Durban FilmMart 4: FREE THE TOWN

FREE THE TOWN poster art

I recently attended the Durban FilmMart Co-Production market, which featured a diverse slate of documentary and narrative projects that are fostering collaboration between African countries and entities outside the continent. This is the fourth in a series of blogs about projects and issues related to co-productions in the South African industry.

NYU Graduate Film Alum Nikyatu Jusu participated in the Durban narrative feature market with her film Free the Town. Nikyatu went to Durban shortly after having attended Film Independent’s Fast Track program in Los Angeles.

I followed up with Nikyatu to see how things had developed since Durban, and what reflections she had about pitching her film to different industries around the world. (She and her producers have also been accepted to Independent Filmmaker Project’s Emerging Storytellers Forum, part of the IFP Film Week in September).

Nikyatu was born and raised in the U.S.; Her parents are from Sierra Leone.  Free the Town is a coming-of-age drama that explores three interconnected stories about different strata of life in Sierra Leone. Free the Town has cross-cultural elements, including an African American character. The project’s local/global narrative blend -- which I find makes it unique and relevant -- presents certain financing challenges, which Nikyatu described to me.

According to Nikyatu, many of the production companies that she met with during FastTrack in Los Angeles had difficulty placing an independent African film like hers within their (mostly mainstream American) purview.  Conversely, when meeting with European producers and grantmakers who had come to Durban to find African projects to finance, Nikyatu found that her background as a Sierra Leonian-American who grew up in the U.S. – and the African-American elements of her film – did not always fit easily into existing models of cultural and financial support for Africa filmmakers. Nikyatu’s short films have explored relationships between Africans and African-Americans, so there was some precedent – but still, she is pursuing subject matter that has not been extensively explored.

A primary goal of Global Film Connect is to find and track innovative partnerships (both creative and financial), so I was curious to hear about Nikyatu’s meetings with South African production companies. One prospect that was explored was to shoot Free the Town in South Africa, with locations there doubling as Freetown, the Leonian capital.  Filming in South Africa would allow the film to take advantage of tax incentives there and would potentially qualify it for co-production status with other countries. (Blood Diamond was shot in South Africa and Mozambique, doubled for Sierra Leone).

Nikyatu’s preference is to shoot in Freetown itself – not only for the authenticity of the filmic experience, but to help engage and support the nascent local film industry.  (Blood Diamond, by contrast, featured an American director, a Beninois star playing Sierra Leonean, and an American star playing an Afrikaner Rhodesian).

Free the Town aims to cast Sierra Leone in its vibrant present, a culture that is more rich and expansive than the stereotypes of its war-torn history. It will be interesting to see what kinds of international collaboration prove to be effective in getting this film made. This is a project worth keeping an eye on.

Durban FilmMart 3: Development(s) in Kenya

I recently attended the Durban FilmMart Co-Production market, which featured a diverse slate of documentary and narrative projects that are fostering collaboration between African countries and entities outside the continent. This is the third in a series of blogs about projects and issues related to co-productions in the South African industry. The Donkey that Carried the Cloud on Its Back, a documentary pitched at the Durban FilmMart by producer Atieno Odenyo and director Philippa Ndisi Herrmann, is about the impending construction of what will be Africa’s largest shipping port on the Island of Lamu off of Kenya. The film, previously titled We Want Development, will deal with the tension between globalizing commercial development and protection of local homes, culture and industry. Lamu Island is a historically rich center of Swahili culture and intersection with the Arab world. There are no cars; transportation there is by boat and transportation around the island is by donkey (hence the movie’s title).  Judging from the trailer shown at Durban, this film will be an artful, allegorical look at Africa’s interaction with the rest of the world. (The port contract was recently given to a Chinese company and will feature in China’s ‘string of pearls’ strategy of commercial bases across the Indian Ocean).

I spoke with Atieno Odenyo about her experience at Durban and other co-production forums, about Kenyan filmmakers’ reliance on European grant money, and about some of the work being done to foster local industry in Kenya.

For Atieno and Philippa, the Durban FilmMart 2013 was a chance to continue to foster relationships formed during development of their feature film Two Princes, which took them in 2011 to both the Durban FilmMart and the Produire au Sud Co-Production workshop in Nantes. Produire au Sud brings producing/directing teams from Africa, Latin America and Asia together with European financiers.

Since European production grants have been practically the only way to finance certain kinds of projects in Kenya, there is a need for more support for producers within Africa.

