Jump to content


Photo

Save The British Film Industry.Com


  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#1 Brian Dzyak

Brian Dzyak
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1517 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Encino, California USA

Posted 08 January 2011 - 02:42 AM

http://www.savethebr...to-the-cabinet/

If we want 250 000 film industry jobs in The UK, it is time Peter Bone, David Laws, John Hemming and David Davis were brought into The Cabinet.

Jonathan Stuart-Brown for Save The British Film Industry.

This is the ’sack race’ month in British football. It is where managers who did not produce results – no matter how well intentioned – get sacked and others given the chance to do very much better. Generally the incoming people do much better and the community gains.

So Roy Hodgson at Liverpool FC, Roy Keane at Ipswich, Avram Grant at West Ham, Carlo Ancelotti at Chelsea, may soon be joining Sam Allardyce (ex-Bolton, Newcastle and Blackburn) while others are given a chance to get better results.

http://www.thesun.co...-sack-race.html

Great entertainment as football is, it can not create 250 000 British based jobs. It can not bring £25 billion a year inward investment into the UK each year (with 320 billion going outside the south-east). The film industry can and needs much much much better management from the present inept clowns in government and quangos.

David Cameron needs to sack some of his Cabinet as manifest failures and promote proven talent.

It is high time that Peter Bone MP and David Davis MP were in The Cabinet. They have real business experience and skill. They have produced real results in the real world.

Among LibDems, it is time to axe Vince Cable and much more important Chris Huhne. The very real talent of David Laws must be put in Cabinet immediately.

So should John Hemming who understands gas and energy and will keep the lights turned on in Britain – while fighting the evil injustice of secret courts and state kidnapping of children.

David Cameron gave a few people a chance but they are manifestly taking Britain into the relegation zone. It is time to give the real talent a chance to get Britain jobs, hope, inspiration, prosperity and security.

We can get 250 000 film industry jobs in the UK spread across every part of The UK. We need top talent in The Cabinet and setting strategy for Government Departments.

http://www.savethebr...lmindustry.com/

We need sound stages (glorified warehouses) built or just converted in ex-industrial areas with cheap land.

We need state of the art sets.

This magnetises in the huge film budget blockbusters NOT tax credits.

The Lottery Money should go into this physical infrastructure NOT continue to be wasted on vast quangos which just undermine any move to build sound stages outside the West London cabal. A cabal committed to keeping the UK film industry jobs total way below 50 000, to keep an elite in-club status, to keep it confined to a very small gene pool non-meritoctacy in a very small part of the south-east.

The most talented and most honest people in the industry want to give expand opportunities for people who are not connected to break in.

Just click here and enjoy a 9 minute showreel from the most talented and most honest of them all.

http://www.vicarmstrong.com/show-reel/

Jonathan Stuart-Brown

www.savethebritishfilmindustry.com


  • 0

#2 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11943 posts
  • Other

Posted 08 January 2011 - 02:46 AM

We can get 250 000 film industry jobs in the UK spread across every part of The UK.




No, we can't.
  • 0

#3 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3073 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 08 January 2011 - 08:12 AM

"expanding sound stages (which attract the $100 million to $300 million Hollywood budget movies) around The UK. Ideally minimum four in in every county in The UK. We also want state of the art film sets across the UK on ex-industrial land which will give UK film production and tourism an unbeatable edge while regenerating towns and cities and creating jobs and great inspirational beauty in every county."

Four sound stages in every county? That's 344 nationwide. Ridiculous.

"We are talking over 250 000 jobs and £25 billion a year turnover. Chancellor George Osborne should be very interested in this"

And where have these figures come from?

"Sound stages are glorified factory warehouses."

No they are not, and anyone who thinks otherwise has obviously never tried to shoot in one.

Jonathan Stuart Brown needs to get back on his medication.
  • 0

#4 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11943 posts
  • Other

Posted 08 January 2011 - 08:29 AM

Well, I think they are, to be honest.

The sort of "sound stage" we have round here, if you recall, is generally one of those erector-set corrugated aluminium buildings with some sheepskin stapled to the inside and one thirteen-amp mains plug if you're lucky. And yes, yes, I have spent lots and lots of time trying to shoot in buildings which crackled and creaked every time the sun hit them. Of course, this stands in stark contrast to what exists in the US with a free doughnut dispenser in every corner and I appreciate how easy it is to forget life in the old country.

But seriously - the difference is in the details. Sound batting. Ply floor. Grid. Power. It's less than what most people would put in a light industrial unit.

Of course, that website is clearly written by the Pot Cookie Monster, but I get the feeling they're trying to talk to the political elite who only understand the sort of conversation where all numeric quantities are routinely multiplied by ten between brain and mouth. They'll fail anyway.

P
  • 0

#5 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3073 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 08 January 2011 - 09:47 AM

I'm aware that Producers are unable to tell the difference between a warehouse and a studio. I know of one rather well budgeted BBC period drama had sets built in warehouses rather than hire a studio. Every time it rained (3 times a day, 340 days of the year...) they had to stop shooting because the noise of water falling on the unsoundproofed plastic roof was deafening. Another production that had neglected to think about heating the vast warehouse they were using had problems shooting because the actors breath could be seen on interior sets!

