Cinema Canada (Nov 1981)

TRADE NEWS CRIC pay-TV hearings at end OTTAWA-— CRTC public hear ings on applications for the first pay-TV licenses in Canada got underway in Hull, Quebec on September 24, 1981. Although few people doubt the seriousness of the enterprise, there was an almost audible gasp when CRTC Chairman John Meisel, in his opening comments, compared the events with Neil Armstrong’s first walk on the moon ! Chairman Meisel was perhaps closer to reality when he argued that this was Canada’s last chance to come up with a system which could develop and sustain both a vigorous culture and a vigorous cultural production industry. The first four days of hearings were devoted to general representations. Groups, in cluding private broadcasters and cultural agencies, cable companies, actors’ unions, regional arts councils, MPs and independent production entities, all had a chance to tell the CRTC how they felt pay-TV should be designed and run in Canada. With the exception of the parliamentarians and the cultural agencies, nearly everyone who spoke has a stake in pay-TV. In its proposal call, the CRTC laid out some clear directives of what it would view favourably in any license application. Specifically, it was looking for solid facts and figures and how much money applicants hope to make and how much they plan to spend on Canadian production and Canadian content Federation adopts new policy to promote low budget films TORONTO —The Federa ‘tion of Canadian Guilds and Unions for Film and Television, an umbrella group of production unions, guilds, and associations, has decided to offer reduced fees in an effort to stimulate the production of low budget Canadian feature films. In announcing the plan at the Toronto Festival of Festivals trade forum, the Federation said it will offer a 30% reduction of fees for films budgeted between $750,000 and $1.5 million, provided the films are 100% Canadian from producer to all talent and crew, plus script, production company, and all contracted services, The producers must also employ Federation members, which include the Association of Canadian Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA), the Directors Guild of Canada (DGC), the Association of Canadian Film _ Craftspeople (ACFC), the Canadian Association of Motion Picture and Electronic Recording Artists (CAMERA), the Canadian Film Editors Guild (CFEG), and the Association des professionels du cinéma du Québec (APCQ). To be eligible, a producer must submit a budget at least eight weeks prior to the first day of principal photography for examination and approval by the Federation. The ACFC, along with the Federation reductions, will offer its own Canadian Film Incentive Plan, also aimed at low budget features. The plan will provide reduced scale rates for films budgeted between $750,000 and $15 million, less overtime requirements, and fewer penalties. The plan is the first of its kind available in Canada. in their programming. Those making general representations fell into roughly two groups on these key issues. On the one hand were the entrepreneurial interests : the cablecasters who will carry pay-TV and who are anxious to expand their businesses, and organizations like the Canadian Association of Motion Picture Producers and the Cana ‘dian Association of Broadcast ers. These groups are essentially commercial in nature, and their prime concern is protecting ‘the bottom line.’ They argued against too stringent Canadian content regulations, and while they gave lip-service to supporting Canadian production and content, most want the companies that are licensed for pay-TV to be given room to manoeuver. On the other hand the Commissioners heard from the whole range of independent production groups. These included the independent filmmakers, the Council of Canadian Filmmakers, the Directors Guild, ACTRA and many others. All of these want to ensure that a large slice of pay-TV revenues are directed into the Canadian production industry and they don’t want this left to the discretion of the licensees. They were backed in their views by most of the federal cultural agencies which appeared, including the Canada Council, the National Film Board and the Canadian Film Development Corporation. What these groups don’t wantis a repeat of what happened when the CTV network was introduced some twenty years ago, and more recently when the Global network was started. Glowing promises were made about Canadian production at the time of the license applications but these rapidly went out of the window in the first year of DISCARDED (cont. on p. 11) Helping you put if alltogether is what we're allabout. THE GROUP FILM HOUSE 22 Front St West Toronto, Canada M5J 164 (416) 364-4321 MONTREAL -— The Provincial Securities Administrators have adopted a revised National Policy concerning the public financing of Canadian films. The policy, number 23, was adopted on October 8, and has met with positive response from the film community. The language of the policy, and the various modifications made, denote a greater understanding on the part of the administrators for the fine points of film production. Gone is the confusion caused in the first policy by the use of the words “promoter/producer.” The key person is now simply identified as the promoter ; he is the person or the company which a) “takes the initiative in development, financing and production of a film, and b) is able to establish the level of fees and other forms of remuneration payable to him or it...” “In using the word ‘promotor,’ we cast the net wider,” commented one source at the Ontario Securities Commission, “all the while making life easier for the line-producer, who is never really the fellow we are interested in.” Gone, too, are the strict limits (5% and 10% of the total budget) which had been put on the producers’ fees, and the regula ADVERTISING MOTION PICTURES IS OUR ONLY BUSINESS 1407 YONGE ST. ® Product Reels @ Theatrical Trailers ® Teaser Trailers @ Audio-Visuals @ Television Commercials ® Radio Commercials @ Print Advertising TORONTO, ONTARIO M4T 1Y7 Michael Goldberg/Joel Reitman (416) 964-7539 QUINN LABS 380 Adelaide St West Toronto, Canada M5V 1R7 (416) 869-1781 New film securities policy QUINN SOUND 409 King St West Toronto, Canada M5V 1K1 (416) 869-1781 tion that all fees paid to a producer in any capacity must be included therein. “Promoters’ fees shall not exceed... an amount equal tothe sum of the following percentages of direct costs...: 10% of first $500,000 ; 6% of the next $500,000 ; 5% of the next $500,000; 3% of the next $1,000,000 and 2% of the amount in excess of $2,500,000.” These limits are applied by the securities Commission to reduce the temptation to bump up budgets, and to give the producers of low budget films an adequate remuneration. In addition to the above fees, promoters may now provide facilities and production ser vices at fair market yalue. If a promoter defers his basic fee until after the investors recoup, “the promoter’s fee may be increased by 100%.” It is now thought that the new policy will sufficiently limit the “self-dealing” of which the commissions disapprove, while giving promoters the flexibility they need. Completion guarantees may also now be provided on a nonarm’s length basis, and rebates may return to the promoter. (cont. on p. 7) Contents see p. 6 PRODUCTIONS LID November 1981-Cinema Canada/3