The Kenyan Film Commission hosted a pavilion at Cannes this year as part of an initiative to sell that country. They also signed Memoranda of Understanding with South Africa and France.  These MoU’s are short of Co-production treaties but will allow formalized collaboration between Kenya and these two countries.

Atieno, who was part of the Kenyan delegation to Cannes, runs a Nairobi-based Production company called Mawe Moja. She underscored the need for support for Kenyan producers – since without that, the fostering of industry and crews may draw foreign productions without necessarily cultivating local voices.

As in many emerging film economies, skilled, affordable crews that can work beyond the limits of U.S. union parameters are attractive to foreign productions – but that alone doesn’t necessarily promote quality films of the kind that people in those countries want to watch.

Part of Atieno’s push for Kenyans’ ownership of their own industry is the development of that country’s first crowd-funding platform for film. Kenya was the first country in the world to widely use SMS bank transfer and donation technology, so it’s an environment well suited to such a venture.

The ‘development’ chronicled in The Donkey that Carried the Cloud on Its Back – and its questions of local voice and agency – will like run a strong parallel to the development of the Kenyan film industry. It will be interesting to see how both turn out.

Durban FilmMart 2: Production Challenges in South Africa – Content and Commerce

The Durban FilmMart’s documentary section showcased eight non-fiction African films in development. A dynamic and diverse lineup of documentarians delivered short pitches and then received feedback from representatives of South African production companies and foreign funding agencies  (including ITVS, IDFA, Hot Docs, and the Tribeca Institute). Three outstanding projects from the Talent Campus Durban were chosen to join the eight official doc forum participants and give their pitches. After the market I caught up with one of these emerging directors, South African filmmaker Maanda Ntsandeni, to talk about his film Parole Camp and some of the challenges of filmmaking in his country.

Parole Camp follows three characters in an alternatives-to-incarceration program called REALISTIC and was born of a very personal experience of Maanda’s: “I had a friend who went to jail when he was 18. He got out, and his friends - including me – turned their backs on him. The next day he committed suicide.” REALISTIC supports young people during their time immediately following their release.

According to Maanda, “it’s very difficult to finance a documentary like Parole Camp, simply because people are prejudiced against ex-inmates, for a lot of reasons -- one which may be that they want to continue seeing them punished, despite whatever time they’ve served inside. No one believed in this project from the very onset… I applied though various funds, (but) I think they just couldn’t understand what I was trying to do. Until I applied to the NFVF (National Film and Video Foundation). They took a chance.”

South Africa’s NFVF provides grants and loans to South African Filmmakers at different stages: education and training, development, production, and marketing and distribution. They also have other initiatives aimed at fostering local industry, including the Sediba Spark Scriptwriting Programs.

Maanda Ntsandeni received a development grant of US $10,000 last year, which allowed him to shoot and cut a work-in-progress and trailer that he presented at Durban. The Parole Camp trailer and pitch earned Maanda a further development grant of €2,500 from Worldview.

In addition to the challenges posed by his subject matter, Maanda contends that persistent racial prejudice and a lingering old boys’ club mentality in the South African film industry create other barriers for young black filmmakers. Among other things, black filmmakers can have a much harder time securing equipment than their white counterparts – a real obstacle for unestablished producers, since rentals in SA can be expensive and grant monies are often not allowed to be spent on equipment purchase. Furthermore, according to Maanda, there is a relative lack of creative cooperation between South Africa and other African countries – in part because the South African industry is seen by many other Africans as a European industry. (Countries in Francophone West Africa, by contrast, have a stronger tradition of cross-border collaboration and creative germination. More on potential connections between African countries to come in future blogs).

Maanda, who was mentored by veteran producer Neil Brandt, is now seeking a partnership with a U.S. Producer so that he can open a Kickstarter campaign. Winning the Worldview grant, a project of the Commonwealth Broadcasting Association, may open doors to other funders in the UK for this project.

Whatever route it takes, Parole Camp is a documentary with heart that is likely to find financial support and an audience.

Canada's Global Reach

From an American perspective, the big Canadian story of the last decade has been, of course, the flight of American productions headed there to take advantage of favorable tax incentives. But there are some other very interesting things happening there, too, as the Canadian film industry tries to expand its reach in terms of both content and financial influence. I spoke with Toronto native and NYU Grad-Film Alum Ian Harnarine about Doubles with Slight Pepper, the feature film he is developing within the Canadian system. Doubles With Slight Pepper is a feature expansion of Ian’s short film by the same name, which won Best Short Film at the Toronto Film Festival in 2011 and also won the 2012 Genie Award for Best Short Film from the Academy of Canadian Cinema and TV (Canadian Oscars). For the feature, Ian has teamed up with Producer Christina Piovesan (Amreeka, The Whistleblower). They are seeking funding from Telefilm Canada (TeleFilm is the more commercial, feature-film-oriented of the two Canadian national film agencies; the National Film Board has been a leader in funding animated films and also focuses on documentaries).

