Wednesday, November 01, 2006

BEGGARS AND LOSERS


The people have spoken. And they said – ‘Aye, right’. Yesterday’s item in The Scotsman about the future of the Edinburgh International Film Festival drew a lively response from people, including yours truly.

thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1608002006

But why did it take a request under the Freedom of Information Act to learn the findings of a report commissioned by the EIFF costing 30 grand? Consultants Split Screen – who have no internet presence that I could find, so who knows - someone’s pal? – was hired to look at ways to develop the festival. Their conclusions, as deciphered by the media, involve more public funding, something that clearly got up the reader's noses, judging by their comments.

It’s been suggested that the EIFF has to grow in order to survive. Does it? Maybe they shouldn’t be doing themselves down. After all, and much to the annoyance of London, the EIFF is the best known, best loved British film festival. One of its charms has always been its small scale and the way it fits with all the other festivals happening in August. In reaction to the loss of a major sponsor, the talk now is of it being shifted to October, grafting on a film market and growing the number of films on show. But in an already overcrowded film festival market, it’s hard to see how the EIFF can pull this off, especially in an October slot, when London steals the limelight with the LFF and Raindance.

Seems to me the EIFF needs to decide who it’s aiming to attract – the cinema-going public, the festival visitor or a film industry whose diaries are already crammed. Like a hamster’s wheel, the annual bunch of markets and fests goes round – Rotterdam, Sundance, Berlin, Cannes, Toronto, Venice, San Sebastian, Rome and countless others. Festivals are big business, but the reason the film industry turns up in Edinburgh is easy to figure. It gives film folk a wee holiday, where agents, producers, sales companies and distributors can combine a few days business with the chance to catch a fringe show or a PA at the book fest or even grab a grandee at the Television Festival.

They also come because the weather’s about as good as it gets, which isn’t as petty as you might think. When you don’t have the facilities of major A-list festivals, like a centrally-located set of screens, a proper delegates centre and venues for talks and socialising, then you need to provide other attractions. You can’t expect your guests to hike from Lothian Road to Fountain Park in the pishing rain either.

A film market needs films. What it doesn’t need is the dross left over from all the other festivals, so how does the EIFF hope to attract the best? If I were a distributor or a sales company, where would I want to stage my world premiere? Like it or not, Edinburgh’s not the first place that comes to mind, no matter how much public cash is ploughed into it.

And here’s where it gets complicated. Reading the comments on the Scotsman article, you can feel the static. Me, I liked the BEGGING BOWL ALERT at the top of the list, because it sums up the feeling among people whether they understand the politics or not. They just don’t like the idea of chucking public money at something they feel excluded from. Most folks’ perception of the film business is that of the fat cat, knocking back free booze at the Council Tax payer’s expense. How much of the EIFF’s emergency cash injection this year, I wonder, went into flying Charlize Theron or Kevin Smith in from the States and putting them up in five star luxury? It just doesn’t play well with the punters, especially with a price hike on tickets from £6.20 to £7.45.

I blame the media because in the past when the EIFF failed to deliver red carpeteers of superior standing, they were criticised. Now, after a relatively starry year, the knives are out. They just can’t win. For years the EIFF has championed indie filmmaking, especially from the UK. It shouldn’t need to draft in big budget movies or create a market just to survive. It should ignore London, do what it can to attract another major sponsor and get on with the business of loving movies for their own sake, instead of chasing their tails in an overcrowded cage.

4 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great blog.

Disagree about the use of public money though - around the world the A-list festivals are subsidised to the tune of millions by both local and national governments. For them it's a matter of pride and prestige to stage these events, something the parsimonious Scots can't seem to get their heads round.

Paul

11/01/2006 12:06 PM  
Blogger Leanne Smith said...

Paul,

Thanks. I'm not saying public money shouldn't be spent. It's just that the way film and film-related stuff gets reported in Scotland, you can't blame the average punter for thinking it's not deserved.

Lx

11/09/2006 8:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The reason the EIFF has gone downhill fast is because it plays shite films that few people want to see - too many polically-motivated selections from obscure repressed countries. That's why the film market is almost non-existent too - they don't have commercial films. Next time check the attendance list - it's full of students, short-film makers and organisers from other festivals.
I love this site!

R

11/17/2006 10:20 PM  
Blogger Leanne Smith said...

Thanks for that R. I aim to please...

Today (17th Nov) I came across a Freedom of Information document on the Scottish Executive website about the EIFF. It makes for interesting reading because the figures suggest in future that the Festival (and its link with the Filmhouse) will be getting more annual subsidy than the entire yearly Scottish Screen development budget. There's also a reference to paying for 'A-List' stars to attend. Who knows what they're up to, but I agree with you they ought to show a broader range of movies. Some of the choices they make are wilfully arty, when all we want is a good night out. God knows it costs enough...

Lx

11/17/2006 10:58 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home