Jump to content


Photo

British Film?


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#1 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3054 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 14 July 2007 - 07:41 AM

This from BBC News:

"British film exports are at an 11-year high, with receipts of $2.2bn (£1.1bn) at the global box office.

The Da Vinci Code was the strongest performer last year, earning $758m (£380m).

"The British film industry is in rude health," said John Woodward, chief executive officer of the UK Film Council."

What?!

How is The DaVinci Code a British Film? Written, Directed, Produced & Starring Americans, & made with American money.

It seems the UK Film Council is extremely flexible when it comes to classifying 'British' cinema.....
  • 0

#2 Andy_Alderslade

Andy_Alderslade
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1055 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London, UK

Posted 14 July 2007 - 08:24 AM

Don't get people started Stuart!

;)
  • 0

#3 Mark Williams

Mark Williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 811 posts
  • Director
  • United Kingdom

Posted 14 July 2007 - 08:54 AM

This from BBC News:

"British film exports are at an 11-year high, with receipts of $2.2bn (£1.1bn) at the global box office.

The Da Vinci Code was the strongest performer last year, earning $758m (£380m).

"The British film industry is in rude health," said John Woodward, chief executive officer of the UK Film Council."

What?!

How is The DaVinci Code a British Film? Written, Directed, Produced & Starring Americans, & made with American money.

It seems the UK Film Council is extremely flexible when it comes to classifying 'British' cinema.....

The film had an opening weekend gross of $77,073,388. By the end of 2006, it had grossed about $244 million in the U.S. alone and has done very well in other markets, grossing over $700,000,000 worldwide, making it the second highest grossing movie of 200

Directed by Ron Howard Starring Tom Hanks Released by Sony Columbia Picures

Brian Grazer
Grazer has produced all of Howard's directorial efforts, including the family-oriented comedy "Parenthood" (1989), the sweeping period epic "Far and Away" (1992, with Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman) and the Oscar-nominated "Apollo 13" (1995). Following their success with "The Grinch", the pair reunited for "A Beautiful Mind" (2001), the biopic of mathematician John Forbes Nash Jr, who battled back from schizophrenia to win a Nobel Prize. Despite a series of controversies ranging from how much of the film deviated from the subject's life, "A Beautiful Mind" was a commercial and critical success, earning eight Academy Award nominations and taking home four Oscars including Best Picture.

--------------------------------------------------
LOOKS LIKE the British film industry is to get a boost then?
----------------------------------------------------

A sequel to the blockbuster movie adaptation The Da Vinci Code is in the works. Scriptwriter Akiva Goldsman, who adapted the Dan Brown novel for the screen, has reportedly been paid $3.8 million to write the sequel. However, it's said the sequel will not be an original story, but will actually be based on Angels And Demons, the book which precedes The Da Vinci Code. Sources claim the plot, which sees cryptologist Robert Langdon, played by Tom Hanks, help a woman to discover the links between her father's death and secret society conspiracies, will be altered so that it can follow on from the first film. It is expected the movie will be released in 2008.

-----------------------------------------------
I guess a British film is any that use Britain for some locations and our skills?
---------------------------------------------------

U.K. post houses The Motion Picture Company, Double Negative and The Senate Visual Effects also contributed sequences to the film.

"The most challenging aspect was when we were asked to recreate the interior of Saint-Sulpice from the floor up, Rainmaker's CG interior shot, realized with LightWave 8, Photoshop and 2d3 boujou, was later combined with live-action footage filmed at the U.K.'s Shepperton Studios.
  • 0

#4 John Holland

John Holland
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2248 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London England

Posted 14 July 2007 - 11:29 AM

This not new ,we dont have a money making British film industry , the Bond films are always called " British " same with the Harry Potter ones , made here sure , [well apart from last Bond } but financed by Hollywood and all the profits go back home .
  • 0

#5 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11934 posts
  • Other

Posted 14 July 2007 - 01:06 PM

Words fail me.

Is this man actually pleased that we have no industry? Does he actually like it that way?

What a complete waste of space.

Phil
  • 0

#6 Richard Boddington

Richard Boddington
  • Sustaining Members
  • 5482 posts
  • Director

Posted 14 July 2007 - 07:54 PM

At least the films he's claiming as British have a British "connection" of some sort. Da Vinci Code was shot in the UK and the kids in the Harry Potter movies are English.

Canada's entry into the best foreign film category at the Oscars last year had nothing to do with Canada. It was set in India and was about Indians, made by an Indian director. And this is a "Canadian" film. Worse of all we Canadian tax payers have to foot the bill for this!!

You've got it good in the UK, don't complain.