Telefilm historically organized its Production Program funds into distinct groups, one for French language films and one for English language films, as well as separating funds into lower- and higher- budget level categories. In a recent effort to streamline the process, Telefilm consolidated these into one major production program. (Micro-budget films will still fall into a separate category). While English-speaking Canadian films are generally overshadowed by American movies, Francophone Canada maintains a relatively high degree of prestige and audience support, with critical and financial success on the world stage. Telefilm’s current mission statement describes an increased focus on promoting Canadian content in both English and French, as well as aboriginal languages.

Telefilm-financed movies with Canadian producers but shot primarily outside of Canada have found great success of late -- notably Incendies (Jordan) and War Witch (Congo), both Oscar Nominees. About 20% of Doubles with Slight Pepper will be shot in Trinidad and Tobago, where Ian Harnarine’s parents are from.  (The short version was shot entirely on the island of Trinidad, and received a post-production grant from the Trinidad and Tobago Film Company, the national film agency).

While Canada has Co-Production treaties with over fifty countries, Trinidad and Tobago is not one of them. Still, the cross-cultural subject matter of Ian’s film – a young man’s dilemma over whether to reconnect with his terminally ill, estranged father – could bring an interesting dynamic to the English-language Canadian landscape if it finds funding at some level within the Canadian system.

Canada’s film industry presents government funding at federal, provincial, and state levels. Telefilm can offer up to 49% of eligible Canadian production costs as either an equity investment or a recoupable advance. If Telefilm comes on board for Doubles with Slight Pepper, Ian and his team plan to seek the rest from Ontario provincial funds and from private investment.

I’ve met with a number of first-time filmmakers from outside the U.S. who have chosen to make their films inexpensively and quickly in the U.S. rather than deal with the (sometimes slow) bureaucracies of their home countries’ film industries. With traction and momentum that Ian has going in Canada, and what will hopefully prove to be a smooth process with Telefilm Canada, shooting the feature of Doubles in his native Toronto could be a great homecoming.

Durban FilmMart 1: Pitfalls of Co-Production

I just returned from the Durban FilmMart Co-Production market, which featured a diverse slate of doc and narrative projects that are fostering collaboration between African countries and entities outside the continent. This is the first in a series of blogs about projects and issues related to co-productions in the South African industry. Durban FilmMart 1: Pitfalls of Co-Production

Michael Auret, Producer at South Africa’s Spier Films, delivered an excellent master class that catalogued in detail his last ten films done as co-productions. According to Auret, Co-Production (especially with European partners) is a very viable means of financing South African Films – nearly the only viable way at certain budget levels. South Africa’s Department of Trade and Industry offers a healthy tax incentive for qualifying national films or co-productions - a rebate of 35% for the first R6-million (about $662 000) spent, and 25% for the remainder of production expenditure in country. (Non-South-African films have a much higher budget threshold -- about 1.3 million -- to qualify for incentives).

Auret spoke to the Durban Talent Campus participants and shared his lessons, which are equally applicable to Co-Productions anywhere in the world. These lessons come from Auret’s experiences, especially cases in which he lost money because of problems described below.

Here are my takeaways from Auret’s presentation:

1. You must deliver your incentive. This is a no-brainer, but partners teaming up with you expect you to be able to successfully meet the requirements to get the agreed-upon tax rebate from your country. As the number of partners rise, the complications and distractions increase. Start with step one – make sure your production meets all incentive requirements and properly does all necessary reporting. If you fail to do that once, you likely won’t make another movie.

2. Be clear about deliverables. Industries in some countries tend to have more onerous requirements than others (according to Auret, films delivered in the U.S. and UK will require a mountain of legal paperwork relative to European films).

If you are the local production company for an international partner and you are handling the post deliverables, are you also responsible for delivering all the legal work for the international partner? Who is responsible for all releases, and do those releases meet the requirements of the partners in all countries? Who pays for versions of the film in different subtitle languages, etc.? Deliverables can be very expensive, and depending on the structure of a co-production agreement, often payment won’t come from a co-producer until you have met all deliverables.

