Comments:

---

Stephen Woolley says...
It's sad that the UK Film Council, after it has cleaned up its act and cut down its own overheads, is now being abolished. One of its great achievements was in the area of backing first and second time filmmakers. Obviously it's great that the likes of Gosford Park and the Mike Leigh, Ken Loach, and Stephen Frears films were made, what's really impressive is Man On Wire (James Marsh), Bend It Like Beckham (Gurinder Chadha), In The Loop (Armando Iannucci), Touching the Void (Kevin Macdonald), Brighton Rock (Rowan Joffe), Red Road (Andrea Arnold), Intermission (John Crowley) etc, were all given the green light by the UK Film Council, disproving the myth that first time filmmakers are not to be trusted. It seems the UK Film Council is a victim of the slash and burn policy the Tories are meting out to anything that New Labour, and it's surely no coincidence that today's Evening Standard contains endless pages of Seb Coe and Boris Johnson banging the Olympic drum. Jeremy Hunt claims that money will be funneled to the filmmakers in a less bureaucratic way, but does that mean the low budget funding scheme will be reinstated? That the 200 film societies the UKFC backs will be supported? That the development funds will be made as available as they are now? And that regional funds which are earmarked for organisations like Film London will be reinstated? And if the answers to all of these questions is yes, then why are they abolishing the UK Film Council? Surely the administration of these funds will need to be monitored, contracts will have to be issued, budgets scrutinised, and yes some kind of bureaucratic process put into place. This shocking and high-handed manner with which the UKFC has been dismissed gives no promise of any fair reinstatement of support in the future. Whilst I am promoting Made in Dagenham, which is released on October 1st, I will do everything in my power to try and persuade the current government to reverse its destructive intentions towards the UK Film Council.

---

Mike Figgis says...
Interesting to speculate on the past - if Blair hadn't dragged us into a war we would still have a film council etc etc - but the fact is that we are only at the beginning of what will be a huge attack on art funding across the board. So we need to begin thinking about the new reality and using digital technology to our advantage. 20 years ago this would have been a catastrophe, right now it need not be. After all, a true independent cinema functions without milk from the tit of the government, we owe them nothing and they don't own us - the next period is going to be interesting - be there - record it.

---

Jezz Vernon, Director of Marketing, Metrodome Distribution says...
It's a huge shame - in terms of specialized film the p&a fund especially was affecting a huge cultural shift over a long period - to encourage the British public to actually understand and take advantage of the diversity we can offer them through exhibition, there's a huge world beyond studio releasing and the p&a fund was about letting the British public discover that.

---

Shane RJ Walter, CEO / Creative Director. onedotzero says...
Dependent film won't survive. Indie film will survive because it is surely that, independent. Change is no bad thing - it may provoke new models, new thinking and approaches - but the slash and burn to the ground policy is insensitive at best and pretty damn stupid at worse. As in all these things it is an incredibly hard thing to get the full facts. One fact is that the decision seems to have happened in a very rash and unthoughtful way with no consultation, no consideration of the consequences and no forward plan. Whatever the positive or negative aspects about how the UKFC ran one thing for sure is that it must be better to have it than not. For some it was a place for welcome support and development - for others a place to vent their anger and sense of injustice at not being funded - both are necessary as both POV perversely progress filmmaking and talent. On a higher level this and other cuts in the arts are really aimed at the cultural well being of this country. On that level I think it is very short sighted and fundamentally will lead to a less civilised and cultural society. The cultural and creative industries have a deep impact on our societies well being in addition to jobs and business growth - this is vital at a time of financial hardship I would argue. These also aid in promoting the UK as a leader in the cultural and creative arena abroad which has a huge amount of benefit and goodwill that comes back to all those in the UK in some way. It is this value that the government just does not understand: their 'cultural cleansing' has began! I sincerely hope we are all more resilient and carry on in some way to produce otherwise the fallout will be a rather unpleasant and culturally damaged country to live in.

---

Mark Cosgrove, Head of Programming, Watershed, Bristol says...
The announcement of the closure of the UKFC comes as a surprise. From my perspective the issues that come sharply into focus as a consequence of this sudden announcement are: There needs to be an open discussion about support for film - the business and the culture - and importantly their relationship with audiences. The current focus on support for film production needs to be balanced with an engaged discussion on how we can achieve cultural diversity on screen. Cinemas are a key place to engage audiences in the cultural diversity of the modern world and the role of film exhibition's value within the filmmaking food chain needs to be re-imagined. Film festivals have a critical role in promoting and profiling emerging talent, new voices and should be supported to achieve this goal.

---

Jamie King, director 'Steal This Film', Founder VODO says...
There's a certain gross violence inherent in any organisational form that's bound to be fingered by opponents. Anyone who, like me, hasn't been on the receiving end of the UKFC's tricky benevolence will on principle say it was mismanaged, ideologically bankrupt and, to boot, funding altogether the wrong kind of films. The truth is that as a filmmaker, I was too far off the UKFC's radar to have any sensible pronouncement on its demise. STEAL THIS FILM, after all, was pretty much a straight abnegation of UKFC's structuring principle: First, Make Money. I was as continuously surprised to be on film festival panels with them as I'm sure they were dismayed to be on them with me. Like many in this distressed industry, they looked at the idea of 'sharing' with a sort of bemused horror. I'm sure they'd have had no compunction in reporting me to the police on spec, had they not suspected there might be an angle to play in some dim and horrible future. As someone working on the edge of new distribution, I suppose it's hoped I'll say I'm excited by the UKFC's expiry. Well, maybe. There is no doubt the UK's filmmakers and film industry need to think 'outside the box' when it comes to getting our stuff out there, and that might be a bit easier when the box has just been torn to shreds, doused in lighter fuel and publicly torched. And VODO's principle: First, Be Seen, may not have been all that compatible with the UKFC's commitment to outmoded distribution systems (yes, even the lauded Digital Screen network remains entirely irrelevant to most of our filmmakers), nor to the ideology of copy-restriction, which in fact only serves a very, very few, and hardly any of them in the UK. But if the UKFC was irrelevant to me as a 'little' filmmaker, I can't as a 'new' distributor find its demise much more moving. The intrinsic error it incorporated - the impossible attempt to prop up a forlorn domestic mimicry of the Hollywood production and distribution system - was really just a reflection of a general, systemic failure to accept that the old system is busted and grab the opportunities represented by new, networked distribution. Blaming this-or-that institution is silly. We all need to think about the challenges and opportunities posed by networked distribution now, urgently, and produce together a system that can make it possible for us to produce, sustain and get our work seen. Perhaps the UKFC's exit can speed that process. In any case, if any one wants to give VODO some of the UKFC's money to help us do our bit, we'll be delighted to give you our account number.

---

Rebecca Mark-Lawson, UKFC / Lifesize Pictures says...
The UK Film Council have funded more than a thousand short films since it began 10 years ago. These original and very British films have headlined at festivals all over the world, won Oscars, Bafta's and major prizes at international festivals. Making a short film changes lives and some of the current crop of feature film talent started with shorts, most of them UKFC supported. The UK Film Council embraced the medium of shorts and really put their weight behind them as an art form. International film festival programmers ask specifically for UK Short Films as they know them to be the best in the world. Those partners that worked with them to deliver shorts, although sometimes hampered by bureaucracy and deadlines really cared about the films. The decision to axe UK Film Council smacks of petty score settling and political expediency and at worst philistinism. Who will now invest that love and care in Britain's up and coming filmmaking talent and British culture? Not commercial sponsors with their narrow creative vision and certainly not a 'rag tag' government as these. RIP UKFC. LONG LIVE SHORT FILM.

---

Rachel Millward says...
Birds Eye View Film Festival received money from the UKFC's Diversity Budget (as did the likes of b3 media & disability film organisations) and from the Festivals Fund. We've been planning for and with lots of cuts already, but this leaves us with no way of knowing where we'll be in 2012. I look forward to discovering what support there will be for Borg diversity initiatives and festivals in the future, and in the meantime we'll be getting creative with plans! My main feeling is the utter stupidity of dramatic statements of abolision before the viability of future plans is tested. It is, sadly, nothing to do with reviewing the current situation and caring about our culture and all about the drama of the political statement. That's infuriating - our government should be representing us and protecting the best interests of the country. That it clearly makes zero economic sense to cut investments that bring in a 500% profit, or even jeopardise the way in which those investments are distributed, doesn't seem to be being addressed by the treasury. Film gets a half pint of milk's worth of our tax, and yet it totally influences and expresses our culture and our collective psyche. I've lost any ounce of trust I had in this government - even to manage their mistakes carefully!

