Trade News North (Nov 1977)

x THE NOUVEAU RESEAU: A REAL ALTERNATIVE? MONTREAL In March 1976, the Canadian Film Development Corp. was responsible for the creation of a private company whose mandate was to develop an alternative. distribution system. It awarded the sum of $191,535 to Explo-Mundo, a local production company, and Bouchard and Dagenais and Associates, sales agents and consultants, and asked them to create a parallel distribution system. Le Nouveau Réseau was founded, and it has just tabled an exhaustive report on the activities of its first year. Grave doubts, both from exhibitors and distributors, have plagued the Nouveau Réseau, and these may not be put to rest by the report. When the Nouveau Réseau was first founded, two elements were insisted upon. First was that the Réseau should open the doors for the ‘difficult’ Canadian films; it should find the public which had not yet been “invited” to see the films because of resistence on the part of commercial distributors and exhibitors and should facilitate the screenings of these films for that public. Second, a_ revolutionary form of division of the box-office grosses was to be established, assuring a much larger return to the producer than is normally the case (exhibitor 50%, réseau 10%, producer 40%). Nowhere in the 166 page report is there any mention of this second point, nor any real financial accounting of the disposi tion of the revenues from the first year’s receipts. The Réseau resumes its activity for the year 76-77 as follows: Sixteen films were shown in 65 halls and theatres from Winnipeg to Chéticamp (N.S.); this involved 811 separate screenings and registered 80,000 entries. As the Réseau anticipated 150 screenings still to come at the time the report was written, it projected that the gross box-office would total $167,000. Of this amount, $75,000 would constitute the net box-office (productiondistribution); about $54,000 would be returned tothe CFDC. , The details of the experience, film by film, are also given (see box). The Nouveau Réseau operated in six separate regions, and each region had a part-time coordinator. Evaluations from these different coordinators are included in the report and make up the most readable section, In general, the films were shown in every conceivable manner. In some towns, the local theatre programmed the films. In others, school auditoriums or cultural centers were used. In many places, the library proved to be the meeting place. There were few revelations in their reports. The most receptive audiences were the students at the junior colleges and cultural centres, Outside of the larger centres, the audience was turned off by _films which some considered ‘too oriented to Montreal’ (as was the case with Ti-Mine when viewed in’ Hull) or too oriented to Quebee (as was the case when the films were seen in the Maritimes) or too vul gar or risqué (as was the case in rural Manitoba). One surprising result — and one which was specific to Quebec — was the general receptivity of the audiences to the documentaries included in the program. These got out the larger audiences and left them satisfied. The coordinators found out — as had many an exhibitor before them — that the critical opinion of the cinephile does not correspond to the general opinion of the public. All of the coordinators said, in one way or another, that a new public had to be educated for films such as those included in the program, and that this public would no doubt come from the young. Many suggested concentrating on the students. Conclusion The Nouveau Réseau has modified its role and now sees itself as‘a pivotal force on the Québécois scene. ‘The Nouveau Réseau must be an instrument of research and development, a practical tool which actively and concretely serves the entire cinématographic community in Québec. It must not enter into competition with the positive forces of the industry but should serve as a catalyst,” as it says in the report. Still, many members of the private sector wonder whether this is an appropriate role for a private company to play and whether it does not simply duplicate the mandate given, by law, to the Direction générale du cinéma and to the Institut Québécois du Cinéma. The end result of the CFDC investment for the first year can be resumed simply. Measuring investment against total number of spectators, it paid over $2 a head to get francophones to go to the movies! TORONTO — Irv Ivers, Columbia’s man in Toronto, has made a commitment to distribute Robin Spry’s One Man across Ca _nada. Although the contract isn’t — yet signed, Ivers feels that it is important to support the film in a manner that should insure proper success at the box-office, and this is what he intends to do. | Ivers has been general manager of the Toronto office since April, having been in charge of advertising at the Columbia Studio in California prior to that. He enjoys the change of pace, and the challenges which he feels still exist in Canada. . Asked about Columbia’s marketing practices in Canada, Ivers states that the company spends between $100,000 and $200,000 to promote the films it distributes. Close Encounters of the Third Kind, which Columbia releases at Christmastime, will probably have a promotional budget of a quarter of a million. Ivers thinks that Canadians could get more mileage out of their films if more attention were paid to Columbia Gets | One Man for Canada marketing aspects. ‘Canadians have not taken the time or made the efforts necessary to determine what kinds of films people