Cinema Canada (Oct 1976)

more than a few thousand of us really clean people so our ticket grosses aren’t too high, but that doesn’t bother us, we’ve got Government Subsidy! We get all those dirty, stupid, foolish people (the kind who pay to see Shivers) and get each of them to give a little bit of money to the government (there’s so many of the bastards that we get millions), and we make nice clean movies. They are so exquisitely clean and serene that you could almost sleep through them. A time for realism: Everybody wants to be involved in the movies. That’s the way we get money. We find some guy who’s made a fortune in construction but feels a bit guilty about being such a good businessman and for $10,000 we give him a script of “his” movie to put on the coffee table and hint that he’ll get laid by a movie star. Yes, everybody wants to be involved in the movies and when Canada decided to create a feature film industry everybody got involved, not just the people who wanted to make films, or just the people who wanted to make money, but many others including the people who thought they should decide what Canadians should see. If there’s to be a real film industry in Canada it’s time for those people to sit back and rethink their misguided nationalism. There’s one simple equation in the film business that all the culture buffs should get into their heads: If A’s films make money, A makes films; If A’s films lose money, A does not make films. Whether A is a person, a company or a country, his equation has a very small margin of error. And when that money door shuts on you with the icy permanence of a bank bault it has a note Scotch-taped on the back which says, “Better luck next lifetime.”’ So don’t be so hard on a guy who may love filmmaking as much as you love talking just because he’s trying to keep his tongue in his mouth. RE: “‘B”’ movies and the Canadian film industry Art has been and always will be the peak of the mountain... the top one percent. Now I wouldn’t be one to put art down — every mountain’s got to have its peak — but let’s not try to put up a peak and ignore the other 99 percent that supports it. Diswalski Notice: Filmmakers who have had interesting experiences = good, bad, or just unusual — with the film purchasing departments of the television networks, or with the distribution of their films through the networks, are requested to write to Ron Blumer, c/o Cinema Canada, Box 398, Outremont Station, Montreal. cinema Canada is proud to offer a subscription to Mr. Brian Mahoney from Toronto whose answers to the Who’s Who Contest in issue no. 29 were not only the most accurate but were also the most entertaining to read. His response is printed below. Dear Who’s Who Contest person, Here are my guesses: ill: 2: Claude Jutra or his look-alike. A beefy person who has just seen the girls in the frames a few rows over. And a gentleman with half ahead. A veritable unknown who hopes to be known by being seen on the cover of Cinema Canada. He is eating cake. Three people sitting on their sides. A Peter Ustinov look-alike. A Peter Ustinov look-alike with two heads. A pretty girl holding a gigantic red i. The same pretty girl holding a mike. Dominique Sanda. | can’t say more without being sexist. Shelley Winters who has said enough. Anthony Quinn standing on his side. A woman and a man completely covered by the address sticker. A semi-clad beauty artfully censored by the E in Cinema. The same semi-clad beauty whom the censor at Cinema Canada missed. : A beautiful girl who forgot to get dressed that morning. Ivan Reitman. Eating cake. The cake must be good in Cannes. A man and a boy sitting on their sides. Gravity in Cannes is funny. Scntinhed on nibs October 1976/5