British Film Industry

OK- unless you don't know I'm English. So I feel compelled to tell everyone at my sadness at the absolute limpness of what I believe the British film industry to be.

In Britain we have no studio capable of producing something of the scale of Harry Potter (a book which is very much British- but no chance it would be produced by a British film production company). Mind you- the films are rubbish anyway- but you catch my drift. Plus- why is it that all of the popular British films deemed good enough to be successful are comedies?!? This really annoys me- the whole subject really gets to me- basically because I believe that the British Film Industry is there for the taking- it will just take someone to make a competent film that is not a 'comedy' to make people believe that quality non-comedy films can come out of the UK.

Does anyone else have opinions on this subject?

What about The Hole? Isn't that British?

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ September 03, 2003 07:43 PM: Message edited by: gecko11 ]</font>

'The Hole'? Shot in the UK by a British director but with American leads you mean? [img]graemlins/wonder.gif[/img] OK, listen- MOST popular British films deemed good enough to be successful are comedies. I also thought the hole was rubbish, but you're missing my point...

I'm asking what OVERALL do you think of the British Film Industry?

Is it good enough?

Well, I reckon it could do a lot more. A lot of the time I think it needs to be braver. If you look back as to the most successful British films of late: Trainspotting, Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, The Full Monty.

Upon reading the scripts, the BFI must have realised they were taking a risk. But it paid off.

There are other British made films like 'Dirty Pretty Things', which is an amazing film, but didn't do well in the Box Office mainly because the British public didn't recognise any of the leads.

Other high grossing films of late including 'Bend it Like Beckham' and 'Anita and Me' did well mainly because anything Indian related was seen as gold by the BBC at the time.

Only problem is when you get a film like say, Lock Stock, which does well in the Box Office, for the next year almost every single script bbeing passed to the BFI is somewhat gangster related, and basically no one wants to touch it.

That probably adds to the reason a film like 'I Capture the Castle' will get made. Simply because its different.

Well, thats my 2 pennies.

i dunno if its as bad as everyone makes out...

theres alot of British directors doing mutimillion pound budget movies in Hollywood, theres a British actors such as that Colin Farrel going into the A list. Alot of american blockbusters are filmed in British studios.... its not like we **** at making movies, its just our people are intergrated in with all the other nationalities that work from Hollywood money.

Dog Soldiers is the most British flick I've ever had the pleasure of watching. And it was shot in Germany. Go figure.

Ironically, Americans are funding the sequel, and apart from Kevin McKidd it will be an entirely Yankee cast. They find the original "too British."

B?stards.

Hey there.

"Dog Soldiers is the most British flick I've ever had the pleasure of watching. And it was shot in Germany. Go figure.

Ironically, Americans are funding the sequel,"

It was Americans that funded the original. They also own the rights. So they can do whatever they want with it.

Despin out.

Really? I really should listen to the producer commentary on the DVD.

The British Film industry needs more British writers WRITING BRITISH FILMS. By "BRITISH FILMS" I mean stories set in Britain with British characters. 90% of British writers I know (and I know many) write specifically for the American spec market. EVERYTHING they write is Yank-orientated... Why can't British screenwriters write British Movies?

It both baffles and amazes me.

Also, why don't British screenwriters take chances? Why is every sodding Brit script I read of late, A) some dumb kitchen sink drama which is little more than an extended episode of Coronation street, or B) a mockney gangster flick? If they were orginal and cool. Fine. I could except that. But the two mockey gangster scripts I've read of late would make Guy Ritchie cry tears of pain.

Frankly, our spec script market is NONE-EXISTENT. It is from specs we find new voices with new dynamic stories.

Another major reason we lack decent Brit-orientated MOVIE scripts in this country is because our best writers often work in TV. Yep, lazy bastards take the easy route out. Skum.

Also, we lack un-reped screenwriting competition. Seriously. Screenwriting competitions are worth their weight in GOLD. Why? Well, because these competitions often expose up and coming talent. How many people d?you know who?ve written a cool script and now haven?t got a ******* clue what to do with it next? You see, this is where competitions come in. They provide doors and opportunities for writers. Most importantly, they allow screenwriters to get their works read.

ALSO, the British Film industry shouldn?t be so ******* snobby when it comes to STOCK MOVIES. Stock movies are the staple of the American film industry. Stock movies are simply genre flicks. No quirky British tales of weird eccentric Britain?s. No. I mean simple genre movies.

*GASPS*

Yes, the sooner we start churning out genre movies that make a small buck here and there, the sooner we can start paying ******* bills and allow other movies to get made.

You can't have cool stories like Pi and Cube without paying the bills with money-making shite like Shallow Hal and The Fast And The Furious.

?From shitness springs goodness,? my uncle always said?

Also, the British Film industry shouldn?t put all its eggs into a few baskets. We should make smaller movies with original angles. We should make stock movies which will break even and/or make a small profit. HOW MANY ******* NOTTINGHILL?S DOES THIS **** WORLD NEED? Answer? None. Bring on slasher flicks. Bring on the type of movie that some simpleton SO SOLID CREW fan would take his ***** to see.

I AM SERIOUS.

Distribution is also a complete travesty in this country. Hundreds of Brit flicks get made each year and waste their life on some dusty shelf in some ****** SOHO storage house.

WE NEED TO HAVE MORE FAITH IN OUR MOVIE MAKERS.

But, basically, it all comes down to SCRIPTS. I watch anything that has a decent story. I don't even care if it ripps-off Mr. Ritchie. It all comes down to decenet stories.

They day we promote fledgling talent (through un-reped screenwriting competitions - I?m serious) and generate a buzz with our spec script market? Well, erm, the next day we?ll start reaping the benefits of a dynamic industry?

The main problem is investment. There is very little in the UK. Which means as soon as there is a half decent project or director or actor - they imediately flee to the American studios. That is where they and the people around them have the money, power and drive to get things done.

Distribution is another factor. Even if there is good British product - the multi-plexes are reluctant to show it. Audiences seem happy enough with much of the Hollywood drivel that drives the (very few as they are) interesting British products to the wayside. There also seems to be problematic stigma attached to British films (which is probably very valid in most cases) of - 'oh it's British, it must be inferior'.

It's a vicious circle at the moment. We need some brave billionaires to get together and set up a British film studio (or two) capable of making multi-million pound films that can compete in the multi-plexes with their American rivals.

Mr. Ritchie? Good scripts?

I partly agree with Souljacker. In the 30's and 40's this country had a law that meant a certain percentage of films made and distributed in this country had to be British. This led to American studios funding what they thought would always be flops for the sake of meeting the legal requirements to get their main features in. These 'quota quickies' however allowed British talents to cut their teeth on and lots of the films done really well. From the many that were made lots of them were great and gave once unknown British talent notification and the British Film industry seems credible and people will invest. A steady flow of decent British films NOW is needed for the industry to atain any type of credibility.

Where I disagree is that for the genre films churnned out there MUST be some that stand out from the rest- really great films. That's the problem, this country is slowly churnning out films- but as mentioned previously most are sub-standard genre cr4p. There simply aren't enough great pure British films coming out of here.

Word, Souljacker.

Gangster **** : Lock Stock &gt; Essex Boys
Death of a Steel/Mining Industry: Brassed Off &gt; Full Monty &gt; Billy Elliot

Sweet Sixteen was last really good UK film I saw, and Shane Meadows does some good stuff (Room for Romeo Brass). We need people like Chris Morris to do some foreground stuff. None of this tiresome horror/zombie stuff so we can hark but to the 'good old days' when this country was notorious for trashy B movies. (Even Christopher Lee will admit that most of those movies he's been in aren't exactly cream of the crop).

It seems to me that our recent movies that seem to be apparently aimed at a niche market (thats fashionable at the time) always seem to be much better recieved in America. Bend it like Beckham and 28 Days Later for example.

At the end of the day though, the whole **** country is pretty bland. A mish-mash of the latest fad, fashion, trend or brand thats going around. How can we expect to have our own voice in this situation. Reflected in constantly making mild variations on a typical set up because we've found an idea that will sell. Where's our 'Y Tu Mama Tambien' or 'Amores perros'. As I said, something like Sweet Sixteen is all I can think of and 'Dirty Pretty Things' which I'm yet to see sounds like a candidate.

I think a part of the problem is that the films that get made are are always trying to hard to please a large enough audience. Yes, okay its a business but as you say Soul Jacker make some more Genre **** and think about what you can do with the money. Re-strategise. I know its America but look at A Band Apart production company - from Resevoir Dogs to Kill Bill. Thats acomplishment. Danny Boyle...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kev Owens:
I partly agree with Souljacker. In the 30's and 40's this country had a law that meant a certain percentage of films made and distributed in this country had to be British.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Thats like the french limiting the amount of america/english songs played on the radio to maintain some cultural identity.

We dont have an identity anymore. Interesting watching the 'Live Forever' documentary. Cool Britania. Gone.

Quote:

---

Where I disagree is that for the genre films churnned out there MUST be some that stand out from the rest- really great films. That's the problem, this country is slowly churnning out films- but as mentioned previously most are sub-standard genre cr4p. There simply aren't enough great pure British films coming out of here.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">High expectations dont you think? Look at how many films America make every year. How many of them are great? Do our recent hit movies really stand out that much?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by belovedmonster:

theres alot of British directors doing mutimillion pound budget movies in Hollywood, theres a British actors such as that Colin Farrel going into the A list.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now...I'm gonna take exception to this. (Deep Breath)

Please note: The Republic of Ireland is not part of the British Empire. Therefore Colin Farrel is not "British." Sorry if I seem touchy, but I am so sick of english people claiming Irish talent as they're own.

Right on to the actual thread topic. The Irish film industry is very similar to the british one in that we make a lot of of comedies...and little else.

Thats always made me feel kinda good, because I believe that if my first feature is even COMPETENT, it'll do very well over here, because I wont be competeing with much.

Some of my favourite films are non american, Crouching tiger, Amelie, Breathless...but it'll always be about money men taking a gamble.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by redlum:
Thats like the french limiting the amount of america/english songs played on the radio to maintain some cultural identity.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, of course it was like that- WWII was the main reason behind the law so that's exactly why it was happening- propaganda. My point was that it was a time that Britain was actually trying to compete with Hollywood and making a lot of films at the time, therefore allowing new talent to emerge.

You say we have no 'cultural identity' anymore so we shouldn't make films? Absolute rubbish!

Quote:

---

At the end of the day though, the whole **** country is pretty bland. A mish-mash of the latest fad, fashion, trend or brand thats going around. How can we expect to have our own voice in this situation.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">So America's different?!?! Cultural identity is a fad in itself anyway- it's an illusion- in it's lowest form it's stereotyping entire countries! Why place so much emphasis on it? It is possible to make a film that doesn't completely focus in the settings and culture of the place it's set!

There's a big problem- when you say British film lots of people immediately think it has to be full of funny c0ck-er-ny gangsters walking around in long coats driving minis with Union Jacks painted on the roof! It doesn't have to be that way! A British film could be about anything.

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ September 04, 2003 10:38 AM: Message edited by: Kev Owens ]</font>

I was just making a connection between the types of films we have that get made and the UK's personality of the past (stereotype or not). Gangster films, comedies (Ealing, Carry On), Horror (Hammer horror).

I'm saying, because of lack of an industry presence its hard to break the mould. In fact there is no mould, it just tends to be the shadow of previous successes. This is why a brittish film can be ostensibly about anything but you cant deny the links between Brassed Off, Full Monty, and Billy Elliot. On the surface you have a brass band, some strippers and a ballet dancer, but they are all the SAME. Good films, but the same things, just repackaged.

I dont think many places have a cultural identity anymore, and yes - America included. You cant deny the identity of the works of Woody Allen and Spike Lee, though. I mean racial conflicts in the hands of our production companies results in East is East, while Spike does Do the Right Thing. Make it light hearted. Drugs and Violence, a few cockney geezers in a gangster movie, while Aronofsky does Requiem and Soderburgh does Traffic (developed from an english tv show for chrisake!). There are exceptions of course but I dont think people want to watch them (there after all has to be a genuine marketting reason why a handful of cinemas will show something like Sweet Sixteen, where as every cinema in the country will show Daredevil).

Hey, I agree; and I'm no fan of Billy Eliiot and all the rest. That's what I was saying; the films you listed is the sub-standard films I was on about that are being churned out with nothing really unique, original or innovative. Simply the same old safe 'hilarious' British comedies that will do well in America.

ah yes, the much promised rebirth of the british film industry which never seems to actually happen.

the british film industry, for the most part, revolves around making films for the americans.

the last excellent british film?

Withnail and I

i think we make comedies because they are cheap and it allows our eccentricity to come through.

I'm surprised 28 days later was only mentioned once already in this thread. Although I'm not sure where the investment came from. But it was an excellent film.

I never knew Dog Soldiers was shot in Germany. Why?

Dog Soldiers was shot in Luxembourg- for the look of locations but mainly because the costs were lower (similar to Lord of the Rings being shot in New Zealand and Matrix in Australia.)

28 Days Later was okay in my opinion and could of been better. Not received too well here though was it- but apparently the Americans really love it. To its credit I would separate 28 Days from the films I've been talking about. It was funded by the lottery fund, the British film council, Canal (french) and Fox.

SoulJacker, I totally agree. It's a multi-layered problem that starts at the roots and works its way up.

Firstly, screenwriters. I'm a fledgin hopeful. I haven't met many screenwriters but from what I can tell they all want to write for television. This sickens me. The very few talented ones are stuck, limited to a format that encourages lazy writing. Turn on your tv and you'll see the same hackneyed, melodramatic, episodic trite. Who's Phil going out with this week? Who gives a **** ?

I hear the filmcouncil throws money ou to film projects. And apparently a decent number get made. Where are they? That's what I want to know. Apparently no one wants to see them... therefore they don't get distributed. No end product. There are few sources of encouragement for filmakers... and even fewer end product.

speaking of fox:

Quote:

---

Fox Comes To Britain
Production deal to boost British movies
05/09/2003

Something that could possibly be filed under the heading 'boring but important', Fox Searchlight has signed on for a five-year partnership with DNA films, a move that will create a major British film company. Now wait a minute. Before you slump into a drooling catatonic stupor, bear in mind that this could spell big things for the British film industry so bear with us.

Searchlight has taken a 50% share in the company, bringing $25 million to a comparable sum DNA has sourced from lottery funding. But the deal brings more to our shores than simple cash. Fox Searchlight's partnership lends Fox's worldwide distribution to a major British production company, meaning more people will see our films, which brings in more money, which means more British films will end up being made. The plan is to produce top quality British movies with budgets up to $15 million and will be a much needed shot in the arm for our nation's film industry.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

If you thought british films were 'pathetic', look at the Dutch film industry.

The only films that get made are either book adaptions, or really popular teenage shows-adaptions.

There has been one good dutch film this year, Van God Los, based on actual events instead of a book or a louzy television show.

The actors are the ones who act in those popular TV shows as well...

Oh well. I think Europe's going to get better. There always was this thing with American films vs European films. Europe had this thing for creating excellent stories, untouched by the commercial minds. Sadly, this has changed, and the Asian market is now taking over the place Europe once had. But like all things, this is a circel, and I believe it will go back. Europe just has to stop making American films. But that's difficult, because they keep funding us.

the Dutch film industry is thriving. it's just too liberal for most ;-)