---

Liz Harkman (Director, Encounters Festival) says...
Having worked for the BFI during the final days of BFI Production and the UKFC for a number of years at the beginning of my career I was deeply moved by the government’s recent decision to close it. Not only for the impact it will undoubtedly have on my current position but also for the 75 members of staff who work tirelessly and are committed to the industry as a whole. However, what scares me is not the closure of the UK Film Council but the sheer speed in which the decision has been made, with what appears no consultation and very little evidence of thought for what will replace it to ‘continue to distribute lottery funding to film’. In the long term perhaps this will encourage more creativity from where funding comes from and less of a reliance on the public purse or lottery? What is a huge shame is the organisations that will disappear as a result of this decision, no-one knows what or who that will be but I can guess it will be the smaller, more interesting organisations that directly support the public by providing interesting and cultural film activity, the young by providing training and access to careers in the film industry and the filmmakers who create the films (long and short) that we want to watch – whom currently depend heavily on public funding and haven’t been given the time to build alternative revenue streams to support them through this transition. We have all been expecting the arts and culture will suffer at the hands of this coalition – but such severance was perhaps unexpected! It’s time to speak up and ensure that the government take note of all the good things that the UK Film Council supported that weren’t just from the production funds and stops bitching about the negatives. The industry pull together to lobby that the level of support stays the same, whomever gets to dole it out.

---

David Sproxton (Aardman Animations, Chairman, Encounters Festivals) says...
The sudden announcement of the scrapping of the UK Film Council took many people by surprise including the Council itself. Whilst talks had been going on for many months with the Conservatives, when in opposition, there was certainly no indication that the axe would fall. The Government are saying that they still support film and film culture but there isn’t a published plan of exactly how they will do this, although it will probably fall to the BFI to pick up the baton. What isn’t mentioned in the many despatches about this announcement is the vital work UKFC and others have been doing in developing talent for the industry. And this is the point that is being totally missed. There isn’t an economic argument for scrapping the UKFC – its budget is tiny compared to the Arts Council , for example – and it’s been proved time again that the money that the UKFC spends produces 5 times the value for the country and a vast amount in VAT for the Treasury. So the economics don’t stack up. It’s a purely political move but the consequences of this decision for this sector of the creative industries could be quite dire in the medium and long term. The industry needs a constant flow of imaginative, committed and bright talent that can tell stories visually. This talent lies scattered all over the landscape, not just in the comfortable homes of the middle classes sitting in Surbiton. The key thing is to find ways of discovering that talent, developing it, getting it to practise and giving it confidence to become a strong player in the industry. Like so many skills, this all needs to start at a young age and this is an aspect that the UKFC and its various partners and agents have been helping with over the last decade : First Light, Second Light, Digital Shorts, working with the Regional Screen Agencies to develop talent in the regions, Skillset, Schools Film Clubs. One of the ways that new talent gets exposure and a greater understanding of how the industry works is through attending and submitting work to film festivals. Although the UKFC had reduced its funding to festivals recently the new Innovation Fund was angled at developing new talent and ideas in the digital age. This is an area that festivals like Encounters are also focussed. By committing small amounts of money to these events the UKFC helped lever up more finance and sponsorship from other parties, enabling these festivals to continue to promote and expose emerging talent. As these funds decline so will these opportunities for talented people to find their way into the industry and the public will have far fewer opportunities to enjoy contemporary British and International short films. The axing of the UKFC threatens not only Encounters Festivals but many other events around the country. This is vital work which isn’t supported by any other body at the moment and certainly won’t be funded by the industry directly because of its current paucity. Once these initiatives dry up the talent supply chain also starts to dry up with the inevitable consequences for the industry and the UK. I’ve yet to hear how this work will be carried but it is essential as without it there won’t be any new film-makers to support and we’ll be back to the dark days of the 1970’s and a1980’s. For this reason alone the Government’s decision to scrap UKFC is simply stupid.

---

Jess Search, Co-founder of Shooting People says...
Shooting People was asked to contribute to a piece in The Times on Saturday, alongside opinion pieces from director Alex Cox and UKFC Chair Tim Bevan. This is what I wrote: Years from now, film people will ask each other: “Where were you when you heard that the UK Film Council was shot?” I was at my desk, eating my lunch. After I dropped my sandwich, I put up a poll on Shooting People, the online community representing more than 35,000 independent film- makers. Votes and comments flooded in. Did the rest of the country notice? I’m not sure if most people know that we have a Film Council. And yet I believe that film matters. Film is the popular art form of our time. Studies show that a thriving artistic sector is a key driver of economic growth in knowledge economies. We all benefit from great British films and film-makers. More than half our respondents thought that it was a bad decision, 10 per cent thought it was a good one and 30 per cent were waiting to see what happens next. There was alarm that no new film policy had been sketched out. Ben Blaine, a director, commented: “As of this afternoon there is a gaping hole in the middle of the UK film industry and, as yet, no coherent plan as to how it is going to be filled.” The bigger reality for our members, however, is that the way in which films have been made and distributed over the past 40 years is dying. The new public austerity is a blow but while we might argue about whether such savage cuts are needed we cannot dispute that digital technologies have changed the world in which we work. The film-maker Mike Figgis, Shooting People’s founding patron, posted: “So we need to begin thinking about the new reality and using digital technology to our advantage. Twenty years ago this would have been a catastrophe, right now it need not be. After all, a true independent cinema functions without milk from the tit of the Government, we owe them nothing and they don’t own us. The next period is going to be interesting — be there — record it.” The Film Council was founded in 2000, in the last days of the old analogue world in which films were funded by investment and pre-sales, sold to distributors and seen at the cinema, then released on DVD and sold to television. The UKFC made some brilliant films and launched some outstanding film-makers. The model still delivers for a franchise such as Harry Potter. However, almost two years ago Mark Gill, a former president of Miramax Films, was asked how bad things were for independent film. He said: “Yes, the sky really is falling.” The future of film-making lies elsewhere; online, on the move, with films made by professionals and amateurs, shared as much as sold, more cheaply made, as likely to be funded by brands or fans. The Film Council’s remit limited it to films made for cinema. It was too large, too bureaucratic and a little too self-satisfied. The Innovation Fund, which was due to launch this year, was five years late. True innovation is happening elsewhere — Shooting People’s members have been making exciting experiments with funding and distribution. Franny Armstrong crowd- sourced The Age of Stupid and got fans to organise screenings. Jamie King used pirate networks to distribute Steal this Film to more than five million people. Rupert Murray’s The End of the Line was funded by foundations and made a distribution partnership with Waitrose. Morris: A Life with Bells On used a Facebook petition to secure cinemas, without a distributor. Whatever comes next, we need a film policy that looks to the future. The lottery money that remains should be redeployed to make the UK not just a place of film excellence but a leader in film innovation.

---

Peter Devonald says...
Totally depends on what replaces it, but the UKFC has 10 years of excellent track record --- so feels like a false economy to abolish it. Feels like a shamelessly political decision that makes no sense - certainly not economic, financial or cultural.

---

Andrew Robertson says...
It seems to be wrong-headed in that the Film Council has funded films which then go on to fund jobs and contribute back to the Government through cinema takings. I think they've stepped in here without evaluating the situation and it'll be very hard to u-turn. It's worse than the BBC scrapping 6 music.

If you had to draw up a list of challenges that you would expect the UKFC to meet in order to justify its existence, I think you'd find that it's probably met them. Looking at the the list on the Guardian site, (http://tiny.cc/mhtsz) the films made have taken a good £20+ million in the UK alone whilst also funding a lot of jobs, so I don't see how this makes sense.

As far as I'm aware the UKFC has always been one of the first ports of call for filmmakers and helps sponsor a great many UK film events. We really need an organisation like this to exist.

---

Ben Blaine says...
I think it's less about the UKFC and more about the manner in which this decision was taken and the message it sends. As of this afternoon there is a gaping hole in the middle of the UK film industry and as yet no coherent plan as to how it is going to be filled.

Also lets not forget that the UKFC was set up to be everyone's whipping boy. Amid the cynical voices archly "sighing in relief" at today's decision I hear an equal split between those who hated the UKFC for being too pretentious and uncommercial and those who hated it for only caring about making money.

To mix a metaphor... you can't please all the people all of the time but if you're up shit creek don't just throw away the paddle.

---

Daniel Cormack says...
Quote from Variety: 'Jeremy Hunt, the government's culture secretary, said it would transfer key UKFC functions to other bodies "to continue to support our sectors and preserve the necessary expertise."'

Is it being "abolished" or is it just the "merger" with the BFI that was planned by the last government anyway?

---

Adrian Hume Robinson says...
I didn't vote for any of the three main parties. Hated the last lot, quite rightly didn't trust the new two. So at least I can say that, whatever the people at Westminster get up to, they don't do so in my name!

Not that I would have ever asked the UKFC for money anyway.

The introduction to this poll seems to lack neutrality, I must say. It tells people somethng is 'shocking' (as fact) before anybody gets a chance to decide for themselves whether it is shocking or not.

Shocking, politically? Can I write you all a list? I'd be here all day...

---

Richard Brunner says...
I'm devasted - to think that I may never again taste the Colonel's Zinger Tower Burger, or experience his Spicy HotRods. I knew that it was a bad move not to sell the Double-Down in the UK, but I didnt think it would mean KFC would end up getting shut down.

Sad times.

