Here is my article on British film today, featured in Issue 2 of New Empress Magazine.
According to the now defunct UK Film Council’s cultural test a film needs to score at least 16 out of a possible 31 points to qualify as a British film, details can be found at http://www.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk/culturaltestpoints. Elements such as if the characters are British, if the film is set in Britain, if the director is British and if the studio is in Britain are all taken into account when judging a film to see if it qualifies as British. 16 out of 31 is actually quite a low amount of points required to be passed as British, is this correct? Does a film need to have a British director in order to be considered British? What about the funding, should all the money put into a film be British money, or as long as the vision is ‘British’, does it matter where the money has come from? What constitutes a British film today?
One of the companies most synonymous with British film is Working Title whose films directed by Richard Curtis, such as Four Weddings and a Funeral (1994) and Notting Hill (1999), show their representation of Englishness. Hugh Grant was the epitome of the bumbling awkward Englishman, locations were British and the weather certainly was. The films showed a rather idealised view of Britain but they were a popular formula. However, Working Title is owned by Universal, an American company, and has opted to have American stars in their British films in order to attract a universal audience. It’s a clever marketing tool but the films start to become British/American hybrids. In the Nineties British film relied on Hollywood and it seems nothing changes.
The Harry Potter franchise, a British national treasure, has been Americanised with Warner Bros. in charge of film production and other US companies such as Industrial Light and Magic adding their special effects, but with the films being a showcase for the best of British acting talent they have managed to retain their Britishness in some respect. Without the American money would these films even have been made? It is great for the British film industry but it’s disappointing that there is that link to Hollywood and where do we draw the line, when does a film stop being British and become an American film?
So British film often needs a helping hand from Hollywood but the industry does have much more to offer than Hugh Grant and book adaptations. Bronson (2008) told the story of the UK’s most dangerous prisoner Charles Bronson, played by the brilliant British Tom Hardy. All elements were British; locations, actors, the story, the DVD even had a special edition Union Jack cover but the director was Danish Nicolas Winding Refn. I don’t believe this affects the ‘Britishness’ of the film nor would it have been more British with a British director. With not even a hint of Hollywood it appears Bronson is more of a British film than many films directed by Brits.
The British film of the 2009 awards season was Slumdog Millionaire (2008), a film set in Mumbai and based on a novel by Indian diplomat Vikas Swarup. With British director Danny Boyle, screenwriter Simon Beaufoy, actor Dev Patel, along with British production companies and money the film was considered British but with Bollywood stars, Indian co-director Loveleen Tandan and a solely Indian location it didn’t feel very British. Should a film be about British culture in order to be classed as British? Slumdog was the huge success story that the British film industry needed and yet by my calculations it doesn’t even pass the cultural points test.
We cannot discuss British film without mentioning the quintessentially British director Mike Leigh who’s Another Year (2010) depicted the simple pleasures and banalities of British life but did receive funding from US Focus Features. These are only a few examples but once you delve a little deeper it seems no film is a completely British effort, but does it really matter? After all film is a collaborative process and let’s not forget that it is a business that requires the best people for the job and as much money as possible. It would be nice to find a completely British film that is a success critically and commercially though.
Attack the Block (2011) is certainly confirming the renaissance of truly British Sci-Fi and with a very British location of a council estate as the setting, British cast, British money and a British writer/director, Joe Cornish, could this be the future of British film? Special effects company Spectral Motion, who were responsible for the beautiful monster effects, are a US company but let’s not be pedantic. This is what the British film industry needs, a very British story with British characters played by British actors, a British location, British money and at the same time a film offering something different, without a kitchen sink or Hugh Grant in sight. Long live British film.
One of the companies most synonymous with British film is Working Title whose films directed by Richard Curtis, such as Four Weddings and a Funeral (1994) and Notting Hill (1999), show their representation of Englishness. Hugh Grant was the epitome of the bumbling awkward Englishman, locations were British and the weather certainly was. The films showed a rather idealised view of Britain but they were a popular formula. However, Working Title is owned by Universal, an American company, and has opted to have American stars in their British films in order to attract a universal audience. It’s a clever marketing tool but the films start to become British/American hybrids. In the Nineties British film relied on Hollywood and it seems nothing changes.
The Harry Potter franchise, a British national treasure, has been Americanised with Warner Bros. in charge of film production and other US companies such as Industrial Light and Magic adding their special effects, but with the films being a showcase for the best of British acting talent they have managed to retain their Britishness in some respect. Without the American money would these films even have been made? It is great for the British film industry but it’s disappointing that there is that link to Hollywood and where do we draw the line, when does a film stop being British and become an American film?
So British film often needs a helping hand from Hollywood but the industry does have much more to offer than Hugh Grant and book adaptations. Bronson (2008) told the story of the UK’s most dangerous prisoner Charles Bronson, played by the brilliant British Tom Hardy. All elements were British; locations, actors, the story, the DVD even had a special edition Union Jack cover but the director was Danish Nicolas Winding Refn. I don’t believe this affects the ‘Britishness’ of the film nor would it have been more British with a British director. With not even a hint of Hollywood it appears Bronson is more of a British film than many films directed by Brits.
The British film of the 2009 awards season was Slumdog Millionaire (2008), a film set in Mumbai and based on a novel by Indian diplomat Vikas Swarup. With British director Danny Boyle, screenwriter Simon Beaufoy, actor Dev Patel, along with British production companies and money the film was considered British but with Bollywood stars, Indian co-director Loveleen Tandan and a solely Indian location it didn’t feel very British. Should a film be about British culture in order to be classed as British? Slumdog was the huge success story that the British film industry needed and yet by my calculations it doesn’t even pass the cultural points test.
We cannot discuss British film without mentioning the quintessentially British director Mike Leigh who’s Another Year (2010) depicted the simple pleasures and banalities of British life but did receive funding from US Focus Features. These are only a few examples but once you delve a little deeper it seems no film is a completely British effort, but does it really matter? After all film is a collaborative process and let’s not forget that it is a business that requires the best people for the job and as much money as possible. It would be nice to find a completely British film that is a success critically and commercially though.
Attack the Block (2011) is certainly confirming the renaissance of truly British Sci-Fi and with a very British location of a council estate as the setting, British cast, British money and a British writer/director, Joe Cornish, could this be the future of British film? Special effects company Spectral Motion, who were responsible for the beautiful monster effects, are a US company but let’s not be pedantic. This is what the British film industry needs, a very British story with British characters played by British actors, a British location, British money and at the same time a film offering something different, without a kitchen sink or Hugh Grant in sight. Long live British film.
No comments:
Post a Comment