Making Sense of the International Reputation of a Small Film Industry: the Estonian Case*
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Commentary Making Sense of the International Reputation of a Small Film Industry: The Estonian Case* MADIS JÄRVEKÜLG, Tallinn University, Estonia; email: [email protected] ULRIKE ROHN, Tallinn University, Estonia; email: [email protected] INDREK IBRUS, Tallinn University, Estonia; email: [email protected] * This work was supported by the Estonian Research Council grants PUT 1176 and PUT 1674. 114 DOI: 10.2478/bsmr-2018-0007 BALTIC SCREEN MEDIA REVIEW 2018 / VOLUME 6 / COMMENTARY ABSTRACT This article presents the results of a multi-method study carried out by the Tallinn University Centre of Excellence in Media Innovation and Digital Culture (MEDIT). The aim of this study was to investigate how international film professionals perceive the Estonian film industry; what image they have of Estonian film, and how they envision or have experienced Estonia as a destination for production and collaboration. The results of the study indicate that the skills of Estonian filmmakers are increas- ingly internationally renowned and valued among foreign professionals. At the same time, however, awareness of Estonian film and its nature remains ambiguous to most international film professionals. While seeing Estonia as a Baltic country rather than a Nordic one, the professionals suggested setting up a Baltic film fund and developing a Baltic brand in order to raise international recognition of local film production. INTRODUCTION on average, only three to six films a year The recent years have been successful are produced by Estonian filmmakers and for Estonian films and the film industry in that the budget of these films hardly ever terms of their international recognition. exceeds a million euros. Most films are pro- Tangerines (Mandariinid/მანდარინები, duced for much less. Zaza Urushadze), a 2013 co-production Yet, owing to the small size of the do- with Georgia, won nominations for best mestic market, the domestic revenues of the foreign language film at the Oscars and the films are hardly enough to grow and maintain Golden Globes. The Fencer (Vehkleja/Miek- a strong domestic film industry. Hence, the kailija, Klaus Härö), a 2015 co-production focus of the national film policy lies on the with Finland, was also nominated for best internationalisation of the industry. Although foreign language film at the Golden Globes. most of the films are produced with signifi- In 2017, November (Rainer Sarnet, Estonia/ cant public support, additional revenues Netherlands/Poland, 2017) won the jury through export are necessary. In this context, award at the Tribeca Film Festival and its international co-productions mean not only director of photography, Mart Taniel, won shared risks and higher budgets, but also the Spotlight Award from the American improved possibilities for international rev- Society of Cinematographers. Considering enues, as co-produced films generally travel the size of the country, with a mere 1.3 mil- better. An important aim for small film mar- lion inhabitants, and its small film industry, kets such as Estonia’s, therefore, is to partic- the past few years have been exceptionally ipate in as many co-productions as possible successful, especially considering that, – as both majority and minor partner. 115 BALTIC SCREEN MEDIA REVIEW 2018 / VOLUME 6 / COMMENTARY Further, as in much of Europe, Estonia co-production agreements with more coun- has put a special emphasis in recent years tries (in addition to the European Conven- on providing film production services to for- tion on Cinematographic Co-productions eign producers. The phenomenon of ‘runa- that sets the basic terms for co-productions way productions’ (Elmer, Gasher 2005) has between European producers); and become a dominant trend internationally in 3) establishing measures for attracting which producers look for better production more foreign productions to Estonia. conditions in foreign countries compared Regarding policy instruments, the first to their home countries. What attracts of these lines of action has included public producers to move parts or all of their support for film distribution to festivals. productions to another country are often Regarding co-productions, Estonia has favourable tax conditions and other local signed unique agreements with large film benefits such as unique facilities or shoot- countries such as France and South Korea. ing locations. Since productions contribute Regarding film production services, Esto- positively to the gross domestic product nia introduced a cash rebate for foreign of a country, countries compete to attract companies. While most EU countries have foreign producers. Furthermore, especially various kinds of tax reliefs or tax rebates to for smaller countries such as Estonia, there attract foreign producers, Estonia with its are additional arguments for participat- 0% corporate tax rate needed to introduce ing in international production activities. a different system: a cash rebate that is a Firstly, local film professionals benefit fixed percentage of the production budget.1 from being part of co-productions and from Despite all these measures already selling their production services to larger being in place, however, their effective- foreign productions as such activities help ness is not clear to policy makers. To better them to gain work experience and improve design and target the measures and to bet- their skills. The experience and knowledge ter understand international awareness of gained as well as the skills developed while the Estonian film industry among foreign working on international large-budget and producers, we agreed with the Tallinn Black high-quality productions not only help to Nights Film Festival (PÖFF), its film market attract further international partners and Baltic Event and its training platform Indus- productions, but also help to improve the try@Tallinn to carry out this study.2 production of domestic films. Secondly, being part of international productions is METHOD AND SAMPLE a form of networking that helps to develop The study consisted of two stages: at the strong partnerships and a stable income end of 2017, we first carried out an online from production activities in the future. survey and then focus group interviews. Lastly, steady revenues from production Both targeted foreign film professionals services help local production companies attending the international A-category film to grow and, subsequently, support the festival PÖFF, which takes place every year institutionalisation of the local production in Tallinn, Estonia. The online survey con- industry. The result is likely to be a more sisted of 54 questions in total, though many professional and capable local industry of them were filtered out for individual producing national films with higher quality respondents. On average, respondents and more artistic value (for more, see took 15 minutes to answer the survey. The Ibrus 2015). survey was distributed two weeks prior to Owing to the importance of interna- the event via email to the official delegates tional activities in the film industry, Esto- nia has focused on three main areas for 1 See http://filmestonia.eu/index.php/film-estonia- increasing internationalisation in recent cash-rebate/. years: 1) supporting the international 2 The study was financially supported by the Creative Gate project that is part-funded by EU structural funds circulation of Estonian films; 2) developing and Enterprise Estonia. 116 BALTIC SCREEN MEDIA REVIEW 2018 / VOLUME 6 / COMMENTARY of the festival and 228 questionnaires were response option ‘Other, please specify’ filled out. We used Survey Monkey and was chosen by almost 40% in the total SPSS for the analysis of the data. sample of respondents who provided us Consequently, in order to explore with a specification of their roles in the qualitatively alternative interpretations of industry. the survey data, we organised four focus To include these respondents in the group interviews. For this, we classified analysis and distinguish clearly between participants in groups based on their role in the process of making the film and that of the film industry and their experience with disseminating the film, we reorganised this the Estonian film industry. The first group variable into two categories: production with six participants consisted of people in (producers, directors, cinematographers, charge of policy making, mostly representa- etc.) and distribution (sales agents, dis- tives of national film institutes. The second tributors, festival programmers, etc.). The group of ten participants consisted of peo- representatives of film funding institutions ple who work for festivals or sales and dis- were excluded from the sample (only when tribution companies, i.e. people who ‘trade’ cross-tabulating) owing to their quantita- with films as finished objects. Members tive insignificance (17 respondents), but of the third group of five participants were their perspective was presented in one of filmmakers who had worked with Estonian the focus groups in more detail. colleagues before and the fourth group of Respondents were allowed to skip six participants consisted of filmmakers selected questions. Some questions func- who had no prior experience with the Esto- tioned as filters to ensure that the respond- nian film industry. We consulted the organ- ents met the required criteria for subse- isers of PÖFF to find suitable participants quent questions. These are the reasons from various regions across Europe and why the total number of respondents