David Cameron says UK films should be more 'mainstream'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-16495095

I look forward to seeing you all in the comments

Which someone would shut that fucking idiot up

'Wish' even

im not even into films but tom d otm

the daily mail crew have arrived

24.
Braumeister1
2 Hours ago

Ken Loach would stand for the idea of public funding for films no one wants to watch. He's a typical über lefty, supporting the fascists in the TU movement in the 70s, as well as the IRA etc, and yet still presenting himself and his kind as the 'victims'.

We do need a diverse cinema industry- we're good at it, after all. But public money for the likes of Loach? NO!

The government should make heavily subsidised Operas more mainstream. I bet Cameron's Tory cronies would be appalled if the Operas had to be more mainstream. Imagine All opera had to appeal to fans of Russell Watson or Katherine Jenkins. Mr Cameron, in Art,whether it be music or film, making money should not come in to it!

Maybe Cameron could get Lana del Rey cast in a 'mainstream' movie and use a Smith's song in the soundtrack for the trifecta

28 Minutes ago

Hollywood are doing the sequel;

"The King's Speech II - This time it's Tourette's!"

Can't for the day when the posters outside the Cameron's local Whitney cineplex read "SKY FILMS presents JIM BROADBENT and DANIEL RADCLIFFE in... CUT THE ROPE: THE MOVIE".

It looks like Cameron is going for the daily mail line of arthouse = BBC = leftie therefore it must be destroyed. Does everything need to be political?

Alas that it's too late to re-do The Iron Lady with an ending that would be more popular with the public.

Surprising, it's usually the Labour Party who try to follow the Daily Mail line

Alas that it's too late to re-do The Iron Lady with an ending that would be more popular with the public.

Should have done different endings for different parts of the country

Scottish ending less Iron Lady and more Wicker Man perhaps?

wasn't each £1 in cultural/film investment under labour yielding £4 back. i don't know a lot about the film council but a p big criticism against it seemed to be that it was pushing this line of feasibility over expression, so it's kinda heavy seeing this reiterated by the guys who killed the film council

nickb now id go see that

I notice Julian Fellowes is part of all this. I remember him complaining years ago that there was no tv shows from a conservative point of view on TV. So he wrote downtown abbey.

Urban monastery being too old boys' club?

PM Slammed For Demanding More Hit Brit Flicks
http://news.sky.com/home/showbiz-news/article/16146659

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118048454.html?cmpid=RSS|News|LatestNews

oh hes at it again

Writing in The Times, "Gosford Park" and "Downton Abbey" scribe Julian Fellowes remarked that "historically…a disproportionate amount of public money was directed at a type of art house production.

"Some were excellent, but they were aimed almost entirely at minority markets. This cannot continue, we must have a more balanced approach with greater support for mainstream films because the key to building a dynamic industry will always lie in a film's relationship with the audience."

All those terrible British fashion designers too, making ridiculous clothes that no-one could ever afford.

I love this last line

"Nobody can predict what is going to be a success, the danger of going down that path is you end up trying to imitate other successful films rather than creating something new and distinct.

"What we need is money to be invested in a UK distribution system like the French model, creating an attractive market for investors."

Mr Daukes said when he approached the UK Film Council for help in making his film three years ago he was told it could not be supported because it was not a commercial proposition.

"Of course hard decisions have to be made but in spite of that we were premiered at Raindance, nominated for a BIFA and are enjoying a limited release later this month.

"Possibly some investment could have been granted to Acts of Godfrey instead of...say... Lesbian Vampire Killers?"

Would a UK distribution system be a good idea? How does the french model work?

Is that where something like 40% of everything has to be french?

Ken Loach would stand for the idea of public funding for films no one wants to watch.

Can someone find the profit margins for Loach films? I would suspect that they (almost) all made money, but I may be wrong...

i bet they made more than lesbian vampire killers

Think most of them were fairly cheap to make as these things go, so you're probably right. xp

Omg Julian Fellowes is such a cunt

Braumeister1 also.

probably his son

This piece of commentary made me think how unpoliticised and 'mainstream' films in Britain are already:

Sex addiction also has dire consequences for society: we're seeing indiscriminate promiscuity; pornography; loss of intimacy. It's not just a personal issue, it's also a political one. I'd have liked to see the film try to tackle that.

i still cant believe someone thought lesbian vampire killers was a good idea for a film

ever other movie being made in Texas right now is about either lesbians hunting vampires and/or zombies.

Yeah, but those have the advantage of not having James Corden in.

Home
News
Showbiz
Winner Slams PM's 'Nonsense' Movie Push

Winner Slams PM's 'Nonsense' Movie Push

News Home
More from Showbiz

Wednesday, January 11th 2012 05:57

David Cameron's call for more "commercially successful" British films has been criticised by movie director Michael Winner.

Speaking on Jeff Randall Live, the veteran producer described the Prime Minister's comments as "a joke".

"Does he seriously think that someone at the British Film Institute is going to be capable of knowing what films are commercially successful? It's nonsense," he said.

A forthcoming review on Government funding policy is expected to recommend more Lottery money for independent pictures with big potential.

But Mr Winner said that even The King's Speech, last year's Oscar-winner film starring Colin Firth, would not have been identified as a box office hit - and it is the UK's highest grossing independent film ever.

"I don't think that people would have chosen that as a commercial film, certainly nowhere near to the degree it has become," he said.

"There are always these... strange films that break through, but 90% or 99% of British films die a death."

Mr Cameron signalled he wants producers to get more help to generate successful pictures that do not have to be bankrolled by Hollywood studios.