R,
  • 0

#7 Mark Williams

Mark Williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 811 posts
  • Director
  • United Kingdom

Posted 15 July 2007 - 03:08 AM

At least the films he's claiming as British have a British "connection" of some sort. Da Vinci Code was shot in the UK and the kids in the Harry Potter movies are English.

Canada's entry into the best foreign film category at the Oscars last year had nothing to do with Canada. It was set in India and was about Indians, made by an Indian director. And this is a "Canadian" film. Worse of all we Canadian tax payers have to foot the bill for this!!

You've got it good in the UK, don't complain.

R,


NO we have it bad. You have it worse. Thats awful.
  • 0

#8 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3054 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 15 July 2007 - 11:19 AM

At least the films he's claiming as British have a British "connection" of some sort. Da Vinci Code was shot in the UK.


By that rationale, 'Star Wars' is a British film, and 'Lawrence of Arabia' is Spanish!
  • 0

#9 John Holland

John Holland
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2248 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London England

Posted 15 July 2007 - 11:29 AM

No i am afraid " Lawence " is american , shot in jordan ,spain ,morroco , post at shepperton , but columbia money , money went back to america land .
  • 0

#10 Andy_Alderslade

Andy_Alderslade
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1055 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London, UK

Posted 15 July 2007 - 11:45 AM

By that rationale, 'Star Wars' is a British film, and 'Lawrence of Arabia' is Spanish!


And...

...'Don't Look Now' would be Italian, 'Dr Zivago' would be Spanish, 'The Third Man' would be Austrian, even 'Shirley Valentine' ! The Superman, Batman, Indian Jones would all be British.

I guess these people are using the same spin tactics which the current Labour Government has been employing for the last decade - they're twisting the context to make themselves look successful, even though there is very little practical success.

Of course this is all good for the high end production/studio sector, which has been looked after by this government.

But lets not discuss the UK Film Council or that other dirty word 'Digital Shorts!' It will all be better for our health.
  • 0

#11 Richard Boddington

Richard Boddington
  • Sustaining Members
  • 5482 posts
  • Director

Posted 15 July 2007 - 01:55 PM

By that rationale, 'Star Wars' is a British film, and 'Lawrence of Arabia' is Spanish!


What I meant was that in the Da Vinci Code the film was shot there and the UK was seen on screen as the UK. Which is better than nothing. Name a big budget movie shot in Canada where Canada is seen as Canada and not the USA.

In Lawrence Of Arabia, regardless of who paid for it or where it was shot, it was about an Englishman played by an English actor.

That is what I mean, England gets portrayed on screen as England, Canada is always a stand in for some place else.

Heck, even in my movie the suspect is interviewed by the Chicago PD! :blink:

R,
  • 0

#12 Andy_Alderslade

Andy_Alderslade
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1055 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London, UK

Posted 15 July 2007 - 02:27 PM

Name a big budget movie shot in Canada where Canada is seen as Canada and not the USA.


Cool Runnings?!

:P
  • 0

#13 Richard Boddington

Richard Boddington
  • Sustaining Members
  • 5482 posts
  • Director

Posted 15 July 2007 - 02:43 PM

Yeah I think Calgary made a brief 20 second appearance. Are you sure that wasn't shot on a sound stage in LA?

R,
  • 0

#14 Mark Williams

Mark Williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 811 posts
  • Director
  • United Kingdom

Posted 15 July 2007 - 03:21 PM

What I meant was that in the Da Vinci Code the film was shot there and the UK was seen on screen as the UK. Which is better than nothing. Name a big budget movie shot in Canada where Canada is seen as Canada and not the USA.



R,

Is that why you got the X Files. Brilliant series 35mm I reckon the Canadians sound more American than the Americans. I want to film in Canada its the greatest place Or was after the UK which used to be too.
  • 0

#15 Max Jacoby

Max Jacoby
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2955 posts
  • Other

Posted 15 July 2007 - 03:31 PM

I think in times of international co-productions assigning a nationality to a film is tricky, if not impossible. But if I had to rely on one criteria only, it wouldn't be where the money came from, but the director's nationality. Obvioulsy it's easier to arguer that case if he is the screenwriter too.
  • 0

#16 Matthew Buick

Matthew Buick
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2345 posts
  • Student
  • Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

Posted 15 July 2007 - 04:41 PM

I would imagine Max Jacoby hit the nail on the head there.

At least Working Title are British. And what the blazes happened to Rank?!
  • 0

#17 Dominic Case

Dominic Case
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1357 posts
  • Other
  • Sydney Australia

Posted 15 July 2007 - 06:31 PM

In Lawrence Of Arabia, regardless of who paid for it or where it was shot, it was about an Englishman played by an English actor.

Well no. Peter O'Toole is Irish. Born in Connemara. Middle name Seamus. Irish father, though Scots mother.

