Cinema Canada (Jun 1983)

— °°. .+C€INE MAG — 7 oo Fund crucial to new generation of producers (Cont. from p. 3) “What's going to be tough is how the CFDC will walk the tightrope between a cultural and a industrial strategy. But it makes sense to tie cultural goals to industrial needs. The only way we'll build an industry is with a product that makes financial sense. Only one there's enough production happening on an on-going basis will there be product with recognizable Canadianness that gets watched. There’s a certain critical mass of production that has to be reached first. And the fund’! help us get there.” MacMillan termed his reaction “about average”, adding that “Within a week or so, well see what kind of consensus there is in response to the pollicies.” CFDC deputy director in Toronto Bob Linnell told Cinema Canada he thought the reaction to the consultative meeting was “fairly good. I’ve had a chance to talk to a number of people. There were a lot of questions, mainly trying to get more specifics.” Linnell emphasized the general and flexible nature of the guidelines : “The CFDC will be assessing each Case on its own merits.” He added that in the responses to the proposed policies “I haven’t heard anything insurmountable of fundamental.” Basically the thing isa step is the right direction,” independent producer Bill Macadam of Norfolk Communications in Toronto told Cinema Canada. “They are consulting with us, and they’ve got to keep consult ing with us. What you're looking at here is a first draft, and I think they’re well aware of that. My feeling is that it would be a great mistake to think that the fund is going to be a significant help. It’s a step in the right direction but it isn’t going to turn the industry around as itis structured. There are a lot of proeblems. The CFDC’s got to be a party in this with us to make things work. They're open to suggestions and I hope they'll continue to be.” Macadam had a number of specific criticisms, many of which he raised at the Toronto meeting. These include the suggestion that the CRTC Canadian content definitions should apply to television programming, rather than CCA requirements ; that beneficially-owned productions (i.e. co-productions) tryly be beneficially owned, though he did not consider Canadian copyright to be an indispensible condition to producing Canadian _television; that production companies should not be limited to applying to the Fund for project ata time though “a mechanism should be set up to ensure that there’s no abuse by one compa ny. “For instance,” Macadam said, “the policies talk of distribution Suarantees. You don’t get distribution guarantees in TV — that’s a film term. You can, however, look at it in terms of pre-sale commitments. Obviously that’s a problem. “Why does the fund have an administrative fee if they’re taking equity? That doesn’t make much sense. “But there’s no doubt about it— the fund will help. The very big question here is that you’ve got to get a free-TV license. If you get next to nothing in licensing fees, the CFDC has got to make sure theyre legitimate licensing fees. Secondly let's say you do get one-third out ofa Canadian network, then you go to Europe and get another third, then you got to the fund for the remaining third. You're not really gaining fround unless the fund says they’re in effect subsidising to one third. If it’s only a loan, then the department of National Revenue’s going to want a return;; if it’s equity, then equity's going to want a part of whatever fees the producer earns. If it’s not financially viable for the producer, there'll never be an industry in this country.” These and other problems — such as the contribution of the CBC to independent production, or the “ludicrous situation” of asking producers to defer their fees — were among ones preoccupying Macadam. “But everybodys working together to sort them out. (Andre) Lamy, (Pierre) Juneau and the pay-people are trying to address this problem. It’s not a simple thing.” “The Toronto meeting involved a group of producers who've long since figured out what the fund is about,” Roman Melnyk, CBC’s director of independent production, told Cinema Canada. “The draft policies held no surprises. They were a strong reflection of the memorandum of agreement (between the DOC and the CFDC). I think it’s very much straight ahead. “We intend to benefit and plug into the fund. It’s a grand opportunity for us to bring a lot of programming. I'm looking forward to sifting through proposals. The next step is to cope with the flood of proposals, and find out what the industry sees as viable propositions. All this now has to be translated into meangingful programming.” The degree of CBC independent production's financial