MEDICI — The Film Funding Journey

Reports Previous Workshops

Please also see Michael Gubbins' presentation “MEDICI-Module 1” (PDF)

Or, in other words:

Should we support fewer films for an overcrowded market?
Should we focus on ensuring that the films we select find an audience on new platforms?
Should we support fewer films for primarily movie theater release, but focus instead on the release of smaller or more innovative films and cross/media projects on new platforms?

Issues to consider:

To try to reach the market through on-demand platforms like Netflix
To build up audiences on the basis of new distribution platforms
To use movie theaters as a trigger for VoD and other new platforms, by putting successful films on those platforms
To consider self-distribution (social networks, crowd-funding, etc.)
To engage more in making sure that people have seen the films being supported
To choose between making fewer films and finding new ways of releasing them through new platforms and forms of distribution
To support at once films meant for primarily movie theater release and projects meant for the entirely new cross- and trans-media network fields
To stop the mass closures of single-screen movie theaters in rural areas.

As publicly-funded bodies, film funds depend on the demands of politicians and legislation.
Politicians demand international recognition (award-winning films) and are reluctant to support unconventional film forms.
Cultural diversity legislation prevents innovation and focuses too much on protectionism. It has a conservative impact and can be a drawback to potentials for reaching the market.
The high number of films in Europe is not an issue for small countries. Their political objective is to obtain several local films a year, even if the economic potential of those films would certainly be diminished in a more competitive market.
Taxpayers are sometimes unaware that their money goes towards film. At a certain point, their pressure may become a political issue and be taken up by the anti-European political forces. Working class people who do not go to art-house movie theaters can protest against funding the enthusiasms of a generally wealthier art-house audience.
Funds have to spend their entire annual budgets. Otherwise, they may risk getting less money the next year.
People running the film funds are usually open-minded liberals, but most often they do not represent the dominant thinking in a country.

For the audiovisual industry:

Producers (and their families) would prefer to have more films financed by film funds because that is the main source of their income.
Distributors: Due to the old-fashioned distribution models, independent distributors see their TV pre-sales and DVD sales going down, so that they are no longer able to play an economic role in the financing of films. A lot of films supported by the funds do not get to be seen because independent distributors cannot afford to put their energy behind it. The economics of the film industry is shifting incredibly.
Film is part and parcel of the creative economy: it consists of many units belonging to the creative industry – publishing, writing, the performing arts, acting, directing, music, photography, design, fashion, software, etc. Therefore, its economic importance, beyond its box office take, can also be measured by the value of the jobs it creates and the extent to which they are part of the creative economy.

For funds:

The objectives of funds and their funding policy depend on how they are financed. Some are levy-financed agencies that get levies from the industry directly (i.e. broadcasters, distributors, exhibitors, professional associations, government and/or tax money).
Funds do not have control over the number of films being produced; that number is rising because new technology lowers the production budgets. The problem is that, increasingly, all these films look alike. This could have a negative effect on the image of national cinema, providing no economic return.
Some funds are not judged on how much they contribute to the industry or how much they get in return: these are judged solely on the basis of their economic performance, as measured by their box office gross.
Funds are given a lot of assignments (festival success, market share). What they should (must!) care about are film quality and obtaining a larger audience for all smaller and art-house films.
Regional funds are the ones that are focused only on the economic impact, and where the money is spent. They support film by film, with an eye to building up an industry in their region. If they support fewer films, this means giving money to fewer production companies. What about the sustainability of their local industry?

Audience has become a big concern today: If we make too many films for the platforms we have, do we know if this is the reflection of demand or supply? In other words, if we were to have as many as ten times more movie theaters, would the demand be better satisfied?
Lack of knowledge:
- More evidence about the way people are responding to a film is necessary, because many of the usual assumptions are based on a pure guesswork;
- The demographics of European countries are changing, which should be taken into account;
- Online platforms can secure a better insight into how people are responding to the content, and who is willing to watch a film.
Audience building: We have to educate the younger audiences. Young people cannot find the old films, and we should be providing them with access to them.
Data access: To access the data as to audience demand, complete control over the online distribution is necessary. Big corporations have such data, just as do the public broadcasters, but they do not want to share it, and thus many independent producers cannot access it.

If we want to put things on new platforms, we have to know how to operate such platforms. For instance, technical knowledge is necessary to use today's latest mobile devices and ever-evolving Internet content.
The proliferation of video cameras leads to a higher level of media literacy. Media literacy should not be only about watching and understanding video content. People should also learn how that content is created and how to create it.
With the help of technology, we can capture and nurture demand more easily. We can thus better understand if we should be creating fewer films or trying to create more demand.

Impact of Digital in Film Business and Production

Decision Making Processes

Illustrations by Jean-Philippe Legrand – called "Aster"