We received a letter from Jeshua Manu. We welcome written opinion pieces from the film community and are happy to share them in the spirit of dialogue within the industry.
Feel free to leave your comments below and join in the discussion.
I want to preface everything I am about to say with a disclaimer: I am NOT an industry veteran. I
do not have decades of experience, and I am by no means an expert on the history of our
industry. I am a mother in my 20s who is creative and attempting to establish a sustainable
income for my whānau. I represent the rising generation looking to the future of our industry.
Right now, the future we are to inherit appears very bleak, like a dark tunnel with no light at the
end. When I peer into that tunnel, I see a career dependent on large overseas productions
(which will become scarcer as studios consolidate, the US grapples with political uncertainty,
and explores federal tax incentives), and where the chances of working in high-impact ATL roles
are incredibly slim. As for becoming a producer creating internationally successful content?
That has been swallowed by darkness. My hope is gone. The air in the cave is stagnant.
We keep employing the same approaches, pouring money into the same projects, people, and
methods under the guise of risk mitigation. This only yields the same results and makes the
cave darker for the next generation traveling this path, believing it will lead to sunshine. I believe
this can be changed by caving in the roof, letting sunlight and airflow in, and allowing first-time
producers and productions access to funding.
Recently, I applied for travel assistance from the New Zealand Film Commission and was
declined. I requested reconsideration and was declined again. My intention was to attend
FILMART in Hong Kong to explore what I consider an untapped market – China. In a last-ditch
effort to attend this over-looked market, I asked my parents for help. If I didn’t have supportive
parents who had the resources to help, countless currently unemployed members of the New
Zealand screen sector would’ve missed out on the job opportunities we have brought home.
We arrived at FILMART and spent hours introducing ourselves. The Australasian presence was
essentially non-existent. We were approached by production companies and financiers
interested in New Zealand as a production destination, and found ourselves in impromptu
meetings with powerful Chinese film figures. We also walked away with open doors to several
high-profile microdrama platforms and financiers (a completely untapped market in
Australasia).
My colleague and I found ourselves operating as international attraction executives but without
the six-figure government salary. We paid our own way and opened doors that I sincerely believe
will lead to jobs for Kiwis in the short and long term. New Zealand was the first developed OECD
country to sign a free trade agreement with China in 2008, and that agreement still stands.
Being the only two Kiwis at this market was hard to comprehend.
The NZFC is one of the keepers of our industry’s resources. But what is the point of those
resources? And what are we pouring them into? The NZFC outlines desired outcomes in its
Statements of Intent and Annual Reports. Alongside important cultural considerations, there is
the often forgotten clear intention to build a commercially successful industry. These include:
- New Zealand films are highly sought after locally and globally
- NZFC-funded films have commercial success
- Achieve high quality New Zealand arts and film production for New Zealand and
international audiences - Support the growth of the local industry to create intellectual property for
international export - International relationship-building remains foundational to sector growth
It is clear that commercial and international success are central to their purpose. However, of
the $14 million poured into feature film production during the 2024/25 funding rounds, only a
fraction has been returned, even though this funding went to trusted industry veterans. These
practitioners can vouch for delivery, but not for commercial success. The current funding model
is not delivering on its own intentions, and these outcomes cannot be achieved by continuing
the same patterns.
From my correspondence with NZFC, I have been told they are “not an early-career funder.” This
function has been devolved to guilds and industry organisations that have no commercial
mandate. This seems counterintuitive to their own outcomes. How are we supposed to grow
high-impact filmmakers if those in power are unwilling to water any seedlings? Instead,
organisations like NZFC and NZ On Air continue to water plants already going to seed, many of
which do not bear any fruit! They do not consider personal financial positions when granting
funding. Because I am not established, I am poor and in need of financial assistance to act on
the traction I do have. But because I am not established, I am denied that assistance, and the
little traction I have slips away.
This is particularly painful as I see those already established receive more financial aid. Thus,
the rich get richer, while the poor remain stuck in a cycle of inequity that serves those at the top.
The successful are propelled to the end of the tunnel and feel the sunshine. Those trying to
enter are left in the dark.
But it doesn’t have to be this way! What is the use of complaining if I do not have a solution?
I’m not an expert, but here are my suggestions:
- Adjust funding methods. Take inequity and financial positions into consideration
when providing grants and assistance. I am shocked that this doesn’t already exist,
as the current frameworks allow for funds to be poured into the least effective
places – into the deep pockets of those who need it the least. Ring fence meaningful
career support for first timers and create a Micro-Budget Feature Slate with no
strings attached. This would allow NZ to actually produce producers! How the hell
are they supposed to get in as it currently stands? - Reduce internal stagnation. Make Stage One assessments blind so they pass based
on their content and market potential, not who is attached. Make all funding data
transparent and accessible on the NZFC websites. Rotate the decision panel and
external reviewers to ensure no stagnation or biases. - Redefine risk. Experience lowers delivery risk, but concentrating experience
increases systemic risk. Stagnation is also a massive risk/threat to our industry!
Producer power is not determined by how many films you have made in the past.
Without support that doesn’t just favour established practitioners, early career pathways are
stalling. We are stonewalling our own industry. A screen sector cannot renew itself if it refuses
to trust anyone new with the tools to build. We cannot claim to value commercial success,
international reach, and IP growth while preventing the next generation from developing the
skills required to deliver those outcomes.
We need innovation, and innovation requires discomfort. We must understand equity not as
charity, but as strategy that benefits the whole industry. If we continue pouring resources into
the same hands, we should not be surprised when we get the same results.
I do not want to inherit a dark tunnel. I want to inherit an ecosystem! Where sunlight reaches the
forest floor and new growth is expected, welcomed, and supported. If we are serious about
building a sustainable, commercially viable New Zealand screen industry, we must be brave
enough to let the light in, and let new growth take root.
-Jeshua Manu
If you’d like to publish an opinion piece of your own, please email stan@shownews.co.nz
