new funded features.
- Thread starter johnmoordon
- Start date
- Messages
- 116
- Points
- 18
Brilliant Chris! I never knew we filmmakers had so much power! One request for some assistance in completing 'Bad Lad' (turned down). One invitation to a preview screening of Bad Lad (not attended by anyone from NWV). One informal chat when you asked after Bar Stewards and told me about some secret 'slush fund' through which you could put some money our way (we decided to decline). One request for a meeting to discuss development possibilities on a feature which took place but which did not result in any offers of practical support. One digital departures pitch which we felt obliged to make for form's sake - but we were and continue to be rather busy.Moll said:
Throughout your time in post with NWV I was one of those who actually and continually defended you. Obviously there are things which are massively and structurally wrong with the UKFC and the RSA's (and according to Alex Cox, particularly NWV) and many of us saw your commissioning of the report "Defying Gravity" (i.e. how is that people like us manage to make films despite getting no support from NWV - it's well worth reading) as an attempt to store up some ammunition in order to make some changes.
So it is gratifying to know that this was enough to make you lose 'the will to live'. Although, apparently, not quite.....
- Messages
- 1,509
- Points
- 40
I have been there on many an occasion when Jon has defended you as someone proactively working to change things at NWV. Not just amongst our core group but with others in the region disgruntled with lack of support, financial or otherwise. For someone to do this with the amount of flak you did get (I don't know if you're aware of exactly how much resentment some had for you, but it's understandable given your job at NWV was a bit of a poisoned chalice) is commendable, at least in my "under-achieving" opinion.Moll said:
Some do understand that NWV have to march to the beat of the UKFC's drum and the confines that it must operate under. In my experience Jon was always one of them.
You may like to note that it wasn't him who began this thread
Last edited by a moderator:
johnmoordon
Banned
- Messages
- 51
- Points
- 6
Chris hasn't produced or directed anything regardless of what imdb may or may not say. He is just a bean counter who has always been managed up and out the way. Yes Nick Park won a bafta, but did he work with Moll again? No. The digital features project produced one successfull film, which is entirely down to Terrence Davies. As for the others they are laughable on every single level. It is great that he has the time to post on here and defend a non-existent reputation. The problem with the likes of him is that he isn't a film fan, and has no clue about art. He'd probably mention DeNiro and Pacino as great actors and Shawshank as a great film but only eats what is placed in front of him. Whilst in office in Liverpool he often smirked at the city looking like a war zone and referred to West Derby as being like Cambodia, which is nothing short of disgraceful. So thank god he has left the area to go and indulge himself somewhere else and take credit where none is deserved.
Last edited by a moderator:
curtinparloe
Senior Member
- Messages
- 118
- Points
- 18
Ooh, never seen a live flame war before...
johnmoordon
Banned
- Messages
- 51
- Points
- 6
Do you think it actually meens anything going to Edinburgh Film Festival Chris? Ive had three films shown there. I went the first time and met some fantastic people, but found the experience shallow and worthless. It's best to leave it up to plutocrats like yourself. surely as filmmakers we make film? But not you Chris because you have re-written the manual, which is the funniest thing you have ever said. Anyone can be a part of what you do, if thats what you want. It would be as ludicrous as arranging an industry breakfast, say in Cannes, just for the sake of it....oh you've already done that....please keep doing what you do though, just for the comedic value if nothing else.
Well the spirit of comment and debate is still alive eh..and hopefully the outcome will push the boundaries a little further..y'know..continue to "tear up the rule book of film making"..
C'mon let's be fair here. There are too many trying and who've tried who've been falsely breast-fed by people who - like you Chris - have no real artistic merit or value anyhow. The great shame is that whilst people like you reign and have control in the so - called "honest " channels, then that "rule book" of film-making will stay conservative and dull, and if any film-maker (apart from Terrence Davies) has to fall in line with you then their project will probably end up compromised beyond all recoginition and ultimately fail.
But ah you say - at least they got made.True. At least they received your NWV guidance and advice to do so. True again - but worthless because your track record at exposure and post support for distribution caches and angles is redundant and arcane as your artistic understanding and values.
