The end is nigh

[Pat Murray]

Richard, parle vous Franc,ais? :)

 

 

If you know how the system works, and you can put up with the Quebecois, why not exploit that? Hire a few token crew there and shoot in Montreal?

 

Not a bad idea on the surface and I have a friend of the family who has made a very lucrative career working solely in the Montreal film business. As there's always work to be had if you can speak French.

 

The other side of the coin is Richard will have to make mostly - in the words of my family friend - crummy French movies about Quebec, the Quebecois, Quebecois culture, Quebecois experience in Canada and so on and so forth. Richard will have a hard time getting funding, even in Montreal with a Montreal crew, to produce something like the Dogfather.

[Phil Rhodes]

Malheureusement, parlant français fait toujours des gens sonnent comme un aristocrate homosexuel pré-révolutionnaire. If you're British to start with, anyway.

[Guest]

The other side of the coin is Richard will have to make mostly - in the words of my family friend - crummy French movies about Quebec, the Quebecois, Quebecois culture, Quebecois experience in Canada and so on and so forth.

 

I would rather have my eyes scooped out with a hot table spoon while I am still conscious. There isn't a sillier more pathetic group of people on the planet than the "Quebecois."

 

R,

[Brian Dzyak]

I would rather have my eyes scooped out with a hot table spoon while I am still conscious. There isn't a sillier more pathetic group of people on the planet than the "Quebecois."

 

R,

 

 

While I understand where you're coming from, I have to disagree. Have you heard about the "Tea Baggers/Party" in the United States? Fox "News" PAC (political action committee)-watching Sarah Palin-drooling-over gun-nut CONservative Creationist whackjobs who think that Anarchy is what "freedom" truly means.

 

These are the same people who advocate the economic race-to-the-bottom and are not working overtime to push that same philosophy on basic intelligence.

 

 

 

I guess ever nation has their whacky "cousin" who they'd rather be without. In the USA, it's the CONservative "Tea Baggers." :blink:

[Guest]

While I understand where you're coming from, I have to disagree. Have you heard about the "Tea Baggers/Party" in the United States? Fox "News" PAC (political action committee)-watching Sarah Palin-drooling-over gun-nut CONservative Creationist whackjobs who think that Anarchy is what "freedom" truly means.

 

I see your whacky people, and I raise you one!

 

The Quebecois demanded that a referendum be held on whether or not they can separate from Canada and form Quebec into a sovereign country. They got their wish, and managed to lose the very referendum they wanted.....TWICE!!

 

Recently they asked the gov't of Canada to give them 400 million dollars so they can build a hockey arena in Quebec City to attract BACK the Nordiques, who packed up and moved to Colorado and became the Avalanche. The NHL told the Quebecois that even if they spend 400 million on a new arena, they are in no way guaranteed an NHL franchise. The Quebecois don't care since they expect English Canada to buy them a new 400 million dollar arena.

 

They recently publicly stated that they want a quota system for the Montreal Canadiens so that there will be guaranteed spots for French speaking Quebecois only.

 

This might shock some Americans, if any of you moved to Quebec, you are not allowed to send your kids to an English speaking school. As immigrants you will be forced against your will to have your kids educated in French!

 

Oh BTW, want to start a business in Quebec, you better make sure that the French language part of your sign is 50% bigger than the English part.

 

I'm sorry Brian, but this level of stupidity easily beats Sarah Palin, FOX News, and the Tea Party. :D

 

R,

[Brian Dzyak]

I see your whacky people, and I raise you one!

 

The Quebecois demanded that a referendum be held on whether or not they can separate from Canada and form Quebec into a sovereign country. They got their wish, and managed to lose the very referendum they wanted.....TWICE!!

 

Recently they asked the gov't of Canada to give them 400 million dollars so they can build a hockey arena in Quebec City to attract BACK the Nordiques, who packed up and moved to Colorado and became the Avalanche. The NHL told the Quebecois that even if they spend 400 million on a new arena, they are in no way guaranteed an NHL franchise. The Quebecois don't care since they expect English Canada to buy them a new 400 million dollar arena.

 

They recently publicly stated that they want a quota system for the Montreal Canadiens so that there will be guaranteed spots for French speaking Quebecois only.

 

This might shock some Americans, if any of you moved to Quebec, you are not allowed to send your kids to an English speaking school. As immigrants you will be forced against your will to have your kids educated in French!

 

Oh BTW, want to start a business in Quebec, you better make sure that the French language part of your sign is 50% bigger than the English part.

 

I'm sorry Brian, but this level of stupidity easily beats Sarah Palin, FOX News, and the Tea Party. :D

 

R,

 

 

Agreed, that is bat-sh** crazy like our "Tea Baggers" but your example only affects 595,000 square miles. The influence of our whack jobs not only affects almost 4 million square miles, but arguably, much of the rest of the world.

