UK industry to create films people actually want to watch

[Keith Walters]

You don't seem to be catching what I'm saying. I'm not saying it looked similar, like the apple-xerox Parc thing. I'm saying they took code from CP/M and reused it to create QDos

So I've heard. But can you actually prove that?

Anyway, who cares?

I rest my case: Take 2 :P

[Freya Black]

So I've heard. But can you actually prove that?

Anyway, who cares?

I rest my case: Take 2 :P

 

Well Gary Kindall claims he can. I can't even prove the world has always been round to be fair so...

[Freya Black]

What percentage of UK films is Government financed.

 

I don't know but the ones that get government financing and backing are the ones that tend to be given distribution, shown on tv etc, so realistically it seems something close to 100%

 

They tend to be match funded tho, so that not all the money comes from the government/lottery whatever.

 

There are of course made for tv dramas and stuff too.

 

love

 

Freya

[Freya Black]

Exactly what needs to happen with video downloads. That's all I've ever really been saying.

 

Never been arguing with that.

 

I would also say this is already happening both with itunes and stuff like amazon, hulu, etc etc

It's just that the big studios are doing nothing rather like happened with music, but maybe that is a good thing and we need the change that will come from the move away from the monopolies we have now. That will obviously reshape the industry tho, so who knows what the future will look like then. Maybe there will even be room for more regional film making. *shrug*

 

love

 

Freya

[Rex Orwell]

The characters operating in the Government shouldn't be allowed anywhere near lottery funding, they should have no influence at all.

 

The tax-payers got the Olympics to pay for next that's gonna be clever.

[Daniel Jackson]

This is it. From my understanding it actually used to be public funding from the tax-payer. Then it changed under Bliar so that it now looks like the government are being responsible with your money, when in actual fact it's all lottery funding.

 

Ah the famed Bliar smoke and shadows trick.

[Rex Orwell]

He's probably the best magician you'll see on TV.

 

Noticed he was chilaxing at the Leveson Inquiry this couple of days past (logistics foot by the taxpayer I'm sure), he won't have been worried having his marmalade on toast of a morning you can forget about that.

Edited May 30, 2012 by Rex Orwell

[Brian Drysdale]

If anyone wants to throw in their opinions on the future of the UK film industry directly to the BFI they can do so here:

 

http://www.bfi.org.uk/future/

Edited June 1, 2012 by Brian Drysdale

[Travis Gray]

I skipped over some of this after just reading the "embrace piracy" bit, but I think there could be some truth to it. Last winter I read "Free: The Future of a Radical Price" (only $18 on amazon! http://www.amazon.com/Free-The-Future-Radical-Price/dp/1401322905... I think I got the audio book for free) and it made some good points.

 

If you can give a way some stuff for free, it creates a buzz or whatever to get people to buy other stuff. I forget exactly. My reading retention kinda sucks if I'm not putting it into practice haha

But like what Monty Python did when they were mad people were uploading videos to YouTube. They uploaded stuff themselves, and then included a link to buy videos. Their sales went up.

 

So, yes, while straight up piracy is wrong, maybe giving away some stuff for free might work for some things.

 

I dunno if I'm on topic. I'm tired today.

[Adrian Samuals]

Every few years there's a feature about how the British Film Industry is going to do this or going to do that and nothing ever happens.

[Phil Rhodes]

Can't say I made the original post in this thread with any anticipation anything would actually change, no. It's political, which these days seems to refer to extremely rich people finding ways to do almost nothing while making grandiose claims about it.

 

As I've said a lot, now, until there's some sort of protection for indigenous distribution, nothing will change. Again; it's politics, and making the changes that are required to make a real, noticeable difference is not complicated and nor is the required action really disputed. It just requires political courage, and at the moment we seem to select our leaders for anything but. I mean, we have a head of government finance who simply repeats the same quote using very slightly different words every time someone asks him any question, because that's all he's been told to say. It should make him embarrassed. Actually it makes him very rich.

 

As such, I've long since given up on any of these people ever making any difference to anything other than their own bank accounts.

[Pat Murray]

Can't say I made the original post in this thread with any anticipation anything would actually change, no. It's political, which these days seems to refer to extremely rich people finding ways to do almost nothing while making grandiose claims about it.

 

As I've said a lot, now, until there's some sort of protection for indigenous distribution, nothing will change. Again; it's politics, and making the changes that are required to make a real, noticeable difference is not complicated and nor is the required action really disputed. It just requires political courage, and at the moment we seem to select our leaders for anything but. I mean, we have a head of government finance who simply repeats the same quote using very slightly different words every time someone asks him any question, because that's all he's been told to say. It should make him embarrassed. Actually it makes him very rich.