And please don't insult with your over/under achieving cheap shots. Considering the financial squandering you've been responsible for that for the reasons mentioned above probably haven't even managed to serve the writers and film-makers involved in the larger film community, you have real nerve.
The great boon is that you are now no longer involved. Maybe someone else will be able to impart creative and artistic north west vision and help to develop things that actually will expand the rule book.
You have to know enough to love the dog-eared ends Chris and whilst you may be able to write stupid reports and give sanctimonious seminars about "the process", what do you know, care and love enough about film to carry any credibility?
You can tell by some of the comments here by just a smattering of people that it's not a lot really..
In fact, probably nothing at all...
George
C'mon let's be fair here. There are too many trying and who've tried who've been falsely breast-fed by people who - like you Chris - have no real artistic merit or value anyhow. The great shame is that whilst people like you reign and have control in the so - called "honest " channels, then that "rule book" of film-making will stay conservative and dull, and if any film-maker (apart from Terrence Davies) has to fall in line with you then their project will probably end up compromised beyond all recoginition and ultimately fail.
But ah you say - at least they got made.True. At least they received your NWV guidance and advice to do so. True again - but worthless because your track record at exposure and post support for distribution caches and angles is redundant and arcane as your artistic understanding and values.
And please don't insult with your over/under achieving cheap shots. Considering the financial squandering you've been responsible for that for the reasons mentioned above probably haven't even managed to serve the writers and film-makers involved in the larger film community, you have real nerve.
The great boon is that you are now no longer involved. Maybe someone else will be able to impart creative and artistic north west vision and help to develop things that actually will expand the rule book.
You have to know enough to love the dog-eared ends Chris and whilst you may be able to write stupid reports and give sanctimonious seminars about "the process", what do you know, care and love enough about film to carry any credibility?
You can tell by some of the comments here by just a smattering of people that it's not a lot really..
In fact, probably nothing at all...
George
Last edited by a moderator:
Just a point Moll....
I've noticed that you are a "junior" member and have only just joined Pleased Sheep..
Could this be because you only wanted to come,view and defend.....?
I would have thought you being you and someone on the cutting edge would already be an esteemed member so you could be plugged into what's going on locally....after all that should be where you earn your bread and butter...spotting new, local and up 'n coming......
I was obviously mistaken.
Enjoy the haggis and thistle
George
I've noticed that you are a "junior" member and have only just joined Pleased Sheep..
Could this be because you only wanted to come,view and defend.....?
I would have thought you being you and someone on the cutting edge would already be an esteemed member so you could be plugged into what's going on locally....after all that should be where you earn your bread and butter...spotting new, local and up 'n coming......
I was obviously mistaken.
Enjoy the haggis and thistle
George
And one further point Chris..
I don't quite follow why you would say that there are "only so many pitches/moans you can take...etc.."
Unfortunately for people like Jon and others who subscribe here, making pitches are what film-makers are supposed to do when people like you make offers of funded development.
It seems there is an inference that you view people who make continued pitches - like Jon - in an unfavourable light. You would understand how that feels for people like Jon if you actually attempted the process yourself.
Write a report on that. And then spend the money on the "breakfasts" on chances for people to honestly get their films and projects made..
At the end of the day, it's all about the money to get it on the screen and the opportunities to do that - know what I mean Chris?...Writing, developing, pitching....
And even though you won't have to be in earshot to hear them, thank God people like Jon will continue to make them
I don't quite follow why you would say that there are "only so many pitches/moans you can take...etc.."
Unfortunately for people like Jon and others who subscribe here, making pitches are what film-makers are supposed to do when people like you make offers of funded development.
It seems there is an inference that you view people who make continued pitches - like Jon - in an unfavourable light. You would understand how that feels for people like Jon if you actually attempted the process yourself.
Write a report on that. And then spend the money on the "breakfasts" on chances for people to honestly get their films and projects made..
At the end of the day, it's all about the money to get it on the screen and the opportunities to do that - know what I mean Chris?...Writing, developing, pitching....