 

Our brand of simpletons wants to make Christianity the rule of law in the USA, give guns to every human being alive, do away with all taxes (for rich people only), do away with all regulations on Corporations that would affect their profits, get rid of the EPA, make all women have their babies even if their fathers raped them, and let Fascism replace Democracy.

 

I do understand where the Quebecois are coming from. They really wish they were France, but over there in the middle of Canada, which makes one wonder why they don't just move to France. The same question I ask of CONservatives here... since they hate government so much, why don't they just move to Somolia where there is no functional government. But for some reason, these kinds of people want to stay where they are, and fight to dissolve as much government as they can, but feel free to ask for government help (like the stadium) when it suits their own needs.

 

I write it but it never makes sense.

[Brian Hulnick]

I agree 100%. As for Quebec, they get 50% of the TeleFILM budget for being 22% of the population. This situation is an outrage to say the least. But very typical of how Canada works. The French tail wags the English dog.

 

R,

 

Please do not get me started on the French. Why are they so damned angry all the time?

Their fishermen are angry,

their lorry drivers are angry,

their students are angry,

Why couldn't they have been this damned angry 70 years ago when it could have done a bit of good.

[Otis Grapsas]

[Guest]

Please do not get me started on the French. Why are they so damned angry all the time?

Their fishermen are angry,

their lorry drivers are angry,

their students are angry,

Why couldn't they have been this damned angry 70 years ago when it could have done a bit of good.

 

We're talking about different French here. I'm talking about the ones in Quebec, who "officially" carry Canadian passports, but they would actually prefer to carry some sort of half assed Quebec passport.

 

R,

[Brian Hulnick]

Agreed, but the still have that quintessentially French arrogance that stinks up the place more than camembert cheese.

 

Was never a fan of Monty Python, however that was funny and very true.

[Guest]

Was never a fan of Monty Python, however that was funny and very true.

 

I too would like to make fun of the French depicted in the Monty Python sketch. But alas, Canadian film isn't much better.

 

R,

[Brian Dzyak]

I too would like to make fun of the French depicted in the Monty Python sketch. But alas, Canadian film isn't much better.

 

R,

 

If Michael Bay made a "Canadian" movie, would it have Canada's flag flying in slo-mo?

[Guest]

If Michael Bay made a "Canadian" movie, would it have Canada's flag flying in slo-mo?

 

Good question. If it was a period piece the question would be which Canadian flag? We've had like 20. The current has only been around since 65.

 

R,

[K Borowski]

Wasthat when they phased out the National Igloo on hte flag Rich?

[Guest]

Wasthat when they phased out the National Igloo on hte flag Rich?

 

It used to be a white dove on a snowy background. But that was phased out when it was decided it was useless when waived by our soldiers in combat.

 

R,

[Alessandro Machi]

I like Ben Stiller. I think he's a comedy genius.

[Brian Hulnick]

It used to be a white dove on a snowy background. But that was phased out when it was decided it was useless when waived by our soldiers in combat.

 

R,

 

 

That's just mean. :P

[Guest]

That's just mean. :P

 

Yeah but damn funny. And very typical of Canadian humour.

 

R,

[Brian Hulnick]

I'M all for government/ state funding in movies. However they should NOT dictate what the content of said film should be. Negotiate over the content maybe, dictate no.

[Brian Dzyak]

I'M all for government/ state funding in movies. However they should NOT dictate what the content of said film should be. Negotiate over the content maybe, dictate no.

 

Why would anyone want tax dollars to be used in ANY way to help a private "business" to make a for-profit product?

 

 

The concern with movies is that what if someone wanted to make something like a political movie that pushed a POV that you don't agree with? YOUR tax dollars are then being used to promote objectionable content. This was an actual issue last year(?) in Texas when a Rodriquez movie wanted a tax "incentive" but there was pushback due to the way the movie would portray Texas.

 

http://www.studiobriefing.net/2010/12/texas-officials-deny-tax-incentives-for-machete/

[Guest]

Why would anyone want tax dollars to be used in ANY way to help a private "business" to make a for-profit product?

 

Are you opposed to the tens of billions that American farmers get every year in subsidies?

 

What about the money the US gov't gave to GM? That kept tens of thousands of your union brothers and sisters in jobs, without the aid from the US gov't (tax dollars), all of those union jobs would have disappeared.

 

Or do you only care about the members of your own union Brian?

 

Also, would you accept work on a movie that is using tax credit money as part of its financing? If so you are a bit of a hypocrite, no?

 

R,

[Brian Dzyak]

Are you opposed to the tens of billions that American farmers get every year in subsidies?

 

Yes, I am opposed to those subsidies.