I'd say NOT English.

In the same way that Canadian is NOT American.

Oh and by the way, T.E. Lawrence was Welsh. That makes him not English. British, yes, English, not really.

That much is clear. Meanwhile, as Max points out, assigning a nationality to a film is not easy these days. Some films are straightforward, no confusion: the bigger budget ones tend not to be.

You can look at where the story is set - or where the idea originated.
You can look at where the investment comes from (and where the profits if any return to).
You can look at the nationality of the writer(s).
You can look at the nationality of the stars.
You can look at the location for the shoot (not necessarily where it is set, of course).
You can look at where the postproduction takes place.
You can look at where most above the line money is spent (refer: nationality of stars).
You can look at where most below the line money is spent (that's work for us all).
You can look at what audience the film was made for.

And different people will have different ideas on which of these is most important.
  • 0

#18 Tim Partridge

Tim Partridge
  • Guests

Posted 15 July 2007 - 07:24 PM

What I meant was that in the Da Vinci Code the film was shot there and the UK was seen on screen as the UK. Which is better than nothing. Name a big budget movie shot in Canada where Canada is seen as Canada and not the USA.


X-Men 1 and 2.

I use to think the UK had the edge with films set in the USA but actually filmed outside. THE HAUNTING (the original), LOLITA (the original), INDIANA JONES, SUPERMAN, THE SHINING, WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT, BATMAN, etc. Seemed to be part of our national identity! It doesn't really happen anymore, and when it does, everyone already knows about it.
  • 0

#19 Richard Boddington

Richard Boddington
  • Sustaining Members
  • 5482 posts
  • Director

Posted 15 July 2007 - 08:20 PM

"Well no. Peter O'Toole is Irish. Born in Connemara. Middle name Seamus. Irish father, though Scots mother.

I'd say NOT English.

In the same way that Canadian is NOT American.

Oh and by the way, T.E. Lawrence was Welsh. That makes him not English. British, yes, English, not really."

Ok Mr. Technical :D

But Peter O'Toole played a British officer in the British army. You can't dispute that! There was no such thing as the Welsh army in 1914. Does Whales have their own army today?

"X-Men 1 and 2"

Where in X-Men 1 and 2, did they say it was taking place in Toronto or Canada?

My point is that there hasn't been a big budget movie seen by the millions where people say, "Oh that was a Canadian story." Maybe the closest was "Never Cry Wolf"? Again, made by Americans in Canada. It was a Canadian story at least. Oh well that's one, back in the 80s.

R,

PS: On TV here right now, "The Canadian Ethnic Media Awards," I'm not making this up. Sorry, but this is yet another reason why Canada has no distinct culture of its own. What's next, "The White Males in Broadcasting Awards?"
  • 0

#20 Dominic Case

Dominic Case
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1357 posts
  • Other
  • Sydney Australia

Posted 15 July 2007 - 10:49 PM

But Peter O'Toole played a British officer in the British army. You can't dispute that!

No I can't dispute that. Why didn't you say that to start with? :rolleyes: :D

My point was that to call an Irishman English is really the same as calling a Canadian American. I thought you would have avoided that.

It's like calling New Zealanders Australian. Except that they are grateful for the compliment ;) :D

By the way, it's a similar sort of picture in Australia: in general, big budget films need international money, and they need international stars to attract audiences to get return on investment. That's in general, of course there are exceptions everywhere. Even the best locally funded and made lower budget productions have to fight to get screened, because distributors do the same deal on an expensive production as a cheap one, and usually the expensive ones will attract bigger audiences.

If you are going to talk about an industry (as in British film industry, or Canadian, or Australian), then it's about who is working and where is it being done. Economic activity:employment. Doesn't matter what the product is.

If you talk about the film business, then it's about who invests and makes money. DOn't they call it "show business" in Hollywood?

What's being discussed here is a film culture. That doesn't necessarily need big budget films (the French seem to manage quite well), but it doesn't hurt to have a bit of money flowing in the film community because they get to work on big-budget international films.
  • 0


Paralinx LLC

Abel Cine

rebotnix Technologies

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Wooden Camera

Visual Products

Aerial Filmworks

Opal

FJS International, LLC

The Slider

Technodolly

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineLab

Metropolis Post

Willys Widgets

Ritter Battery

CineTape

Glidecam

Opal

The Slider

Technodolly

CineLab

Ritter Battery

Visual Products

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Metropolis Post

Rig Wheels Passport

Wooden Camera

Aerial Filmworks

Glidecam

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Abel Cine

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

rebotnix Technologies

Tai Audio

FJS International, LLC

Willys Widgets

CineTape

Paralinx LLC