The Australian Film Industry - Essay Example

USTRАLIА FILMS Name Professor Institution Date The Australian film industry is primarily government-supported, withlimitedinfrastructure and with smallpopulation. In youressayrefer to thehistory and development of the Australianfilmindustry and makereference to current film industrydebateandissues on developing, supporting and sustaininganationalfilm industry. Between 1906 and 1911, Australia produced the largest number of feature films. In 1911 alone, Australia produced 50 fiction features and numerous local films. ‘The Story of the Kelly Gang’, a feature produced in 1911, won credit as the world’s premier full-length feature. The supplies of foreign films during this period were irregular, and thus Australian films enjoyed a lot of screenplays. The industry failed to consolidate this position. From 1913, a range of mergers and takeovers in the exhibition and distribution sectors led to the decline of Australian feature films(George, 1980). These mergers and takeovers created a monopolistic environment. The companies that came up operated as Union Theatres in the exhibition sector and Australasian Films in the distribution sector. This monopolistic environment referred to as ‘combine’, was widely criticized for its reluctance to screen other Australian producers’ films and its dwindling interest in production. Experts in the field described Australia as a dumping site for foreign films and contended that Australia had the capacity to produce such films. The ‘combine’ responded to this criticism by claiming that if they rejected any producer’s films, it was because they were not up to standard. Though Australasian Films produced a handful of films between 1913 and 1918, the managers viewed distribution and exhibition as the most lucrative sectors of the business. The ‘Combine’ merged with Spencer’s Pictures in 1912(Anon., 2013). Prior to this merger, Spencer’s Pictures had produced a range of very ambitious films. It owned a studio at Rushcutters Bay and its film unit was under the leadership of Raymond Longford, a pioneer in Australian film production. Spencer, the owner of the company, was an ardent supporter of local Australian production. However, when he stepped down from the board of his own company, production of films stopped. Australasian Films had control of 75% of the exhibitors by 1920. After the First World War, however, Hollywood studios reversed this gain as they began establishing distribution branches in Australia. Hollywood studios had larger advertising budgets than Australasian Films and therefore, had the upper hand. The First World War had weakened European film production substantially and at the same time had consolidated the position of Hollywood studios at the top. Hollywood became the world’s film capital. After the First World War, 85% of all the feature films production was at Hollywood studios(Dennis, 1993). Hoyts and United Theatres gained control of the exhibition sector through mergers and takeovers. That notwithstanding, the contract system ensured US studios attained de facto control of the sector. Local Australian exhibitors, because of ‘block’ and ‘blind’ bookings, had to take most or all of a studio’s output for a given period. This period was usually 3, 6 or 12 months. These bookings included films that had not yet been screened or even produced. This system is still on usage in the modern-day television sector. Local exhibitors had to take average American films so as to access the few top box office hits. Australian producers felt that their films were being diminished in the market. In 1931, this dominance was ‘made formal’ when Fox Film Company acquired a majority stake in Hoyts, the largest cinema chain in Australia at that time. Paramount and MGM also acquired their own first-run cinemas in the years that followed. In 1945, the British Rank acquired 50% stake in Greater Union and with that foreign dominance of the film industry was complete. Australian films mainly focussed on the local market since the foreign market was elusive. The Empire Quota introduced in 1927 in Britain, gave Australian films quota status. Foreign films had to pay to 75% tax on their revenues. This limited the dominating effect of American films in the British film industry. The Act that gave rise to the quota amendment was in 1938 and the quota status of Australian films withdrawn. This dealt a huge blow to the Australian film industry. The arrival of sound in film production was a positive for audiences but introduced near prohibitive costs on local Australian production. The Depression also led to the decline in local production. These two factors together almost led to the collapse of the local film industry. However, the industry re-emerged between depression and the Second World War. It included independent film makers like Chauvel and studios like National Studios, Cinesound and Efftee productions which followed the Hollywood studio system. Cinesound was the most successful of these studios. The management of the studio was under studio Ken Hall. Cinesound’s first production, On Our Selection (1932) was a big hit. It brought high profits to the studio. All, but one of the films produced by Ken Hall made profits. Profits from the previous film financed the next. Cinesound also emulated Hollywood by employing a constant group of technicians and actors. Ken Hall ensured that other producers had experienced technicians, adequate equipment and studio space. However, this support for feature production was mostly dependent on the goodwill of the managing director of Greater Union, its parent company. At the inception of Cinesound Stuart Doyle was the managing director of Greater Union. He was a risk taker and was ready to take a risk on film production. Doyle's place handed to a risk-averse manager who was keen on investing in real estate than in film production. The Second World War came with a decline in film production. This was mainly due to diversion of resources for propaganda and news and also a film stock shortage. Many talented actors and technicians also joined the armed forces(Anon., 2013). This halted film production during the war. After the war, film production stagnated. In the fifties and sixties, foreign productions and co-productions took the significant share of the industry. Local production over these years was mostly constituted by newsreels, television commercials and documentaries. The huge success of Kelly Gang inspired more production on lawbreakers defying police. However, in 1914 the NSW police department placed a ban on bush-ranging films. This void was filled by American westerns and denied the