And even though you won't have to be in earshot to hear them, thank God people like Jon will continue to make them
Last edited by a moderator:
johnmoordon
Banned
- Messages
- 51
- Points
- 6
No-one should forget that the likes of Chris Mole and NWV exist because we, as filmmakers, allow them to and not the other way round. I went to see them about 8 years ago and after about 5 minutes in the meeting i knew it was a complete waste of time. They exist to justify their own existence. The best anyone could hope for is to be given funding for a feature to be made, and then have something you may have worked on for years destroyed by people who have no clue about film. If they did, then they would be making them. I would advise people to speak to people from the recent features. Not one person has a good word to say about them. Infact being funded actually goes against you in the long term because you end up with a pile of shite, that no-one likes and the producers then back away and take no blame, afterall north west visions moto is 'ipodium nil satorium caltis' which roughly translated means 'all of the credit and none of the blame'.
People shouldn't be frightened about speaking out because outside of the north west no-one gives a toss about NWV. Even in the north west most films are made without them(other than them attempting to put their logo on the credits, post shoot).
Its' ironic that the only 'successfull' film from the latest batch is the one that required the least work and thankfully the least NWV input.
I hope the filmmakers on this forum continue regardless and avoid NWV at all costs, at least then they may just go away..
People shouldn't be frightened about speaking out because outside of the north west no-one gives a toss about NWV. Even in the north west most films are made without them(other than them attempting to put their logo on the credits, post shoot).
Its' ironic that the only 'successfull' film from the latest batch is the one that required the least work and thankfully the least NWV input.
I hope the filmmakers on this forum continue regardless and avoid NWV at all costs, at least then they may just go away..
Last edited by a moderator:
- Messages
- 116
- Points
- 18
On February 2nd North West Vision staged a distribution seminar, hosted by Elizabeth Draper. Elizabeth has some 25 years experience working at the highest level for America and French majors such as Fox and Pathe - distributors of medium to large budget films with well known casts and the clout to get them on general exhibition; so not exactly the sort of films they we can produce up here.
NWV asked for feedback, and, rather than fill in their form, I decided to write them an 'open letter' which didn't just explain how this had been completely irrelevant, but also suggested that they could collaborate with the region's no/micro-budget feature filmmakers on new ways of getting these films screened in the North West - and by implication this also included their 'digital departures' films - which would serve a useful purpose; and asked them for a response. But, despite having sent them multiple copies which they could distribute around the office, no one has bothered to reply.
Just so that you can see the content and the tone of what I sent, here it is...
"An Open Letter to North West Vision & Media
Doubtless North West Vision received much good feedback from Elizabeth Draper’s talk on distribution, 2nd February 2009. And this would be hardly surprising given Elizabeth’s more than 25 years experience working at the highest level with the distribution arms of both major American and French studios, together with Icon which substantially acts on behalf of the American (and French) majors in the UK and certain other English-speaking markets.
However your publicised claim that “This is a fantastic opportunity for the region’s many talented filmmakers … to realise the possibilities available after their film has been created” was and is nothing short of irresponsible.
The plain facts are that it is US/UK, together with French/UK, co-productions – what the Film Council calls “British Studio Films” that get both distribution and general theatrical release. Independent British films with around £1.5 million budgets and some stars, whether Film Council sponsored or not, average £60,000 at the box office, so it is little wonder that UK distributors such as Icon would rather acquire the UK rights to American films. And then the fifty or so remaining British distributors only stay in business by an almost exclusive policy of handling heavily subsidised non-UK European productions. Hence, under this system, regional independent British filmmakers are firmly at the bottom of the pile.
As your own excellent report, “Defying Gravity” pointed out, most of the region’s new producers don’t “seem to really appreciate how restricted the distribution
opportunities for independent productions in the mainstream are.” Unfortunately Elizabeth Draper did nothing to dispel these delusions, in fact quite possibly the reverse.
But would a representative from one of the small distributors have been more appropriate or useful? I have spoken to many in private; some have also gone on public record, and they all say that, as far as no-to-micro-budget British films are concerned, pretty much all they can do is to try to distribute and sell them on the internet - that other than four-walling a London independent for a week at considerable cost in order to get some reviews in the nationals they can’t get exhibition.
