FLYING PICKETS

Great story in today’s Scotsman about another Scotsman – The Flying Scotsman, due to open the Edinburgh Film Fest on August 14.

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1099772006

In an earlier blog I mentioned the small matter of the 170,000 quid that the film’s producer, Peter Broughan, claims to be owed by Scottish Screen to pay off overdue invoices from crew and extras. This is a tricky one, because the company making the film, Mel Films, went bust and as reported, so far hasn’t bothered to file any accounts. Which poses the question - why should SS fork out?

At a time when Scottish film production has ground to a halt and with massive uncertainty over its future, this sorry tale does the business no favours. The recent hoo-ha over the begging letter signed by 45 of Scotland’s ‘top’ filmmakers has yet to result in anything. And while there’s a case for film to be subsidised, in the same way that, say, opera or theatre continues to be backed by the government, threats of picketing extras outside Fountain Park at the Flying Scotsman premiere only gives the powers-that-be further justification to write off moviemaking as a cultural pursuit.

If I were in Shane Danielsen’s shoes, I’d be seriously tempted to pull the plug. Not because the film’s stars, Brian Cox and Jonny Lee Miller, might be a no-show if they have to run the gauntlet of unpaid extras, but more because of the dubious morality of screening the movie. At almost eight quid a ticket (not to mention the freebies dished out to those who can afford it) I’d feel pretty uncomfortable knowing I’m watching faces on screen that haven’t been paid. Look, if this was a film made with unpaid child labour, you can bet the festival would have run a mile from it. We’re talking about the lowest paid workers here, not Brian and Jonny, reported to have had theirs and then some.

Some might argue that only by showing the film could it hope to make a profit. Pull the other one, guys. Turns out The Flying Scotsman doesn’t have a distributor and even if it did, isn’t there a queue of financiers all waiting for payback? If I were an unpaid extra or crew member I’d storm Cineworld, pelt Brian and Jonny with eggs and hold the projectionist hostage. And pull the plug on the popcorn machine while I’m at it.

Shame on the lot of them. Up the workers.

JOBS FOR THE BOYS

What’s going on? The sweltering heat? The Moon in Venus? Everybody seems to be quitting their jobs for pastures new - or not.

First off, congratulations to Lenny Crooks, Head of the Glasgow Film Office, who's about to become the Head of the Film Council’s New Cinema Fund. Lenny’s replacing Paul Trijbits, champion of fresh filmmaking talent such as Ken Loach, Nicholas Roeg and Michael Caton Jones. Let’s hope the bold Lenny can improve on that. My guess is he saw the writing on the wall for film in Scotland, so good luck to him.

Second - Hannah McGill is replacing Shane Danielsen at the EIFF amid ‘stiff competition’. Good for her. But as a rare female in the fest biz can she make a better job of it than loony Lizzie Francke did? Still, Hannah’s well qualified – I mean, she’s already well used to watching lots of movies.

Third - the boss of Scottish Television, Andrew Flanagan, has also quit. Why? Probably because he’d prefer a job in television, not running a website and a bunch of premium rate number quizzes.

Fourth - BBC Scotland’s Head of Current Affairs, Blair Jenkins, has flown the coop under a dusty cloud of unknowing. Nothing to do with job cuts, a strike ballot and a general lack of morale at QMD, I don’t suppose?

So who’s next for the off I wonder? There’s more than a few candidates I’d like to see heading for the Jobcentre.

MINE'S A LARGE STIFF ONE

Ahoy boys. Today’s Scotland on Sunday reports that the long-awaited £10m remake of the Ealing Studio classic, Whisky Galore! has run aground – yet again. This time the excuses range from uncertainty over tax breaks to anti-Scottish casting. Apparently writer/producer Peter MacDougall is raging about the proposed stars, saying, ‘the list had five Sirs and not a single fucking Scottish actor’. Nicely put, Peter.

He’s got a point though. When names like Steve Coogan and Ricky Gervais are talked up as ‘big in America’ it only confirms the delusion of London film lovies because Steve and Ricky are about as recognisable to American audiences as clootie dumpling. Besides, at an alleged £10 million budget, it doesn’t sound like Hollywood’s chipping in, so why worry? Did the makers of the original give a toss about cracking the States? I doubt it. They just wanted to make an enjoyable movie that did okay business on its home turf, which is about as much as we can hope for any film made in this country.

Whenever I read about British C-list slebs trying their luck in Hollywood, I can’t help but cringe on their behalf, in the same way I feel embarrassed at the thought of Tessa Jowell out in LA, trying to flog the new film tax regime to a bunch of moguls who really don’t give a toss.

Where Mr MacDougall’s argument falls down is in thinking that Whisky Galore! was a Scottish film in the first place. It wasn’t. It might have been based on a story set in Barra and it was filmed there with a few token Scottish actors but it took a London-based film company to make it and a London-based distributor to put it in cinemas. So what’s new?