 

As such, I've long since given up on any of these people ever making any difference to anything other than their own bank accounts.

 

Something like the Canadian content rules for music on commercial radio stations is probably the kind of legislation you're after. Here in Canada it has its supporters and its detractors, but (I think) 30% of air time mandated to Canadian recording artists does make a huge difference. If you did the same for UK theaters (30% UK content), I think there would definitely be a revival of UK cinema. And just like Canada's content laws for recording artists, films will be produced that people "actually want to watch". The competition for that 30%, plus the new companies/studios/distributors that would go into business to fill that 30%, will naturally try to produce films that can compete with what's playing on the other 70% of screens.

 

Now that I think about it, I'm surprised the Canadian government has legislated content rules to protect recording artists, magazines and domestic television productions, as well as pro football players, but there's no such protectionism for Canadian films in our cinemas.

Edited June 6, 2012 by Pat Murray

[Phil Rhodes]

If you did the same for UK theaters (30% UK content), I think there would definitely be a revival of UK cinema.

Me too. Or something like the Eady Levy, about which so much has been said on this forum, mainly by me, that it hardly bears repeating. Or some sort of protection, of some kind. Even the most ardent laissez-fairists admit that there does need to be some sort of control.

But again, we're under the thumb of people who have absolutely no reason to care whether we live or die, much less whether we have jobs.

P

[Rex Orwell]

Real talk.

 

Or who more precisely, are of the belief that it would be better if we died, and certainly weren't comfortable enough to be a danger (jobs).

 

 

Following the tradition of the Club, which avoids administrative overhead (sometimes being called a non-governmental non-organisation) The National Associations are working as networks of active individuals. The Centre in Vienna coordinates their activities, assists in events and conducts projects in cooperation with the Associations and the Club's Secretariat-General which is located in Winterthur.

 

 

We don't select our 'leaders' though. Look at the London Mayer elections three or four weeks ago as one example. 67% didn't bother to vote. That's a landslide. A massive landslide of those who are basically saying "It's all getting tired. We don't like any of you. We've heard it all before and know exactly what you're really interested in, which is feathering your own nest and sorting your little pals out." Democracy involves responsibility, which is something we're not ready for unfortunately, so we don't have it and never have.

 

"Which of these three do you want?"

 

"None."

 

"Way it's tough cos you're getting one of them."

 

Edited June 6, 2012 by Rex Orwell

[Phil Rhodes]

That's nicely lit, Rex.

[Markshaw]

Can't say I made the original post in this thread with any anticipation anything would actually change, no. It's political, which these days seems to refer to extremely rich people finding ways to do almost nothing while making grandiose claims about it.

 

As I've said a lot, now, until there's some sort of protection for indigenous distribution, nothing will change. Again; it's politics, and making the changes that are required to make a real, noticeable difference is not complicated and nor is the required action really disputed. It just requires political courage, and at the moment we seem to select our leaders for anything but. I mean, we have a head of government finance who simply repeats the same quote using very slightly different words every time someone asks him any question, because that's all he's been told to say. It should make him embarrassed. Actually it makes him very rich.

 

As such, I've long since given up on any of these people ever making any difference to anything other than their own bank accounts.

 

 

Unfortunately you have hit the nail on the head.

[Rex Orwell]

 

The salesman is in business cos the business is there.

 

This 10 and 12 and 5%'s is largely built from those on the gravy train through one means or another already. Those percentages are built up of us ultimately. So the problems in us its just that the vehicle is provided, but by and on behalf of whom? ... We're not sharp enough.

 

One thing I'd say is that this issue of the Taxpayer footing the bill for the Olympics, and a good deal of it being paid for by those working in office with Lottery funding, a source of revenue over which there were once laws put in place to prevent political parties plundering and directing it to either assist themselves or their business associates, is generally a sore point with most of the people I meet and it's never long before they find an excuse to voice that concern.

 

Yeah that coming around again. The Lottery.

 

A local news reporter almost slipped up today. "Now, many people in the region have asked I'm sure 'But what will the Olympics do for us? What do we get back?'" he said. I couldn't help my jaw dropping slightly as he went on to describe the magical three days ahead when we're to witness the Olympic Torch being carried through various townships in the County.

 

... and that's how easy it is to buy us off.

 

Cos that's all we'll be getting.

 

Banjo Salve... and the wonderful changes. For our Lackanookie, Gollyweasles and general stupidity really.

Edited June 13, 2012 by Rex Orwell

[Brian Hulnick]

My friend who lives in East London was initially very pleased and proud that London won the Olympic bid for 2012, that was until he realized just how much each Londoner was going to foot the bill (transport, police, security etc) all that with little chance of actually being able to afford to see any of the events. Now he is very annoyed by the whole thing.