Because of this many filmmakers are turning to DIY distribution, with now even some Sundance successes turning down lucrative offers; and to new exhibition strategies. Let’s face it, the multiplexes are the home for big budget effects-laden and soon to be 3D movies; they are the equivalent of the West End Theatre. Features made by North West filmmakers on no/micro-budgets are the equivalent of fringe theatre. They belong in arts centres, little independent cinemas, in film clubs, colleges and universities. But these screenings need to be promoted – we need it for our films to go out on tour! And organised tours would also give purpose to DSN screenings too.
North West Vision and Media could make a huge contribution to such an initiative for comparatively little money. It’d be a “win-win” situation all round. It would be good to talk!
Best wishes, Jon Williams"
NWV asked for feedback, and, rather than fill in their form, I decided to write them an 'open letter' which didn't just explain how this had been completely irrelevant, but also suggested that they could collaborate with the region's no/micro-budget feature filmmakers on new ways of getting these films screened in the North West - and by implication this also included their 'digital departures' films - which would serve a useful purpose; and asked them for a response. But, despite having sent them multiple copies which they could distribute around the office, no one has bothered to reply.
Just so that you can see the content and the tone of what I sent, here it is...
"An Open Letter to North West Vision & Media
Doubtless North West Vision received much good feedback from Elizabeth Draper’s talk on distribution, 2nd February 2009. And this would be hardly surprising given Elizabeth’s more than 25 years experience working at the highest level with the distribution arms of both major American and French studios, together with Icon which substantially acts on behalf of the American (and French) majors in the UK and certain other English-speaking markets.
However your publicised claim that “This is a fantastic opportunity for the region’s many talented filmmakers … to realise the possibilities available after their film has been created” was and is nothing short of irresponsible.
The plain facts are that it is US/UK, together with French/UK, co-productions – what the Film Council calls “British Studio Films” that get both distribution and general theatrical release. Independent British films with around £1.5 million budgets and some stars, whether Film Council sponsored or not, average £60,000 at the box office, so it is little wonder that UK distributors such as Icon would rather acquire the UK rights to American films. And then the fifty or so remaining British distributors only stay in business by an almost exclusive policy of handling heavily subsidised non-UK European productions. Hence, under this system, regional independent British filmmakers are firmly at the bottom of the pile.
As your own excellent report, “Defying Gravity” pointed out, most of the region’s new producers don’t “seem to really appreciate how restricted the distribution
opportunities for independent productions in the mainstream are.” Unfortunately Elizabeth Draper did nothing to dispel these delusions, in fact quite possibly the reverse.
But would a representative from one of the small distributors have been more appropriate or useful? I have spoken to many in private; some have also gone on public record, and they all say that, as far as no-to-micro-budget British films are concerned, pretty much all they can do is to try to distribute and sell them on the internet - that other than four-walling a London independent for a week at considerable cost in order to get some reviews in the nationals they can’t get exhibition.
Because of this many filmmakers are turning to DIY distribution, with now even some Sundance successes turning down lucrative offers; and to new exhibition strategies. Let’s face it, the multiplexes are the home for big budget effects-laden and soon to be 3D movies; they are the equivalent of the West End Theatre. Features made by North West filmmakers on no/micro-budgets are the equivalent of fringe theatre. They belong in arts centres, little independent cinemas, in film clubs, colleges and universities. But these screenings need to be promoted – we need it for our films to go out on tour! And organised tours would also give purpose to DSN screenings too.
North West Vision and Media could make a huge contribution to such an initiative for comparatively little money. It’d be a “win-win” situation all round. It would be good to talk!
Best wishes, Jon Williams"
johnmoordon
Banned
- Messages
- 51
- Points
- 6
Just to add, i really did like Tom Gabbut who worked there, i think he was taken out and shot for refusing to massage his bosses ego....
Jon
That's a great letter. It's validity is totally credible and I could not agree with you more. The no/micro budget film-makers - and I hope I'm speaking sense here - are always looking for new and innovative ways of telling and pitching a story that has practical capabilities of being made. By this I don't mean to assume at all that they could not work on a much larger canvas and realised by larger production bodies, but just in the real nuts and bolts attitude that it couldn't be easier to realise...
