| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

Hon D A Highet

Page history last edited by David Lindsay 3 years, 9 months ago

 

Thank you for your warm introductory remarks. I would like to take this opportunity of congratulating your Federation on another year of very successful activity. It has been a busy year for everyone interested and involved in films. The activities of your member societies have continued to expand with the growth in membership and this I believe, is a very heartening sign for film culture in general.

 

It has also been a busy year for Government - both for myself as Minister and for my department. The introduction of the new act on April the first, last year has, I believe, made the censorship process more realistic in relation to attitudes prevalent in our communities today.


It has, I am happy to be able to say, also been a busy year for our feature film makers with four feature films on release or in the can. Hopefully, this burst of activity can be sustained, to some extent through the vork of the interim film commission and the permanent commission, which will be established this year as soon as I can bring a bill before the House.


On the commercial front, I believe that business has not been as good as many exhibitors would have wished. This is due in part I imagine to the ever increasing number of colour television sets and perhaps also to the large number of movies that have been shown on television. I understand the movie houses in smaller locations have been particularly hard hit.

 

However, we have seen some interesting developments in this area. In Christchurch for example an arts cinema will be opening in March in the new arts centre showing a restricted range of films, and in Otago vie have the situation of a private radio station buying two existing cinemas. I am sure vie will all watch with interest the fortunes of these two ventures.


There are still some teething problems in the display of the censor's classification in cinemas, there are a few problems in the licensing area, and the film commission will require legislation this year. With all the recent changes and developments in the various facets of the film industry I am finding that as Minister for the Arts or Minister of Internal Affairs, depending on the circumstances, I am becoming much more deeply involved in films generally.


I think this is a reflection of the increasingly important position that film is beginning to occupy relative to the other art forms. It is also a reflection of the developing public interest in film, and particularly New Zealand-made films.

 

Today I want to speak primarily about film production but I will also comment on aspects of distribution, exhibition  and censorship as constraints on that process. You will all no doubt be aware that in November last year the Government established an interim film commission. Its terms of reference required it to advise on development policies for the industry and on the establishment of a permanent commission.


There were two main reasons for establishing the Commission. First, New Zealand has a long tradition of film–making – and of people who have been deeply committed to this art. It is perhaps surprising, given-the small size of our country, and the relative lack of importance accorded the arts in the process of national development. People have been and are willing to make great sacrifices to make films. If anyone wanted to make a fortune he would not be in this business.

 

In 1972 when the National Development Sector Council did a survey there were 35 production companies, whereas I understand according to the most recent estimates we now have about 60. And of course we have the National Film Unit which has always been a significant force in the New Zealand scene both in terms of production and facilities. It is interesting to compare the New Zealand situation with, for example, South Australia where when the South Australian Film Corporation was first established there were only four very minor production companies.

 

However, mere numbers can be misleading. No matter how many like to call themselves film–makers this is to no avail if work in the industry - if a fragmented collection of people and facilities can be called an industry – is intermittent and insufficient.

 

Despite the problem, and I have been talking about the problems to inject a note of realism into the current situation – the industry has had many notable achievements. I am not just referring to the more visible expressions of these achievements - Sleeping Dogs, Wild Man, Off The Edge and expectantly Solo!. I am also talking about the number of good films made over many years, especially in the documentary area.


Of course most film makers dream of eventually making their feature film, but I do not believe that the making of films, even some successful ones, can adequately compensate for the establishment of a sound industry. Therefore one of the first objectives must be to ensure we have an on–going industry and that the recent burst of activity was not a mere flash in the pan.

 

The second reason for establishing a film commission is that films are a very important ingredient of our cultural diet. Film is a most pervasive medium and it seems to be the one that most younger people react to and are influenced by, whether in the cinema or on the television set.

It is also important culturally because it is a means of redressing the vast cultural imbalance which we have suffered in our film diet by the almost total concentration on imported films. This means that we have almost always had a potent expression of artistic values, accents and language that are not our own. This has helped to breed a form of cultural colonialisation - a passive cultural takeover of the mind and unconscious surrending of independence.


