March 11, 2004

ACTORS OBEYED

All that bitching and howling and crying from the Thespian-Australian community seems to have paid off:

The fine print of the US-Australian free trade agreement has yielded one surprise – Australian subscription television providers may be forced to double their investment in Australian drama.

Present regulations demand that 10 per cent of pay-TV programming investment must be in Australian drama production, whereas the FTA foreshadows that rising to 20 per cent.

This is a significant concession to the Australian film and TV production lobby, which fought to prevent an erosion of support measures designed to allow Australians to see and hear Australian stories in cinemas and on TV.

Culture by legislation. Great.

Posted by Tim Blair at March 11, 2004 10:48 AM
Comments

it worked so well in the soviet union

Posted by: Mr. Bingley at March 11, 2004 at 10:54 AM

You've lost me - what has the Yarts got to do with culture? Particularly Australian culture? And particularly the Australian Yarts? A bigger bunch of self-indulgent whining everyone-else-should-pay-to-support-my-lifestyle clowns you'd never find. This mob make the cane farmers look like complete amateurs when it comes to sucking on the public tit.

Posted by: Paul Johnson at March 11, 2004 at 11:36 AM

I'm looking forward to hearing Robyn Nevin effusively congratulating the PM. Should I hold my breath?

Posted by: Freddyboy at March 11, 2004 at 11:36 AM

Do Australian stories end differently?

Posted by: Mr. Davis at March 11, 2004 at 11:42 AM

No, Mr. Davis, but the plots generally revolve around the other way!

Posted by: JDB at March 11, 2004 at 12:08 PM

They sure do- Australian stories always end with a nice, romantic finish- usually taxpayers being cornholed by some talentless nonce who hates Australia and Australians.

John Howard is a xenophobic, racist, reactionary bigot who is killing single mothers and eating their babies!! How's that for a synopsis? I'm not greedy; a six figure grant should enable me to develop the theme into a script.

I await my cheque.

Posted by: Habib at March 11, 2004 at 12:12 PM

Oh lord how I love the Orwellian ring to that phrase, "allow Australians to see and hear Australian stories in cinemas and on TV."

Allowed! We're going to be allowed to pay for something! Whether we like it or not! I'm so exited!

Posted by: Amos at March 11, 2004 at 12:13 PM

Paul Hogan in the King and I.

Paul Hogan doing Hamlet.

Mel Gibson doing Mad Maxx.

Whoops forgot, already been done.

That nature wonk, wonking animals. Call it Dr. DooLittle.

Yes I know his name is Steve. But come now. He is a wonk. Being from Florida, a land where people wrestle alligators for tourist amusement allows me to say he's an idiot. I drink beer with his kind of folks.

http://www.palindrome.com.au/film.htm

for you poofters who think I can't find any more Australians to make fun of.

Posted by: IXLNXS at March 11, 2004 at 12:14 PM

What makes laugh is the equation of dreary, unwatchable soapies: nerd nose-picking teenager sobbing his/her little lungs out over the fate of the environment, shags girlfriend, eats beef then puts on the Reebocks; cops in tragic love triangle as we follow them through the jungle of administration,form filling and solving crimes as a past-time; wankers sulking by a beach; and such like ad infinitum, all capped with the tedium of revolving camera angles, moody looks, slovenly written dialogue,plastic blow up characters in an irritating down at heel whining noise as accent: with great plays, satires, accomplished art.

Yartz fartz.

Posted by: d at March 11, 2004 at 12:19 PM

I see INXS is still here, and still making real sense.

Posted by: Amos at March 11, 2004 at 12:30 PM

Quote from Article:

"This clause may allow an Australian government to address industry concern that the 10 per cent rule on drama investment leads to a mere 3 per cent of Australian content on screen. This is because Australian production costs are higher than the cost of importing filmed content."

This must be true for Hollywood produced stuff? I would have guessed that Hollywood production costs as higher. Are the costs higher in Australia due to union rules? I know some studios in the US try and film outside the US because of high union costs.