---

kate jessop says...
As an animation filmmaker with an experimental edge UKFC never/would never have funded me as I don't make live action dramas about the break down of the family.
However I have concerns for all the indie festivals and organisations who have supported me and the work that I do (and rely on public funds for their existence) being effected by their demise

---

Somerled Mackay says...
Hoping the crusty old UKFC is replaced by something leaner and more geared towards putting together financial collaboration and partnerships rather than spending most of its budget employing themselves and running expensive offices

---

charlie phillips says...
It really does depend what happens next.
If we're talking truly independent, then UKFC wasn't about that because it's already-limited funds had to show a commercial benefit. They couldn't support an independent film culture because there was;'t enough cash. So for independents - as in not associated with a known prod co, or a known name - it will make difference.
But the disaster is for training, exhibition, and the regions. All the focus has been on "oh god, where will mike leigh get his films funded?" but actually the disaster is "where will the next mike leigh be given the time and space to be trained and developed?"
The ideal thing would be to decentralise the functions of the UKFC, and spread it amongst autonomous regional bodies as subsidiaries of local governments, but clearly, the Coalition just want to cut cut cut, so i think we may end up with nothing

---

Ed Griffiths says...
Undoubtedly there will be a lot of well connected people who will speak a lot more eloquently and knowledgeably about the demise of the UK Film Council than I can.

I only ever went to one seminar there at their invitation in 2009 as an aspiring screenwriter. Even though I didn't expect to go again or receive support I see the loss of it as criminal sabotage of an essential earning creative industry by the UK government, which seems to find endless supplies of money to give to an irredeemably corrupt and irresponsible banking sector and financial services industry. Fifteen million to support something with this potential earning power and returns (if chancy) is miniscule in comparison.

The UK Film Council was an essential point of contact and information for aspirant film makers, writers and others. With Skillset and the former New Producers Alliance and SHOOTING PEOPLE itself they all formed an embryonic and diffuse but real network that allowed people to meet and discover the industry.

Personally I feel if BECTU and the BFI had been more closely integrated with it the government would not have been so quick to target it. Far more than just a producer of films its real role could have been more like a life support system for the talent here that inevitably goes to the States for the real opportunities.

And this would seem to be the sad fact of the message from the coalition - emigrate. They are robbing this country of the chance to revitalize its still potentially great film industry. Instead Britain will be relegated to just another 'cottage industry' site from which the American industry draws its pool of the best talent.

British film culture, talent and writers will all come to be defined only by what the American industry makes them, and that is sad, considering that George Lucas, Steven Spielberg and Martin Scorsese themselves acknowledge Powell and Pressburger as a key influence and Hitchcock is part of the high canon of suspense cinema among so many other great examples.

You can always try Canada, though!

---

Susan Everett says...
The UKFC was set up 10 years ago, as a way of being able to bring funding, production, training and distribution together. Together with the regional screen agencies, it made film more accessible and potentially commercial - and 2009 was its more successful year yet. The government has not thought this through. This will take us back to the bad old days where nothing joined up fully- and there was no real film life outside London. What system will they put in place? Will producers have to pitch to Jeremy Hunt or David Cameron? This is a massive step backwards for the UK Film industry. Shameful.

---

Mark Jacobs says...
Given that this website is one of the few in the country that promotes the non-payment of workers (from wherever the funds originate) I fail to see that it can speak with any moral authority on the use of public funds.

---

Cherry Bennet says...
I think it's a good move for the UK Film/Media industry in general. Film is a business, it should be commercial, it's something we're good at and shouldn't be left for support by a quango with limited resources and a narrow remit.

---

jane foster says...
I do believe that the film industry in the Uk really needs help, especially in getting features by new directors up and running to be profitable,not just win at festivals, and lots more help is needed with the commercial aspects of production - However I was never that impressed by the film council,even though they were good in some areas. They had a tendency to either support low budget , festival worthy, boring urban comment films, or dead certainties from working title which mean they could get back their investment. I never minded this, and they had no choice... but it wasn't any good for building a viable, commercial film industry. More schemes along the lines of the microwave model would be a better idea. However, it may improve if it's changed so I await developments.... and as far as i'm concerned, they might just turn out to be better than what has gone before...

---

simon foster says...
Although I never benefited from any development or production finance, (and on several occasions I had spent weeks filling in forms and providing paperwork only to get a one line rejection letter or email without the screenplay even being read), I did benefit from the UKFC's financial support of events and networking both in the UK and abroad. So my feelings are very much dependent on what happens next - and that's not clear. Britain definitely needs a central body representing and promoting British films both here and abroad. It certainly appears that there is no plan behind this policy and that's a bit scary.

---

Tom Kerevan says...
This is a horribly ill-thought out decision. They are saying they want to get rid of the 'middle-man', but the UKFC was never designed as that; it was meant to get the funds into the right places by people who care and have expertise to cultivate talent, then allow that emerging talent to get a foot in the door which boosts the British Film Industry as a whole. And all that for just £15M!

It's kind of like Man United abolishing a large chunk of it's youth scouting and training programme. Might give you more cash now, but they'll suffer in the years to come.

---

Roland Moore says...
Hunt's decision is short-sighted as less films will now be made because of lack of funding and the British Film Industry will become even more disparate. Why don't the Tories hit the Banking Sector (who caused all the mess in the first place)? Oh, I forgot, all their mates work in the City don't they..?

---

Tomás Sheridan says...
My ONLY fully funded film was part-funded by UK Film Council, couldn't have done it without them, they totally jump-started my career. I doubt they could be replaced with a better organisation and I cringe to think they might be removed and not replaced at all!!!

---

Maz Lewis says...
Well it's obvious... Conservatives are in CREATIVITY is obviously out!! I knew this would happen once they came into power!! A disgruntled Maz

---

Mark Dobson says...
How will this effect Shooting People ? How much funding does Shooting People get from the UK Film Council ?

The manner of the announcement is unfortunate, no debate, no discussion as to how costs of running the Film Council could have been reduced, just a curt decision to cut what can only be seen as a soft target.

---

Grant Keir says...
Charlie Phillips is right that the real disaster will be for training and support for festivals that allow the film making community to meet and share our passion for all sorts of film that does not get any mainstream release to be shown. But change is also an opportunity. In my view, we need a serious campaign to re-introduce an 'Eady Levy' micro-tax on Box Office (and perhaps also a micro-tax on some of the big new digital players like Google) to fund a real fund to promote, develop and train film making in the UK - not unlike that which exists in France, for example...??

---

Heather Millard says...
The UKFC fund only a small handful of productions and they seem to be more inclined to fund films that they have a personal involvement or liking for.

I have never found the UKFC to be unbiased nor non-political - thus a new system should have been in place a long time ago.

If they scrap the UKFC only the handful of producers/production companies will suffer, those that were dependent on the UKFC's support. Most independents have always had to find their own way, be creative and look for alternative sources. Now it should open up to a new and more balanced filmmaking circuit in the UK.

If only UK Broadcasters could take similar advice.

A shift in positions of individuals and a shift in politics needs to take place before we can ever see a fair balanced overview of the filmmaking industry in the UK.

If the UKFC are no more - so what? We will still find a means to keep producing. Maybe we will be even more creative, maybe the digital age has replaced the UKFC any way?

The UKFC ended up being more like a business model, a case where it's not what you know it's who you know - a financial system where filmmakers were still raped of any profit that could come from a theatrical release of a film. The whole system needs to be redefined any way.

I do not agree that there should be no funding available for UK Independents, but I certainly believe that the UKFC was never an unbiased medium in the first place.

A culture of change is happening now, the greed that has led us to here has got to stop and we need to stop living in the past anyway.

People who forget their past have trouble in tackling the future. Those of us who never received funding from the UKFC and those of us that did, we will see a clear divide with those ready to move forward be creative and those that wallow in the past of self-pity because the no longer readily available funds from the UKFC mean they have to think outside the box.

---

vasco de sousa says...
15 million isn't really going to fix the budget.

Looking at the UKFC's website, it appears that it's total cost is more than 15 million. Still, it's nothing compared to the total budget.

I feel bad for the adminstrators who will lose their jobs. Hopefully they'll find something else.

I think the film industry will pull through. My belief is that it's the emerging talent, not government subsidy, which has brought British film so far.

---

cath le couteur says...
Hi. Cath - co-founder of SP here. The open market, the BIG society or whatever the Tories ('coalition' govt, natch) want to call it, always fails culture. No matter how important many of us may think public support for the Arts is, it does always gets bludgeoned by the right. Hunt actually volunteered for his department to be the one to take on the biggest cuts. He volunteeeeered. And with no statement about ongoing support being forthcoming, we as Independents WILL suffer from that impact - skills, training, public appetite for film, festival promotion, jobs etc etc. But there is a fundamental point too about how independents make/distribute work anyway and have been seeking to engage their audiences on their own. The whole area of indie filmmaking/technology is also SO damn different now… digital street smarts are where new opportunities are emerging AND being taken up by independent filmmakers in vastly different ways. As buildings do or don't get concreted up - it's the Indie's who will still continue to pull out the jack-hammer - forever coming out on the other side of the road.  This is really where we need to support and learn from each other. If I could, I'd jack-hammer a very big hole in front of Hunt's door at the same time.