feature film industry a very lucrative and successful genre. This ban was effective until after the Second World War. The industry after that still had to deal with the Commonwealth censor which affected its success. Revision of the censorship regulations in 1926 added an extra requirement: that the films produced should not contain any material that is likely to be prejudicial or detrimental to Australia’s Commonwealth(Michalk, 1981). The Governor-General also prohibited the export of films that touched on the drought of 1920 and the police strike riots and mouse plague of 1923. They also claimed that the censorship invoked moral criteria rather than just the criteria the censorship stated. They also protested that the censor had the ability of removing scenes from export films though it could not prevent Audiences in Australia from watching them. Two inquiries were formed in 1927, and 1934 to highlight the problems that local film production faced. One of the primary issues was that both state and federal governments were unable to act on these problems. The main problems as noted from the inquiries were unfair business practices and the high number of American films being shown locally. The agenda items for the 1927 inquiry (the Royal Commission into the Moving Picture Industry) were taxation, censorship, film quotas and import duties. The ‘Combine’ was widely criticized for not giving Australian producers a level playing field. Australasian Films however responded by saying they could not release low quality films (referring to locally produced films). They added that America was not to blame; Australia allowed America to do what it was doing. The commission failed to prove that the American film industry had undue advantage over the local film production. It took 50 years down the line for the Tariff Board Inquiry in 1972 substantiate these claims. This inquiry discovered that the local distribution and exhibition network was an extension of foreign film production. The Royal Commission in 1927 recommended an upper limit of 12 months for all exhibitor-distributor contracts, a 5% rejection clause to be included in all contracts, a 5% quota for all Empire (non-Australian) films which would rise to 10% and 15% in the second and third years respectively. Many players in the distribution sector opposed the quota system on the grounds that it simply would not work. The government doubted its constitutional powers thus it did not proceed with the recommendations. This fear of intervention, it is believed, propelled renewed interest in local film production. The primary players in this were Union Theatres and Australasian Films which were involved in the Master Picture Series and later on the Cinesound studio from 1932. F. W. Marks, who had also headed the 1927 inquiry, headed the 1934 inquiry into the film industry. The items on the agenda included an Australian Film quota, a policy that was deemed to have saved the British Film industry from collapse. Other items on the agenda were the ‘block’ and ‘blind’ bookings. The central recommendation by the inquiry was a nationwide introduction of an Australian film quota. It recommended that NSW write up legislation to that effect and later other states follow suit. This legislation came into effect in October 1935. Local production began growing as local producers anticipated its implementation. The legislation that was put in place in 1935 was that the quota for Australian films would be 20-25 in the first year, which was double the existing level. In the next five years, this amount would rise to 60. American distributors were compelled to finance local film production if none could be bought in the market. Foreign distributors lobbied aggressively terming the move as unconstitutional. Motion Picture Distributors at one point threatened to withdraw from NSW and the entire Australia. The British film industry was also against this move. The term ‘acquire’ as used in the legislation aroused a lot of controversy. Distributors refuted the fact that they were obliged to produce or invest locally in the case of any shortfall. All these events piled pressure on the NSW government, and in 1937, it amended the legislation so as not to compel distributors to take part in the production. It issued partial and full exemptions to the distributors(Dennis, 1993). Similar quota legislation was passed in Victoria, but it was never proclaimed. This led to Efftee studios closing shop. The film quota proposal eventually became unsuccessful for two reasons: the inability of government to provide finance and low cost studios and resistance by foreign distributors. By the late 1930s, the quota legislation was not being practised. Other initiatives that were put in place by the government to try and solve the issues facing the film industry were a 5% tax on gross receipts from theatres and a 12.5% tax on purchases of imported films. The central intention of the 5% tax was to have a piece of the profits that were flowing from Australia to America as a result of American films being screened in Australian theatres. These initiatives were defeated by the exhibitors’ campaigns against them albeit a few successes. In 1939, the NSW government provided minor financial support by guaranteeing bank overdrafts for approved producers. This reduced the cost of four productions by local producers. The other success was the creation of the Australian National Film Board by the Commonwealth in 1945. This board was named the Commonwealth Film Unit and later it was known as Film Australia. Its main aim was to produce documentaries. Several commonwealth and state departments also developed production facilities. Unfortunately, meaningful government support for the film industry only came in the 1970s. In the 1970s, the local film industry witnessed massive expansion following the introduction of comprehensive government support. Government support began in 1970 with the Australian Film Development Corporation (AFDC) and in 1973 with Australian Film, Television and Radio School (AFTRS). The Australian Film Commission replaced the Australian Film Development Corporation in 1975. Other measures that the government took in the 1970s included establishing the Film Finance Corporation and introducing 10BA concessions. Other non-governmental factors that led to the development of the modern local film industry included the entry of the Village chain in the sixties(Michalk, 1981). This broke the Hoyts and Greater Union duopoly and brought about some level of competition in the industry. Eventually, however, Greater Union and Village developed cross ownerships in both distribution and exhibition. The