BURNED OUT

I’ve been staring at a blank screen for about three minutes now, thinking of something positive to say about the film business.....


I’ll start again.

This week an item on MTV movies grabs my attention, seeing as how it relates to some of the recent comments on my posts, especially from my pal, English Dave, about the dire state of distribution. The item concerns Ed ‘Brothers McMullen' Burns and the death of the art house film (so he says). Ed’s beef is that his latest film, Purple Violet, has failed to get bums on seats. In fact, it’s failed to get anywhere near the seats since he couldn’t bag a distributor, so instead he’s releasing it as a download on iTunes for $14.99.

Not a great move, Ed.

Now I admit I don’t know much about Ed’s movies, but it seems he’s made the same one about eight times now, dealing mainly with ‘relationship issues’. In other words, a few folk standing in rooms either shouting at each other or not talking to each other, maybe with a bit of door slamming thrown in. What Ed fails to grasp is that this sounds too much like real life to entice the punters to part with their cash. We can all do our own door-slamming, thank you. As he blubbers, “If they’re not going to see Reese Witherspoon and Tom Cruise they’re not coming out to see me and Patrick Wilson. The audience isn’t there anymore.”

Not so, Ed, so don’t point that huffy lip at us. The reason people are staying away in droves from your movies isn’t Tom Cruise. They’re staying away from him too, if the reported box for Lions for Lambs is anything to go by. No, the reason people are staying away from your movies is because a) they’re not in the cinemas and anyway, b) there are much better films out there.

The question is, how likely is it for punters to shell out 15 bucks to watch a movie on a screen smaller than a packet of fags? For years people have talked up the great online revolution that promised to turn distribution on its head. Lots of people have sat on lots of panels yakking about online distribution, film on demand, mobile phone downloads and suchlike. Apart from filmmakers flogging a few DVDs on a website, I’ve yet to see a rush on this.

Maybe it’s because unlike watching a couple of minutes of nonsense on YouTube or any of the other sites for free, there’s only a few nutters willing spend more money than it costs to rent a film to download an entire feature and watch it on their phone or their iPod, a bit like being in the cheap seats at a gig, since the screen’s so tiny it detracts from the ‘experience’. It doesn’t seem to matter that the technology’s out there, because all the technology’s done is make us part with cash for the latest gadget and brainwash us all into only watching shorts, usually topped and tailed with some corporate message.

They used to say that adverts were the good bits between telly programmes. Now we’ve got a situation where we dummies fork out for the hardware to watch ads and fork out for the subscription to download the ‘good’ stuff. Why anybody would want to pay more than the cost of cinema ticket to watch a screen the size of one is beyond me. Apart from watching porn, cause at least you've still got a free hand. (see pic)

Maybe Ed Burns would be better off with a camcorder and a YouTube account rather than get all sulky about nobody wanting to release his films. As he says, “I don’t think I’m going to make another small dialogue driven movie for a while.” I don’t think you’ve got much say in the matter, Ed, not when the audiences’ bums are firmly planted on their own seats.

SMALL EARTHQUAKE, NOBODY DEAD

Judging by the UK coverage – e.g. page 9 of Saturday’s Guardian and second last item on Friday’s national BBC Radio news - you’d never guess that Glasgow just won its bid to host the 2014 Commonwealth Games. But much as we Scots love to moan about southern bias and indifference, we could do with sorting out our own house when it comes to reporting on matters of national importance.

It’s a while since I last mentioned the Culture Bill, so long overdue I’m surprised the bailiffs haven’t been round. That, and a fully-fledged Creative Scotland, the body to replace both the Scottish Arts Council and Scottish Screen. Yawn all you want but the scrapping of these two agencies marks the biggest shake-up in the arts in Scotland in decades so it’s bound to have an impact.

Filmmakers, ignore the small print at your peril. That goes for SS boss Ken Hay too because if anybody ought to watch his back, it’s him. Even on their own website, buried in the news section you’ll find a recent speech by Scottish Culture Minister, Linda Fabiani, who gives glowing mentions to the National Theatre of Scotland, the Venezuelan Youth Orchestra, Edinburgh’s festivals, the National Collections, National Museums and the National Library.

What she doesn’t mention is film, an omission that not only ignores every filmmaker in the country but also fails to acknowledge our one and only screen agency, an agency paid for out of government’s own coffers. Not a good sign, is it? In fact, her only film reference begins and ends with David Mackenzie, presumably because Hallam Foe opened this year’s EIFF.

It’s here you really begin to wonder about the future because if Ms Fabiani fails to talk up film as a cultural asset because the powers-that-be and advisors failed to remind her to talk it up, then we might as well give up now.

So what does Ken Hay have to worry about? How about Richard Holloway, chair of the joint board of SS and SAC, for a start. After years at the SAC, we can only guess where his loyalties lie and you can bet it’s not film since apart from turning up at a few gala screenings he doesn’t know the first thing about it. I’d have thought theatre, dance and opera was more his bag. Then you have the recent appointment of Anne Bonnar as director of the interim body set up to oversee the transition to CS. Her background? The NTS and Traverse Theatre. So no 'advocacy' for film there either.