---

Emily Corcoran says...
I forwarded the article in Screendaily announcing the abolishment of the UK Film Council to some film maker friends. The majority responded with a few choice words then ending with 'serves them right'. Most of the film makers I know, applied upteen times and were never considered - these are film makers with features under their belt. If the funds are redistributed to other bodies, I think it could be much more interesting and could mean that people/projects that were not attractive to the film council to fund, may now get a look in. Otherwise, we'll all just carry on as we most of us did - without government funds!

---

Paul O' Connor says...
The UKFC tried to take 100% copyright on our film and once challenged couldn't tell us why they actually needed it, just that it was the policy!

It was the arse leading the head. All negotiations were so tedious to the point that we wore T-shirts which said FCUK when we went to hand over the contracts. ps-we won and never got copyright and we got the funds after a lengthy battle.
So good riddance to them I say!

---

Stephen Homewood says...
Typical short sighted reaction - cut funding despite it being a money making sector.

---

Drea Davila says...
The arts should never be stop being funded, its not only a way of free expression and happiness but it also provides many jobs! It is an outrage that they are even thinking of closing the UKFC down, it will leave independent film makers in an awful position which surely cant be right for the economy, closing it down might seem like a quick solution for saving money but it can be catastrophic for the economy in the future whilst allowing the big shark -big production companies- with all the fish to eat!

---

Rick Mcleod says...
It's too early for us to make judgment on this issue, we need to see what comes in its place, but I believe this is only the start of the shake-up, the regional screen agencies will be next and that could be a good thing for the majority of indie film makers, the way I see and hope it comes true for us all is that as one door closes that hasn't helped many of us, another will open that will offer better opportunities, we'll have to just wait and see what happens...

---

Louis Paltnoi says...
Its extremely short sighted to abolish without consultation or without a defined blueprint for the future, especially as the film sector is in rude health, generating a lot of revenues for the UK economy and employing tens of thousands of people.

However, the UKFC is not without its faults and big shortcomings.

For example 8 of the UKFC board are on over £100,000 per year and 3 over £150,000. For a public body to have these astronomical salaries in the current economic climate is outrageous and arrogant.

Why don't they do a big cost cutting measure across the board within the UKFC first, slash salaries within and streamline the quango.

If the top 8 highest earners within the UKFC took a 30% pay cut and 1 or 2 posts were actually abolished / merged, the savings on salaries alone would be £600,000+ per year.

Hows that one for starters?

---

Charles Wood says...
In some ways the government is right to axe something that should be able to be generated by private groups and finance.

However I have always believed the British upper classes who are vastly overrepresented in the industry of Tv and film would finance even more about themselves. Most of us don't take drugs and are not so bored out of our minds that we think up schemes to rob banks or become gansters. So I do think many of the funded ideas are culturally bankrupt.

The real question HOW do you fund REAL representative culture? Let me be blunt and perhaps non PC: I do not need to be guided, a lesbian (sorry if you are lesbian AND a damn good film maker), disabled or whatever to have GREAT film ideas. In every case and ability though we DO NEED FUNDING based on talent and originality, and the funding MUST take cultural risks.

It is a huge shame that we continue to see huge amounts of American crap in our cinemas and on TV: trivial soaps, films based on effects, car chases or shooting people (and being the winner). This NOT what the UK is about, and it about time our government reflected the MASS of the people and tried to make this industry really work.

The first thing they could do is INSIST that 85% of the BBC drama and film budgets are spent entirely on BRITISH product. They should also restrict air time on all other services in the UK to a similar level. Eventually the channels would catch on and start making material in the UK and our EX colonies around the world. It is one hell of a lot bigger and more interesting that JUST West coast America..twisted morals, religion, guns and all!

---

Tim Prescott says...
The BBC reports: "The Department for Culture, Media and Sport said film funding would continue but would be distributed through other bodies." Seems pretty vague to me.

Whether this transpires to be the "correct" decision or not, it's the government's duty to clearly state where filmmakers can now go to look for film funding.

One can only hope that these other bodies will collectively strive to support a wide variety of creative ideas and not just films that deal with subjects such as "the breakdown of family" as another Shooter put it.

---

Chris Pinches says...
An annual budget of £15M is a drop in the ocean really - I believe the NHS spend more than double that on staff cars alone for instance.

---

Neil Oseman says...
Good riddance to bad rubbish.

---

Adam Bromley says...
The British Film industry does need some kind of support but I'm not sure the Film Council was it. With so much money to distribute each year, being able to cite Bend it Like Beckham and Slumdog as examples over 10 years of work isn't really enough.

I was also shocked to hear the level of salaries. Let's see what replaces it. Something leaner, less box-ticking is probably better.

---

richard dunkley says...
15 Mill is about the amount the disgraced head of BP is walking away with for failure and a big bankers annual bonus, etc, etc... the Culture we live in. More important is the figure (don't know if correct), that the Arts put £4 back for every £1 of funding put in. Also if we are in for a period of total misery due to cuts everywhere, surely a few million is in order to try and keep the population from depression and suicide? There are many things already to intensely dislike about this hypocritical Government

---

David Thomson says...
Societies are primarily remembered by their culture. This is a terrible decision, not just from an industry and audience POV, but also from an economic POV - it just doesn't make sense.

---

Mazin Power says...
With a 25 million yearly budget, I don't think the UKFC is as important as people are making it out to be. Independent film isn't going anywhere, we just have to keep adapting and growing.

---

Tim iloobia says...
people will always make work if they have drive and motivation. The end of the UKFC will not put a stop to innovative projects and the freedoms the new digital realm offers film-makers. Many of those lamenting the loss of the UKFC would have had no hope of receiving funding anyway.

---

Ben Richardson says...
It's a challenging thing to poll on, as my gut reaction is: of course it is a bad decision. But, I'm holding back on making a lasting judgement because I don't actually know, when I think long and hard about it, what the Film Council actually does. I think their impact could have been a lot bigger than it has, and I think the crucial test will be when we know how we as independent filmmakers can now access public funds. I suspect that a lot of people will make - rightly or wrongly - a gut reaction judgement that this is bad news for UK film. But we'll only know the lasting impact of this decision in a couple of months. Perhaps you could do an analysis for us all on what the impact will be on funding, where to get funds from, what alternative sources/bodies will funding be channelled through? Let's be broadsheet about this, rather than tabloid...?!

---

david l. williams says...
The UK has some of the best industry talent in the world but why then has our industry for so long seemed very clubby and generally exploited rather than nurtured new talent? Funding has long needed to shift from production to distribution to help create a real and viable market for UK films because at the moment it only incentivizes increasing budgets to increase production fees. The market, which the conservatives profess to love, does not currently exist but it could. The funding structure needs reforming but the Conservative Government has slashed and burned when it could create and nurture. There is a huge opportunity here for the Government of the day to save and build the UK film industry. It looks at the the moment like this may go begging. You have to ask yourself, why? David L Williams, Director/Producer, Beyond the Pole

---

Kate Herron says...
I work in the independent film arena, and it is crucial for there to be a central body dealing with this industry. The UK should be proud of the creativity, talent and expertise cultivated here. It is a great export, provides a valid alternative to the Hollywood studio, and it has proven to be very profitable. So doing the sums, keeping the UKFC should be essential if the government is to support profitable businesses and rebuild the country.

---

Philip Wood says...
This is a major issue that raises several points.

1 - is not most of the money from the Lottery? How will this now be dispersed? The BFI is now a charity and won't be able to fund commercial projects, so will there be a new body setup? If so, surely this body will incur admin costs and have to put into place some kind of decision board to select where the money goes. The Film Council may have had high admin costs and the issue about some of the high wages paid was significant, but won't a new body need people to run it and admin costs? Would it not have been cheaper to restructure the existing body than create a new one and incur all the setup costs - I'm sure the costs of the setup of the Film Council offices ran into millions.

2 - Production. Whether you approve or not of the selection of what projects were funded, and yes, there were several bad choices made which lost money (just like any studio or large production company) overall the projects supported by the Film Council were both commercially and culturally successful. In which case, in commercial terms (and the oft quoted figure seems to be that for every £1 invested, they saw £5 at the box office) why is the Film Council being closed? On the other hand, it did seem that a lot of Film Council production funding wasn't competitive in terms of investment returns - if these films were overall as successful as shown, then the Film Council should have been receiving most of its production investment back each year.

3 - Exhibition and distribution. Aside from the production debate that always has supporters and detractors, one area that needs Public support more than others is that of Exhibition and Distribution.
Schemes such as the P&A fund, whilst not perfect have meant that many 'specialised' films got much more cinema play than would have done otherwise.
Similarly, the Digital Screen Network was a bold move to kickstart the Digital revolution and saw the UK leading the way in this respect. Yes, it wasn't perfect and serious questions need to be asked about why some of the major players that received funding haven't met their targets for the screening of specialised film, but overall it was certainly beneficial for the UK film industry. And if it is to be continued in some form, again would it not have been better to improve what was there than start again?

The recent move by The Film Council to restructure the production funding into one pot and introduce an innovation fund seemed to be quite a forward-thinking one, moving away from purely commercial concerns and towards ways in which the industry and audiences would benefit.

