An opinion piece by New Zealand Producer Nick Garrett.
I have been actively trying to produce films for over 8 years now. I have had the odd part-time job or contract work during that time to house and feed myself, but developing and producing films is a full-time gig. One cannot pursue producing alongside another full-time job and expect to have multiple films in production at any given time. That meant I was often living on less than NZ$30,000 a year, eating frozen vegetables and McCain Pub Style Hot Bandito wedges. I don’t have any generational wealth to fall back on, so there was also a time where I simply ran out of options and ended up on the Job Seeker’s benefit. I persevered and eventually was lucky enough to find mentors who became friends, and they believed in what I was trying to do. Looking back, I can understand why it was so hard, because although I was born and raised in New Zealand, I never wanted to make what we know as a “New Zealand film”. I was a New Zealander who wanted to make commercial films.
“New Zealand films” are easily recognizable. Set in Aotearoa, they address problems faced by kiwi individuals and families and often fall into the drama category. They fit inside a very small box. They also hit the exact criteria needed to trigger large sums of government funding. Don’t get me wrong, there are some great “New Zealand films”. I went to the Berkeley Cinema in Whangaparāoa to watch Whale Rider when I was 13 years old, and it had a huge impact on me emotionally. It is a very good “New Zealand film”. So is The Dark Horse. At the premiere I had to drive Cliff Curtis back to his hotel in Ponsonby, and he was a nice guy. Despite enjoying several of these films, I never wanted to make them because they didn’t (and still don’t) make any money. Whale Rider did very well internationally, but when was the last time that happened? Escapist, high concept films with broad international appeal are the most successful films in most markets around the world. After years of being led down a certain path, I looked around just before my 30th birthday and realised that films like Whale Rider were the exception, not the rule. Very few films currently considered as “New Zealand films” succeed internationally. I have a 4-year-old son, and New Zealand is not an affordable place to raise a family. Why would I sacrifice almost a decade of my life learning the ropes, only to find out I have another decade of financial instability ahead of me?
It turns out that making commercially viable films in New Zealand is ten times harder than making a commercial failure about New Zealand. The former is discouraged, and the latter is consistently championed. I probably could have cut the 8 years of rope learning in half by making a film about New Zealand. Traditionally funding pathways only support the development of those “New Zealand” films that fit into a small box, so a producer interested in a commercial trajectory needs to fund their own development. If you’re lucky enough to get to the production stage there are many more non-sensical bureaucratic roadblocks to look forward to as well. Yes, you read that correctly – attempting to produce films that rely less on New Zealand government funding is actively disincentivized. Which is weird, because we should be encouraging innovation and self-sufficiency. Producers are encouraged to rely on a specific government funding model that only greenlights films with limited international earning potential. Producing is a terrible job, so I don’t want to shit all over producers here. The reality is that most producers only develop feature films that they think can get New Zealand Film Commission funding – because producers are just trying to survive and not live off Hot Bandito wedges. Producers are just playing by the rules of an antiquated game. However, I think it’s safe to say that this game is no longer fit for purpose.
The jewel in our industry’s crown is the NZSPR for New Zealand Productions. This thing is a godsend for independent producers. But how are we supposed to defend a 40% rebate for New Zealand films when most films never pass a few hundred thousand dollars at the local box office? Bear in mind that the NZSPR for New Zealand Productions is predicated on a film having an “audience reach… commensurate with the expected amount of the New Zealand Rebate”. When a film receives a rebate of NZ$3,026,846 but makes NZ$894,644 from the New Zealand audience, that is not commensurate. This happens all the time, by the way, and the box office is usually a lot worse than the example I have used. On top of this, most “New Zealand films” only have a handful of international territories to fall back on because they just don’t work well internationally. Before I continue with the negatives, though, I should acknowledge that the TV/episodic side of our industry is a lot more successful with MG’s and presales. I was stoked to read about Wild Sheep Content’s partnership with Luminous Beast on Good Bones – I hope they generate some fantastic presales ahead of production and therefore don’t need to rely on soft money (NZ On Air) to get the show up and running. So, well done, guys. Now, back to the bad stuff.
Right now most “New Zealand films” have a finance plan that is 70 – 80% government money. It’s worth noting that official (and unofficial) co-productions can take a bit of pressure off the New Zealand system by opening up international discretionary funding and incentives, but your typical “New Zealand film” is heavily subsidised. Usually, that 70 – 80% is a combination of NZFC equity and the NZSPR for New Zealand Productions. On top of that, producers are allowed to recoup the value of the NZSPR as producer equity, and if they’re not using the rebate, they get a 50% corridor (recoupment position) on whatever the NZFC have invested. That’s a pretty sweet deal, so I guess there’s a lot of rich producers making “New Zealand films”, and they don’t need government money anymore, right? Not really… Because a film needs to generate revenue for producers to see those benefits.
How are we supposed to look Paul Goldsmith or Nicola Willis in the eye and defend the NZSPR for New Zealand Productions? Not only do “New Zealand films” need a 40% rebate and another six-figure injection from the NZFC to go into production, the producers are being given additional benefits that should theoretically lead to less of a reliance on government funding. Still, the only “solutions” I read about are people asking for more public money! Some major changes have just been implemented at the NZFC, and for the first time in many years the word “commercial” has begun to appear in funding guidelines – even at the development stage. I really hope the recent shift leads to more financial success for Kiwi filmmakers. There are some very talented local filmmakers with great projects, and I will always be willing to defend local films. Unfortunately, it’s just getting harder to defend the way things work here.
My point is, I think what constitutes a “New Zealand film” needs to change. A “New Zealand film” should be a film made by New Zealanders. It’s that simple. Let’s support producers and filmmakers to develop and produce universally appealing content – films that can travel the world and return the NZFC’s investment (if the film is being funded that way). We are currently denying our industry and whanau potential financial stability and international acclaim by taking such a shallow approach to what a “New Zealand film” could mean. Our homegrown talent could be supported to create world class commercial content and franchisable IP. While kiwi movies about growing up, the local dairy and sheep make the heart feel good, they doth butter no parsnips. Let producers take something to a market that a sales agent can presell or put up a solid advance for. A “New Zealand film” is not successful because a sales company has decided to represent it without providing a meaningful advance – films are products, and can often be worth a considerable amount of money if packaged correctly. We must shift this incredibly outdated focus on New Zealand box office as the most critical performance metric for a film – we are one of the smallest markets in the world, and the local data on admissions to “New Zealand films” certainly isn’t trending upwards. Let’s actively seek out the bigger budgets that come with more commercial projects, because then we can also stimulate our fragile economy. Right now we have heavily subsidised movies with bloated production budgets that don’t even work in their own market. We must focus on the business of filmmaking and be an industry actually worth protecting. Right now, we’re taking the piss, and if I was the Finance Minister in a country with a $17.31 billion deficit I’d be prioritising the health and welfare of our most vulnerable communities. We are in a recession. Our economy has shrunk in four of the last six quarters. The government has bigger fish to fry, so the New Zealand feature film industry needs to innovate and stand on its own two feet. As it currently stands, as a taxpayer and general film industry observer, it has become impossible for me to defend an industry that refuses to adapt. I’d much rather see my tax dollars go towards a hospital. How about you?