[Keith Walters]

My friend who lives in East London was initially very pleased and proud that London won the Olympic bid for 2012, that was until he realized just how much each Londoner was going to foot the bill (transport, police, security etc) all that with little chance of actually being able to afford to see any of the events. Now he is very annoyed by the whole thing.

For bureaucratic cock-ups, nepotism, Political Correctness and general clot-headed-ness, you would be hard-pressed to beat the 2000 Sydney Olympics.

[Mark Dunn]

>For bureaucratic cock-ups, nepotism, Political Correctness and general clot-headed-ness, you would be hard-pressed to beat the 2000 Sydney Olympics.

 

We'll have a jolly good try though.

I'll start, shall I?

The Olympic park doesn't appear on satnavs, and all the signage is new, so the volunteers can't find their way around and have to spend all their time (in their specially- designed uncomfortable BMWs) on the walkie-talkie checking in.

Also, the breakdown services can't find you because none of the streets exists.

The new postcode for the area is E20, which is the fictitious postcode of the fictitious BBC soap opera 'East Enders'. (I thought that must be a joke at first).

So not only doesn't the place exist, it's actually a film set in Elstree 20 miles away.

Edited June 20, 2012 by Mark Dunn

[Freya Black]

We'll have a jolly good try though.

I'll start, shall I?

The Olympic park doesn't appear on satnavs, and all the signage is new, so the volunteers can't find their way around and have to spend all their time (in their specially- designed uncomfortable BMWs) on the walkie-talkie checking in.

Also, the breakdown services can't find you because none of the streets exists.

The new postcode for the area is E20, which is the fictitious postcode of the fictitious BBC soap opera 'East Enders'. (I thought that must be a joke at first).

So not only doesn't the place exist, it's actually a film set in Elstree 20 miles away.

 

I don't get this, as a lot of the streets were already there but just got fenced off with huge metal gates. It also had a postcode before the olympics but I guess it now has to have a special one!

 

I'm popping over there today to check it out as it's just the other side of the park from me.

I guess I'll find out.

 

Yeah bringing the olympics to London was stupid. Manchester or Birmingham would have been much better choices. More growth for London will cause more problems, we struggle with it already. I expect it will do far more harm than good, and it's yet another London thing that the rest of the country has to bankroll.

 

love

 

Freya

[Phil Rhodes]

The best bit is this:

 

When the China olympics were happening, and were so spectacular, the UK olympic officialdom immediately started making excuses along the lines that we wouldn't be able to afford to spend as much money on it and not to expect so much.

 

As if we were ever expecting anything other than a grotesque international embarrassment, but anyway.

 

Since then the budget of the games as a whole has grown by over 400% the initial estimate, although they're still claiming to be under budget. You have to ask how you can possiblty have the brass neck to go from 2.4 to 10 billion and still claim to be under budget, but I guess the ability to comfortably emit pathetically obvious lies is what it takes to become a member of the ruling elite in the UK.

 

The thing is, with irony that's visible from orbit, we actually are now spending something like the amount spent by the Chinese. And they're still making excuses for how crap it's going to be.

 

Clearly, the olympics were a great idea. Even more annoyingly, I haven't been able to arrange any out-of-town work during the period they're on, so I'll have to sit here and do nothing. I certainly won't be able to actually do much by way of work, at least not work that involves going into London proper. Anyone who's actually aware of the transport situation in London - which one would naively assume would include members of the organising committee - will be fully aware of the transportation holocaust that awaits.

 

No, wait, nix that - the organising committee have their ZiL lanes to run around in, so they won't have to sit in the horrendous gridlock that will most certainly affect the rest of us paupers. The combination of greed and arrogance that exists in people like Sebastian Coe is huge beyond the power of language to describe.

[Freya Black]

 

The thing is, with irony that's visible from orbit, we actually are now spending something like the amount spent by the Chinese. And they're still making excuses for how crap it's going to be.

 

 

Only if you pay £15 to go up the thing!!

 

 

love

 

Freya

[Freya Black]

Have to say, I'm right on top of the thing and was hoping to pick up some work shooting around the event, but that hasn't materialised and now theres a possibility I might get booted out for the duration! :(

 

So I have sour grapes on top of the fact I just think the whole thing was a really bad idea to start with.

Would have loved to grab some arty shots of those athletes. Triumph of the will 2012 edition, the remake!

 

Ah well.

 

love

 

Freya

[Phil Rhodes]

Ah, you're in one of those rented flats where the landlord has realised he can make twelve to fourteen times the usual amount of money by giving it to games-spotters?

 

Wonderful!

 

It's illegal for them to do that, as I understand it, but you're not rich so it doesn't count.