Building sustainable film businesses: the challenges for industry

8.4

Breakthroughs in digital production 

Low-budget filmmaking

  

In many ways the history of independent cinema 

is one of low-budget filmmaking, from Jean-Luc 

Godard’s Breathless (1960) which triggered the 

French Nouvelle Vague through to the low-budget 

films of the Danish Dogme movement in the ‘90s. 

As digital camera equipment has become cheaper, 

digital outlets for film have also mushroomed. 

Filmmakers can upload their work direct to YouTube 

creating viral marketing campaigns for their work. 

Even Hollywood has caught on to the craze for low-

budget documentary-style features: for example 

Paramount has created a low-budget horror 

franchise with its Paranormal Activity series. The 

first Paranormal Activity film cost $11,000 to make 

and went on to gross $193 million worldwide. As 

with any project, the success of any low-budget film 

depends on execution – imagination, after all,  

costs nothing. 

Many national and regional film agencies have been 

good at recognising the potential for low-budget 

filmmaking. Screen Australia has a scheme for 

funding features budgeted at under A$1.5 million 

(€1.2 million) while the Swedish Film Institute 

financed five features through its one-off Rookie 

Film programme aimed at first and second-time 

filmmakers. Rookie Film provided 80% of the 

financing for five films with maximum budgets  

of SEK 10m (€1.08 million) each. 

Identifying talent through these kind of low-

budget film schemes establishes partnerships 

between directors and producers, which can then 

be leveraged into more solid partnerships in more 

sustainable film companies. For example, Vertigo 

Films in the UK released Danish director Nicolas 

Winding Refn’s Pusher II and Refn went on to direct 

Bronson (2009) for Vertigo. The company itself has 

continued to become more mainstream, enjoying 

hits such as teen dance movie StreetDance 3D 

(2010) and its sequel.

3-D

  

3D however remains more problematic for 

independent producers, being primarily the 

province of the Hollywood spectacle. James 

Cameron’s Avatar (2009) was the breakthrough 

movie in terms of what technology can do. Despite 

costing $280 million to make, the science-fiction  

film has grossed $2.7 billion worldwide to date. 

Independent producers have also jumped on the 

3D bandwagon with features such as Streetdance 2 

3D (UK), Asterix and Obelix: On Her Majesty’s Secret 

Service (France) and the Australian 3D underwater 

action film Sanctum, which has grossed $109 million 

worldwide. Because cinema remains for the most 

part the only place to see 3D films (take-up of 3D 

television sets has disappointed manufacturers’ 

expectations), exhibitors have been keen to show 

3D features. 

Audiences however have become more discerning 

about the kind of 3D film to watch. Where 3D could 

be of more interest to the independent sector is in 

documentary film-making. Werner Herzog used 3D 

to film Cave of Forgotten Dreams (2010) about cave 

paintings in France. Wim Wenders, whose German 

dance film Pina, was nominated for an Academy 

Award, has said he will only make documentaries in 

3D from now on.

Section 8.0  

l

  How digital innovations are changing the

                               film business world  

Building sustainable film businesses:

the challenges for industry and government

34

---

There is plenty of food for thought in this report  

and in several places we allude to potential or partial 

solutions to the challenge of building sustainable 

film businesses. This would be from the perspectives 

of both the companies themselves and the 

agencies or governments that are so crucial in their 

supportive role.

We certainly do not claim, in any way, to have all 

or even many of the necessary answers. The main 

reason for writing the report, and for researching the 

topic in the way we have done, is to get the subject 

of sustainability into its rightful place on the film 

policy agenda.

In sections 3 and 6 we have identified key success 

factors that we believe are useful for companies  

and governments to bear in mind. Having noted 

these, there are a couple of additional thoughts we 

have for further discussion and perhaps the subject 

of further work by us or others.

9.1

Achieving ‘investment readiness’

We are very taken with the concept of ‘investment 

readiness’ and how it seems easier for companies 

to reach this state in other sectors rather than film. 

As previously mentioned we have identified some 

corporate success factors that do exist and have 

been shown to contribute to sustainability, even 

for film businesses. But we believe the public sector 

has an important role to play in supporting those 

businesses with ‘investment ready’ potential.

This is not about providing funds, but providing 

advice, encouragement and assistance and access  

to potential private finance sources.

So we suggest that a new activity be considered 

by some screen agencies with film expertise: the 

creation of an advisory function that on a very 

selective basis would work with film businesses 

with real potential in leading them to strategies for 

sustainability and then to sources of private funding 

that they will have identified.

This is a very specialist function and possibly the 

executives to carry it out might be hard to find. But 

in cases where they can be found, we believe the 

activity of ‘investment readiness’ support could act 

as an effective catalyst to bringing film businesses to 

that sustainability goal.

9.2

Think company not project

This has been an SPI ‘mantra’ for some time and 

maybe what we really mean is ‘think company as 

well as project’. 

The point to be made here is to encourage owner/

managers of film production companies to think 

of themselves as individuals whose careers are not 

about making great films but running businesses 

that make great films.

This encouragement could perhaps be extended to 

governments and screen agencies.  

In addition to what is suggested in 9.1 above,  

maybe one way to do this is to propose that 

whenever an agency is considering any new 

initiative (or evaluating an existing one) it should 

assess how the scheme could  best be adapted to 

deliver against the sustainable company agenda. 

This would be done by asking the simple question: 

‘does this initiative build company sustainability 

and, if not, can it be adjusted to do so?’

Where do we go  

from here?

Section 9.0

Building sustainable film businesses:

the challenges for industry and government

35

---