3. Make sure everyone is on the conference call. If there are four countries involved, then the financial partners and producers/lawyers from all four countries need to be on the call. You don’t want a simple misunderstanding about the structure of an agreement to delay the deal or the film getting done.

4. Work with Co-Production partners that you like – or at least can share the red carpet with. Co-production is an intimate partnership, and whatever your level of involvement, you may be married to these people for several years.

ASKING THE RIGHT QUESTIONS ABOUT TAX INCENTIVES

Tax incentives – do they work? The answer to that question depends not only on whom you ask, but also on how you define success.

For producers, tax incentives ‘work’ when they help get a film financed and made -- in a location that works creatively and logistically for the film.

For craft professionals, an incentive system that ‘works’ means just that – it helps them get work (and hopefully ‘good’ work in terms of both pay and creative satisfaction).

For a local or national economy, tax incentives can be deemed successful if they bring in more revenue than they pay out to attract that revenue – which can be highly contentious and surprisingly difficult to measure.

(Here is a good description – from outside the industry -- of how politically contentious that processes can be in the U.S.).

There are also the ancillary businesses that can accrue to an economy from the presence of the film industry. (New Zealand’s big budget gamble on tying the tourism industry into the Hobbit franchise is a high profile example, but regional film boards the world over deal with this on a smaller scale.)

For a community or society, tax incentives can serve the aim of fostering local talent and local creative voices. In countries with the means, this can be the most important desired result of an incentives system.

But not surprisingly, these goals aren’t always in alignment.

It’s likely that in most cases the attraction of big budget Hollywood/international productions support the technical betterment of local craft professionals.

But when it comes to supporting local creative voices, do such productions create a trickle-down effect? Or simply homogenize the art form and raise the cost of filmmaking to a level that crowds out independent producers working on projects with locally specific content?

I am particularly interested in the ways that this dynamic is playing out in emerging economies and emerging film industries. Next week I’ll be traveling to the Durban FilmMart in South Africa. South Africa is fertile terrain for these questions because it has an active national funder, an incentives structure at least partly geared towards attracting big money studio films, and a sometimes uncomfortable co-existence between government-funded local talent initiatives, big-budget international films, and local films made and distributed on shoestring budgets.

Crowdfunding - Patronage or Purchase?

I recently attended two great Aspen Institute events that dealt with society’s investment in the arts.

The first, entitled “What Are We Worth?: Shakespeare, Money, and Morals” combined Shakespearean monologues about money – performed by Matt Damon and Alan Alda, among others – with a town-hall style discussion led by Harvard professor and social philosopher Michael Sandel. The crux of Sandel’s argument is that while marketplaces are a necessary part of society, there are certain things that should be excluded from and protected from market forces. Up for debate was the question of whether arts should be among these. (A question that would, on average, be answered very differently in Paris than it would in Hollywood).

In thinking about the future of the Co-Production, I’m considering different types of film economies and their relationship to the global marketplace. One broad trend I anticipate is that there will be increasingly greater collaborations between private and public money the world over. Financing for the arts -- especially expensive arts like moviemaking -- will be subjected to the marketplace of audiences’ ideas and tastes. But films will also continue to be partially shielded from the marketplace by the patronage of those who are willing to pay for their existence without expecting financial gain in return.

So where does crowdfuding fit into all this?

Several CRI posts by the Grassroots Distribution team have dealt with the game-changing nature of crowdfunding – addressing the benefits of gift economies and the donor-versus-investor paradigm shift that many see occurring.

This brings me to the second Aspen Institute event, a discussion on “Democratizing the Arts” with Yancey Strickler of Kickstarter and Charles Best of DonorsChoose.org.

One of the things that struck me during this discussion was the blurring of lines between Non-Profit and For-Profit entities that has seemingly emerged with crowdfunding.  DonorsChoose.org, a Non-Profit that channels funds to specific need requests posted by teachers, functions very much the same way as (the For-Profit company) Kickstarter.com.  Both platforms facilitate the actualization of something that the audience/donor would like to see exist in the world.

Neither of these offer a financial return on investment for the donor, but they do both offer an assurance that by giving money, you are purchasing/funding the creation of a specific product or service. In the case of the now-ubiquitous rewards for Kickstarter Donors, you’re also likely pre-purchasing a DVD, digital download, or ticket to a screening of the film.