Lastly, what will happen to the Education support, such as the Film Club? Don't many of the major festivals such as Edinburgh and London receive support from the Film Council? If the Lottery money is still there for them, how will it be given out? And when will this system be implemented?

In summary, whilst the Film Council is certainly not perfect, it has done many positive things for the industry. If there is still Lottery money for film, then there will need to be a new system put in place for this and seems a major concern that a) there is no new system for this already or any kind of idea about it and b) that the new system will need to spend a lot of time and money in order to set itself up, neither of which we have.

---

john barlow says...
The decision to terminate the Film Council is very shortsighted and detrimental to the economy. The existence of UKFC has lead to a flourishing Film Economy which more than returns the investment in tax revenue and spending into the UK economy. This will hit jobs and increase unemployment thereby pushing up welfare payments and will also diminish the image of the UK abroad as British films have been instrumental in attracting tourism and also promoting the sales of Uk goods abroad.

---

Pradeep Shahi says...
It was probably only one of the organization that was so sucessfully maintaining the quality of British Cinema infront of Hollywood. But since it is close, God Help British Cinema.

---

Mel Melcer says...
Definitely a bad decision. The promises of new funding though BFI are vague at best and the whole thing will probably take ages to set up. At best it will deliver the same thing as the newly restructured UKFC, at worst, we will see the funding limited or cut altogether.

A point that particularly bothers me is what's going to happen to the short film funding initiatives. While not perfect, they are the only place where beginning filmmakers can get some funding for their projects. Where will we go now?

---

Nick Black says...
I agree with Mike Figgis. no more government tit, they don't own us and we don't owe them the time of day.

---

Mike Valente says...
it's outrageous,any person wanting to be a politician should automatically be disbarred from being one! The UK Film industry deserves more funding and tax breaks not less.

---

Ian Vernon says...
The UKFC may have it's fans or opposition within the independent film world. BUT IT'S ALL WE HAVE!

---

says...
A great exmaple of the Tories reverting to type - just makes it even harder for up and coming Brit talent to get noticed and even more profits from films made by Brit talent flow back into american pockets. Heres a thought - wy not can that piece of complete nuclear folly Trident or perhaps the UK Royal Familiy... equally useless.

---

Brek Taylor says...
I think it's astonishing to discuss the abolition of the film council without commenting on how else the government can support film-making. It reads as the government trying to ignore or eradicate an art which hugely benefits from popular growing technologies. Perhaps this is their reason for choosing film over theatre or music? I rather hope the industry will thrive as film-makers have more to react against now.
My biggest concern is it will be harder to grow UK film friendly audiences and generate strong returns as we won't have the money to compete against American promotional budgets. Eeeeeek!

---

Ellejay Stacey says...
I don't understand the thinking behind the decision. While it may save money in the short term, what about the money Independent films bring into the country,not to mention the jobs it creates. When we look at the number of people in Art colleges and Universities studying film we have to think about how many people will be out of work when we are limiting the funding available to them for future projects, how much more will be spent on people unable to find work now. A big part of the Lib Dem campaign was an importance in putting more money into the arts and culture of this country as it is our fastest developing market,what's happened?

---

says...
If they are going to take away something which has been an enormous help to British film makers across the board, they must replace it with something equally good or better. The British film industry is relatively small as it is - to remove this would be to take away much of the future of film makers in this country, or else will send our talent abroad to seek education or funding there.

There must be something to replace it.

---

Jack Jones says...
Look at the industry's progression since the council started operating.

---

Michael Riley says...
With so few sources of film finance now available in the UK the removal/reduction of one of such a key cornerstone and pump-primer as UKFC is going to have a devastating effect on the industry. Aside from development/production support, their work subsidising the distribution of smaller UK films gave UK audiences the chance to see work not otherwise available against the all-devouring Hollywood blockbuster machine.

---

shirley day says...
I am not sure if the UK film council funded the regional development agencies for film. The regional development agencies I know are very patchy, but I do see a lot of money being squandered and used for the wrong reasons with the agency I am attached to. I think it is imperative that some core part of the UK film council does continue. Even if they only give small grants, getting their backing gives the ability to attract other grants - it makes your project really kosher in the eyes of other funders. Closing the UK film council completely is short sighted. It sends all the wrong signals. I really believe that they could do more with less money.

---

Sofia olins says...
Hopefully, this will publicise an important debate-What does/did the UKFC fund? & Who recieves the funding?
The UKFC has been seen by many indys as a closed shop to a few favoured practitioners, so to many it will make no difference that it will no longer exsists. But, what is a concern, is that if the UKFC was to be seen as the governments support of the industry and now it is axing it, then where and how will the new government demonstarte it's support of UK culture?

---

Darren Ladbury says...
The government are idiots. The UKFC brings back the money that it is financed by, so why cut this body? It will not help lower the deficit!!!

---

Brian Croucher says...
CULTURE IS AT THE FOUNDATION OF EVERY SOCIETY, AND THESE DAYS IT NEEDS EVERY HELP IT CAN GET. THIS GOVERNMENT AS WE ALL KNOW ARE LUDDITES. INTO THE DARKNESS!!! BRIAN CROUCHER

---

says...
Without the UKFC we will lose what little national product we have and allow ourselves to be dominated even more by the US. We need to support indigenous talent as the French do, from training, through development, into production, distribution & screening. There are very few paid opportunities for graduates through to senior professionals. As a 'senior',I should be employed & passing on my experience to newcomers, instead I have been virtually 'retired'. This is a bad day for the industry & the British public alike.

---

Daya Dodds says...
This is a very bad thing, what little film industry we have is now been axed. Well I know we all shell still make films but this makes it that much more harder! It is all well and good talking about shooting HD but really its a lot more complex then that.
As long as people want to make films films will get made. Maybe we should group together and some how make our own UKFC with money coming from independent investors? Hard yes but doing anything as regards making film is always hard.

---

francesco caradonna says...
I think it's a crazy decision. Uk Council is/was perhaps the greatest opportunity for a lot of independent filmmakers. Amen.

---

Louise Pennington says...
Agree with Mike Figgis: "After all, a true independent cinema functions without milk from the tit of the government, we owe them nothing and they don't own us...". It will also mean that some dubious films won't be indulged and made with what is, after all, tax payers' money. Someone close to my heart can't even get a job let alone be given a hand out. Okay, I digress, but we need to come to terms with how things are, not how we would like them to be - we need to be innovative, clever, exploit what is out there, stop moaning and get on with it.

---

James MacGregor says...
The UKFC has not been the perfect champion of British independent production that it could have been; its remit was too wide for that. Nor has been a complete failure, even as a quango. It has commissioned a lot of helpful research and it has helped create produced some very successful British films. It always fell between the commercial and independent stools. Overall it was getting better though too often far too London-centric, particularly after regional film agencies were set up, allowing the UKFC to side-step some of its UK remit. Its most appalling failure was to help subsidise cinema operators to install state-of-the-art digital projection systems, without ensuring that British independent film would benefit from guaranteed low-cost screening opportunities that should have been part of the deal - a missed opportunity if ever there was one for encouraging UK Indie filmmakers. This government announcement that the UKFC will close, taken without any consultation with anyone sounds like an accountancy decision and is destructive and not at all creative. Any hope there might be rests on the detail of what comes next. A simple expectation of the BFI taking over the entire UKFC role is just a little too simple. If the government wants to grow our creative industries, including developing the next generation of skilled technicians, directors and producers, they need to come up with something very constructive, very quickly. Hopefully, they will first consult with the broadest spectrum of the industry and not just the BFI, SKILLSET and PACT. They should also take into account the digital screen convergence that is going on, between VoD, TV, Cinema and the Internet, because the future digital world market is going to be huge. So in the end, there is some cause for optimism for Shooters; the only way is up - per ardua ad astra. Of course, should the Westminster government not yet realise this, we could be in for a very sticky period. Meanwhile, now that they have struck the match and hurled it in, let's see what comes out of the flames.

---

Jamie Balliu says...
Arts and film may not provide physical sustenance but they provide us with food for our minds and souls. Film is also a great counter to difficult times and does provide food for many families. This is very short sighted decision making. Yep... shame our money is spent on banks and tanks rather than people who can provide new ways of looking at the world and ourselves.
But there is freedom now to make our own low budget films and docs and even turn them on our politicians with a critical eye. This may bring back the spirit of punk film-making and let go of the reliance on Gov funding which may or may not place creative limitations on film-makers. This spirit may produce work that is original and surprising and not simply glossy, tailored, or formulaic.


J

---

katy vans says...
what did we honestly expect? all those tactical voters who didn't think the tories would just cut cut and cut some more, so frustrating as everyone I know has a TV ,or dvd player or watches films online, where do they think the content comes from?

---

Gabriel Foster Prior says...
this makes me want to leave the country, even more than i did already

---

Mo Thomas says...
Typical stupid supposedly cost saving move which will do far more harm than than they can forsee. If we make films in this country lot's of people are involved and employed
and far more would be achieved for the financial benefit of the country.It's a typical short sighted,lack of real understanding by the Government. We should invest more into making films etc and thereby create more wealth. Where the hell are we headed in this country?