Yet even with those ideas and out of the box pitches....there's little or no practical help. Persist - as indicated out by Chris Moll - and you're nothing but a pain in the arse.
Those same pains though are lorded when they hit paydirt under their own steam. Funny that isn't it? Look at Neil Marshall...binbagged by everyone over Dog Soldiers yet when an asparagus farmer in the US decided he'd loan "crazy neil" the money...bingo. Everyone then loves Neil Marshall.
Point that out though post scriptum and again...you're an under achiever.
Well said Jon. If you can't get honest pointers and even replies from "industry professionals" that seem to change positions when the seasons are inclement, what are you supposed to do?
There's always nouns and adjectives for the underdogs. Usually they're not very friendly or heartwarming but they are within easy reach of egotistal preachers who have a shallow position to protect.
The saddest part about all of this is that as much as anyone here really does care and wonder, Chris Moll doesn't.
If he had the balls enough to throw in and make a movement in the fashion of anyone else who's trying then he really would be "defying gravity".......
Apparantly though, he's going to be sampling the 'fiddich n' tatties.
Nice.
That's a great letter. It's validity is totally credible and I could not agree with you more. The no/micro budget film-makers - and I hope I'm speaking sense here - are always looking for new and innovative ways of telling and pitching a story that has practical capabilities of being made. By this I don't mean to assume at all that they could not work on a much larger canvas and realised by larger production bodies, but just in the real nuts and bolts attitude that it couldn't be easier to realise...
Yet even with those ideas and out of the box pitches....there's little or no practical help. Persist - as indicated out by Chris Moll - and you're nothing but a pain in the arse.
Those same pains though are lorded when they hit paydirt under their own steam. Funny that isn't it? Look at Neil Marshall...binbagged by everyone over Dog Soldiers yet when an asparagus farmer in the US decided he'd loan "crazy neil" the money...bingo. Everyone then loves Neil Marshall.
Point that out though post scriptum and again...you're an under achiever.
Well said Jon. If you can't get honest pointers and even replies from "industry professionals" that seem to change positions when the seasons are inclement, what are you supposed to do?
There's always nouns and adjectives for the underdogs. Usually they're not very friendly or heartwarming but they are within easy reach of egotistal preachers who have a shallow position to protect.
The saddest part about all of this is that as much as anyone here really does care and wonder, Chris Moll doesn't.
If he had the balls enough to throw in and make a movement in the fashion of anyone else who's trying then he really would be "defying gravity".......
Apparantly though, he's going to be sampling the 'fiddich n' tatties.
Nice.
Last edited by a moderator:
Chase
Junior Member
- Messages
- 28
- Points
- 1
I have been trying to get in all day and hopefully what I have to say makes sense at this stage.
I don;t want to join the "EVerybody hates Chris" club but I find it interesting that Chris jumps on here with defense and insult. I always admired how Chris would stand up at the front of the room and take it. Like at one of the defying gravity seminars NWV had in the safety of BBC when they weer offering DIg Deps in the first place. But Chris you can't honestly think you served the film community fairly, can you?
I mean I nearly died laughing at your IMDB credits saying you were exec producer let alone producer on projects you brely had any involvement in. Just clearing the path for film funding is not enough. I mean, its funny how NWV always wants to put their names on films at the end of credits because they supported getting it made but don't actually walk the trench of making them.
I guess I'm one of the few who don't like Time and the city but the most successful film made in the NW is Grow Your Own. The film no one at NWV wanted Carl Hunter to make which is why another director was brought in and Carl was relegated to shootng Behind the scenes of his own project.
Where is Sparkle? I remmeber going to anohter useless seminar with big names from UKFC showing up wasting time and when discussion gets heated, true learning gets lost in the sauce.
I guess people are throwing hate on you Chris because the true heart and soul behind NWV was Helen Bingham and whe you came, you not only usurped her power but slowly squeezed her out. Don't blame Chris for the cannes breakfast and stuff when it was clearly alice morrison who started things like that before Chris showed up.