like to see, what it takes — and how much money it takes — to motivate someone to spend three dollars to go to the theatre.” Realizing that Canadian distributors are not likely to have as much money at hand to support their films as do the American majors, Ivers suggests government support. “I think funds should be set aside the same way they are set aside for participation in the production of films.” He feels, too, that the onus is not on the distributor alone. The producer also has a responsibility to become market-wise. It is surprising to Ivers — “distressing” is his own word — that Canadians have not approached Columbia to distribute their films. Although he is aware that films produced with CFDC monies have an obligation to use a Canadian distributor, he is anxious to establish some contact. Columbia might well be interested in rights in the States or even in worldwide distribution. He hopes that his office will serve as a clearing house for distribution deals and also for interesting production projects. It is true that in Canada, films distributed by the American majors fare well in relation to those distributed by Canadian distributors. Though the causes are no doubt multiple, Ivers feels that the commitment the majors are ready to make to their films are crucial. “Exhibitors know that we are not going to abdicate our responsibility. Once a picture is dated for exhibition, that’s when the responsibility begins; the responsibility is to support the film properly, to encourage the audience to go and see Ite In. an average year, Columbia distributes about 16 films, 75% of which are prouced by Columbia. Canadians will watch with interest to see if the combined enthusiasm of Ivers and Columbia ~will make a_ box-office success of One Man. NR: Objectives for 78/79 The Nouveau Réseau, in its report, states that presently, its essential objective is to provoke the satisfaction of the viewer. It realizes that more normal conditions must be created for the distribution of films made in Quebec, and that some control must be exercised over the screening in the province to allow Québécois films to gain recognition. The program which will hopefully allow the Réseau to ac The Details No. of viewers 19,681 Film Ti-Cul Tougas Leskieur de l’Everest L’Horoscope d’Elise Les mensonges que mon pere me contait L’Absence Ah6, au coeur du monde primitif Jules le magnifique Québec/Acadie Ti-Mine, Bermie pis la gang’ Le son des Cajuns L’Amour blessé Chanson pour Julie Les beaux dimanches La piastre Ii était une fois dans ]’Est Les vautours 16,094 14,911 7,980 3,968 3,388 3,120 2,593 2,129 Total Gross receipts Net receipts $ 33,142.82 $16,326.92 43,252.90 14,065.82 26,657.74 13,321.12 16,298.78 7,115.41 6,563.70 3,966.18 6,366.85 3,109.61 5,980.27 4,690.86 3,006.10 2,985.94 4,030.02 1,977.81 3,326.56 2,756.00 1,725.79 2,329.04 968.50 439.92 985,50 859.20 394.98 394.01 625,50 370.50 266.59 177.61 $157,027.41 $70,651.14 . complish these goals is called Les Jeudis du Cinéma. It involves screening 20 Canadian features in a double program with 20 foreign films of the art-film category, on 20 consecutive Thursdays. The idea is to create the beginnings of an art-theatre circuit using the available theatres in the province. All activity outside of Quebec has been abandoned for the coming year. So, too, all documentaries have been dropped from the program. The Réseau has anticipated criticism of the fact that the CFDC will be, in effect, giving financial support to the exhibition of foreign films but it states that the production in Quebec is at an all-time low, and that it was not possible to build a program out of recent films. The package chosen does, indeed, include some old films like Ti-Coq.) Moreover, the foreign films are needed to draw the public and to leave it satisfied. NR: Conflict with the Private Sector During the late spring of 1977, the Nouveau Réseau was invited both by the Quebec Theatres Owners Association and the In- dependent Quebecois Distributors Association to give an accounting of its activities. The theatre owners were worried about the fact that cultural centres were being used as commercial outlets, therefore creating a disloyal competition: moreover, the competition existed because of the CFDC. (It is interesting to note that in its program for 77-78, the Réseau has eliminated the use of the institutions and cultural centres, and is only screening its films in commercial theatres; this despite the fact that several coordinators stated the commercial theatres were not ideal for the purposes of .the Réseau. One case in point is the Boite a Films in StJean. Although the coordinator states, “Nothing can be done with this theatre; it’s a waste of energy for the Réseau”, the Réseau has expanded its use of this theatre and will add three others owned by the same group.) As for the distributors, ~ they resented the fact that a production house whose only distribution experience had been with its own films should be granted a sum by the CFDC and then proceed .to distribute films in the territory. In many cases, the films had been procured directly from the producer (this, in function of the new system of box-office division proposed by the Réseau). Although the originality of the approach of the Réseau was admired by some, there was a general feeling of malaise, a worry about other projects which the Réseau might get into. (Here, too, it might be noted that in the project proposed for the coming year, all films will be procured from Canadian independent distributors.) Cn er