two firms were also involved in joint ventures together. In 1972, the Tariff Board inquiry was instituted. It recommended a thorough restructuring of the film industry involving production, distribution and exhibition. Pressure was piled on distributors to invest in local film production. Hoyts and Greater Union also assumed Australian ownership in the early 1980s. However, foreign interests acquired shares in Hoyts later. Recent entries of distributors and exhibitors like Dendy and Palace has also improved the local film industry. A 1998 report commissioned by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) reported that there was a higher concentration of film distribution in Australia compared to Japan, America and most European countries. The major distributors imposed strict conditions on exhibitors because distributors had access to American studio output and the fact that exhibitors relied heavily on distributors. These conditions, the report claimed disadvantaged smaller distributors. At present, Australian film makers have worldwide recognition. Australian actors, writers and producers are also highly sought after. Over the past few years, Australia has developed considerable reputation in post-production processes, which include sound and visual special effects, editing and compositing. In the 1996-1997 year, the Australian film and television production industry generated more than 1.6 billion dollars. It also attracted 266 million dollars from foreign film companies to finance production in the country. During the same period, the industry employed more than 9,000 people. International studios on the Gold Coast and in Sidney represent more than 100 million dollars in investment. The construction, communication and tourism industries also benefit immensely from the film industry. The Australian film industry, as with other industries is undergoing transformation mainly driven by innovation and new technology. There is high reliance on high-performance communication and computing. More services are online, and production equipment are fast becoming digital. Products now rely on intellectual capital as opposed to the manipulation of materials and physical resources. The Australian film industry has showcased its ability to embrace new ideas and use them in film making. Australia has also made innovations of its own which have led to Award-winning films. ‘The Matrix’, for example, was produced at Fox Studios Australia and managed to bag Oscars for visual and sound effects. Despite this huge success, the Australian film industry still faces many hurdles and challenges. Most of the firms in the film industry are small. They struggle to survive. The industry is also diverse and multifaceted. This makes it challenging to take a single approach at solving problems. Intense competition among post-production firms primarily in the sounds and visual effects sector is also hurting the industry. Some large international studio has also opened branches in Australia. These large studios are well-funded and thus there is a general concern that the industry is becoming polarised. Great Australian or international productions had sufficient funds, whereas local production is dwindling due to lack of financial support. Another major impediment is the prohibitive cost or difficulties in accessing high-bandwidth telecommunications capacity. Such capacity is necessary for the transfer of the industry’s knowledge and products. The costs of high-bandwidth telecommunications are significantly higher in Australia than in foreign countries, and this had a negative impact on the development of the Australian film industry. Piracy is also a significant challenge that industry players the world over have to tackle(Bulbeck, 2013). At this year’s Australian International Movie Convention held in Sydney, the new arts minister George Brandis cited piracy as one of the primary impediments to success of the industry. He reaffirmed the government’s support in enforcing piracy laws but also challenged the industry players to take the bull by its horns. The government could not solely be relied on to tackle the issue of piracy. Other challenges that have affected the industry include the rising value of the Australian Dollar compared to other world currencies and the increasing number of tax barriers for Australian productions in foreign markets. These incentives had attracted the production of high-budget films in Australia. The producer offset supported the production of 115 feature films since its inception. This translates to 429 million dollars in support. This has increased the profitability of local film production The future of the Australian film industry should be focused on embracing modern technology in the industry, developing creative talents and a more responsive, flexible and competitive communications infrastructure. There should also be cooperation among the industry players to develop the industry and reduce unfair competition to boost local production. Finally, the government should support more local production and put in place legislation that will attract foreign direct investment in the Australian film industry. References Andresgtm, 2013. Is There A Crisis in the Australian Film Industry?. Accessed 17 October 2013at: http://www.studymode.com/course-notes/Is-There-a-Crisis-In-The-1064913.html Anon., 2000. Innovation in the Australian Film Industry. Accessed 17 October 2013athttp://www.innovation.gov.au/Science/PMSEIC/Documents/InnovationInAustralianFilmIndustry.pdf Anon., 2005. The crisis the Australian film industry refuses to see. [Online] Accessed 17 October 2013, at: www.theage.com.au/news/Opinion/The-crisis-the-Australian-film-industry-refuses-to-see/2005/02/06/1107625057175.html. Anon., 2013. Australia Competition and Consumer Organisation. [Online] Accessed 15 October 2013 athttp://www.accc.gov.au/ Anon., 2013. Australian Film Industry Overview. [Online] Available at: Australian Film Commission[Accessed 16 October 2013]. Bulbeck, P., 2013. Piracy Among Hot Topics Addressed at Australian International Movie Convention.Accessed 17 October 2013 at: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/piracy-hot-topics-addressed-at-648323b Craven, P., 2006. Has the Australian film industry lost its way?. Society Cut, May, pp. 20-32. Dennis, J., 1993. Aotearoa and the sentimental strine : making films in Australia & New Zealand in the silent period. Wellington: Aotearoa. George, K., 1980. Australian film, the inside story. Sydney: Summit Books. Michalk, D. L., 1981. A Review of the Australian Film Industry–Past and Present. Journal of Popular Film and Television, 8(4), pp. 41-48. Read More