What I'm saying is that Chris came in to reinvigorate the regional attraction fund and merseyside initiatives and took it upon himself to dismiss the filmmakers that were trying to thrive within it. He obligated for production companies to come from outside such as baby cow, tubedale, anybody who had a name attached but ignored colin's liverpool studios which died a quick death after digital jesus and Tower films on Bank st which had all those millions. Anybody remember them?
Chris never wrote any report. He was always on his laptop probably reading notes from his kids when real researchers like Derek Murray was pounding the pavement meeting flmmakers and building that report, defying gravity which chris and NWV ignored and thought by giving derek his 15 min to talk about it, noone ever seemed to rea it except for the insults people laid at Helen and everyone else.
What do we as filmmakers need? WE need distribution which JOn and the Bad Lad boys have been proving with each step. WE need exposure such as the Guerilla festival tour at Kino which brought together such filmmakers whom are still shooting today to sit on a panel with legends such as Alex Cox. Now that was valuable information.
I went to the 2 seminars they had for Dig Dep and although some of the info was great, the filmmakers that came, are not in communication. Why didn;t NWV catalouge their own filmmakers and continue to support them to this day.
Good question.
I don't expect a response, Chris. I just ask that you hear what I am saying about what is or should have been important besides pumping an already established filmmaker who didn't need your money or support and with it, made a film full of archival footage, nostalgic voice over and stock music with only one or two set location shots with no people in them. A crowning directorial feat. If anything it damn sure was well produced. Good on the Hurricane Boys.
Chase
Prepping his film, Static Kiss, for Cannes. Maybe I can get a bagel at the NWV breakfast pavilion.
I don;t want to join the "EVerybody hates Chris" club but I find it interesting that Chris jumps on here with defense and insult. I always admired how Chris would stand up at the front of the room and take it. Like at one of the defying gravity seminars NWV had in the safety of BBC when they weer offering DIg Deps in the first place. But Chris you can't honestly think you served the film community fairly, can you?
I mean I nearly died laughing at your IMDB credits saying you were exec producer let alone producer on projects you brely had any involvement in. Just clearing the path for film funding is not enough. I mean, its funny how NWV always wants to put their names on films at the end of credits because they supported getting it made but don't actually walk the trench of making them.
I guess I'm one of the few who don't like Time and the city but the most successful film made in the NW is Grow Your Own. The film no one at NWV wanted Carl Hunter to make which is why another director was brought in and Carl was relegated to shootng Behind the scenes of his own project.
Where is Sparkle? I remmeber going to anohter useless seminar with big names from UKFC showing up wasting time and when discussion gets heated, true learning gets lost in the sauce.
I guess people are throwing hate on you Chris because the true heart and soul behind NWV was Helen Bingham and whe you came, you not only usurped her power but slowly squeezed her out. Don't blame Chris for the cannes breakfast and stuff when it was clearly alice morrison who started things like that before Chris showed up.
What I'm saying is that Chris came in to reinvigorate the regional attraction fund and merseyside initiatives and took it upon himself to dismiss the filmmakers that were trying to thrive within it. He obligated for production companies to come from outside such as baby cow, tubedale, anybody who had a name attached but ignored colin's liverpool studios which died a quick death after digital jesus and Tower films on Bank st which had all those millions. Anybody remember them?
Chris never wrote any report. He was always on his laptop probably reading notes from his kids when real researchers like Derek Murray was pounding the pavement meeting flmmakers and building that report, defying gravity which chris and NWV ignored and thought by giving derek his 15 min to talk about it, noone ever seemed to rea it except for the insults people laid at Helen and everyone else.
What do we as filmmakers need? WE need distribution which JOn and the Bad Lad boys have been proving with each step. WE need exposure such as the Guerilla festival tour at Kino which brought together such filmmakers whom are still shooting today to sit on a panel with legends such as Alex Cox. Now that was valuable information.
I went to the 2 seminars they had for Dig Dep and although some of the info was great, the filmmakers that came, are not in communication. Why didn;t NWV catalouge their own filmmakers and continue to support them to this day.
Good question.
