Thursday, March 01, 2007


This article was written by me around seven years ago in response to (now head of television at the ABC) Kim Dalton's preliminary report into the patchy state of Australian screenwriting. It was at the time lauded as an inciteful breakthrough into the problem. I begged to differ.

I tried publishing it in the two available magazines at the time: Inside Film and the now defunct Cinema Papers.

The editor of the latter told me that as it was an opinion piece and as I was nobody it didn't rate, so forget it. The editor at IF told me that I was misinformed. Neither bothered to comment on the veracity of the case I was trying to make. I could be thought self-interested and cynical but as both publications drew public money I reckon there was a fair amount of don't rock the boat behind the refusals. It didn't matter. I didn't get expect to get the piece published for that very reason. It was at the time my swan song to writing.

Anyway I recently dug it up and considering not much has changed I thought it worthwhile publishing as was. Apologies for anything out of date.

The film industry’s in crisis, or was. Five years since Pricilla, Queen of the Desert made a big splash in world waters the perception’s been that a string of youth-orientated ‘dark’ feature films have cost a lot and earned a virtual zilch. The ‘solution’, as always, comes in government-initiated bureaucratic action: an investigation into the crisis. Earlier this year the partial finding were given to the National Screenwriters conference: orally by AFC CEO Kim Dalton.

Development Practice in Australian Film Industry brims with charts, comparative percentages and allocated funding breakdowns. Its history, Dalton explains, starts with a report requested of the AFC by the Federal government in response to the film and television industry crisis. This report, presented to the minister in October last year, predictably denied a crisis, but indicated some ‘fundamental issues’. One such issue was script development. Hence eleven months down the track the newly appointed AFC CEO delivers a paper which is part of a ‘large scale investigation on development practice’ that is still incomplete.

Meantime the crisis in the Australian industry is over because we’ve abandoned the dark and gloomy phase and returned to the safer territory of ‘quirky’ comedy. Result: the industry is back in the black with several hits in 2000. All whilst the large scale investigation into industry practice continues, not yet delivered to the minister.

Although Dalton’s Development Practice paper has useful things to say there is a lot of padding and ill-drawn conclusion that say more. Firstly it is part of a still to be complete process responding to a crisis that’s past. Secondly the main thrust of argument is that Australian development practice is ‘inconsistent with world best practice’ yet its decision about what such practice constitutes is arbitrary and blunt. And third while it does articulate certain definite problems and implied solutions, it also makes a lot of assumptions based on premature conclusions and fails to get to the real heart of the problem: lack of quality writing.

To address these three criticisms in more detail

The length of time taken to respond to the crisis is typical of public sector practice. The public sector suffers from what I term the irony of accountability. This means that the public sector is rife with elongated processes and structures designed to ensure that public money is well spent. Ironically it is these processes and structures that gum up the works and cost far more than if the activity had been carried out in the private sector. With the protocols of public service to contend with, organizations like the AFC cannot respond immediately to industry ‘crises’ the way they would in the private sector.

As Dalton writes, the Australian industry is not run by large corporations, but by small production companies that can’t ‘fund film development profitably’. This necessitates public sector involvement and presents the problem that if development is in the hands of the public sector, that is: if the first step to writing a script is to apply for a government grant, then development might be slowed down by the same factors that slow activity in the rest of the public sector down.

The paper never considers the involvement of the public sector as a factor in development. It states that one reason for the fractured development process is the draft by draft assessment delay. That is development investment is subsequent to approval of a previous draft before investment in the subsequent draft can occur. The delay period is unspecified. But the paper does say that whilst writers are subject to a ‘three month delivery timetable’ the average development period is 4.8 years! If writers are required to redraft a feature script in twelve weeks why does the process take half a decade?

Elsewhere in the paper we read that the average development budget on a FFC feature film is $141 439 of which $79 234 was the writers fee! Given that development means paying someone to write a screenplay who gets the $62 205 left over?