It’s hardly an exaggeration then that it’s all beginning to look like the players here are a bit skewed in favour of the stage. Now I might be dead wrong but at a time when the National Theatre of Scotland is grabbing favourable headlines for Black Watch, its success is maybe less to do with the plays they put on than the fact their head of marketing is on a 55K a year salary. SS has no equivalent but then again, unlike the NTS, Scottish Screen isn’t a production company with untold riches at its disposal.

One obvious conclusion is for SS to hand over the keys to West George Street and its annual budget to the National Theatre since the NTS looks like it can claim success where SS can’t and so might be better at the job of getting films made. But you only have to look at the numerous stage plays adapted for the big screen over the years to know it’s a very bad idea.

The Life of Stuff, for instance?

“Devoid of any wit, humour or cinematic style” – FilmFour review.

Or The Slab Boys?

“As much enjoyment as slowly squeezing your finger in a vice.” – User comment on IMDB.

Or Blood Red Roses?

“Mind-numbingly boring, self-righteous and over-prone to the use of that terrible short-cut of having its characters reacting to world events on TV”. – Time Out.

All based on stage plays, of course. And just because a playwright might fancy getting into movies doesn’t mean they’re any good at it. In fact, I couldn't turn up a single Scottish stage play-turned-film that got a decent review.

Meanwhile those of us in Scotland who genuinely want to make movies are forced into entering competitions to make TV dramas at a time when telly is shedding jobs by the skipload. I’ve never heard of playwrights having to do the same thing, because in theatre it’s more a case of a cosy phone call and ‘here’s the cheque, away and write what you fancy’. And unlike theatre, our film producers and directors start from a base of no wages and no funding to treat themselves or writers properly. It’s more like ‘give me your draft and if we’re lucky I might get us a few grand’. No, in Scottish theatre the money’s in place from the start. Nobody ever goes hungry, not when the government and the joint SS/SAC board value theatre so much more than film.

In February next year a 3-day conference, The Cultural Summit, is due to take place in Edinburgh. Guess which cultural item is off the menu? If any or all of what I've written here doesn’t sound the death knell of film in Scotland, I don’t know what does. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if sometime next year, SS and the idea of Scottish film will be quietly strangled and dumped. And if track record is anything to go by, our press and media won’t bother to tell us where the body’s been buried.

PI-LOSS IN GLESGA

Thank you Light&Shade for keeping us alert to the non-opportunity that is The Pilot scheme.

Maybe they should rebrand it Pi-loss, since that's what it amounts to. And shame on WGGB for not jumping on Channel 4, SS and HIE's heads for coming up with this tawdry, ill-thought and totally exploitative scheme.

Even worse, Pi-loss has got fuck all to do with cheap telly, it's about grabbing 12 properties for a pittance - you only have to look at the rights that you, the writer, have to give away even to take part in this bag of shite. And sorry Lucy - (see comments on my post 4CryingOut Loud) - I hate to piss on the parade here, but to say that the scheme gives a leg-up to Scottish writers is bogus. Only rich kids looking for a wee jolly up north need apply.

They might as well mug you in the street. Don't fall for it folks.

WINNER TAKES ALL

Costume? Who said anything about clothes, dear?

As part of my public service blogcast remit to readers south of the border – since you won’t hear about it on the national news – this year’s BAFTA Scotland Award nominations have just been announced. Cue the readers of our national rag, The Scotsman, who are already chucking bangers at the door of West George Street due to the woeful lack of names in the Best Actress category.

If you thought the two contenders last year was a joke, this year BS boasts only one – Sophia Myles – for her role as – and let’s be honest here – an unhappy slapper. It’s not enough to get your kit off, Sophie, you need to do some acting as well, darling. To her credit, parting her legs for slumming-it nipper, Jamie Bell, shows some range.

What does this tell us? Well, according to the story one actress, Angela Coates, who played in Wilma and Duncan’s ‘My Life as a Bus Stop’- fell off the list. The fact she appeared as a fat, deluded, struggling actress is ironic enough, but having seen the film what’s tragic here is that Ms Coates’ performance was genius and more than deserving of a nomination. Hell, they should have just handed her the prize.

So why the omission? Snobbery, probably. BAFTA Scotland, desperate to make their annual event look credible in the eyes of the wider media – and keep the sponsors and telly tarts interested – can’t be seen hanging out with the likes of Angela.

Whyever not? You might ask. Because they think ‘My Life as a Bus Stop’ isn’t a REAL film, just a few folk from Coatbridge farting about with a camcorder. Forget being selected for the EIFF, Wilma and Duncan can’t be counted as serious filmmakers. Their film didn’t have a big budget, they didn’t have ‘stars’ but at least they didn’t waste public money or take a nosedive at the box office like Hallam Foe did.

As one of the saner commentees writing in the Hootsman points out, a nomination can go a long way in helping an actor’s career. Maybe Angela Coates could carve a niche for herself in the business. She deserves to. So shame on BAFTA Scotland for not putting her on the list.