Mr Stuart Brown thinks that government should invest in creating enormous sound stages all over the country, and brand them all 'Pinewood Studios'. Why exactly the taxpayer would do this for a privately owned company is never explained. He is similarly vague about what the permanent standing sets of every major city & natural wonder would be doing when not being used. It's exactly this kind of deluded woolly thinking that scares off serious investment and lets government continue to regard the British film industry as a part time hobby practiced by crackpots and dreamers.
  • 0

#6 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11943 posts
  • Other

Posted 08 January 2011 - 10:31 AM

Well, yes.

On the other hand, people do maintain backlots. I sometimes wonder how Paramount, being the last Hollywood studio that's actually in Hollywood, justify that amount of what must be cripplingly expensive real estate on a couple of acres of pretend city. Then I remember that they're engaged in the business of producing and selling television and motion pictures, which is now such a remote and abstract concept that it seems genuinely outlandish to consider it.

P



  • 0

#7 Richard Boddington

Richard Boddington
  • Sustaining Members
  • 5482 posts
  • Director

Posted 08 January 2011 - 04:34 PM

250K jobs? The Ontario gov't claims there are that many people working in film and TV in the province of Ontario alone. Where they get these numbers from I dunno?

Also, the Ontario gov't just handed out a big chunk of cash to Ridley Scott and Co for their Toronto sound stage. I guess the big banks don't want to fund movie sound stages, gee why?

Sound stages are such a gamble, only giant movies that want to build giant indoor sets can afford them. So if you don't attract a blockbuster into town, you're SOL.

Another big problem for the UK is the cost of the pound, who the heck can afford to convert US dollars into pounds these days?

R,
  • 0

#8 Will Earl

Will Earl
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 385 posts
  • Other
  • Wellington, NZ

Posted 30 March 2011 - 12:06 PM

250,000! According to the Film Council there were around 42K working within the industry in 2009 http://sy10.ukfilmco....com/21.1.1.asp - that's up from 31K in 1996 (with a few ups and downs inbetween).

I'm curious to know how much of that growth has been in other areas outside of traditional film production (people shooting on sound stages) and into other areas such as post, vfx and animation - which has increased significantly in the last 10 years - for example Double Negative, Framestore and MPC each employ at least 600 people (I've heard the 1000s being mentioned for two of them) within their London offices. If you include (which I doubt the Film Councils stats do) employees working outside the UK (all three have facilities outside the UK) you'll find that number increases again quite a bit. This is up quite a bit if you consider 10 years ago, all three of these companies would have probably employed no more than 200 people all together.
  • 0

#9 Hal Smith

Hal Smith
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2280 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • OKC area

Posted 30 March 2011 - 05:58 PM

["Sound stages are glorified factory warehouses."

No they are not, and anyone who thinks otherwise has obviously never tried to shoot in one.


Nor has tried to design one.

I know of one production company with a "Sound Stage" that was designed by a local architect who assured them he knew all about sound proofing. Great studio location, it's under the glidepath to the local airport and one-eighth mile from a railroad main line. Our local genius architect thought soundproofing consisted of double studded walls and very little else. Result? They have to shut down production any time a train or airplane is around.
  • 0

#10 freddie bonfanti

freddie bonfanti
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 315 posts
  • Gaffer
  • LONDON

Posted 27 April 2011 - 02:47 AM

I know of one rather well budgeted BBC period drama had sets built in warehouses rather than hire a studio. Every time it rained (3 times a day, 340 days of the year...) they had to stop shooting because the noise of water falling on the unsoundproofed plastic roof was deafening.

the one with lots of bonnets and a post office? i spent many days in there, shocking. no heating either!
  • 0

#11 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 27 April 2011 - 01:51 PM

I sometimes wonder how Paramount, being the last Hollywood studio that's actually in Hollywood, justify that amount of what must be cripplingly expensive real estate on a couple of acres of pretend city.


The New York Streets at Paramount are about 2.4 acres, located in the middle of a 22 acre lot. It wouldn't be practical to sell that area off to anybody else except perhaps the cemetary to the North, which I doubt is in any position to buy. I don't think the land there is all that valuable, the neighborhood isn't particularly good except to the South. The New York Streets work quite a lot, especially in TV commercials, so they're probably as good a use of the land as new sound stages or whatever else they might build there.

Fox used to have a much larger back lot on the West side, it was turned into the Century City high rise area.




-- J.S.
  • 0

#12 Brian Dzyak

Brian Dzyak
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1517 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Encino, California USA

Posted 27 April 2011 - 04:37 PM

The New York Streets at Paramount are about 2.4 acres, located in the middle of a 22 acre lot. It wouldn't be practical to sell that area off to anybody else except perhaps the cemetary to the North, which I doubt is in any position to buy. I don't think the land there is all that valuable, the neighborhood isn't particularly good except to the South. The New York Streets work quite a lot, especially in TV commercials, so they're probably as good a use of the land as new sound stages or whatever else they might build there.

