National Film Studio?

[DB7]

Picture of a perfect future



by James Lee

Viewpoint: A former Film Council director, wants a national centre for the movies







I AM convinced that Britain needs a National Film Studio as the screen equivalent of our highly successful National Theatre.

I was a director of the UK Film Council from its inception in 1999 until last year and fully supported its policy for the public funding of film production. But a dispassionate review must conclude that it has not worked. We allocated £22 million to film investment in 2004. Nearly £200 million will have been invested over the past five years. This is a massive amount. Public investment in the National Theatre over the same period was about £70 million. It is only reasonable to question whether this investment might have been made more effectively.







Some excellent British films were supported and new talent was found and nurtured, especially by the New Cinema Fund, which was dedicated to fostering innovation. But much of the investment has already been written off. More importantly two key objectives have not been achieved.



The policy was intended to achieve much more than a few good films. It was to establish favourable conditions for sustainable production companies to emerge. With a very few exceptions this has not happened. Most British production companies continue to exist on a hand-to-mouth basis dependent on lottery or public subsidy. In such an unstable environment, producers are unable to play their proper role, which is to create new work and develop talent.



Alan Parker has referred to a "creative crisis", which is clearly reflected in the quality of too much of our output. The explicit aim of any alternative policy has to be to improve creativity and I believe this requires a totally different type of organisation to develop ideas and screenplays.



The policy was also to address some fundamental deficiencies in distribution so that British films could gain greater access to international audiences. The private sector has not responded and almost nothing has changed. No new distribution companies or processes have emerged, except the excellent digital initiative. International distributors have not given greater priority to distributing British films, and attempts to introduce incentives have failed. Market conditions may even be less favourable. So more radical approaches need to be considered.



My alternative would be to build a National Film Studio and to dedicate the lion's share of public funding to it. I have three arguments. First, it is the only solution that might give us a chance to regain control of the national film agenda from Hollywood. Second, it would provide a home where our best creative minds could collaborate and have the opportunity to excel. Third, after twenty five years, I no longer believe that indirect incentives will ever succeed in inducing the British film industry to change. The time has come to consider more interventionist approaches.



The studio, which would be owned by the nation, would have two principal functions � to develop new work and to organise international distribution. Production would continue to be controlled by independent producers. So the new studio would support and strengthen the existing production base and not compete unfairly. It would become the European equivalent of a Hollywood studio.



The National Film Studio would be led by a highly creative and respected film director, just as the National Theatre has been led by hugely talented stage directors, like Peter Hall, Richard Eyre and Trevor Nunn. The appointment would of course be the absolute key to its success. I know there are sufficient strong candidates. Like the NT, the studio could have Associates chosen from among the best of our producers, directors, writers and designers to form the core of a creative powerhouse.



The Studio Director, as at the NT, would be granted the sole power to set the film- making policy and slate. The creative processes that have evolved at the NT could be adapted to the needs of film-making. Multidisciplinary project teams of Associates and others might be formed to commission and develop individual films or smaller slates of projects within the overall programme. A small but highly trained and competent permanent staff would provide skilled support to both the scriptwriting and the overall development process.



The artistic policy of the National Film Studio would be based on the best that our nation has to offer; the work of our best British talent, the best and most innovative production design, and the best British stories and ideas. Like the National Theatre it would be international in its outlook and above all ambitious. The policy could have the potential to radically transform the output of our industry, which has been forced to become overly preoccupied with small relatively unadventurous tele- vision movies, or with romantic comedies only a step away from sitcoms.



We need an artistic policy that is much more compatible with the real interests and skills of our established directors, who are largely dependent on Hollywood, where they find it increasingly difficult to address subjects that interest them. Our creative talent are capable of much more and there is a potential audience for their work that is increasingly overlooked. A substantial part of the British and indeed European audience is very badly served.



Over the years, I have seen many great British directors lose their way since the heady days of the early Eighties, when David Puttnam was producing films such as Chariots of Fire, The Mission and Local Hero under the Goldcrest umbrella. After initial recognition, they failed to find any role for themselves in Hollywood, but had no real alternative. Only a few sustained their output. Nevertheless, Britain remains blessed with a substantial cadre of innovative directors; Anthony Minghella and Alan Parker who love to paint on a larger canvas; Ken Loach and Mike Leigh who prefer a more intimate scale; and the boys from the theatre like Sam Mendes, Stephen Daldry, Richard Eyre and Nicholas Hynter who have proved that drama is drama whatever the medium. Even these formidable talents find it difficult. I am convinced that their work would blossom within the framework of a national film agenda that was less dependent on Hollywood.



The other great advantage of a National Film Studio is that it would provide a proper infrastructure for talent. Many creative people in the British Film Industry work on their own with limited support or opportunities for collaboration. Yet film-making is by definition a group effort and the development of a film should be multidisciplinary from as early a stage as possible. In Britain, our development process is too one-dimensional and linear. A more collaborative approach to development, within a studio system like Hollywood, might produce more innovative ideas. New writing talents like Patrick Marber and Gregory Burke, at the NT, might also be discovered.



The £200 million of public money that we have invested in film over the past five years would be more than enough to build a National Film Studio, provided some alliance can be formed with the BBC, our national public broadcaster.



The time is right to consider a radically different approach to public funding of film production. I am convinced that the answer is to actually create the new infrastructure. But the first requirement is for calm and intelligent public debate.

[deckard]

Check out this page(scroll down about 2/3rds on the left) http://www.stevepearce.co.uk/film.htm and click the link about the closure, What happened? Down in Cornwall there was great excitement over these purpose built studios, actors popping up in the county saying there working at St. Agnes etc., and now....gone! The only news I've picked up is that some underhand dealings were going on? and that smug G*t(see studios bring in administators)Prof. Peter Gripaios should try and help rather than gloat, just because he criticised the objective one funding in the first place! What a choker. Regards, Decks.

[Peter Carter]

I agree 100% with everything Mr Lee said and have voiced exactly the same idea on this very forum within the last couple of months.



If you look at tv in most European countries it consists of nothing but wall to wall americana. We escaped that fate, and we escaped it because we had a well funded BBC to invest and set a standard for other companies.



In film we have no such institution and the result is a national industry owned by foreigners and capable of producing little except the odd rom-com.



A BBC like NFS with its own studios, distribution AND multiplexes is the only way to go in my mind.