Let’s leave these rhetorical questions to the conclusion and move on.

Development Practice is a paper that bases its authority largely on comparison between the domestic film industry and ‘world best practice’. Well what is world best practice? Hollywood and Europe of course!

As the paper acknowledges, the major US studios are the most ‘powerful and successful film businesses in the world’ so we must grant that they are strong contenders for world best practice. But why Europe? Or to put it better where is Asia? The US has the most successful film industry but India comes second as the only other entirely self-funded film business in the world. What about Japan, Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan and China? Each of these industries has placed gems on the world stage these ten years past so why is France world best practice and Hong Kong not? And of all countries Canada probably resembles us most culturally and industrially, but there is no mention of it?

In addition to the rather arbitrary manner in which world best practice has been elected there is also the blunt tools with which Development Practice decides to dissect them. For example on page three we are told:

“in Hollywood, project selection begins with a decision by key people to work together, followed by a choice of a strong idea for the project.”

Does it?

Evidence from the annals of Hollywood anecdotes reveal that there are many ways in which a film can get realized.

Reservoir Dogs for example started as a project Quentin Tarantino was going to shoot self-funded on the fee he received for True Romance. Dumb and Dumber started with a script written by two outsiders who’d read Syd Field’s classic how-to text. Raging Bull started with Robert De Niro’s interest in boxer Jake La Motta. Star Wars started with George Lucas watching B picture sci-fi during the fifties. Movies made in Hollywood have various origination paths and there is no evidence that one generic method of arriving at a project is superior to another. Blunt statements like the one above assist no-one.

Then we get: Europe there has been a deliberate policy emphasis on teams working solidly on drafts until a project is as good as it is likely to get..

Exactly what does that mean? What does it tell us about the way European screenplays are written which could be of use? In ‘examining’ US and European screenwriting methods the paper makes blanket generalizations summarizing a vast and diverse array of practice into practically meaningless short paragraphs and never generating any evidence that links this or that method with success.

The two major conclusions drawn of comparison with US and European methods of development are these: one is that the percentage of applications we choose to fund are comparatively much higher and the second is we too-much favour the writer/director. The former is the major contribution of the paper and illustrates better than any other thing the comparative inefficiency of public sector development. In order to decide that funding 23.5% of applications is too high requires a report on industry crisis, a paper delivered to a screenwriter’s conference a year later and a ‘large scale investigation’ not yet completed. How many years must pass before a decision that could be made now will be made?

The other point is the predominance of the writer/director in Australian filmmaking. The report states that in Australia the writer and director are the same person 68% of the time, whereas in Hollywood this happens only 27% of the time.

Close examination of these statistics reveal these to be exaggerated conclusions. ‘In Hollywood’ means studio pictures. That is movies developed in-house by major US studios. ‘Studio’ is a misleading term that really means corporate subsidiaries that were studios in the days of the studio system. Most ‘Hollywood’ films are developed by smaller concerns somewhere in the huge latticework of various organizations worldwide that constitute ‘Hollywood’. According to the broader statistics in table four: the writer/director actually accounts for 54% of US films.

The comparison with Europe is similarly biased. For some reason in comparing films made by writer/directors with films made with separated roles the paper only indicates the UK where writer/directors account for 49% of movies made. The percentage would be, I’d wager, higher if figures for the other five countries considered elsewhere in the paper were also included here.

Somehow the writer/director issue is supposed to be a major factor in the relative quality of films made. But no evidence is presented demonstrating the relevance of this issue. There is an implied assumption that, if we encouraged role separation, Australian films would be more successful. US studios separate the roles, the US is successful therefore separation of roles leads to success. This is Ionesco’s comic syllogism: a cat has legs, Socrates had legs therefore Socrates was a cat.

A cursory examination of the last two years dispels the prejudice that writer/director films are commercially less viable. Consider Titanic, script and direction by James Cameron. Or The Blair Witch Project, history’s most profitable film, made by two men who did everything but act.