I am not trying to establish New Zealand as an artistic island fortress that is impossible in today's global village especially in film, which so often these days crosses national barriers. But what I am looking for is something with which New Zealanders can identify and say 'this is ours' and 'yes this is how we are'.

Film also utilises all the traditional art skills as well as much technical expertise to produce the completed physical form. For all these reasons it is important - far more important than one would have assumed from the neglect from which film has suffered especially in terms of patronage over the years.

 

Now I know that this is all very well and sounds good in theory but the realities of the film world are perhaps more constraining than in any other area of the arts. You will know for example from your own activities about the difficulties of marketing certain films. In fact the very existence of film societies illustrates the problems of showing a complete range of films in the limited New Zealand market.

Costs of course are an ever–present problem. For a New Zealand produced film to make money it must gross at the box–office three to five times what it costs to make. Most films shown in New Zealand apart from exceptions such as Rocky, Star Wars and Jaws would not gross anything like the amount necessary to cover production costs of even a fairly modest New Zealand-made film.

 

This leaves the New Zealand producer with two alternatives. One is to make a very cheap movie which hopefully will return its costs at home. The second is to make a more expensive movie which can compete and sell well overseas. This is a problem which is concerning Australia, Canada and other countries attempting to establish an indigenous industry in the face of the commercial power of the major producers, and it is one which I know the Film Commission is already considering.

Selling overseas is an immensely difficult and expensive business. The Australians who have been in the business a few years now, have not achieved a great measure of success. There is also the inherent danger that in trying to sell overseas, national cultural objectives are compromised along the way. I have painted this rather gloomy picture because I want to dispell any romantic ideas that making a feature film is easy, or is going to make the producer a fortune.

 

The film commission has been established not to perpetuate the myth of a boom, but to help resolve the problems in the fledgling industry. I would far rather see activity sustained even at a somewhat restricted level, than have erratic bursts which artifically stimulate the industry and eventually leave new recruits to the industry desparately looking for work.

I believe the film commission will have a difficult task in attaining both the cultural and economic goals I have outlined and I shall be looking forward with interest to hearing Mr Sheat's policy towards these ends. Apart from the constraints of economy and the market, the New Zealand film producer must also run a gamut of other mainly institutional constraints.

 

One of these areas which hopefully is no longer a real constraint is that of censorship. I personally believe that every society must have some form of censorship to protect those whose opinions are still at a formative stage and who are vulnerable to expressions of opinion which might be too sophisticated or too crude for them to absorb. However I do feel that the censorship provisions in the new act reflect the views of the majority of New Zealanders.

 

I still, of course, receive many letters from people coriiplaining about so called 'liberal standards'. Most of these letters are of the 'form' type. In general their campaigns do not curry much favour with me. As I explain in response to the better-argued and more rational letters, the decisions taken by the Censor based on the guidelines in the act meet with approval from most New, Zealanders. It is inevitable that for some he will have gone too far - for others, not far enough.

 

I firmly believe that the film societies are an essential component of our film exhibiting system. They provide the means for film-lovers to see a range of films that could never otherwise be available given our restrictions of small population, and hence limited commercial outlets. I hope that the censorship provisions are sufficiently flexible to allow your societies to show films of significance to your members.

To return to my original theme - it has been a busy year and it shows no signs of abating. I am involved at present in proposals to allow the introduction of drive-in cinemas on a trial basis. I can forsee problems arising in the respective roles of the public and private sectors of the film production industry. The role of the Film Unit for example is I believe, critical to the future of the industry.


Television too must examine its position in the burgeoning industry. An immense public subsidy is a cushion which must not be used to smother the small independent industry. The power of television as a producer is equal to the power of television as an exhibitor. Films screened on television have an immediate impact on the cinema industry. I notice that in Europe the television channels are restricted in the number of feature films they can screen.


I look upon all these problems as providing a most worthwhile challenge. I am confident that we will achieve a well-ordered and fully-employed industry, and building on the interest generated within the film societies a community aivare of film as an important cultural medium.


It now gives me very great pleasure to declare this conference officially open.

 

- Victoria University, Saturday 18 February 1978

 

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.