Part 3 - The British Film Industry

Q1. What do these statistics suggest about the current state of the British Film Industry? Does it seem to be in good shape?

From reading these statistics, it seems that the British Film Industry is indeed in good shape and still growing and becoming more popular. My principle statistics for this assumption is the cinema admissions for 2010 and the box office revenue. The admissions reached 169.2 million in 2010, a very strong total that was only 2% down on 2009 (an excusable drop when considering the presence of the World Cup and the winter's big freeze). To illustrate further the popularity of UK cinema, the 2010 box office revenue still rose despite increases in ticket costs to come to a box office revenue of £988 million, a 5% increase on 2009. Furthermore, the UK is currently the third largest film market in the world, making substantial contributions to the UK's GDP. UK filmmaking is also doing very well, adding to the success of the British Film Industry; 'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1' earning almost $1 billion at the worldwide box office and 'Kick-Ass' was the highest grossing independent title of 2010.

Q2. How does film production in the UK seem to be very different from the Hollywood model?

In Hollywood, films are produced by large studios who buy the script and then generally use tens of millions of dollars making the film, using high-paid directors and actors, and marketing it. In the UK it is different due to lack of available money. Before making a film, a production company may have to find multiple investors simply in order to fund the film. In addition, multiple production companies may make one film in order to assure enough money is put into the film to have it made. A lot of money for films will also come from the government through things such as lottery funding, whereas in Hollywood this does not happen.

Q3. What does this information tell us about the state of the UK film industry in 2010?

This information tells us that the UK film releases of 2010 are still very much dominated by the US' output. While there are still a lot of films with British connections, it is hard to truly define a film as British as funding often has to be gained from other countries such as the US. Quite a shocking statistic is that the US films released in the UK in 2010 made up 72% of the total box office earnings, showing how much of a presence US films have in our market and how UK films still have a long way to go to dominate the market, sharing only 24% of box office earnings in 2010.

Q4. Use imdb.com or another website to find out the UK distributors of the films placed 6-10. How many of them could be considered British films? What does this say about the scale of the UK film industry?

Shrek Forever After was distributed by Paramount UK.
Twilight Saga: Eclipse was distributed by E1 entertainment in the UK.
Sherlock Holmes was distributed by Warner Bros UK.
Alvin and the Chipmunks was distributed by Twentiefth Century Fox UK.
Sex and the City 2 was distributed by Warner Bros UK.

The only one of these films which could be considered to be a British film is Sherlock Holmes as it was directed by the English Guy Ritchie and set in England. However, it was produced by two American studios so cannot be defined as truly British.

This suggests that the scale of the UK film industry is still relatively small as purely British films are still not able to reach into the box office top 10, only British-American films.

Q5. Which one of these two films recently released in the UK do you think is a BBC co-production and why?

I would think that My Week with Marilyn is a BBC co-production as it looks quite stylish yet understated as well as having many British actors in the cast, which are things that BBC films are known for doing well. I am also aware that the film is set in England. The poster for The Boy in the Striped Pajamas makes it look like it could be a BBC co-production, however I think it looks a little too cinematic and highly produced for quite a simple concept which makes me think it may not be.

Q6. Why do you think the Coalition government decided to close down the UKFC?

I think that the government closed down the UKFC because it did not appear stable and sustainable with its money. It appears that it was irresponsible with money and in tough economic times the government has an obligation to be extremely sensible with the taxpayers' money and so I imagine they felt it prudent to shut down the UKFC.

Q7. Do you think the film industry needs a body like the UKFC/BFI? Why?

Yes, I do think that we need such a body because, as David Puttnam said, it's the "strategic glue that binds a disparate sprawl of auteurs, craftspeople, circus barker and market traders". There are so many roles involved with creating film and so much bureaucracy that it seems very important to have an organisational body to manage the situation.