---

George Kleanthous says...
i have just graduated from university after studying film for the past 5 years. if finding work or funding was not hard enough this certainly will not help. British Cinema was on its way up and now it will decline

---

William McCoid says...
Why the surprise? This is what Tories do. Labour hire, Tories fire. Wait until these cuts really bite.

The good neww: Imagine what the Tories woud have done if they actually had their own majority.

Prediction: The coalition will not see out a full term. Once there has been a referendum on electoral reform the Lib Dems will pull out of the coalition.

Also: I am not a fan of the UK Fm COuncil or their agencies, they do sod all for indie filmmakers.

However, any investment, or promotion for the film industry is a good thing and this cut is shirt sighted and lamentable, but not surprising.

---

Bruce Melhuish says...
My experience of the Film Council, having worked on two projects with them was that of an organisation that didn't understand independent film as it needs to be thought of in the UK and was essentially a group of middle men that appointed further middle men to oversee its operations.

---

Sasha Andrews says...
There should have been full consultation

---

Simon DaVison says...
The UKFC may work inefficiently etc - but it works better than the banks did. If they'd lost 2 billion we'd have to keep them and give the bosses a bonus. 15 million is nothing but it looks good as a 'see how we're sweeping out the spongers' gesture.

---

John Lynch says...
Mike Figgis has the right attitude: fuck them. we should be independent and recognise that their philistine attitude only affects the middle of the road and i ain't there. we need to get stuck into communicating through our films a different set of values and how these cuts affect working peoples lives across the board. lets take it to them. digital technology gives us more power than we have ever had, lets use it. but we are gonna need to collaborate better to do it.

---

Mariya Mizuno says...
Did you enjoy 'The Last King of Scotland'? Thank the UK Film Council responsible for that masterpiece as well as 900+ other films since 2000

So UK film just had best year ever, earning millions for UK, but the govmnt are axing the UK film council and its £15m annual budget. WHY?!!

---

Daisy Cooper says...
Many people will have made the point that one of the testing points of a society is how it treats the arts, whether it encourages and nurtures, or ignores and holds as low priority. The economy is in a mess, no doubt, but the film industry creates revenue, jobs and positive economic drive in this country (if done right!). Add to that it is a highly competitive industry, with many young people aspiring to work in film, that the TV production in this country has also recently had to make cuts, with more to come, this news does make me concerned about the future of developing media, skills and talent in this country. The real test will be what happens next, what fills the void the closure of the UK Film Council will inevitably create. I sure that I will not be the only person watching how this news develops very closely.

---

Robert Messer says...
Yet more proof that this new government is going to squeeze this country till its dead. then we'll have nothing and what will we do. I never voted for them or this.

---

Neal Hartman says...
Simply this announcement, let alone the actions promised, will have an impact on film production in the UK. In a country where every street corner is being homogenized, chain stores are buying up independent retailers, and Tesco are building housing, one has to wonder what "British" things will be left. I had thought film might be one of them, but it seems they'll just axe that, too. Welcome to America.

---

David Allain says...
Apparenly a Government's legacy (and tearing down the previous government's achievements) is all that matters: With this party changing so much so hastily, a legacy of ruin followed by years of expensive restructuring and slow recovery (in more sectors than necessary) looks set to appear on the horizon.

---

Abi Sirokh says...
i am glad they are getting fired! not because they never funded anything i tried to produce but because of their ethics and mentality. its time the film community in the Uk to create its own cow to milk.

---

Grace Vallorani says...
During wartimes, and the depression, the arts flourished because people needed some escape, some joy, some beauty during the misery. To take funding away from this incredible gift that we can offer is crazy - it will not help the economy improve - it's not really that much money in the scheme of things yet it is a lot of money to the film world!

---

Patrick Leavy says...
it's hard enough to fund films without a reliable and respected source drying up overnight. The UKFC has a better understanding of what to fund than most private investors, who just look at profit and don't know about film.

---

Chris Bearne says...
Killing off the Film Council : my own incandescent rage with withdrawal of arts funding dates from the Thatcher cuts which destroyed the British Theatre Association in the 80s. OK, it's a long time ago, but the same, really dumb, stupid attitude - killing the goose that lays the golden eggs (have "they" NO idea what the return on cultural activity is in this country?) - leaves me foaming at the mouth. The old rule is about not throwing good money after bad : funding for the arts is the very opposite. Which part of "the arts are a money-earning resource" don't they understand?

---

Martin Ellerbeck says...
The Film council never gave me any money, looks like they're getting a taste of their own medicine.

---

Victoria May says...
I don't understand why artists are not supported more. We could have a booming film industry which brought a great amount of profit to the UK. I worry that any kind of creative production or UK creative ideas or good education is not supported. I have notice that the education in schools is much better in India now.

---

Thomas Wood says...
I am shocked but I am not surprised the Arts has always suffered low funds even in times of economic stability. It's a pity that the government don't realise how powerful independant film can be in terms of generating money and cultural interest!!! I can only hope that someone tries to come up maybe with a smaller version of the film council who in all honesty have been at the fore front for years in supporting and nuturing good quality talent in the UK.

---

charlie Coldfield says...
There are vauable lessons to be learnt through film as well as great pleasure in entertainment. There needs to be some kind of funding to help and encourage film makers based in the UK, often the most dynamic work can come from people who have not be blessed with money and connections, why should the wealthy and connected rule our film industry along with all the other industries? Governments have poured money into banking and other ethically dubious businesses to ensure backing from the fat cats and these guys will take and never give anything back. Film makers give their work back to the people who enjoy them, often for a very small financial reward.

---

Nick Goundry says...
According to Tim Bevan, the UKFC Chairman, the move was carried out without any kind of consultation, which seems like knee-jerk cost-cutting. Perhaps something better will be set up in its place, but it seems unlikely as the arts clearly aren't a government priority at the moment. Maybe the Coalition Government will redeem itself in the next few months with a bold gesture to reassure the British film industry.

---

Claudette FLINT says...
The cost of Irak and Afghanistan war may be an obstacle but more likely the OLYMPIC GAMES arriving in a crisis time is, for the Government, definitely a priority. As long as the British are showing more interest in Sports than in Culture, especially in the cinema, there is little hope to maintain funding. It is not the fault of the British cinema which is, in my opinion, one of the best in the world, it's the fault of the lack of interest from the people. It would be an idea to set small cinemas in some estate or remote places.

---

Keith Friday says...
Sadly we ALL have to make sacrifices and this area is not difference to any other - give it time and it WILL return.

---

Margaret Dickinson says...
These comments relate to cinema which is 'independent' in the sense of being culturally distinct from Hollywood, not in the sense of wannabe commercial film with no funding. The UK Film Council has done some good work for the latter as it has for commercial cinema; such support could have indirectly helped culturally independent cinema too since categories are fluid and individuals work across them. Unfortunately, New Labour took advice from people who actively disliked independent film and so the Film Council was part of a package which not only ignored independents but abolished various small pockets of funding which had previously helped them with production, exhibition or promotion.

---

Ebele Tate says...
Extremely shocked and confused as how this massacre of british independent film porduction is going to "eleviate" the finacial crisis. Not only is it going to boost unemployment creating further strain on what already is an over sized hole in the tax payers pocket, but slam shut and bolt the doors to an industry which is already unbelievably difficult to get into. Without the UK Film Council how are young aspiring filmmakers going to get their break? We dont all have a "trust fund". Some of us are actually passionate about making films and not in it because daddy is! Where will we find the support, the network, the training, THE OPORTUNITIES!!! Has anyone even contemplated the ripple effect this will have on other Arts agencies?! Is anybody safe?! The day the doors close to the UKFC will mark a grave day for UK independent cinema. Thanks Coalition Cunternment!

---

Alex Hudd AMPS says...
Budgets need to be cut on film projects. This will hopefully mean that better quality films are made because people really want to make them with a passion and have to commit more rather than relying on UKFC handouts. Also with no funding you don't have anyone to answer to once the film starts making money - that has to be a good thing.

---

TERENCE DREW says...
Good riddance to bad rubbish. Yes, they keep bragging about how much money they've put into "British" films, but how many of them are really worth watching?!

---

Darren Tubby says...
The trouble with these large organisations is that two many people in the top positions earn so much money that the people who require funds for their projects dont get any help. There must be a way in which funds can be allocated without this happening.

---

Emma Shane says...
I think having a recognised body is important, as a means of atteracting films into the UK, and funding both outside and within the UK.
The Film industry is a minefield, especially for those outside of the industry.
I am concerned that if an organisation who does not know the industry throughly is involved in distributing money, that money could be wasted through coruption. At least with an organisation that knew the industry, it would stand a chance of having some awareness of which production companies were at least reasonably honest and honourable (ie deserving of investment support), and which ones were beyond the pale (because those running the production company were outright crooks). I am concerned that if film investment is left to other organisations then any money allocated could be syphoned off to line the pockets of corrupt producers, instead of actually being used for the benefit of the industry.