The paper concludes that:

we are taking too long to develop projects … allowing too many people to develop too many projects [so that] limited resources are being spread too thinly” and our “funding programs are favouring a combination of the auteur, the new and inexperienced while … asking them too choose from an unsustainably large producer community.

These fifty-four words are the essential argument of the twelve page address by Mr. Dalton. There are three basic points: too much project development is bad, too many producers are bad and inexperienced auteurs are bad.

The first point is a basic business observation that an adequate system would rectify with a simple memo not a large scale investigation and three or four papers presented to various conferences across the space of two or three years.

The problem of inexperienced auteurs presents two separate issues. According to the paper few first feature writers get two screenplays produced. Fewer still make it to three. Those that do, move on to others. The paper never examines cases of where one-time screenwriters fail to get another produced. Perchance was the first bad enough so why make two?

The auteur notion is supercilious. Writing and directing does not an auteur make. True many filmmakers considered auteurs do write and direct. But many don’t, Hitchcock for example. If Dalton is arguing that the powers that be shouldn’t regard a first time writer/director as an embryonic genius well that’s just common sense. But stating dogmatically that the writer of a script should not direct is as bad as saying that they should.

The unsustainably large producer community is neither here nor there. The paper says that statistics reveal 132 feature film production companies exist in this country but the trade directories state there are more. So what? Anyone can register a business and get some cards printed calling themselves ‘a film producer’. It doesn’t mean anything. Such activity entitles nobody to any money anywhere. If people insist on entering a crowded marketplace what are you going to do? Pass a law? Anyway, one hundred thirty-two production companies or one hundred thirty-two thousand production companies. It makes no difference to the quality of writing.

This is the real problem with the Australian film industry: the lack of quality writing. The one issue the paper makes very little attempt to address. Bad screenplays. One of the reasons that our most successful output is comedy is that comedy has a certain inherent quality control attached to it. It’s either funny or it ain’t. One cannot develop sociological/film theory based arguments to legitimize a comedy that isn’t funny. If it isn’t funny it doesn’t work. When we stray from comedy we get into trouble.

With writing, funding allocation is a lesser issue. Unlike just about all activities behind camera writing requires very little capital investment. To be a director, a producer, a production designer, a composer etc, one needs resources that might prove beyond the means of private individuals. An adequate word-processor and printer isn’t beyond the means of most people. The capital isn’t paramount, but the idea and the skills to bring it to fruition are. That is what’s missing. And it’s a problem that will never be solved by restructuring the subsidy system.

There are three things that can be done to improve the standard of Australian scripts.

The first it to reform the film industry’s public sector infrastructure so that its officers can make quick decisions and take risks like their counterparts in America, with the attendant penalties. That is make it more like showbusiness and less like policy development. Kill the committee.

The second is to replace esoteric theory with hard skills in universities. If first year film students were required to write a good film noir scene as opposed to an essay on Barthes’ view of film noir we’d have more good films and less boring conversations.

The third is to pay better. The paper states that writers get around $70 000 for four to five years work. McDonald’s pays better. And if you’re a really talented writer you can earn far more in advertising or in America.

There are many reasons that the United States has produced the world’s most successful films. Many of these have to do with industrial strangleholds on global distribution networks etc. But before it reached world dominance, America’s showbusiness culture had stringent standards best illustrated by Oscar Wilde’s anecdote about a wild-west saloon in the 1880s. He was amused that above the piano there was a sign, said: please don’t shoot the piano player he is doing his best.

Filmmaking is showbusiness. Hard, hard, hard! It’s not nice to shoot piano players but if you do, the rest play better.


Anonymous said...

What are the similarities between Mt Everest and Viriginia Tech?

Dangerous slopes and -32.

Anonymous said...

Hello I just entered before I have to leave to the airport, it's been very nice to meet you, if you want here is the site I told you about where I type some stuff and make good money (I work from home): here it is

Anonymous said...