So is crowdfunding a movie patronage or purchase?  It seems to be both. And it’s an important question because mounting a crowdfuding campaign and mobilizing an audience’s participation (financial or otherwise) is now a prime directive of many producers.  For these projects, the relationship between the filmmaker and their audiences/customers/supporters is now exercised to a great degree in the fundraising stage.

Last year was the first in which money given to the arts through Kickstarter outpaced funding from the U.S. National Endowment for the Arts. It will be very interesting to see how the landscape has shifted by the time this benchmark is reached in a European country with a more collectivist, government funded film industry. But I’ve spoken recently with a number of European filmmakers working on first features who are foregoing the (stable and) traditional public funds of their home countries in favor of a more flexible crowdfunding base – which they believe allows for a quicker turnaround time and more artistic control.

Perhaps what is so promising about the future of filmmaking, and expensive artistic endeavors in general, is that the modern Medicis can be anywhere in the world. And an audience member of modest means can patronize your film and purchase it in advance – which in turn allows it to exist in the first place.

In the rosiest view of crowdfunding, it is indeed a new kind of marketplace – one in which return on investment means getting to see a film you wanted to be made.

Making Movies in France - The American Way

Melanie_Small

Grad Film Alum Melanie Delloye’s thesis film Anna and Jerome, starring Élodie Bouchez, is a French road movie about a mother who doesn't have custody of her six-year-old son and decides to run off with him. Shot in Normandy, and taking full advantage of the geography of the province, this film eschewed traditional financing through France’s national and region­al film agencies. Instead, Melanie made use of a new feature of the French landscape – Crowdsourcing.

Melanie says: “We applied to a bunch of the regional grants, but we were told that in order to do it right we would have to wait a year to make sure that we met all the guichets [benchmarks]. We didn’t want to lose momentum so we decided to go ahead and make the film ‘the American Way.’”

Melanie and her producer Robin Robles raised funds through the crowdsourcing site Ulule, which accepts money in multiple currencies from inside and outside of France. Like Kickstarter, Ulule facilitates funding for a variety of projects (those currently featured on the site include film, photo, and music projects, and even an agricultural start-up).

According to Melanie: “It [crowdsourcing] is very new in France and a lot of people don’t really under­stand what it is. There isn’t even really a French word for it – we just say ‘crowdsourcing.’” To date just under 1,900 projects have been funded through Ulule – compared with over 38,000 funded on Kickstarter. And the goal of 14,000 Euros (about US $18,000) for Anna and Jerome was one of the larger amounts raised on the site – at least at the time.

The novelty of crowdsourcing in France had some benefits. Ulule was fully behind the project and fea­tured it in a number of ways (including a blog about Melanie as Ululer of the Week). Anna and Jerome also received a small amount of funding and other support from Daily Motion (the French equivalent of YouTube).

Melanie and Robin finally did get word from one of the regional film funds that they’d received a grant – but it came six months after Anna and Jerome was finished! (Most such grants require the production to take place within the specific region, province, or municipality, so it was moot.)

Productions that fall under  the guidelines of the Centre National du Cinéma et de l'Image Animée ( the 'CNC' - France's national film agency) also come with other rules, including minimum labor and benefit payments. Making Anna and Jerome outside the con­fines of that system allowed the production to function strictly as a student film, which gave more flexibility (Producer Robin Robles is a recent graduate of La FEMIS, the French state film school). So for a number of reasons, the decision to make the film ‘à l’américaine’ seems to have been a good choice.

Still, Melanie is not forsaking traditional French fund­ing methods. She is developing a feature film set in Colombia, for which she plans to find production financing within Colombia and also seek French co-production funds.

In future blogs I will discuss the Colombian film industry's new incentives system and other productions in development to be shot in that country.

Introduction to Global Film Connect

CRILOGOLRGwht

Global Film Connect is a Cinema Research Institute project that will examine the future of the Co-Production in the independent film landscape.

Beginning with the international NYU film community and ultimately reaching far beyond, this platform will explore dynamic areas of change in cross-border financing, providing a place to amalgamate information and share solutions.

The Global Film portion of the CRI blog will report on topics that are diverse in terms of both region and industry structure, paying specific attention to opportunities for international collaboration at lower budget levels.

Over the next several months, I will be blogging regularly with original content and links to other material. Some topics on the immediate horizon include:

The Paris Project and other French platforms for international investment

Austerity measures - current and impending

South Africa's government fostering local and international talent

Crowdfunding/crowdsourcing in Europe

China in the world

The South American road movie

I'm looking forward to making this a valuable resource for the independent film community.