Newly formed CCFM proposes im­ 9. to encourage the priority of employ­ The committee was formed to meet mediate remedy for lack of feature ment of Canadians and reciprocal almost on a weekly basis, unril the production. relationships with international present slow production situation is motion picture makers. rectified. Its members have been con­ scientiously coming together at Spence- Heated discussion followed the intro­ Thomas Productions (who offered duction of the above aims and objec­ temporary shelter to the Council), tives, since everyone had their own sometimes as often as twice a week. At the past two meetings of the viewpoint as to what is actually wrong Subcommittees were formed to deal Council of Canadian Filmmakers and what's to be done about it. Peter with specific issues, such as political (CCFM), there was quite a bit of excite­ Carter, Budge Crawley, Allan King, Ron lobbying on both federal and provincial ment, and many in the industry feel Kelly, John Board, Don Shebib, David levels (Sandra Gathercole, Jack Grey, that this newly formed group may be Lee, Patrick Spence-Thomas, Ken Post, Allan King), inter-union relations English-Canada's last hope in unifying A. Ibranyi-Kiss, and both chairmen (Richard Leiterman, Glenn Ferrier, filmworkers on all levels of cinema into made impassioned speeches about their Patrick Spence-Thomas, Bill Wood, a cohesive and powerful voice. prognoses and own brand of remedies. Don Shebib), funding for the Council After much dehberation as to the make­ As we indicated in the last issue of (Budge Crawley, Kirwan Cox), and up of a new, permanent executive this magazine, major changes are in the drawing up a constitution (Jack Grey, committee (how many affiliated people offing for the filmmaking community. Jerry McNabb, Peter Pearson), also versus how many independents), the Their extent and impact are more dis­ formed were a Membership Committee following people were elected by secret cernible now, than right after the initial (June Pike, A. Ibranyi-Kiss), and a Press ballot, either representing their organiz­ meeting of the Council at the Westbury. Committee (John Board, Ron Kelly). ations, or as free agents: Whereas over 200 people (the cream of The non-executive members on these the Canadian film community's crop) John Board (Assistant Director) subcommittees were co-opted from jammed into that meeting hall in March, Budge Crawley (Producer) member organizations. the next general meeting at Bennet Glen Ferrier lATSE 644-C Fode's Tivoli theatre in April was Sandra GathercoleToionto To help solve the present crisis situa­ attended by nearly 500 filmmakers. It Filmmakers Co-op tion in English-Canadian feature produc­ was chaired jointly by Peter Pearson, Jack Grey ACTRA tion, Ron Kelly put forth an idea which President of the Directors Guild of A.Ibranyi-Kiss (Managing Editor-CC) was adopted by the Executive and Canada, and Richard Leiterman, lately Ron Kelly Chairman presented to Ottawa, by way of an of lATSE 644-C, but a maverick, indep­ Allan King (Producer/Director) urgent telegram to the Film Advisory endent thinker just the same. The Richard Leiterman(Director of Committee of the Secretary of State's Council adopted its present name at the Photography) Office, which met on April 30th. A Tivoli, as well as unanimously accepting Peter Pearson Directors Guild copy of it went to Robert Desjardins, as the aims and objectives drawn up by the Ken Post (Director of Photography) well. founding executive. Don Shebib (Director) The CCFM rushed this proposal to 1. to pursue the development of an Patrick Spence-Thomas NABET Ottawa well in time for the Advisory economically and artistically viable Bill Wood lATSE 873 Committee's session, but the Council motion picture industry; has yet to receive a formal reply. Every­ one went to Cannes shortly thereafter, 2. to encourage an increase in the and Secretary of State Faulkner's only demand for Canadian motion picture verbal comment since then has been that productions and their distribution in Robert Desjardins is looking into it. foreign and domestic markets; When the CCFM was first formed, it 3. to pursue the development of cinema was welcomed by government represent­ crafts and trades through the estab­ atives who felt that it will help them lishment of minimum standards; deal with the industry in a rational way. Instead of having to talk to half a dozen 4. to encourage the education of lobbying organizations, now it is members and potential members of possible to come to across-the-board the film industry in motion picture agreements, and lobbying efforts will arts and crafts; not be contradictory. However, in spite 5. to encourage the exchange of motion of its initial favorable reaction, Ottawa pictures and information related to has yet to back it up with any concrete the production of motion pictures action. The Council is getting impatient. between Canada and countries throughout the world; "a o 6. to promote effective communication and common action between