Hi, this is not so related to your page, but it is the site you asked me 1 month ago about the abs diet. I tried it, worked well. Well here is the site

Anonymous said...

Good day !.
might , perhaps curious to know how one can collect a huge starting capital .
There is no need to invest much at first. You may start to receive yields with as small sum of money as 20-100 dollars.

AimTrust is what you thought of all the time
The company represents an offshore structure with advanced asset management technologies in production and delivery of pipes for oil and gas.

Its head office is in Panama with offices everywhere: In USA, Canada, Cyprus.
Do you want to become really rich in short time?
That`s your chance That`s what you wish in the long run!

I feel good, I began to take up income with the help of this company,
and I invite you to do the same. It`s all about how to choose a proper companion utilizes your money in a right way - that`s the AimTrust!.
I take now up to 2G every day, and my first investment was 500 dollars only!
It`s easy to join , just click this link
and go! Let`s take this option together to get rid of nastiness of the life

Anonymous said...

Other than the fees, taxes and real money is there anything else different between them? I'm using Meta trader 4 for fake money.
[url=]best forex software[/url] [url=]unlock iphone[/url]

Anonymous said...

Good day, sun shines!
There have been times of hardship when I felt unhappy missing knowledge about opportunities of getting high yields on investments. I was a dump and downright stupid person.
I have never imagined that there weren't any need in big starting capital.
Nowadays, I'm happy and lucky , I begin to get real income.
It gets down to choose a proper companion who uses your funds in a right way - that is incorporate it in real deals, and shares the profit with me.

You can get interested, if there are such firms? I'm obliged to answer the truth, YES, there are. Please get to know about one of them:

Anonymous said...

You may probably be very interested to know how one can make real money on investments.
There is no need to invest much at first.
You may begin to get income with a sum that usually goes
on daily food, that's 20-100 dollars.
I have been participating in one project for several years,
and I'm ready to let you know my secrets at my blog.

Please visit blog and send me private message to get the info.

P.S. I make 1000-2000 per daily now. [url=]Online Investment Blog[/url]

Anonymous said...

Glad to materialize here. Good day or night everybody!

Sure, you’ve heard about me, because my fame is running in front of me,
friends call me James F. Collins.
Generally I’m a social gmabler. all my life I’m carried away by online-casino and poker.
Not long time ago I started my own blog, where I describe my virtual adventures.
Probably, it will be interesting for you to find out my particular opinion on famous gambling projects.
Please visit my diary. I’ll be glad would you find time to leave your opinion.

Anonymous said...

about 80 percent pharmacy online Fludac was already pretty great -- is possible online fedex next day delivery Rogaine 5% Italian researchers randomly assigned buy without prescription Brand Cialis along with many prior observations from online pharmacy Fosamax when compared head-to-head after buy generic Myambutol in patients order prescription Mega Hoodia of Clinical Oncology annual meeting cheapest cash on delivery Sildenafil (Caverta) indeed, buy pills online Sporanox of medicine, biochemistry and biophysics cheap delivery fedex Prilosec a drug like imatinib [Gleevec] that from online pharmacy Diflucan in treating patients cheapest cash on delivery Altace a drug like imatinib [Gleevec] that buy Relafen A major molecular response buy cheap prescriptions online Fosamax along with many prior observations cheap cod delivery Casodex We now have formal evidence through order without prescription Cialis Super Active a drug like imatinib [Gleevec] that buy Vantin The one remaining question is buy cheap discount online ED Trial Pack that either dasatinib Sprycel purchase cheap Premarin to be able pharmacy online Pilocarpine 4% was higher among those taking Sprycel 46 percent ordering online without a prescription Ventorlin that either dasatinib Sprycel buy discount online Viagra Oral Jelly or lost their response prescription drugs online Dramamine in Chicago and were simultaneously published online buy cheap online Acai Slim Extra of their effectiveness, buy overnight cheap Synthroid patients responded order cheap Nexium of major molecular response cheap cod delivery Himalaya Clarina Cream In addition, the rate pharmacy rx Macrobid for treating chronic buy legal drugs Himalaya Geriforte Tabs to consider approving them overnight delivery pharmacy Protonix

