Cinema Canada (Jun 1978)

which way the co-ops ? Film co-ops have played an important role in Canadian filmmaking over the last years. Although they have sprung up in most of the larger cities, the granddaddy of them all is the Toronto Filmmakers Co-op. In April, that co-op had a meeting to decide on new orientations. At the same time, we heard from the Filmpool in Regina, the newest of the co-ops. The following réués give some idea of the problems and aspirations of those who want to make films cooperatively. ESAS AaB IA LL ONE IT EE NL EE toronto struggles “An epic struggle climaxing in solvency” is how the new executive of the Toronto Filmmakers Co-op describes its determined efforts to keep the co-op from sinking into bankruptcy. The well-attended general meeting of the co-op that was held on Sunday, April 9, at the co-op’s offices at 67 Portland Street, was a cross between a Rochdale reunion (the co-op was founded at Rochdale College in 1971) and a ritual debate (one observer called it déjé aura, which meant he’d heard it many, many times before) between “commercial” filmmakers on one hand and the “independent-experimental-personal” filmmakers on _ the other. Bill Boyle, stepping down after four years as co-ordinator, kicked off the debate with the observation (which was not brought up again by anyone else during the meeting) that Canada Council had, in 1976, spoken of eventual self-sufficiency for the co-op and “eventual phase-out” of the Council’s financial support. Boyle said he had felt at the time that “the only way we could continue in existence was to maintain some kind of money-making ventures.” Later Boyle also said that he opposed having the. co-op dedicated to the production of low budget films by young filmmakers, on the grounds that the size of the Toronto film community made the co-op different from other centres. He acknowledged that “there are other people who disagree.” 34/Cinema Canada Boyle also argued that the changes seen in the last four years were simply the result of decisions made by members who were active in the co-op, and that people who had complained about the co-op’s direction had not been involved in the co-op. George Csaba Koller, who described the co-op in its present form as a loose alliance of small businesses, remarked in turn that the reason experimental filmmakers had stayed away might have something to do with the way Boyle had been running things. Other observers argued that the co-op’s growth to its present form had actually lessened its ability to serve a greater number of people, and that the co-op’s founders had envisaged a grant-supported production facility for beginner filmmakers, instead of a commercial pay-as-you-go operation charging high rates to members. Raphael Bendahan, an experimental filmmaker who had stayed away from the co-op for four years, charged that in recent times “a lot of people have come to the co-op who are independent production companies, which is a different thing from being an independent filmmaker.” He said Boyle’s role had been essentially that of a businessman: “He seems to be fulfilling the needs of companies who want to make 30 prints at Quinn’s... Instead of using commercial facilities they come to the co-op.” Bendahan said that before deciding on the future function of a co-ordinator, the co-op should first decide what a co-op is and does. Others, including Boyle, agreed. However, Boyle disagreed with Bendahan’s comments on commercialism: “Everybody who’s... receiving any kind of services out of this co-op is making blood and guts films like everybody else.” And anyway, he asked, what is commercialism? “I don’t know what it is. Is it the one that makes the money back?” Some other speakers said that the two approaches aren’t mutually exclusive: that it’s possible to make personal statement films and to make money from them at the same time. Still others said there is a clear distinction between information that is, and is not, marketable within “the corporate money system.” . Iain Ewing, a director of commercial films who described his own trials as a beginning filmmaker 12 years ago, said that if people were willing to become shareholders in a company to keep the co-op going, then they may as well run it as a business and try to make money with it. But he said that if the co-op gets government grants then it should not use its tax-supported equipment to compete with private sector businesses such as Patrick SpenceThomas and Mirrophonic Sound. Ewing also received strong support for his suggestion that anyone using co-op facilities should return to the co-op a specified percentage of any profit. Sandra Gathercole was also at the meeting She mentioned that it was four years since she had been involved with the co-op and that the fact that it was still running was a major achievement: “Whether it’s gone in one direction or the other direction — I understand that there’s an ongoing debate: it'll probably be a permanent tension — this co-op is the oldest film co-op in the country. It still exists and I think Bill Boyle deserves credit for the fact that it exists.”