Posted by: Chris Josepshon at March 11, 2004 at 01:09 PM

Izzie has a sorta Tim Blair tribute, or something, going at his site now.

http://home.comcast.net/~incubus52/fab.html
http://home.comcast.net/~incubus52/peta.html

Posted by: Screamapiller at March 11, 2004 at 01:12 PM

Habib, you need to throw in some sub-plots: how about refugees abandoned and forgotten on Nauru, cane farmers impoverished by John Howard's FTA, bitter and twisted Moslems raping white girls in SW Sydney, cab drivers bashed by drunken ALP leaders,and so on. Plenty of material to equal Hollywood's best/worst.

Myself, I'm working on "Dirty Dogs", a TV series about a football team on holidays in Coffs Harbour - their lives and loves, how they bond together, as an example of the Australian mateship ethos. I'm applying for my grant from the Australia Council now.

Posted by: Freddyboy at March 11, 2004 at 01:12 PM

Pity they didn't scratch the DMCA laws too... I guess actors have more of a hold on the public consciousness than software developers :/

Posted by: Michael at March 11, 2004 at 01:21 PM

"bitter and twisted Moslems raping white girls in SW Sydney" That won't do. How about "The evil Jews made the helpless Moslems who practise religion of peace to rape white girls in SW Sydney."?

Posted by: ic at March 11, 2004 at 01:46 PM

OT, but hilarious:

The Indymedia Morlocks have posted photos from International Womens Day.

http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2004/03/63968_comment.php

Of course it wouldn’t be a march if they didn't stop outside Nike.

Most amusing is the 3 women who form "Women for Palestine". Its just as amusing as the "Queers for Palestine" banners. I guess they all like to be second class citizens.

Posted by: Jono at March 11, 2004 at 01:48 PM

I wonder how the subscription providers will ramp up their Australian content? Re-runs of Skippy/Matlock/The Sullivans/Paul Hogan all on one channel should do it - keep it going for years I reckon. Oops dont forget Kingswood Country for all you politically correct people out there.

Posted by: Rob at March 11, 2004 at 01:53 PM

Matlock Police, please. We need an update on what's been happening out on the Burrabri Road (where the off camera plot always unfolded)

Posted by: superboot at March 11, 2004 at 02:16 PM

I'm thinking of turning my life into a script for a TV show, hey it couldn't be any worse than Secret Life Of Us (which I see is being 'retired' - maybe someone at Ch10 has been off the brightly coloured pills long enough to realize what an utter load of shite that was).
Though I imagine there would be a few less complicated love triangles, and considerably more road-rage scenes.....

Posted by: Johnny Wishbone at March 11, 2004 at 02:25 PM

Freddyboy, don't forget to beef up the numbers for the application.
`Dirty Boy' takes, say, only a thousand for equipment and, a few hundred in beer to pay of the team. Pad it out to chisel oo, say, $3.5m, from the Yartz Grantz Council.

N.B. : submission must be written someone whose mastered the jargon of `meya, kultrure and Yartz studies' or else it lacks `intellectual cred.'

I'll have a per cent of the grant for this expert advice.

Posted by: d at March 11, 2004 at 02:31 PM

"Izzie has a sorta Tim Blair tribute, or something, going at his site now."

What a peculiar person - at least he believes in Australian content!

Posted by: Craig Mc at March 11, 2004 at 02:32 PM

Wow, I hope this means a sequel to Marking Time. Australian drama at it's Aussie-hating finest.

Posted by: Crusader at March 11, 2004 at 03:10 PM

Just go kill them. I need not argue further.

Posted by: Joe Peden at March 11, 2004 at 03:10 PM

Freddyboy,

you're on a winner there. At first, you'll get a knock back, I mean, such themes as sport combined with hetro-sexuality are a bit of a no no.

But wait, tell them one of the accused was a muslim. Throw in themes involving anglo males and violence, you've got the dosh in your hand.

If you add that its all Howards' fault, you can get a lecturing post in 'meedja studies' out of it as well.

Posted by: nic at March 11, 2004 at 03:39 PM

It's a shame. Australia is so close to be being America 2.0, complete with the kick ass attitude.

