RADGE OF DISHONOUR
Guess what was on the menu on Sunday night?
No big surprises at the Bafta Scotland Awards then. Red Road ran away with the prizes, and so it should have. Also no big surprise that Monday’s Scotsman ran a piece on the winners that attracted some radge ranting from Embra loonies taking exception to RR for being Glaswegian like it’s a punishable offence. Which is a bit rich when their favourite son, writer and (a whole music video later) director Irvine Welsh is shooting a slice of Leithian bawbaggery for Channel 4. See, they’ve even got me at it.
Like the slogan says – Scotland – The Best Small Country in the World – only they left out the word ‘Minded’.
thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1675652006
If you ever wanted to know why filmmaking in Scotland is a dead loss, here’s the proof. Bad enough when the papers only announce half the Bafta awards, leaving out the New Talent, who don’t merit a mention since it’s unlikely they’ll ever get to be old talent. It’s pretty bad as well when some snider writing in the Sunday Times Scotland rubbished the awards, slagged off the organiser, Alison Forsyth, and insulted anybody lucky enough to have a ticket. Clothes out of Primark and Barnados? How amusing. Has this clown never heard of TK Maxx?
If you want the full story check the link. Me, I recommend Listerine.
www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,2764-2447075,00.html
When will Scottish hacks finally understand that TV and filmmakers in this country are not all freeloading talentless spongers wasting taxpayers money? Or that the films that get made here, like it or not, hold an undistorted mirror up to who we are? If, as the journalists never tire of telling us, nobody here goes to see Scottish movies, then doesn’t some of the blame lie at the door of the rags? And as for the nutters writing in, where do you think they're getting their information?
And no, there’s no point wagging the finger at Scottish films for not making money. English, Welsh and Irish films don’t either. Come to that, neither do most other European or even American films. That’s showbiz. But being too lazy to do any research, the hacks just pick away at the scabs in that same old self-loathing way, then have the cheek to snipe when the talent ups and leaves.
I’m not saying we should only make wee miserable films. But when you’ve only got wee miserable budgets to make them with then what’s the option? I’d rather watch a film with something true to say than a couthy tartan and shortbreid pack of lies that might satisfy the rags, the Tourist Board and Jock McConnell, who wouldn’t know a good film if it bit their arse. Although I’m sure rubber chicken tastes better.
posted by Leanne Smith at 12:06 PM
4 Comments:
Yet again Leanne misses the point: the Scottish Baftas are laughable. The films nominated don't compete on a level playing field in terms of budget or quality. The voters are even less qualified than the Oscar crowd - so critical journos are making a perfectly valid point.
Filmmakers can enjoy the Bafta beano by all means - no-one begrudges them a night of free booze and rubber chicken. But the awards are a meaningless luvvyfest on a par with those kids parties where the biggest, ugliest child wins all the prizes.
Thanks for writing, Anonymous. I always welcome other folk's opinions.
In this case though, I'm calling it, because when you say I'm missing the point YET AGAIN, I can only assume you're one of those serial moaners who's written before, trying to pick holes in my blog.
Du-uh - it's a blog. My opinion is not your opinion, so get that poker out of your arse. Or some therapy. Or get your own blog - seems to me you need an outlet for all those opinions.
Anyway, I fail to see what point you think I'm missing, or why you complain about what I've NOT written.
Since you raise it, there are no voters on the Scottish BAFTAs. I'm told they have judges, including some 'critical journos' who are so-called experts.
As for the booze and rubber chicken - my mate told me it cost a hundred quid a pop, so it's hardly free.
And the 'biggest, ugliest child' winning? I assume you mean Red Road. Don't you think this only highlights the problem of not having enough competition? We make so few films here it's all too likely that all the gongs will go to the one film - just like the year Young Adam won everything.
Hardly BAFTA Scotland's fault, is it?
Duh yourself. Why do you register any surprise at Red Road rout, or the coverage of Scottish Baftas, when we already knew it would be an event with little competition.
Do Sigma really feel that beating a film that hasn't been released and a film that will never be seen outside the Edinburgh Film Festival is any kind of feather in their cap?
Really, what's the point of resurrecting this meaningless awards ceremony?
Better if Scottish Bafta ploughed the money into New Talent side - the only awards that mean anything at this level - and eschewed prizes for bigger budget, one-horse races. The event could still have glitz, if glitz is needed to attract attention, by ensuring the presenters are starry.
And Gyac - there are Bafta voters. All members of Scottish Bafta are sent out voting forms at the end of September, although most of them vote without seeing all of the nominated films. Juries deal with the shortlist.
And tell your mate that not everyone paid £100 for their dinner. Or find better informed mates. Perhaps then you could publish more informed opinions on your blog.
Double duh.
Who's registering surprise here? Not me. Try reading the second sentence again or get your eyes tested.
And why slag Sigma? For winning? If the competition's not cutting it, then tough titty. That's exactly my point - that we ought to have more competition, but when Scotland only makes a few films a year, that's all we can expect.
And as for the 100 quid dinner - so what? There's always going to be freeloaders at these dos. My mate never paid...
And since you think I'm not 'informed' enough, maybe you should stick to The Scotsman instead of giving me abuse.
Post a Comment
<< Home