RUFF TIMES AHEAD

Welcome to my special first anniversary blog…

After mentioning the film lobby on Sunday, I thought I’d check out the original letter that caused the fussette in the first place.

http://www.netribution.co.uk/2/content/view/681/182/

If they can be believed, the numbers are pretty revealing. So what I’d like to know is this - does Scottish Screen think it’s good value for money to spend £60K plus on wages and expenses to oversee £150K worth of development funding? And why do we need three development executives anyway? Are they suddenly being deluged with scripts? The SS website names a trio of new recruits - Robbie Allen, Becky Lloyd and Leslie Finlay. The question is, is this good news?

Is it a lack of candidates or pure coincidence that all three new execs share a background in TV? And if so, does it offer a clue to those worried about the likely direction of SS and the future of the Scottish feature film? After all, wasn’t the first ad hastily redrafted before it appeared in the Guardian media jobs page to include the word ‘film’?

Why should it matter anyway? Surely writing is writing and a good script is what counts.

If only it was that easy. Becky, Robbie and Leslie are all coming out of telly in one form or another at a time when SS seems to think the future's in TV. Their job is to decide who and what gets funding – so what’s it to be? TV or film? My guess? Both - because it doesn’t take a genius to work out that only indie TV companies looking to break into drama will win public funding for film. This has got less to do with talent or ability than having the chops to run a business. Or look like you’re running a business.

It’s also got a lot to do with PR because judging by the drip feed of negative press over the years, Scottish film producers have been attacked on various fronts – miserable films, insolvent companies, bad debts – all adding to the perception that filmmakers are inept. I’m sure some of them are eejits, but not all – how else did the film lobby rack up around 150 films between them? They can’t all be crap.

Making movies from scratch is a lot harder than getting a commission out of BBC Scotland or C4 to make a comedy or a cheapo lifestyle series year in year out. Those who make TV shows don’t have the same problems as feature film producers when it comes to getting their work shown. Producers need to knock on the doors of London companies, not only to raise the funding to make a film but also to get it in front of an audience. A bit harder than handing a tape in to a broadcaster, no?

Some might argue that if film producers are that skint then why don’t they go off and make telly? Seems to me if you’ve set yourself up as a film company, it’s kind of hard to persuade the powers that be that suddenly you’re in the telly game, especially when the big London outfits, when they’re not buying out the small fry, are opening branches all over Scotland. So for the average local film producer, 'diversification' looks like a non-starter, made all the harder when you’re already remortgaged up to the hilt and feeling just a wee bit suicidal.

As for writers, having three dev execs at SS means three times the excuses for a knockback. Take your pick...

‘we’d really need to see a draft’
(translation – go away)

‘we’ve read an awful lot of horrors/romcoms/Charlie Kaufman knockoffs this year’
(no really, go away and stop annoying us)

’we already blew the budget on draft 15 of that historical costume drama’
(your script’s utter shite, so will you please just leave now?)

So who’ll win development funding from SS? My money’s on the box. Maybe there should be a prize for guessing...