New Sectors
John Hatfield argues that our film
industry could be a major
component of the economy if given the proper investment
REMAKES and sequels are all the rage in the movie world so, with the British film industry breaking box office records, maybe it's time for a new version of The British Are Coming. Colin Welland's famous Oscars soundbite in 1983 heralded what he thought was the UK cinema industry's equivalent for the D-Day landings - only on Venice Beach in Hollywood rather than Juno beach in Normandy. With Gandhi following Chariots of Fire and Passage to India in quick succession in the early 1980s Welland seemed to be the Harbinger of a brave new world of Brit movie.
After the second division fare of Ealing Comedies, Hammer Horror, grim-up-north kitchen sink dramas and Carry On films it seemed that Britain was on the verge of entering the blockbuster league.
Alas the invasion turned out to be no more than a beach-head and the plucky Brits were pushed back into the sea. Our film successes were like performances of the Scottish football squad - occasional world-beating performances mired in general disappointing results.
However, the second coming of British cinema may be here and with it the chance to prove that this sector can be a real moneyspinner for the Scottish and UK economy and not just a frivolous indulgence. After all cinema is America's largest export revenue earner - well ahead of aerospace, automobiles, computers and all the other totems of economic virility. And it is worth noting that Britain currently runs an entertainment deficit of several billion dollars a year.
The fact remains that British cinema still seems a bit like a one-man and his Super 8 home movie camera matched against the financial behemoth that is Hollywood. Titanic cost #150m to make and had a marketing budget of #40m. UK films consider themselves lucky if they have #1m to spend on publicity and promotions.
Occasional exceptions prove the rule. So-called breakout successes can be achieved if a small film wins an Oscar as The Crying Game proved in 1991. Even the Rednecks in the Bible Belt flocked to see this bizarre, gritty and very British film. Having cost just #2.5m to make, it grossed #63m across the States.
Then came a rush as Four Weddings and a Funeral, Shallow Grave, Trainspotting and The Full Monty all proved that low budget black humour can earn huge multiples at the multiplexes. Even Mr Bean has turned into a celluloid over-achiever.
Hollywood's hegemony is being challenged but is it any more than a small kid kicking a heavyweight boxer in the shins?
Movies are a quintessential part of Blair's Cool Britannia and Clarkes' appointment sends a clear message that the Government now takes the industry seriously. This will come as welcome news to people such as Lynda Myles, producer of The Commitments who pointed out that: ''Film has been like a cottage industry in Britain. It's really hard raising development money.''
Last month Clarke and Culture Secretary Chris Smith announced that the generous tax benefits introduced by Gordon Brown in his first budget will be extended until 2002 - permitting producers to write off costs.
A proposed all-industry fund will seek to stimulate the British market by supporting film and by seeking a bigger chunk of National Lottery funding.
It was a welcome shot in the arm but more needs to be done if British cinema is to fulfil its potential as a major employer and revenue earner. While money for British films comes from a variety of sources such as the Lottery or Channel 4, there is hardly a penny from the richest potential funding source - institutional investors in the city.
That is why the profits from the Oscar-laden English Patient went to Miramax in America which backed the film while the British provided all the artistic talent but lost out on pay-day. In the past the solution to funding constraints was the Euro-pudding - the nickname given to those lowest common denominator French-British- Italian-German co-productions which gave actors like Hugh Grant their big break.
Without city funding we can expect more cautionary tales along the lines of Channel 4's experience with the Full Monty. The company ploughed thousands of pounds into the script but couldn't afford the #2.2m needed to make the film which has taken #135m so far. Instead the television company opted to make Brassed Off which took #3m.
What Britain really needs is investment in studio facilities. Michael Jackson, Channel 4's chief executive says his goal is to create Britain's pre-eminent film studio. Its current budget of #28m will be increased to #52m with the company planning to make around 10 pictures a year.
Scotland too, is gearing up to ensure that it becomes a serious force in the physical home of Scottish cinema. Then last month came the encouraging news that the Scottish Enterprise Film Unit had proposed the construction of a #5m film studio in Glasgow which could be in operation by 2001. In Scotland the film industry is already worth #35m and it is hoped that the new studio complex could boost that by #15m annually.
Repeating a winner formula by making sequels is catching on with follow-up planned for Four Weddings and a Funeral. Mr Bean (the biggest grossing British film overseas) and Gregory's Girl. Fox Searchlight is in discussions about a Full Monty sequel.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article