---

Gavin Eyquem says...
I've scripts and plans I was hoping to turn into films but now it seems the path to doing so is going in a different direction. I'm not sure what's ahead but hopefully there are people like me out there willing to help out others.

---

Daniel Kellingley says...
Given the current economic climate and Government this is hardly a surprising move. Moaning about it, will just be a waste of energy.

The important thing is to hold the Department of Culture Media and Sport to account to ensure that adequate funding is distributed to whichever institutions take the work of the UK Film Council forward.

There are two years to make the changes - do not wait until 2012 to discover that promises have not been fulfilled. We need to think about alternative sources of funding and different ways in which money can be generated and used - reinvesting a percentage of profits from successful films that have had public money for example.

In addition, independent film makers need to call on support from some of the now well known cast (and crew) who have benefited from appearing in films that received funding because this will be crucial in gaining public and political support.

---

Nicholas Hughes says...
Well, I'm shedding no tears for the UKFC. Not a very helpful body, still shackled to outmoded 1980s ideas about film making and more an oily facilitator for American movies that want to film in the UK. British movies need to be free of the shackles of being dependent on some government body handing out pittances of help and budgets to movies that are so out of touch with the British public. Yes, it's going to be tough but let's be honest; just how beneficial to British film art and culture was the UKFC?

---

Simon Le Boggit says...
This (shitty) government's actions may be "astonishingly shortsighted", but then so is / was the UK Film Council. Are any screenwriters on its Board? Nope. And for MANY years writer's couldn't even have their own projects considered, if not attached to real filmmakers (you know the types - producers and directors). From the outside looking in, the Film Council looks rather cozy and incestuous. Fine for the in-crowd - lip service for the rest of us. "Money goes to money" my old mum used to say. Sour grapes? Me? Too right!

---

Rowland Jobson says...
The ISSUE is there was NO consultation, which shows a complete disregard from the industry and understanding of it. I have it that it WAS a POLITICAL decision. In parliament Jeremy Hunt (unlike his namesake Henry Hunt MP, a great proponent of democracy who fought for your right to vote and was imprisoned for doing so many year ago) did not consult the industry before the announcement was made with no plan or proposal other than that the BFI MAY take the UKFC's place.

It rings a similar tone in my ear of the passing Labour government. What would you do if you were making a regime change in a country? In removing the powers that be would you not look ahead and see how you might reinstall democracy and stability to that country, it people and economy? They did not look, and look what happened, how much did it cost! An extreme analogy perhaps but it is real one. I am sure if you do the figure you will find the £3M saving Jeremy Hut is looking for as he stated in parliament to give US filmmakers will not be. It will cost more than that to close down the UKFC and install a new team, legals, agreements, system etc etc etc. The cost in term of loss of industry knowledge and insight alone is incalculable.

With such a growth industry would you not look ahead and propose a realistic and insightful approach to ENGAGE that industry in your BIG IDEA..your BIG SOCIETY? As a responsible government looking after growing industries that bring you income should it not be a discussion how this new body is to or might work?

The UKFC may not have been the best but to approach the industry and filmmakers in this way is unconstructive in a financial crisis no matter what that filmmaker or producers or production companies political leaning is. It is naive and blind to not engage, consult and discuss and enrol the people that tell the stories of this nation past and present in discussion before you wield an axe.

I think now is the time for us to get the public behind the UK Film Industry and British CINEMA! This is an opportunity to get the public to support British Cinema and films and make it important us all again to ensure it DOES have a future for the public to become involved in cinema and the discussion about it. This has never happened but it is nearly 15,000 people have signed a Facebook petition...IF this is the BIG SOCIETY...lets talk not wield AXE's

---

William Scott-Johnson says...
I think that the British film making scene is limited enough without cutting it back still further, for most of the time they can't even pay the actors.
Do they want all entertainment stroke art to be coming from an outside country? For example the U.S.
Are we not good enough to create our own? It seemed that way in the eighties, when they slashed British industry to import from abroad. It seems to me like the Tory way. They shouldn't be calling themselve's Conservative, for Conservative, at least I thought Conservative meant to retain old values. But I suppose allowing new blood into the film industry isn't an old value. However, as Mike Figgis infers, new technology might not need any support from the Government. So the new digital movie industry, probably running on the internet, in webisode and mobisodical form etc, perhaps could run itself. With people being able to make movies with the minimum of subsidy, and decent cameras and other equipment costing as little as family cars.

---

Dianne Thomas says...
The Industry brings in a lot of money to the economy yet never gets given much back. One would hope the government would change its view as financially it could gain more if it placed more backing into the Industry creating a win-win situation for all.

---

Jenny Shepherd says...
I think this cut is a bad decision. The Film Council has supported first time film makers through the Digital Shorts scheme and other short film schemes. It's also formulated education and training policies, working with Skillset, that have led to some valuable university courses, and has provided funding for some of these courses. It's also supported investment in digital projectors so that digital films can be more widely screened. Not everything can be governed by the bottom line and cultural subsidy allows minority voices to be heard and helps non-traditional film industry talent to gain a step on the ladder.

---

says...
I'm not overly sure how effective the UKFC was for independent film makers in the first place. As far as I'm aware, the UKFC only seemed to fund big projects with big names attached, never really taking any risks or encouraging young potentials. I'm in my early 20's, so have only tried a few times to get funding without much of a showreel. The sort of "up and coming" films they fund are usually pretty dire, nothing new or original, just ideas that tick the PC box.
As Penny Woolcock says 'Culture is perhaps our only indisputably lively and successful industry', which I agree with. But as mike Figgis suggests 'true independent cinema functions without milk from the tit of the government' and maybe that has always been the case.
I think a new system will emerge, probably something similar to what happened in the music world. Some sort of underground-national-network of film makers with a purely d.i.y attitude. It sort of already exists but I'm guessing this will become a more prominent way of making films. Collectively, film makers might work together in a more communistic way, "you scratch my back, i'll scratch yours". Digital cinema is making this a more realistic ethos but I suppose we'll just have to continue on regardless

---

Marian Evans says...
Whatever happens, I hope it results in better conditions for women writers and directors.

---

Julian Boote says...
I do not believe it is a great loss. The funding will still be in place, just managed by other orgs. Perhaps instead of bureaucrats without much background in filmmaking, it should it managed by filmmakers for filmmakers.

---

Jaya Gibson says...
This is a short-sited and arbitrary decision that shows the new coalition government in a bad light.

---

Jason Shields says...
I personally think that Politics shouldn't get in the affair of film, but that's just my opinion. To Politicians, it's seems to think all about financial issues then creativity and get talent established from the UK with film.

The UKFC helps to establish new talent from this country, but now the Government (as usual) makes it hard for anyone to try and succeed now (this is not doing any good for the future in my honest opinion). I'm pleased for those who have been able to succeed and establish themselves through the UKFC, and all the best to those.

But now, it's seems all about finance and money than creativity and talent (but that's just my opinion, often it never matters).

---

Ray Brady says...
I agree with Mike Figgis. Expect nothing from the government, just go out and shoot. Personally after the government bailed out the banks for billions without any expected or contracted return and after failing miserably without investigation or liability, to then cut the £15 million film council's (a world wide success story) budget, is comparatively unbelievable. Without the film council "Hunger" would never have been made, a vital and important piece of cinematic art. The government's decision is simply wrong, wrong wrong. Regards Ray Brady

---

Jonathan Lyle says...
Sometimes a shake up can be good. I know the UK film industry can be quite incestuous so it might help disband that...however they have to think of an alternative way to support creative viable film talent.

---

sonya sier says...
This is terrible and very small minded. At a time when people are curbing what they spend on entertainment it is vital that there is great cinema, DVD and TV viewing to thrill, inspire, motivate and yes of course entertain the nation ..... we can't afford to go to the ballet, dinner or ice skating anymore but watching a great British film is something most of us can afford .... why kill a thriving industry dead .... oh I know to feed the fat cats in the big banks!

---

Charlie Caselton says...
When the shit hits the fan like this you've gotta be resourceful and when that is a necessity special things can happen. This will only make those of us who are really dedicated even more so and may well add some more funk into our filmaking... The loss of any funds is a ball ache but it's not a tragedy. Just means we gotta step up our game and get even more on top of new technologies and online distribution. Charlie Marbles

---

Jade Alexander says...
Go to http://www.facebook.com/?ref=logo#!/pages/Save-the-UK-Film-Council/137240442975080?ref=mf
join the facebook group.

---

Chris Armstrong says...
I think that the money spent on the UK Film Council could have been used to set up a British Film Production Company that employed film makers full time and actually made films.

As it is we have a sketchy 'industry' in which most people can't rely on their jobs from month to month. But I am in no doubt that scrapping UKFC will have a negative effect on the film business in the UK.

---

Daniel Hopkins says...
I don't know what to think about the film council. For the area of experimental film, they have had not much impact. But in areas of commercial cinema and features they have had a massive impact on getting British films out there. But if you look at the support that other countries get from the government. It is poor. You only need to look at the British stand in the Clermont-Ferrand short film festival market place to see how bad it is.

But having the film council is better than nothing, and the statistics that have come through suggests it's stupid getting rid of something that is making money, and bringing lots of benefits to the country.

