Yesterdays's
SMH saw Garry Maddox turn the spotlight on the Australian audience for Australian cinema in
this interesting article. Though outwardly a very strong year for local fare - with the likes of
Samson & Delilah,
Beautiful Kate,
Disgrace and
Balibo (with more strong titles to come) - Maddox bursts the bubble by citing some rather illuminating box office figures.
Comparing the takings, as well as the number of screens for local vs Hollywood films, puts Australian cinema in sharp relief. This - coming off the back of the shocking news that the much acclaimed
Three Blind Mice wasn't going to get a theatrical release in it's home town of Sydney - paints a fairly sad portrait of the local industry.
So what does Maddox make of this? From the sounds of things he would have filmmakers cease and desist with tortured tales and try to give audiences are more pleasant, broadly appealing cinematic experience.
Happy Feet 2 will fit that bill, as well as Maddox's second argument, that Australia films need more heroes.
Thirdly, he calls Phillip Noyce:
"All Australian filmmakers have to be aware (as Baz Luhrmann so obviously is) that making the film is just half the job," he says, "A much higher percentage of budgets need to be quarantined for publicity and marketing. We need less workshops devoted to refining our craft and a huge redirection of energy by funding and teaching bodies towards basic entrepreneurship. “The classic economic rules of supply and demand do not apply to movies; demand to see a film has to be created."
So what do I make of this? Well, firstly I think success is relative, and compared with recent years, I'd wager 2009 is shaping up to be critically and (again, relatively!) commercially strong for Australian cinema. I would have been interested to see those figures, because of course Samson & Delilah isn't going to fair well next to Transformers 2. It's a mute point.
Maddox's other points, however, I find quite valid. Much as I can appreciate the performances, stylistic and thematic strengths of films like Last Ride and Disgrace, they certainly not feel-good trips to the movies, and are thus unlikely to attract mainstream audiences. So yes, it might be nice to see less angst and a few more laughs.
But it is Noyce's comment that I find most intriguing. Given my cultural cringe confession - which, I must admit 2009's crop of films has done much to change my mind - I have long bemoaned the charity style marketing of Australian films. Surely, appealing to audiences to "support the industry!!...Please!" isn't going to be nearly as effective as a cracking campaign that piques interest based on great storylines, dynamic visuals, and yes, perhaps even some new heroes?
Just think about District 9 and the tantalising teaser, viral campaign and much publicised antics at Comic-Con. Ok, yes and Peter Jackson's name probably helped the hype. Now, admittedly I have no idea what such a marketing campaign would have cost, but the point is no-one was talking about seeing that little sci-fi film from South Africa, instead they were all gagging to get into District 9.
I would love to see a local film experience such giddy anticipation. Australia came close, but then again it was also had the quintessential, "see this film if you love your country," spin. In which case I can only hope that those much more in the know that I will take heed of Maddox's article when marketing strategies are on the table, and perhaps - cultural cringe notwithstanding - breed us a few more home grown heroes.
---
So what did you make of the piece? Has the glass really, "fallen over and smashed on the floor," or can we hold our heads a little higher with this year's batch of Australian cinema?
***UPDATE 24/8: Speaking of comparative local figures, it seems my assumption was incorrect. See this article from Steve Dow at The Age.