enough commercial product in film that allows them to survive big-budget failures on a regular basis like Hollywood does. So it's not really about producing a commercial success, it's about being able to survive commercial failure and keep making product. When England had a bigger industry, it was being supported by a few rich men like J. Arthur Rank who created a large enough output of product tailored for local consumption that it could weather rises and falls in profit (to some degree). But there aren't a lot of J. Arthur Ranks anymore, or Kordas, etc. Anywhere. And the international corporations that own Hollywood (it's almost silly to call it an American industry anymore when half of it is owned by the Japanese or Australians, etc.) are so big that it is much less of a level playing field compared to the 1950's or 1960's.

 

So the unanswered (and perhaps unanswerable) is how to foreign film industries compete or do they even bother given the size of the forces at work now? If they can't create a large enough investment climate and mass-produced product to survive failure, do they opt for state-supported smaller production?

 

What happened to the Australian industry by the way? You had those great movies of the 1980's coming out, many of them quite commercial (like Road Warrior). What was wrong with that system of tax incentives and breaks? It's not like you can call "Mad Max" an art film...