I don't expect a response, Chris. I just ask that you hear what I am saying about what is or should have been important besides pumping an already established filmmaker who didn't need your money or support and with it, made a film full of archival footage, nostalgic voice over and stock music with only one or two set location shots with no people in them. A crowning directorial feat. If anything it damn sure was well produced. Good on the Hurricane Boys.
Chase
Prepping his film, Static Kiss, for Cannes. Maybe I can get a bagel at the NWV breakfast pavilion.
Chase
Well said. I say that because here again is another film-maker - regardless of whatever they do or do not get - carrying on but also blowing on burned fingers. Is Chase another "moaner" - creating the headspace for people to "lose their will to live"?
Not at all. I've a feeling that Chase will continue to do what he does whether he gets his bagel or not. Buttered or not. That seems to be in keeping with everything else needed to have resilience - but more importantly - integrity in seeing precious projects through to the end. That is priceless, but it is all too often stolen or crushed by people who never really understood it in the first place.
They're all too busy with the next rung on the ladder made from the creative bones and mettle of believers - pushed aside, left behind but oh so easily dismissed as they have been in some of Chris' earlier posts.
It is fortunate though that "Of Time and the City" can lammer the bough for the Dig Dep scheme and thornily crown a "Head of Funds". Everyone who had anything to do with the DD scheme knows how bad it was - how awkward, insidious, lumpy and insane - and I say again here that if Terrence wasn't Terrence then it would be three out of three littering the proverbial budgie. Well said Chase. So where is the meat, the beef, the substantial level of locally fostered output backed by the scheme...I'm talking about where/how and when we can expect to see it in a fashion that isn't going to be laughed at by the rest of the film community and promises so much more for others champing at the bit?
Oh it's in Edinburgh. That's ok then.
PS By the way, if nobody felt that any of this wasn't relevant or that they had some kind of sympatico with it, then it wouldn't have been mentioned in the first place. I think that's kind of important don't you?
Well said. I say that because here again is another film-maker - regardless of whatever they do or do not get - carrying on but also blowing on burned fingers. Is Chase another "moaner" - creating the headspace for people to "lose their will to live"?
Not at all. I've a feeling that Chase will continue to do what he does whether he gets his bagel or not. Buttered or not. That seems to be in keeping with everything else needed to have resilience - but more importantly - integrity in seeing precious projects through to the end. That is priceless, but it is all too often stolen or crushed by people who never really understood it in the first place.
They're all too busy with the next rung on the ladder made from the creative bones and mettle of believers - pushed aside, left behind but oh so easily dismissed as they have been in some of Chris' earlier posts.
It is fortunate though that "Of Time and the City" can lammer the bough for the Dig Dep scheme and thornily crown a "Head of Funds". Everyone who had anything to do with the DD scheme knows how bad it was - how awkward, insidious, lumpy and insane - and I say again here that if Terrence wasn't Terrence then it would be three out of three littering the proverbial budgie. Well said Chase. So where is the meat, the beef, the substantial level of locally fostered output backed by the scheme...I'm talking about where/how and when we can expect to see it in a fashion that isn't going to be laughed at by the rest of the film community and promises so much more for others champing at the bit?
Oh it's in Edinburgh. That's ok then.
PS By the way, if nobody felt that any of this wasn't relevant or that they had some kind of sympatico with it, then it wouldn't have been mentioned in the first place. I think that's kind of important don't you?
Last edited by a moderator:
johnmoordon
Banned
- Messages
- 51
- Points
- 6
I'm sure Chris Mole et al have been following the thread but decided not to reply. I'm amazed that he posted in the first place given his busy schedule and highly important role as Chief exec of the exec chiefs in charge of execing. The truth is often painful and isn't it amazing that this thread has meant people joining the forum just to post and when so many people are pointing their own mistreatment out it gets classed as 'moaning'. Surely we're all not wrong are we?