 

 

What about the money the US gov't gave to GM? That kept tens of thousands of your union brothers and sisters in jobs, without the aid from the US gov't (tax dollars), all of those union jobs would have disappeared.

 

That wasn't a subsidy nor an incentive. That was a bail-out which WAS necessary and was paid back with interest in a time of severe economic crisis. I agreed with that while not loving the situation that caused it to have to happen.

 

 

Or do you only care about the members of your own union Brian?

No. Your question doesn't seem sincere at all. The accusatory tone isn't necessary.

 

Also, would you accept work on a movie that is using tax credit money as part of its financing? If so you are a bit of a hypocrite, no?

 

R,

 

I don't have much of a choice, do I as EVERY movie made now is made with "incentive" money?

 

For that matter, MOST industries in the USA are now operating by virtue of "incentive" money that has been paid by some form of government to get that business to operate there. The CONservative economic system that has been established has given Corporations a kind of stranglehold over local and state governments as they play locations off one another to get the biggest bribe in exchange for the jobs. While one might be able to argue with some sense of validity a local government agreeing to an incentive for a permanent factory (that provides stable permanent jobs), that argument isn't as valid for something like movie-making where the "factory" is extremely temporary. It's not like a steel or automobile plant that will be there for years on end. A movie production is mobile and temporary, not a good investment/bet for any government that thinks they can hand out bribes for eternity.

 

 

The previous model for filmmaking was better for the industry as a whole and for those who wish to work in it. The reason being that when there are just one or two primary locations where most of the production occurs, it requires that aspiring professionals make the commitment to move there. That's the first "weeding out" step. You truly had to want it to go to where the work is. Now, it doesn't take that kind of initial decision so someone who just happens to be entering the workforce at a time when the roulette wheel of incentives lands on their state thinks they can just stay put and build a life where they already live. But eventually, the incentives WILL go away and production will dry up and that professional will sit there wondering what happened, complaining that the government should continue to hand out bribes so that he can keep working.

 

But if we did away with this incentive nonsense and kept production in just two or three primary places (with location shooting happening as traditionally necessary, of course), then the TRULY committed professionals would know where to go to establish a lifelong life and career and feel reasonably confident that it would last. But now, the bouncy ball of incentives roams around randomly and it threatens to erode the long-term quality of the workforce as no one can be sure if they will be able to create and sustain a viable career. The only one's "winning" in the incentive game are the Corporations who get the bribes. In the short-term, the governments paying out the bribes lose and in the long-term, the labor force loses too.

 

 

Personally, I took the risk and made the commitment to get off my butt, leave home and establish life where the movie industry is centered (in Los Angeles). And for the moment, I'm doing okay (knock on wood!). But I watch what's going on with other states/nations and get questions from people about what's going on and I genuinely worry for them. It's hard to know what advice to give the new aspiring "crew member" as to where to move to establish a career. This incentive thing is a trainwreck on many levels.

[Guest]

Ah but Brian not everyone in America believes as you do that the film industry should be established in only New York and LA.

 

Now I will actually agree with you to a certain degree on this point. Because in Canada the situation is even more ridiculous than it is in the USA. In the USA you really only have two production centres, NY and LA. The vast majority of Americans accept this.

 

In Canada the two main production centres are Toronto and Vancouver. But, every province here believes they are entitled to their own movie industry. Which is why gov't subsidies are poured into places like Saskatchewan. Now Saskatchewan is about the most unlikely place to have a movie industry, but there it is. :blink:

 

Which of course means that Manitoba and Nova Scotia also demand a movie industry as well. :blink:

 

I know a Canadian director that moved to LA, he has just wrapped his second studio feature film. Both shot in Vancouver.

 

So he moved from Canada to LA, only to be told to get back on the plane, so he could shoot movies in.....Canada.

 

I don't know if you saw my post in the off topic forum about the situation with US film tax credits? The good news for you is that the US states are broke and can't afford their tax credit schemes. Michigan will soon get rid of theirs I'm sure.

 

Of course as the article in the Hollywood Reporter points out, this means more work going to Canada. No danger of the tax credit programs here ending.

 

R,

[Markshaw]

I actually don't have a problem with subsidies and incentives for film making, as long as a percentage of profits are given back to the state. And also as long as the state does not interfere with the creative process. Many UK films receive Government/ EU funding which seems to work fairly well. Without funding the likes of Dog Soldier, The Long Good Friday and Trainspotting would never have been made.

Edited March 2, 2011 by Markshaw

[Brian Dzyak]

I actually don't have a problem with subsidies and incentives for film making, as long as a percentage of profits are given back to the state.

 

Ah, but profits are NOT shared. Even though taxpayers are partially footing the bill for a for-profit product, they get none of the benefits back as other investors do.

 

It's a racket. Publicize the costs, privatize the profits. A long time racket. :ph34r: