Events in York, Visit York, Local News Yorkshire, Things to Do in York – Oneandother.com

Riotous debate has exploded following David Cameron’s comments on the state of the UK film industry. During a visit to Pinewood Studios, West London, the prime minister has urged film-makers to produce more films with mainstream box office appeal, in order to better distribute National Lottery funding. This situation would provide successful film companies with extra support, whereas unproven film-makers would be put in an even less fortuitous situation than they already find themselves. Therein lies the problem with Cameron’s postulation; it is difficult to predict the success of a film, as the past few years have provided box-office surprises. However, it is believed that more funding will enable certain film companies to grow, and will therefore have more influence when it comes to marketing, thus ensuring a hit at the box office.

The King’s Speech and Slumdog Millionaire are two such examples of films that were surprisingly successful at the box office, critically acclaimed, and lauded with trophies come awards season. It was impossible to foresee the success of either of these films, despite the involvement of star Colin Firth and director Danny Boyle, themselves proven successes in their own right.

Cameron’s opinion is that the government’s role “should be to support the sector in becoming even more dynamic and entrepreneurial, helping UK producers to make commercially successful pictures that rival the quality and impact of the best international productions.

“Just as the British Film Commission has played a crucial role in attracting the biggest and best international studios to produce their films here, so we must incentivise UK producers to chase new markets both here and overseas.”

The prime minister’s comments, although tinged with an element of naivety, are sensible in the sense that it is crucial that the British film industry is successful internationally. However, the success of larger companies should not be at the expense of talented independent film-makers. By dividing the available funding between the established film companies, the smaller, (though no less capable), independent film-makers are put at a disadvantage, when it is more than possible that, in light of the stratospheric success of a glut of British productions, it is the smaller companies that produce the most innovative and interesting movies.

Paul Richardson, Creative Director of York based film-makers Parashoots, hopes that the extra funding is in some way inspiring for independent film-makers. He says, “I hope a shift towards large scale commercial productions will at least mean a boost for the many actors and technical crew who depend on a vibrant British film industry for work. If this is at the expense of state-sponsored art films then hopefully this will mean that independent filmmakers will be freed from box-ticking and become truly independent and artistic. The radical evolution of digital cinema means that it’s easier than ever to make a film. The real issue is getting people to see it.”

The British film industry has never been one for explosions and mainstream narratives. In fact, if there is one thing UK movies are known for it their tendency to take chances, and to err towards controversy. It is doubtful that the massive following Shane Meadows has received for his This Is England film and consequent series, or the continued and consistent demand for Ken Loach and Mike Leigh films, could be predicted, or prepared for with any certainty. The film industry, both at home and abroad, is an unpredictable beast. Many, many millions of dollars have been thrown at huge, CGI-heavy productions that have flopped both at the box office, and with critics. (The recent superhero movie The Green Lantern is a case in point.) British film-maker Ken Loach commented on this issue yesterday, “Success can come at all levels. You don’t have to be a blockbuster to be successful. People don’t go into films to be entrepreneurs…it’s to be creative, to be original, to have wit.”

It is important to have a diversity in our film industry, and it is a danger that giving all the government’s funding to larger companies in order to make ‘mainstream’ pictures would ensure a distillation of genres, and would doubtless halt the production of unpredictably commercially successful films such as Paddy Considine’s directorial debut Tyrannosaur, Richard Ayoade’s first effort Submarine, and Chris Morris’ ‘suicide bomber comedy’ Four Lions; none of which would be backed under the suggested changes in financial support.

The Artist, a film that has captured the imagination of countless movie-goers and critics, would not look like the hit it has become on paper. All the same, a silent, black and white movie released in 2012 looks like the hottest contender for Best Picture at the Oscars. It begs the question; just what is ‘mainstream’?