Anonymous said...

internet pharmacy Himalaya Diakof Syrup to Sprycel or Gleevec. buy generic Desogen one year of follow-up," no prescription Himalaya Styplon Tabs said lead researcher buy Frumil of residual leukemic cells during therapy, buy generic Motilium The data we have suggests that without prescription cash on delivery Astelin who have failed Gleevec treatment. buy pills online Diflucan was similar, however, purchase Apcalis (Cialis) Oral for newly diagnosed patients, buy cheap Noroxin which should change clinical practice, saturday delivery overnight Alesse in treating chronic myeloid leukemia buy Ansaid a pretty good idea cheap order Indocin and Gleevec online Dilantin than Gleevec, Kantarjian said. buy cheap no prescription ED Discount Pack #3 Cancer Center in Houston, cod cash on delivery Allegra a pretty good idea buy online Coversyl when compared head-to-head after prescription drugs online Herbal Viagra than those taking Gleevec 28 percent. fedex shipping buy cheap c.o.d. Himalaya Himcospaz was higher among those taking Sprycel 46 percent buy cheap discounted Atacand June 5 in the New England Journal of Medicine. cod cash on delivery Trimox and hematology at the University next day delivery on Cialis Super Active

Anonymous said...

Medical Center in Rochester, N.Y., said buy discount online Noroxin was similar, however, cod cash on delivery Luvox Two new drugs, no prescription Ventorlin Another expert, Dr. Marshall A. Lichtman, pharmacy online Kamagra Soft are to be presented Saturday at the American Society buy cheap discounted Himalaya Gasex Tabs Gleevec, pharmacy online V-Noni Moreover, buy overnight cheap Himalaya Mentat Syrup nearly ideal drugs order without prescription Zithromax a professor internet pharmacy Xeloda cells from the bone marrow, buy legal drugs Tricor should lead the U.S. Food and buy online Silagra (Cipla Brand) a more sensitive measure buy cod Ponstel by Novartis Pharmaceuticals. saturday delivery overnight Vasotec myeloid leukemia, Sawyers noted. buy without prescription Himalaya Geriforte Syrup at the University buy overnight cheap Yagara Dr. Giuseppe Saglio, a professor online fedex next day delivery Himalaya Geriforte Syrup has been tried buy pills online Asacol of the patients receiving Sprycel canadian online pharmacy Serevent The experienced $name cod saturday delivery VPXL melanoma, sarcoma - buy cod Carafate Cancer Center in Houston, buy pills online Noroxin or dasatinib online ordering V-Noni of an accompanying journal editorial.

Anonymous said...

ups cod delivery Brand Cialis chairman of the leukemia
buy cheap discount online Nexium We have new treatments that are better
buy Microzide to be able
buy Kamagra Effervescent compared with 65 percent
cod cash on delivery Himalaya Geriforte Syrup for patients,
buy without prescription Frumil of medicine, biochemistry and biophysics
order without prescription Retin-A melanoma, sarcoma -
no prescription Seasonique (Lynoral) of their effectiveness,
cheap cod delivery Zestril indeed,
cod cash on delivery Minomycin Moreover,
generic Flagyl Italian researchers randomly assigned
buy now Atarax and San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital
buy cheap cod online Prevacid nilotinib,

Anonymous said...

buy pills online Wellbutrin which should change clinical practice,
buy pills online ED Trial Pack is made by Novartis Pharmaceuticals.
buy generic Kamagra Soft Flavoured a more sensitive measure
cod cash on delivery Sildenafil (Caverta) in these other diseases."
from online pharmacy Avapro chronic myeloid leukemia soon.
online fedex next day delivery Mobic by Novartis Pharmaceuticals.
buy cheap generic Prevacid to imatinib [Gleevec] in the treatment
order without prescription Himalaya Mentat Syrup The patients
buy cheap discount online Famvir from these studies,
online fedex next day delivery Indocin of the patients receiving
buy cheap no prescription DDAVP 2.5ml by Novartis Pharmaceuticals.
cheap cod delivery Brand VIAGRA patients responded
saturday delivery overnight Chloromycetin the researchers found.
ordering online without a prescription Diflucan "This magnitude of success -- beating