---

Corine Dhondee says...
Mike Figgis, love it, especially the comment about sucking on the Government's tit, yes I agree and no I don't. I have just made a documentary with NO MONEY. Was it easy? No. How long has it taken? 19 months. What is the feedback so far on the trailer? This is the the most inspiring thing I have seen in all my adult life. How many folks are twittering, writing, getting it out there? Lots. So yup this is the digital age. Is it any easier? Nope it's just different. The one good thing is it's opened the doors to someone like me who years ago would never have had an opportunity to direct a doc. Why? Because the UK's film industry still has issues around race and gender. So Mike, it's not just money. The majority of people who have so far donated to the doc are friends. It is called the community or people power. But in line with your analysis it is sucking on people's tits. As I'm already sucking on 36 tits I could add yours to it. What do you say? I don't mind, if it means getting the doc funded. Great. You can pledge anonymously then you won't have everyone else trying to suck your tits. The Film Council wasn't interested in the doc and someone's PA passed me onto another organisation. But I'm glad other folks got to suck on the tit. I have until the end of August. Check it out http://kck.st/cbGGo1 As for the future, in line with your thinking, tits will be sucked and films will be made. Corine PS do share with your friends.

---

JOHN TOMKINS says...
An easy cut for the Government . But if u look at the Americian model , of how much money the industry makes
from tourism it's madness.
One for you might see UK film talent go abroad for talent , the other new talent and films projects might
never be discovered .

---

James White says...
It is not so catastrophic given that one government agency has had so much control over which films are funded and by how much. It is a greater loss that we will no longer have a reliable infrastructure looking over the industry, in particular the Digital Screen Network which may leave us open to exploitation by the large American studios.

---

Cally Lawrence says...
Tory government will tear us to shreds piece by piece. Enterprising? Creative? Then be prepared, i remember the last time round, don't count on any support from 'ministers of culture' an oxymoron if ever i heard one!

---

Daniel Outram says...
I'm sure we'll all adapt. . . onwards and upwards!

---

Tamsin Lyons says...
Although the UK Film Council was far from perfect, its absolutely outrageous that it has been demolished without any prior consultation and during a period when it was undergoing a transformation to reduce cost and improve efficiency.

---

Liz Harkman says...
Having worked for the BFI during the final days of BFI Production and the UKFC for a number of years at the beginning of my career I was deeply moved by the government’s recent decision to close it. Not only for the impact it will undoubtedly have on my current position but also for the 75 members of staff who work tirelessly and are committed to the industry as a whole. However, what scares me is not the closure of the UK Film Council but the sheer speed in which the decision has been made, with what appears no consultation and very little evidence of thought for what will replace it to ‘continue to distribute lottery funding to film’.

In the long term perhaps this will encourage more creativity from where funding comes from and less of a reliance on the public purse or lottery? What is a huge shame is the organisations that will disappear as a result of this decision, no-one knows what or who that will be but I can guess it will be the smaller, more interesting organisations that directly support the public by providing interesting and cultural film activity, the young by providing training and access to careers in the film industry and the filmmakers who create the films (long and short) that we want to watch – whom currently depend heavily on public funding and haven’t been given the time to build alternative revenue streams to support them through this transition.

We have all been expecting the arts and culture will suffer at the hands of this coalition – but such severance was perhaps unexpected! It’s time to speak up and ensure that the government take note of all the good things that the UK Film Council supported that weren’t just from the production funds and stops bitching about the negatives. The industry pull together to lobby that the level of support stays the same, whomever gets to dole it out.

---

Joshua Cooper says...
First - if the government doesn't support film (independent or otherwise) they are cutting off their nose. Entertainment, arts and specifically film contribute to a huge amount of revenue for the UK economy. The UK is in a leadership position today that will slide if the government does not support the industry through regulation, finance, training, planning, etc. It is much harder if not impossible to rebuild an industry once it has deteriorated as the supply chain cluster breaks down - look at manufacturing.

Secondly - the government can only support an industry, they can not lead it (unless it is military). So it takes effort and talent from the industry - and that is clearly already here in the UK. The government needs to make sure that they don't marginalise the people who built the industry in the first place, as they will just go somewhere else or use "digital spaces" to increase tax revenue in countries that have more pleasant attitudes.

The UK is a great place to be creatively at the moment and can continue to be a world beater. Even if direct funding is cut, there needs to be a respect for how much the arts and entertainment industries contribute culturally and financially. Do you think any one would want to visit London if there were no museums, no theatres and no thriving arts scene? What kind of city do rich foreigners and bankers want to own property in? When a movie is shot with England and London as a back drop how many American kids beg their parents to go on holiday where Harry Potter lives? Film must be one of the best 90-120 minutes of advertising for a city/country (anyone has stats on what Braveheart did for Scotland?)

Times are tough, but the government needs to create conditions for investment and help to lower the cost of living for people working/leading important sectors of the economy. Certainly sucking air through teeth saying that cuts have to be made is not the whole story that needs to be told.

---

Steve Keeble says...
This is just the first of many cuts that this CONDEM (MED)Government intend to inflict upon us. We have to start fighting back. Let this be the first.

---

Simon Wood says...
I agree with Mike Figgis. Now we have an opportunity to use the power of digital film making to influence the debate on the future of film finance. Surely we should be demanding that profitable production and distribution should match lottery funding for independent film.

---

anna gb productions says...
It is an appalling Bush-like decision, disastrous for UK cinema and culture. Art needs state funding to have at least some freedom from lucrative interests reigning in consumer societies. The Film Council used lottery money (not a government money!) to support independent UK filmmakers, and should continue to do so.

---

Andrew Wright says...
Its long overdue, the 'jobs for the boys' culture within the UKFC should've been dealt with from the start. It was always all about what tie you wore and who you were related to and very, very seldom if at all, about genuinely nurturing new talent. Hence the state of the British film industry today (if you can call it that). Now my main worry is that Skillset have the monopoly and appear to be on an offensive to break every other training and film organisation in the UK to maintain their stronghold and keep their hands of lottery money after divvying it up with thieves on the QUANGO's first of course (£250k salary for 2 days work per year for example), which sounds like the UKFC under a different name; same administrators and accountants running a creative industry which just isn't right. The bootom line is that film makers always find a way to make films thank goodness and the most successful ones do it on their own anyway because of the mountain of red tape these organisations put in the way to prevent you getting funding. Turn the light off on the way out UKFC.

---

Martin Davies says...
The Film Council was run by a bunch of pompous, unimaginative, short-sighted, cobweb strewn traditionalists who did very little to encourage cutting edge film-making. They were more interested in financial return and bums on seats than doing anything remotely original. Most of the best maverick talent in this country is still hidden in the shadows. Most of the best films in this country have never been made. Most of the truly original and valuable ideas were never given the time of day by that overpaid panel of clueless executives. Just look at the amount of brainless dross and predictable "gritty" drama (yawn) that got money tossed at it over the past 10 years. The Film Council was a great idea but one hell of a wasted opportunity. I hate Tories and I was tempted to hate them for this but when I was honest with myself, I realised we'll hardly notice it's gone.

---

Ann Monks says...
Over the past five years, I have received funding to develop my screenwriting culminating in script consultancy support with a feature film. What is going to happen to all the emerging UK filmmakers in the future?

---

ROBERT LEE says...
The UK Film Council was key to supporting Britain's presence in the international film markets. Bearing the Royal Standard for excellence at film festivals around the world is a hallmark of the UK Film Council. This responsibility can not be left to the wealthy entertainment friends of the Tories, since that will come with all the trappings of Fleet Street and the Industry of Dishonor. Rupert Murdoch - Are You Listening!

---

Tom Stoddart says...
Government quota often dictated what was funded. If there is to be a Film Council of any description it needs to be able to fund and support without having to tick boxes. The only people who will miss the Film Council are the ones who benefited from it.

---

Paul Stanway says...
the very idea that you need taxpayers' money to fund "independent" film is laughable.
i would have been glad to see this organisation closed even without the recession / uk debt. great filmmakers will always find a way to make their films.

---

Mark Normandy says...
Jobs for the boys, the ties and all those in their coterie of buddies. Years of wasted money. The worst thing was the lack of an arrangement with American producer/diretors who came up with 50% of a film and then walked away with the profits. A quango run by idiots.

---

Andrew Johnstone says...
Now that the UK no longer has a large manufacturing base, the UK needs to find a range of other industries that it can specialise in to create jobs and revenue. Film has a global market and a global appeal, why not continue to develop it?

---

Eric Young says...
The UKFC wasn't all bad, but their remit was too narrow, their funding too miserly, and they did a terrible job of letting people know what they did and achieved.

There needs to be a replacement of some sort though - one that really helps people starting out in the industry (and not just YOUNG people - seriously there are plenty of people trying to get into film as a second career - please no ageism!)

---

says...
I agree with Mike Figgis. It needn't be a disaster but i do have a concern with this government and their ability to turn it into a disaster!.
With the advancement of digital shooting it is cheaper to shoot now but we have to be realistic and not depend on digital completely.

---