participation “is still a matter of discussion,” Melnyk added. “Part two of the broadcasting strategy (dealing with the CBC) is going to give some indications where the public broadcaster fits in overall.” Another perspective was offered by independent television producer Doug Hutton of Edmonton, who was not present at the Toronto meeting. “Everybody's getting on the bandwagon with this fund. I hope it creates much-need programming. | hope it won't be all the good old boys who'll get all the funds again. I'm a great believer in all of us participating and I hope the fund'll be evenly and regionally distributed. “But I’m not that optimistic. Pay-TV has not worked out and there have been severe cutbacks in program purchasing. “We've got the hardware, we've got a good distribution system. All we have to do is get some quality programming together.” In the July CineMag, Cinema Canada will carry further responses to the CFDC’s proposed program development fund management policies. Policy spelled out (Cont. from p. 3) vided by the Fund) 3) a loan guarantee (with monthly fee) or4) acombinaison of the three. An administration fee of not less than $1000 will be charged by the fund on its financial participation. In distribution and marketing, the fund will favor projects witha contract with a Canadiancontrolled distributor or salesagent. Nielsen sets sights on Quebec-Canada 95 TORONTO — Shooting began May 16 in Toronto on Quebec/ Canada 1995, a political satire produced and written by Richard Nielsen starring John Neville, Jackie Burroughs, Mar tha Henry, Kenneth Welsh, Albert Millaire, and Louise Marleau. The 90-minute comedy is being produced by Primedia Productions in association with First Choice and the CTV Network. The program has been licensed to both First Choice and CTV and is scheduled to be delivered to First Choice in August for a fall telecast, according to Nielsen. The director is John McGreevy, who replaced Primedia’s original choice Robin Phillips, who was busy with previous directing commitments as well as well as preparing for his new role as artistic director for the Grand Theatre in London, Ontario. Recently, Primedia and the Grand Theatre announced a three-year deal giving the production company exclusive TV and film rights to three of the theatre's plays per season. Three co-prod treaties ready MONTREAL — Three co-production treaties between Canada and France have received provisional approval from both governments, and the first treaty, dealing with cinema, was officially signed May 31 in Montreal by Communications Minister Francis Fox at a public announcement made at the Maison Radio-Canada by Fox and French ambassador Jean Beliard in the presence of members of the Montreal film community. The treaty covering television productions and a third dealing with special cultural projects should be signed this July. Fox told Cinema Canada that the television treaty, a “first” of its kind, was his “personal initiative,’ and was prompted by remarks made several years earlier by France’s Culture Minister Jack Lang. ‘There is a need to extend the space occupied by francophone production around the world, and this treaty should held to increase both the quantity and the quality of that production,” Fox said. Fox is especially pleased that the treaty includes provision for films made in English to be dubbed either in France or in Canada, depending upon the choice of the majority producer. Until now, the dubbing was obligatorily done in Fran Cinema Canada ce, due to legislation which prohibited the screening of films dubbed in other countries. Fox said that the treaty, coupled with the new Broadcasting Fund, to which all treaty productions will be eligible, nicely complements his new broadcasting strategy. “Soon we will resolve the question of the CBC and copyright, and the broadcasting aspect of our policies will be complete,” he added. In response to producers’ questions concerning the Broadcasting Fund and the letter of agreement with a broadcaster which is a pre-requisite to access to the Fund, Fox said that he felt the initiative would remain with the producer. ‘J even expect that agreements will be made between producers, broadcasters and pay-TV networks; certainly there is nothing to keep the pay-TV operator from having first window for productions which come from the fund,” he said, rectifying the impression that pay-TV licensees would be excluded from the Fund. Fox concluded by saying that his film policy would not be ready until “late Fall.’ Sources within the department of Communications report that work on the National Film Board chapter of the policy is responsible for the delay. 100 8x10 Colour Photos Q9C Es. 8 x 10 b/w Photos 60C Ea. aa aaa ee Cinema Canada June 1983/7