The virtue of the original was its simplicity and small scale, relying more on stunning scenery and wry humour than on ‘starry’ actors, be they Robbie Coltrane, Brian Cox or their English below-the-radar equivalents. In fact, why are the makers bothering? Do they really think they can improve on the original? How can Mr MacDougall's script ever top Compton MacKenzie and Angus MacPhail's? And why do they need 10 million quid anyway when the 1949 version was probably shot for 40 guineas? Unless it’s to cover the producer’s tab at the Castlebay Bar.

Sounds like this one’s going the way of the SS Politician…

RUBBER JOHNNIES

This year’s Edinburgh International Film Festival kicks off with The Flying Scotsman, the only Scottish feature listed in the entire programme. Let’s just hope the film’s producer, Peter Broughan managed to persuade Scottish Screen to cough up the £170,000 they owe him – as revealed in his angry letter to the Herald a few weeks ago – so he can finally pay off his overdue invoices.

Away from the glittery sideshow of the EIFF, closed-door politics prevail. According to Screendaily.com, Scottish Screen and the Scottish Arts Council are to form a joint board for Creative Scotland by the end of the year, which sounds like a done deal to me. If so, then isn’t there the small matter of legislation, such as, duh, a draft Culture Bill to be put before members of the Scottish Executive? Anyone whose eyes glazed over reading the Scottish Executive response to the Cultural Commission Recommendations -

www.hi-arts.co.uk/Scotlands-Culture-SE-Response-to-Cultural-Commission-Review.pdf

- might have missed the small print on page 51 that suggests there’s a way to go before anybody goes around setting up boards for quangos that haven’t yet been rubber-stamped by the government. And isn’t there supposed to be proper scrutiny of said Culture Bill and a consultation period before anything gets passed?

A quick sniff around the Scottish Executive website admits as much in a press release dated 11th July.

www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2006/07/11110842

"Creative Scotland will be responsible for developing talent and excellence in all branches of the arts, and the creative and screen industries. The new body to be regulated by OCPAS will need legislation to establish it and the Executive will publish a draft Bill later this year.

Culture Minister Patricia Ferguson said:

"The establishment of this joint board is a positive step in the development of Creative Scotland. It will give a new focus and clear leadership to the Scottish Arts Council and Scottish Screen during this time of change. It will facilitate working arrangements as the two organisations work more closely together. The new cultural agency will sustain talent and provide an environment in which culture will flourish and be appreciated."

On January 19, 2006 Ms Ferguson outlined plans to invest an extra £20 million per year from April 2007 to nurture the best creative and cultural talent, and boost participation while cutting back on unnecessary bureaucracy.

Each of the existing members of Scottish Arts Council and Scottish Screen will be invited to apply for posts on the joint Board. The chairman will be appointed following an open competition. The persons appointed will be members of both the Scottish Arts Council and the Board of Scottish Screen Limited."

Looks like a done deal, though why it’s gone unreported by the Scottish press is a mystery to me. But shuffling an old pack to practice a sleight of hand shouldn’t surprise anybody. As long as our politicians view culture as an occult minority activity best left to ‘those in the know’ they're giving licence to the same cast of feckless self-interested individuals who, as Peter Broughan would testify, think it’s okay to cheat freelance film crews out of their wages.

And they call this progress? On yer bikes…

SKY MOO-VIES

With the festival season looming in Auld Reekie, it’s probably not the best time to flit back to Paisley. There’ll be no more fun directing shivering Spaniards to public toilets when they ask the way to Arthur’s Seat. No more rubbish chat-up lines from the likes of Barry and his mate Colin from Wolverhampton here on a stag weekend. No more sponsored cow-verts (see above) littering the capital’s streets or hatchet-faced matrons elbowing you in the knicker department of Jenners. And saddest of all, no more Harvey Nicks.

One of the best things I saw recently was a tourist sign opposite the Marbella Holiday Village otherwise known as the Scottish Parliament building. Under ‘Places to Visit’ some wag had scrawled the word ‘Glasgow’, proof of the ongoing rivalry between the two cities, with one renowned for history, architecture and culture, the other known for, well, shopping. Which poses a question, because with all the talk of ‘cultural entitlement’ in political circles, who’s really calling the shots about the kind of culture on offer?

Among the upcoming fests is the Edinburgh International Film Festival, which launches its programme next week. The details are sketchy, but according to the EIFF website, it is -

"recognised as a place to find new, important, international work"

No mention of British films then, new or important. Unless it’s got Julie Walters in it (Wah-Wah, Driving Lessons). The only noteworthy Scottish film, Red Road, won't feature on the list, thanks to distributor, Verve, who thinks playing Edinburgh could damage the film’s UK box potential – on how many screens is that? There’s optimism for you. Didn’t Young Adam play the EIFF a couple of years back only to be released in cinemas a week or so later? If anyone knows how hard it is to compete with Hollywood, surely it’s a two-bit British distributor. Or are they planning a major PR splash, with an Empire front cover and 400 prints? Unlikely. Did the film’s investors forget to read the small print when they condemned Red Road to a one week run in 20 arthouses?

