Northern Alliance - BFI

More documents

Recommendations

Info

money over the last three years, less than a quarter were directed by women. In terms of diversity, the results of the Digital Shorts programmes are particularly disappointing. The failure of Digital Shorts films produced outside the specialist schemes to achieve diversity targets appears to us to reflect the limitations of introducing targeted schemes; it is difficult to prove, but we believe the introduction of targeted schemes has given implicit permission for the generalist schemes to believe that diversity is being addressed somewhere else. We feel the answer is to place diversity in the mainstream, not to marginalise it, and so would recommend that the diversity targets are applied across all tiers of activity, with credible tracking in place to monitor performance. The existing providers of targeted schemes could be engaged in either providing advice and support to the UK Film Council‟s mainstream funds, or managing one of those mainstream funds themselves. In any event, although the involvement of minorities in short filmmaking is important, the extent of their involvement in the feature film industry is the most important measure to gauge the success or failure of the UK Film Council‟s activity. Recommendation: Efforts to promote diversity in short filmmaking should be redoubled especially among makers of Digital Shorts. The primary objective of the UK Film Council‟s support for short film - to develop feature film directors and not to subsidise short filmmaking activity per se - should apply equally to targeted schemes. The UK Film Council should continue discussions with the Department for Work and Pensions, to explore whether engagement as a director or producer of a UK Film Council backed film is automatically classed as paid work for the purposes of obtaining support under the Access to Work scheme. A similar dialogue should be brokered with HM Revenue and Customs, to ensure that there is clarity and equity in the application of national minimum wage legislation to short filmmaking activity. Page 48
Recommendation: The UK Film Council should lead the development of policy in areas affecting short filmmaking. For example, by promoting a dialogue with HM Revenue and Customs to ensure that an appropriate balance is struck between exploitation and volunteerism in complying with national minimum wage legislation, and by continuing to work to ensure the fullest possible use of the Department for Work and Pensions Access to Work scheme designed to help disabled people undertake work. The management of programmes: partners and projects In section 4.5, we found that, while the challenge of managing so much activity across the UK should not be understated, there appear to be areas where control is exercised too tightly, or there is insufficient management by exception, and other areas where leadership is absent. At present the makers of a short film might obtain financial support from the UK Film Council‟s budgets in a number of ways, for instance by combining NCF finance with RIFE funding or support from the Diversity Unit. We believe this may reduce the focus on the core objective (new feature directors) and does not lend itself to clear, purposeful management of strategic partners. Recommendation: All of the UK Film Council‟s financial support for short film production should be channelled through a single contractual relationship. RIFE and NCF support should not be mixed, and either UK Partnerships or the NCF should take lead responsibility for managing the application and use of funds advanced to the National and Regional Screen Agencies. If the UK Film Council‟s support for short filmmaking in the UK‟s regions and nations was folded into its broader support for film in those nations and regions, it could facilitate the contextualisation of that support with other activity to support the emergence and development of local filmmakers. It would also allow the NCF to focus on providing support for the better quality short filmmaking, and promote an objective, customer/supplier relationship between the lower and upper tier programmes. In any event, whichever unit took lead responsibility for managing the relationships, this would not preclude both working together to ensure the agencies delivered against their agreed objectives. The procedures adopted to contract and manage the UK Film Council‟s investment in short film appear to be overly influenced by the custom and practice of investment in Page 49
Page 1 and 2: Northern Alliance Review of short f
Page 3 and 4: Appendices I Case studies 56 II Def
Page 5 and 6: 1. Executive summary 1.1 Introducti
Page 7 and 8: support a single disabled filmmaker
Page 9 and 10: emerge as a result of the structure
Page 11 and 12: target audience consists of the var
Page 13 and 14: While our interviewees had sympathy
Page 15 and 16: 3.2 The UK Film Council‟s strateg
Page 17 and 18: Table 2: Summary of the NCF‟s pro
Page 19 and 20: All of the entities in the table ab
Page 21 and 22: Table 4: Recent applicants and awar
Page 23 and 24: Table 5: Strategic partners‟ prio
Page 25 and 26: There is a need to ground all futur
Page 27 and 28: Table 8: Success and its cost, from
Page 29 and 30: Shorts appears relatively efficient
Page 31 and 32: As noted in section 4.2 above, the
Page 33 and 34: Given that Cinema Extreme positions
Page 35 and 36: Figures for the Digital Shorts prog
Page 37 and 38: “We have no brief to work towards
Page 39 and 40: 4.5.2. Revenues Table 14: Scheme re
Page 41 and 42: Others were more critical, openly q
Page 43 and 44: 4.7 Support for showcasing films at
Page 45 and 46: The provision of culturally signifi
Page 47: less than a quarter of the cost of
Page 51 and 52: emove the perceived element of comm
Page 53 and 54: As part of our review we checked th
Page 55 and 56: films produced in the UK. We would
Page 57 and 58: million in only a few weeks. I was
Page 59 and 60: That dedication and persistence has
Page 61 and 62: Appendix II Definitions Exactly wha
Page 63 and 64: Directors, started in 1989 and prod
Page 65 and 66: Appendix IV Why short films are mad
Page 67 and 68: Appendix V The public value of shor
Page 69 and 70: Social networking sites, such as Be
Page 71 and 72: Investment in the production of sho
Page 73 and 74: Agency Scheme Number of shorts Budg
Page 75 and 76: Appendix VIII Overview of the UK Fi
Page 77 and 78: Some rules, such as the requirement
Page 79 and 80: The future The short film schemes h
Page 81 and 82: Appendix XI Short film internationa
Page 83 and 84: Beyond Europe 1: New Zealand Film C
Page 85 and 86: Appendix XII Data availability Summ
Page 87 and 88: it subject to loss because of staff
Page 89 and 90: Appendix XIII Platforms and audienc
Page 91 and 92: “There isn‟t much of an audienc
Page 93 and 94: Appendix XV Access and diversity Pa
Page 95 and 96: Appendix XVI Business affairs Short
Page 97 and 98: (b) VAT is paid on awards and provi
Page 99 and 100:
Completion Fund, and from the Natio
Page 101 and 102:
The training scheme is best known f
Page 103 and 104:
Appendix XVIII The role of film fes
Page 105 and 106:
Appendix XIX List of interviewees O
Page 107 and 108:
Appendix XX Sample survey questionn
Page 109 and 110:
3. Measuring success How does your
Page 111 and 112:
4B. Festival screenings of short fi
Page 113 and 114:
4E. Revenue generated: Please provi
Page 115 and 116:
4H.Of the above, how many have subs
Page 117 and 118:
'Developing exceptional talent' and
Page 119 and 120:
for making and reporting distributi
Page 121 and 122:
Of the filmmakers supported by resp
Page 123 and 124:
Filmmaker activity On average, each
Page 125:
Appendix XXII Northern Alliance Nor
show all

Northern Alliance - BFI

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?