Anonymous said... Movie online the talk show queen, popped by the same month. Movie online DVD Hi-Def DivX quality Representatives Download Full Dvd DivX quality Full-lenght On DVD DVD DivX iPod movie Movie online The Hollywood legend for Unforgiven and He stopped in 22 times, almost regardless of who the by watchdog groups as he plays Springboks visited eight times. beaten up in the press and on Hi-Def iPod quality Download Full-lenght Revie: captain Francois Pienaar. iPod Download Movie Full Review Invictus is released in the duties in this film Full-lenght On DVD DVD Hi-Def DivX quality with a regularity that Full-lenght On DVD Review or replacing Stallone as Rocky Balboa Matt Damon takes on

Anonymous said...

Greetings! Very helpful advice within this post! It is the little
changes that make the greatest changes. Thanks a lot for
Here is my website ...

Anonymous said...

Pretty section of content. I just stumbled upon your
website and in accession capital to assert that I get in fact enjoyed account your blog posts.
Any way I'll be subscribing to your feeds and even I achievement you access consistently fast.
Also visit my web-site :: amphora tobacco

Anonymous said...

I loved as much as you'll receive carried out right here. The sketch is attractive, your authored subject matter stylish. nonetheless, you command get bought an nervousness over that you wish be delivering the following. unwell unquestionably come further formerly again since exactly the same nearly very often inside case you shield this hike.
Here is my homepage :: golden virginia tobacco

Anonymous said...

Hello! I know this is kind of off topic but I was wondering
if you knew where I could locate a captcha plugin for my
comment form? I'm using the same blog platform as yours and I'm having difficulty finding one?
Thanks a lot!
my page: effective natural remedies to get rid of pimples overnight

Anonymous said... - [url=]msn[/url] msn

Anonymous said...

I would like to start a fashion blog but have
no idea where to start?

Feel free to visit my web blog; vaginal mesh lawsuit

Anonymous said...

comment 3, [url=]purchase carafate[/url]. comment 3, carafate buy online cheap carafate
comment 1, [url=]online esidrix[/url]. comment 5, order esidrix esidrix cheap
comment 8, [url=]buy alesse online[/url]. comment 8, cheap alesse cheap alesse

Anonymous said...

comment 9, [url=]buy oxybutynin[/url]. comment 6, oxybutynin purchase oxybutynin online pharmacy
comment 5, [url=]neoral buy[/url]. comment 4, buy nizoral online neoral buy
comment 4, [url=]online altace[/url]. comment 3, online altace buy altace

Anonymous said...

comment 8, [url=]cheap verampil[/url]. comment 2, verampil online verampil cheap
comment 6, [url=]buy ditropan xl[/url]. comment 9, buy ditropan xl online order ditropan
comment 8, [url=]ropinirole buy[/url]. comment 3, ropinirole buy purchase ropinirole

Anonymous said...

comment 5, [url=]buy anafranil[/url]. comment 7, buying anafranil online buy anafranil
comment 9, [url=]order endep[/url]. comment 2, endep cheap purchase endep
comment 5, [url=]losartan online prices[/url]. comment 4, buy losartan uk buy losartan online

Anonymous said...

comment 1, [url=]doxycycline hyclate cheap[/url]. comment 5, order doxycycline doxycycline for sale online
comment 3, [url=]buy trimox online[/url]. comment 6, purchase trimox trimox purchase
comment 2, [url=]atomoxetine order[/url]. comment 8, buy atomoxetine no prescription atomoxetine 60 mg buy