Cinema Canada (Mar 1983)

a CLEP LTERS. Ce ginalized enough? Moreover, does all discussion of independent alternative filmmaking have .to be collapsed together — to the extent of affixing a title of an American documentary to a discussion of a Montreal film co-op? Apart from the dismal gray background on which the article was printed, (is this an unconscious metaphor for the economic situation facing independent filmmakers ?), the omission of any reference to our very successful screening last year at Cinema Five (over 500 eager afficionados of alternative cinema !), is serious, indeed. Again, we do welcome the interest of Cinema Canada and look forward to more articles dealing with the co-op situation in other parts of the country. Brenda Longfellow Mainfilm, Montreal Critique of judgement The views of ACTRA’s National Committee on Women’s Issues, reported in your article “ACTRA women on offensive in film...” (No. 92), that women are underemployed, under-represented, and portrayed unintelligently in the media, and that influential media organizations like the CBC, the CFDC, and private broadcasters ought to be pressured to change these things, while no doubt offered in a spirit of fairness, are too strong, too militant, and in the long run too potentially harmful to what is really important: the freedom of artistic expression. I refer primarily to the Committee's apparent attitude toward the portrayal of women, whose TV image makes them “sick to the teeth” and whose portrayal in feature films, in Nancy Rossov's view, “borders on soft-core pornography.” Apart from the obvious difficulties in judging objectively the degree to which broadcast material is “sexually stereotyped” or “offensive”, any legislated requirements on the social, or—to calla spade a spade — ideological content of broadcasts, whatever their intended purpose, can only entail a lessening of the expressive potential of film and TV artists. Whatever themes the artist considers most important must always then be subordinated to the requirement of official orthodoxy; he must dispense with scenes and characters not approved by the government. Programming which is broadcast on the basis of ideological orthodoxy is simply propaganda. (The ACTRA Committee may argue that the current broadcast system is an implicit and therefore more pernicious kind of propaganda, but I would reply that unconscious propaganda is not propaganda at all, but rather a spontaneous reaction to the demands of the market : except in a negative way, through:censorship, the programming of broadcasters has always been determined by what people will voluntarily watch, not by the petitions of pressure groups). As things stand, the control of programming is in the hands of television network buyers and film producers and distributors, whose decisions are doubtless influenced more by their perception of a program's expected popularity than by its ideological content. By forcing these people to select on the basis of socio-political content we force the creators to limit their thematic material, and as a result the audience loses the freedom of choosing what it wants to see. What exactly is gained by this? Sexual “stereotyping” of men and women is as old as humanity. The types change with changing society, but always spontaneously, and not as a result of royal decree or legislation. “Stereo typing’ is the meat and potatoes of popular drama ; in trying to eliminate it we would not be doing our artists or ourselves any service. In fact, often those who most stridently insist upon the abolition of “stereotypes” simply want to substitute a new type for the old. There is no reason to believe there will be an end to sexual “stereotypes” of one kind or another ; dramatized sexual types will continue to exert a fascination on us as long as we remain sexual beings, and as long as sexuality remains the fundamental, consuming thing that itis. Now, if we could somehow legislate inept filmmaking out of existence... But alas, who am I to judge ? Is anyone ? Paul Vitols Vancouver, B.C. Budget blues Iam writing to tell you of a project Iam currently very much involved in-I hope you find it interesting enough to print in your publication. I am in great need of publicity for this project and I hope you can help. First, I will give you a straightforward description of the project. I have entered into an agreement with a production company based in Jakarta, Indonesia (Umbara Brothers Films), the agreement has me co-producing, writing and playing the lead role in one film and coproducing, co-writing and playing the lead role in asecond film. I have written the script for the first film (Sojourn), the idea has already been approved by the intended director (Danu Umbara) and the second script is now being formulated in Jakarta. Sojourn has many Canadian elements to it, the lead characters are Canadian; throughout the story they often make known the fact that they are from Canada — it’s an adventure-comedy that is set 20% here in Canada and 80% in Jakarta and sur rounding Indonesian islands, An interesting part of this agreement, and a rare element in films that originate here in Canada, is that we already have a distribution company (P.T. Parkit Films) lined up that is willing to distribute the picture throughout the Asian market. This company has a proven track record and is currently handling four films in that same market. Now to the problem — $1.3 million. | have made some headway with gathering a budget but I am getting stonewalled by the very people that I thought I could count on for aid; the CFDC is at the top of that list. My story is Canadian, in that it starts offin Toronto and concerns two Canadians on an adventure in Indonesia violence is nonexistent in the story, it is quite funny but never offensive, but on the other hand a current CFDCsanctioned picture Videodrome has something to offend just about everyone, but since they think that the picture is “commercially viable” it gets the support. I have been involved with the picture business for about seven years (I’m 23) and I have been recently working for a production company based in Barcelona, Spain (Figaro Films S.A) : I help get their Spanish language films distributed here, mainly in Canada’s Spanishspeaking communities. I have acted bit parts in films. I have written and submitted a few screenplays, but now I want to make pictures on my own, so! started to make contacts with production companies all over the world hoping to get lucky. After about a year this Jakarta project began (last June), we have been working hard putting this project together, and now all that is missing is the budget money. I'm sure thatI canraisea budget, if for no other reason than the money is almost guaranteed recoverable with the picture already having a distributor for the giant Asian market. The people in Jakarta have expressed to me that they feel the picture could be a success in their market, and I feel that it could be likewise here. So, as you can see, I need publicity for this project wherever and however I can get it, so if you think this is interesting enough to be printed in your magazine I would be deeply appreciative. Christopher Heard Oshawa, Ont. P.S. Just a note to add that our project is in no way similar to the current Peter Weir film The Year of Living Dangerously. Our film takes place in a much Friendlier Indonesia of the ’80s rather than the revolutionary Indonesia of the early ’60s. Now is the hour Now is the time for the Canadian Film Institute to come out of hiding With the demise of the director and a staff now numbering one person, the board of directors must elicit the support of the Canadian film community by: re-con stituting the membership, amending the constitution, soliciting members, calling for an annual general meeting and electing a truly representative board, calling for support both financial and political and seeking a solid funding base, defining CFI’s objectives and role in the Canadian film scene. Now or never more. Why should it die except by the apathy of us all? Jack Horwitz Ottawa No one can hold a candle to us Help Cinema Canada celebrate 10 years of publication by taking out a subscription. In return, we'll provide all the film news, views and interviews you'll need to keep abreast of developments both artistic and commercial in Canada. 0 Individuals: $18. (a saving of S6 olf cover price) NAME —_-—- ADORESS (Add $5 postage for USA and overseas per year) Pioase enter a 0 Renewal 0 New Subscription for: Rs Se eee COUNTRY ~~ COE 0D Payment enclosed O Bill my VISA ace. no. DB me RO pe Expiry date _ SIGNATURE eer O Companies and institutions : $24. : | -_——— CITY ti et tees —_- Mail coupon to Cinema Canada, Box 398, Outremont Station, Montreal H2V 4N3 March 1983 Cinema Canada/1?