God forbid you end up as Canada 2.0, complete with the kneejerk paranoia of outside media...

Posted by: Aaron at March 11, 2004 at 04:35 PM

Quote from Article:

"This clause may allow an Australian government to address industry concern that the 10 per cent rule on drama investment leads to a mere 3 per cent of Australian content on screen. This is because Australian production costs are higher than the cost of importing filmed content."

This must be true for Hollywood produced stuff? I would have guessed that Hollywood production costs as higher. Are the costs higher in Australia due to union rules? I know some studios in the US try and film outside the US because of high union costs.

No, Hollywood has already made its profit on the US domestic market,
so Hollywood product can be sold internationally at a cost much lower than Australia can produce it.

The US population is 13 times the Australian, and the US GDP is 23 times the Australian.

Posted by: peggy sue at March 11, 2004 at 04:37 PM

It's really interesting to see what the defintion of Australian content is or means these days. Lets take a look at what happened accross the Tasman over the last few years.
You had the the largest or one of the largest grossing trilogies in history being shot in New Zealand, with a Kiwi director, British actors, a combination of European/American funding with the final product- Lord of the Rings being distributed by an American film studio. How would someone define the content of these three movies. I wish someone would describe the moeaning of content to me. Maybe fat Phil could have a go.

Posted by: joe cambria at March 11, 2004 at 05:36 PM

The kindness of bloggers here is almost overwhelming. d and nic, I'll be more than happy to commission you as consultants on "Dirty Dogs"
- on handsome retainers of course.

The plot is evolving: my hero is a sensitive New Age Moslem rugby league footballer, Hassan, who while holidaying in Coffs Harbour, resists the blandishments of booze parties and bun bonding with the boys, to join a local Aboriginal womens' rights group (should be good for some ATSIC funding) to workshop minority rights.

The heroine is Brenda,a young professor of gender studies from Sydney University who persuades the team to explore their feminine side and give up sex and booze. She succeeds and marries Hassan, converting to Islam and adoptiing the veil. The team, now metrosexuals(a fashionable touch here, which should appeal to advertisers),is a failure, loses its matches, drops out of the comp and is deserted by its sponsors. However they all get big modelling contracts from Giorgio Armani. Hassan and Brenda live happily ever after.

I think I should clean up in the grants. I'll also be entering it for Tropfest.

Posted by: Freddyboy at March 11, 2004 at 08:08 PM

Freddyboy,
If you chuck in a "I hate John Howard", it sounds like something that has been done to death already in 'popular' theatre
You're on the right track though

Posted by: Johnny Wishbone at March 11, 2004 at 08:18 PM

What I know about Ozzie/Kiwi culture: Paul Hogan, Tom Cruise's ex-wife, the Croc guy, Mad Max, the early films of Peter Jackson (which were both funny and disgusting), um, a bunch of other actors like Heath Ledger and Russell Crowe who come to America and annoy me (but not as much as Keanu Reeves does), Ayers Rock, Qantas ads, that "Whale" movie (I think), Midnight Oil and that band who sang about vegemite sandwiches and the critics all said they were the new Beatles...

What have I been missing?

Oh, yes, big sharks, surfing, and koala bears and kangaroos.

Posted by: ushie at March 12, 2004 at 02:40 AM

Don't forget Peter Weir who - in any other year - would have been a strong contender for Best Director.

Of course, his pic was about British fighting the French, and that ist verboten. ja?

Posted by: Steve in Houston at March 12, 2004 at 04:21 AM

Freddyboy, this is the ripest.If you could include `street kids',` social workers', retarded teachers, and ACOSS, that will bring in grants and philanthropic donations - ah, in that case, thrwo in nasty capitalist pigs raping mudder earth and greenies and youf stoically defending the evil bitch and I reckon, you have a film greater than a L.O.R. Trilogy - worth ten instalments at least, at grants paid $300million a pop. It will sell in France.

I here a tax haven pleasure Island calling.

Posted by: d at March 12, 2004 at 11:00 AM