Fox used to have a much larger back lot on the West side, it was turned into the Century City high rise area.




-- J.S.



Paramounts stages are almost always busy anytime I'm on that lot. Universal went through a slow period, but they seem to be hopping lately too. Warner Bros, next door to Universal seems to be busy often as well. Raleigh, just across the street from Paramount stays fairly busy as does the Manhattan Beach location.

Sometimes it's a shame when we go to shoot in some old warehouse in some random "tax incentive" city when all of the specific infrastructure for making movies is all right here for the asking.
  • 0

#13 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 27 April 2011 - 05:54 PM

Four sound stages in every county? That's 344 nationwide. Ridiculous.


Indeed, are there that many real sound stages existing worldwide? It might be close....




-- J.S.
  • 0

#14 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3073 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 27 April 2011 - 09:07 PM

I know of one rather well budgeted BBC period drama had sets built in warehouses rather than hire a studio. Every time it rained (3 times a day, 340 days of the year...) they had to stop shooting because the noise of water falling on the unsoundproofed plastic roof was deafening.

the one with lots of bonnets and a post office? i spent many days in there, shocking. no heating either!


I think they got rained off more often when they were indoors than when they were out!
  • 0

#15 freddie bonfanti

freddie bonfanti
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 315 posts
  • Gaffer
  • LONDON

Posted 28 April 2011 - 01:46 AM

I think they got rained off more often when they were indoors than when they were out!


don't get me started, mate. i was on it for weeks,on and off, two years in a row. the things i have seen and heard! and the sad thing was, the crew were always top notch. they deserved more
  • 0

#16 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3073 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 28 April 2011 - 02:28 AM

don't get me started, mate. i was on it for weeks,on and off, two years in a row. the things i have seen and heard! and the sad thing was, the crew were always top notch. they deserved more


ah, then you'll know all about the unpleasant behaviour of one certain highly placed member of the camera dept.....
  • 0

#17 freddie bonfanti

freddie bonfanti
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 315 posts
  • Gaffer
  • LONDON

Posted 28 April 2011 - 02:54 AM

ah, then you'll know all about the unpleasant behaviour of one certain highly placed member of the camera dept.....


mr P is a misunderstood chap, i didn't mind him at all
  • 0

#18 Dave Green

Dave Green
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 31 posts
  • 2nd Assistant Camera
  • London

Posted 21 May 2011 - 09:37 AM

mr P is a misunderstood chap, i didn't mind him at all


Ah, I've just realised who you're talking about.

I have to say I like Mr P. I can understand not everyone would enjoy the F1 pit-crew approach to running a camera department, but it keeps you on your toes and he does make sure you know you're doing a good job as much as a bad one. ;)

He's also the only DoP I've worked with who has genuinely fought for his crew when the production office have started to push their luck or been incompetent. I'm not going to claim he doesn't sometimes have his moments, but he is at least honest enough to admit he's over-reacted and back down when he does ... and even takes the p*ss-taking when he does it, too.

Not the easiest bloke to get to know, but not quite the ogre he can appear to be, either.
  • 0

#19 freddie bonfanti

freddie bonfanti
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 315 posts
  • Gaffer
  • LONDON

Posted 23 May 2011 - 09:45 PM

Ah, I've just realised who you're talking about.

I have to say I like Mr P. I can understand not everyone would enjoy the F1 pit-crew approach to running a camera department, but it keeps you on your toes and he does make sure you know you're doing a good job as much as a bad one. ;)

He's also the only DoP I've worked with who has genuinely fought for his crew when the production office have started to push their luck or been incompetent. I'm not going to claim he doesn't sometimes have his moments, but he is at least honest enough to admit he's over-reacted and back down when he does ... and even takes the p*ss-taking when he does it, too.

Not the easiest bloke to get to know, but not quite the ogre he can appear to be, either.



that job's problem wasnt mr P. how can a top popular BBC drama like that suffer huge cuts year after year? lower rates, no accommodation, etc etc...it shouldn't happen really. i miss the UK film industry, there's a lot of great and varied work being produced there, on all levels. it'll be alright
  • 0

#20 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11943 posts
  • Other

Posted 24 May 2011 - 03:39 AM

It is rather far from all right at the moment; I hate to think what it'll be like in another ten years.
  • 0


Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineLab

Glidecam

Wooden Camera

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Opal

The Slider

Tai Audio

Metropolis Post

Visual Products

FJS International, LLC

Technodolly

rebotnix Technologies

Abel Cine

Rig Wheels Passport

Ritter Battery

Aerial Filmworks

Paralinx LLC

Willys Widgets

CineTape

Broadcast Solutions Inc

FJS International, LLC

Technodolly

Ritter Battery

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Aerial Filmworks

CineTape

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

The Slider

Abel Cine

Wooden Camera

Metropolis Post

CineLab

Paralinx LLC

Opal

Tai Audio

Glidecam

rebotnix Technologies

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Willys Widgets

Visual Products

Rig Wheels Passport