Mr Winner, director of Death Wish, said film makers do not need public funding, especially in the current economic climate.

"I find it very difficult to accept at any time and particularly today, that when we're asking people to cut salaries, cut pensions... And we're told: put the money into movies. Please, let them make movies that make a profit of their own accord."

Hollywood makes massive amount of films, most of which fail to make a profit. It's the few films that do, where they can make huge profit margins, that keeps them solvent.

Can someone find the profit margins for Loach films? I would suspect that they (almost) all made money, but I may be wrong...

― emil.y, Wednesday, January 11, 2012 5:22 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Bread and Roses seems to have lost money but The Wind That Shakes The Barley cost £8m and took £23m and (according to Wiki) Looking For Eric cost £4m and took £11.5m. Seems like quite a good return.

sensible bradshaw piece
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jan/11/uk-film-funding-david-cameron

Cameron basically has zero aesthetic judgement or even curiosity beyond the boringly tasteful, that much is screamingly obvious from his Desert Island Discs or those photos you see of his bookshelf.

Seems to me Cameron's in his Teflon Tony stage (apres les EU veto) where he thinks he can do and say anything about any subject and get away with it

He's right in a sense. Not to target art cinema but in potentially recognising a need to reshape a lot of the stuff that is aimed at a 'commercial' audience but doesn't really cater to what anyone wants to watch. I've been paying less attention recently but a couple of years ago the release schedules seemed to be packed with badly-written middlebrow nonsense starring the same dozen actors. Not commercial enough to sell tickets, not interesting enough to appeal to the Ken Loach fans, just existing in a strange void somewhere in between. Maybe the reductions funding over the last few years have killed them off.

"badly-written middlebrow nonsense starring the same dozen actors" = The King's Speech!

but in that sense the conclusion would be to stop trying to make commercial films & revert to an artistic meritocracy, so he's still v wrong

http://www.movieposterdb.com/posters/08_09/2004/368259/s_368259_29407d59.jpghttp://www.movieposterdb.com/posters/08_09/2004/368259/s_368259_29407d59.jpghttp://www.movieposterdb.com/posters/08_09/2004/368259/s_368259_29407d59.jpghttp://www.movieposterdb.com/posters/08_09/2004/368259/s_368259_29407d59.jpghttp://www.movieposterdb.com/posters/08_09/2004/368259/s_368259_29407d59.jpg
http://www.movieposterdb.com/posters/08_09/2004/368259/s_368259_29407d59.jpghttp://www.movieposterdb.com/posters/08_09/2004/368259/s_368259_29407d59.jpghttp://www.movieposterdb.com/posters/08_09/2004/368259/s_368259_29407d59.jpghttp://www.movieposterdb.com/posters/08_09/2004/368259/s_368259_29407d59.jpghttp://www.movieposterdb.com/posters/08_09/2004/368259/s_368259_29407d59.jpg

xp Not necessarily. Lots of countries (Japan, France, etc) seem to be pretty good at having artistic meritocracy at one end and very commercial, but relatively well made, stuff at the other.

There seemed to be an underlying assumption, for a long time, on the part of film companies that the British audience is split down the middle between oi-oi-oi football hooligans and ultra-middle-class pensioners who want to watch gentle comedies about bumbling vicars. It's not true. The end of the tax loopholes may have put paid to most of that, however.

no that's true. & i don't mean "stop trying to make commercial films" which is obv a thing that happens & i am glad people consequently attend cinemas. but i think it applies to aggressively pushing a desirable outcome of commercial success, which leads you to the neither-here-nor-there films you mentioned, & so takes us back to 'don't make this the priority' because it isn't in fact going to make it the outcome.

It absolutely shouldn't be made a priority for everyone. Our best filmmakers should be left to do more or less what they want.

I'm not sure whether aggressively going after success leads to those neither-here-nor-there films. I have always had the impression it's more a result of the cultural makeup of an industry that, in large part, doesn't understand what its target audience wants.

Good piece from Bradshaw, the Goldman quote should be played out by now but is as on the button now as then. I can't imagine Fellowes or his ilk championing something like 'The Full Monty' which is Ken Loach lite and did over £50 million.

yeah sure. unless the recipe is just 'put colin firth in everything' it's kinda horrifying to imagine what the formula for success would be.

Put Jim Broadbent in everything

Make a film version of Gavin and Stacy and/or Top Gear

otm
xp

Desperate Scousewives - The Movie

a biopic of katie price

A biopsy of Katie Price

biopic

lol

stupid auto-correct hahaha

Fellowes obviously wants funding for a movie of Downtown Abbey (with money to pay for Colin Firth)

dunno if anyone's heard this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lCNrDOMQSw

it's a great interview with Goldman from 1992, some of which is relevant to the thread but it's a great and very funny chat about the movie biz and screenwriting any way.

I've been paying less attention recently but a couple of years ago the release schedules seemed to be packed with badly-written middlebrow nonsense starring the same dozen actors. Not commercial enough to sell tickets, not interesting enough to appeal to the Ken Loach fans, just existing in a strange void somewhere in between. Maybe the reductions funding over the last few years have killed them off.

I've been paying even less attention however there will always be 'bad' projects that will sell tickets and 'good' ones that won't. There isn't reason to given some funding to either.

I've been watching Kevin Brownlow's Winstanley (funded by the BFI who I think are now in charge of whatever funds are left) and this would be the kind of un-commercial historical film that you could also argue is unique and yet may not get off the ground, given how out of step with current politics but also subverts current moves in the educational policy to teach kids about British history.

or 'great' Brit history