So what can filmgoers expect to see at Fountain Park this year? A couple of Korean capers and a few Sundance leftovers? Probably. At eight quid a time, mind, popcorn not included.

What does this tell us about cultural entitlement? Because where film’s concerned it looks to me like it’s in the grubby hands of minor London film distributors, a greedy multiplex chain and a bunch of programmers trying to turn a few scrappy pictures into an ‘eclectic’ programme for discerning cinephiles. Me, I’m sticking with Sky Moo-vies.

THE LESSER SPOTTED ZOOMER

For once it’s not all bad news on the Scottish film front, what with the Glasgow Film Office quietly getting on with the business of supporting films being shot here.

Though I guess if my name was Harmony Korine (above), I’d have no problems getting what even the GFO describe as an ‘outlandish’ plot into production. To quote from their site -

"This is a yarn about a young American lost in Paris, eking out a living as a Michael Jackson lookalike. By coincidence, he meets Marilyn Monroe. He follows her to a commune in Scotland, joining her husband Charlie Chaplin and her daughter Shirley Temple. Fellow residents include The Pope, The Queen of England, Madonna and James Dean. The drama is also partly set in a Brazilian forest where a community of missionary nuns bring aid to the locals".

The film stars Diego Luna, Anita Pallenberg, Werner Herzog and Samantha Morton. A cast to conjure with, if not to die for.

Somehow I think if yours truly from Paisley was the writer/director, I’d be more likely to get a kick in the arse before I’d get a cheque from Lenny and a mention in Screen International and the Guardian. And that’s where we Scottish filmmakers are going wrong. Maybe we should reinvent ourselves as grungers with funny names and American accents because it’s obviously got more cachet with local funders than being Scottish with zilch profile in trendy mags. Still, it just might be worth a shot…

"Zat the Glesga Film Oaffice?"

"It is, hi, how can we help?"

"Oh, hiya, ma name’s Chastity Zoomer, y’know, fillummaker? Ye mighta hearda me. Ah'm lookin’ tae dae a movie an’… "

"Sorry, what was the name again?

"Chastity - as in nae nooky? Zoomer – as in Zoo. Waant me ‘ae spell it fur ye? Z-O-O-"

"That's okay. And you say you're a filmmaker?"

"Aye, too right ah um. See, ah’ve goat a pure brulliant idea fur a fillum…"

"Uh-huh..?"

"Aye, aboot aw these dead famous guys in a mental home, y’know? The Pope, her Maj, coupla deid film stars an’at – pure amazin’, so it is.

(cue sudden loud click)

"Hello? Hello? Ye still there? Ah'm runnin' oota credit here..."

Good for Harmony though – with a handle like that he must have got a few doings at school, the poor soul. And good for underemployed Glasgow-based companies. They could sure use the work.

THE FINGER OF SUSPICION

Last week it was widely reported that women don't blog, which is news to me. Plenty of us in the blogosphere are hard at it, thanks to sites like Blogger. But there can't be many bloggers out there who've had every single item flagged up to the blog police as potential 'objectionable content'. Apart from Filmflam that is, according to Google, who owns Blogger.

All I can conclude from this is somebody's got their knickers in a twist. That's good. It means I'm doing my job. Like the header says - 'She cares so you don't have to' - the 'you' being the thousands of people from all over the planet, fellow filmmakers linked to my blog from other sites, blogs and message boards, who seem to agree that I'm saying the stuff that ought to be said. Anyone petty enough to wear out their finger repeatedly clicking a flag button to complain about my blog deserves RSI. And chipped nail varnish.

It doesn't take a genius to work out who the phantom flaggers are, judging by my stats - which lists every visitor to the site. You know who you are - and so do I. But until Blogger decides the content of Filmflam is too objectionable for public consumption I plan to keep on reporting on the highs and lows of Scottish film and the shenanigans of those who make life hard for filmmakers while pretending to support them or by offering 'opportunities' - shorthand for working for less than the going rate.

This may disappoint all you frustrated flaggers out there but you've got a choice. One - if you don't like my opinions, don't read them. Two - if you really don't like my opinions, you're free to disagree - either anonymously or privately via my email, if you're that shy.

As Blogger states - one person's vulgarity is another's poetry. Besides, what's so objectionable about presenting facts, opinions and gossip? Unless folk have something to hide, of course. When I started this blog last year it wasn't my mission to take a swipe at anyone, but as time passed and more and more fellow filmmakers told me about the shabby way they've been treated - by funding bodies, producers, TV companies and dodgy outfits (I wonder how Propeller TV's doing these days?) somebody had to claim the right of reply. All the facts are out there anyway, the rest is opinion.

As Voltaire said, 'We look to Scotland for all our ideas of civilisation". Those ideas have to start somewhere - but not if we gag free-thinkers. Still, a girl can't be too careful. That's why my blogs are safely archived away from this site and in the unlikely event of censorship, ready to be posted elsewhere at the click of a button. That's what you call forward planning...