profes­ sional motion picture organizations for the achievement of common goals; o 7. to speak to governments and depart­ ments of governments as the unified voice of all the disciplines; 8. to concern itself with social, economic and labour relationships within the motion picture industry, and to make recommendations to the Don Shebib appropriate organization; Cinema Canada 11 A Crisis can be an Opportunity : A Proposal from the undermined potential profits despite increasing acceptance by Council of Canadian Filmmakers towards solving the present Canadian audiences. crisis in English-Canadian feature film production— Finally, one must not overlook the failure of the Canadian The Council of Canadian Filmmakers represents Film Development Corporation to take aggressive measures to approximately 5,000 people in the film community including develop scripts and scriptwriters or the failure of the Canadian the members of ACTRA, NABET 700, lATSE 644-C, lATSE Broadcasting Corporation to provide a mechanism to link 873, the Directors Guild of Canada, the Toronto Filmmakers Canadian films and the mass audience - in other words, to just Co-op, and other groups. show the films. 1. The Organization III. The Solution The CCFM was brought into existence because the English- The following proposal is designed as one interim solution Canadian feature film industry is on the brink of collapse. that is possible within present structures without a great deal Films are simply not being made and many hundreds of film of additional money. The CCFM plans to make proposals in workers are unemployed. They have organized the CCFM to the future of greater depth and breadth. The present crisis meet this emergency with radical and creative solutions. demands immediate action. II The Problem In essence, we believe that the CFDC must expand its We are culturally overwhelmed, demographically dispersed, present scope of operations to include script development, and undercapitalized by the failure of native private enterprise management of initial theatrical marketing of films in this to take the risks our situation requires. Yet our national category, and ownership of those films on a profit-sharing survival depends on our economic and cultural vitality. basis with the makers of the films. In addition, the CBC must The problems of making films in Canada are unique and take an active part in financing Canadian films and distributing demand unique solutions. The present crisis stems from them to the people in Canada. decisions made in Canada to attempt to model an English- We must avoid the present overdependence on private Canadian film industry on the American pattern. These investment, avoid many of the present excesses in the decisions have proved bankrupt in the long-run and the distribution/exhibition marketing system, and assure the mass disastrous decline in film production will continue unless those of the Canadian people an opportunity to see the work decisions are changed. that they pay for. The reason for this decline hinges on the lack of private We also believe that the creative talent has a responsibility investment without which the CFDC is presently inoperable. in this system, and we, the film workers, are prepared to work The Department of National Revenue has decided to interpret for reasonable minimum rates in this film category in exchange the Income Tax Act to avoid leverage leasing which was the for participation in potential profits and involvement in the rationale behind nearly all previous film investment. The management of this film category. leverage leasing bubble has disguised the fact that private We believe that continuity is essential for a successful film investment is not wiUing to take the risks inherent in the industry and fear that the great progress in Canadian feature Enghsh-Canadian film market at this time. An alternative must films made over the past few years will be irretrievably lost if be found to the present system of financing, the inadequacy of talent is now dispersed through prolonged unemployment. which is evident from the flood of applications from estab­ IV. The Mechanism hshed filmmakers for the low-budget CFDC category which We propose that in addition to present programs, the doesn't require heavy private money ox distribution advances. CFDC undertake a new category of ten (10) medium budget The fact that some top filmmakers cannot find private films beginning July 1, 1973. These films will be owned by the investment for even this category should prove that the system CFDC. The CFDC will oversee distribution on a market-testing simply doesn't work. basis. The option remains, after this market testing, for One cannot ignore the fact that most English-Canadian distribution through regular channels. films have a record of unrelieved red ink. They face infinitely This program covers an 18 month period with 6 months for greater competition from foreign films in their domestic script development followed by 12 months production.