With the way filmmaking has changed(more cameras, laptop editing etc) their days are numbered and i think they are aware of it. The current batch of filmmakers are on a four day course teraching them how to make film when they all have plenty of experience in exactly that, and thats why they were shortlisted in the first place.....self justification yet again. The sooner they all leave us in peace the better. The great thing is that the people who make films without them(the real artists), like the people on this site, will continue to do so without them. The people who see it as some sort of career path and a way to indulge the likes of NWV will thankfully stop and go and become solicitors, 'associate' producers or execs of execs.....
With the way filmmaking has changed(more cameras, laptop editing etc) their days are numbered and i think they are aware of it. The current batch of filmmakers are on a four day course teraching them how to make film when they all have plenty of experience in exactly that, and thats why they were shortlisted in the first place.....self justification yet again. The sooner they all leave us in peace the better. The great thing is that the people who make films without them(the real artists), like the people on this site, will continue to do so without them. The people who see it as some sort of career path and a way to indulge the likes of NWV will thankfully stop and go and become solicitors, 'associate' producers or execs of execs.....
Last edited by a moderator:
You have to wonder..
If any "project manager" spent x amount of money on their respective projects, and said projects failed to generate any income or critical acclaim they'd be given the boot.
These vacuous individuals are really only invigilators surely - getting others to kind of do what they want - and that's fine if the end result is commendable.
It begs the question really though yes?....what is the point of an "executive producer"...
When everything can be practically done outside this lofty realm, why bother?
Oh I forgot - its the brilliant "industry breakfasts"...
They're absolutely vital
If any "project manager" spent x amount of money on their respective projects, and said projects failed to generate any income or critical acclaim they'd be given the boot.
These vacuous individuals are really only invigilators surely - getting others to kind of do what they want - and that's fine if the end result is commendable.
It begs the question really though yes?....what is the point of an "executive producer"...
When everything can be practically done outside this lofty realm, why bother?
Oh I forgot - its the brilliant "industry breakfasts"...
They're absolutely vital
johnmoordon
Banned
- Messages
- 51
- Points
- 6
Recently i was in charge of building three houses as part of a scheme for the government using public money. Each house was to cost no more than £250 000. The first i subcontracted and they built a house using an already made kit and i had very little to do with it. The two architects made a lot of noise about only spending £40 000 on the material which upset a lot of people, given the money was public. However i have to say the house was rather origional and all of the credit goes to the award winning (but sadly out of work) chief surveyor.
The second house was made of mostly salvaged material and there were very different plans drawn up from 5 different architects. The house kept being built and pulled down. The experience for all of the builders was terrible and no-one now wants to live in it or take the credit or blame.
The third house was made mostly for kicks, i say a house but it is really more of a shack that no-one wants to see or go near because the likelyhood is that it will be pulled down. It looks like a cave only Fungus the bogeyman would live in.
As i write this people are calling for my dismissal and i simply cannot see why. Thankfully i have been moved onto a new project nearer to home where i get to oversee the building of houses. The deal is that if they are any good, i get the credit if not i take none of the blame. Win win for me. The truth is that underneath it all i know i shouldn't even be employed because i have absolutely no skills or training of any value in the building of houses. Infact i couldn't even build an ikea flat pack table. But as long as nobody finds out i'll always have a job.
Anyway ipodium nil satorium caltis troops, i'm off to Scotland to stare at myself in the mirror.
The second house was made of mostly salvaged material and there were very different plans drawn up from 5 different architects. The house kept being built and pulled down. The experience for all of the builders was terrible and no-one now wants to live in it or take the credit or blame.
The third house was made mostly for kicks, i say a house but it is really more of a shack that no-one wants to see or go near because the likelyhood is that it will be pulled down. It looks like a cave only Fungus the bogeyman would live in.
As i write this people are calling for my dismissal and i simply cannot see why. Thankfully i have been moved onto a new project nearer to home where i get to oversee the building of houses. The deal is that if they are any good, i get the credit if not i take none of the blame. Win win for me. The truth is that underneath it all i know i shouldn't even be employed because i have absolutely no skills or training of any value in the building of houses. Infact i couldn't even build an ikea flat pack table. But as long as nobody finds out i'll always have a job.
Anyway ipodium nil satorium caltis troops, i'm off to Scotland to stare at myself in the mirror.
Last edited by a moderator:
