Should films be governmentally funded?

[VideoFred]

people are ready for anything, nothing and everything depending on how you look at it.
/matt

They are not ready yet to follow some very simple logical rules.
Rules to make eveybody's life more easy.

Take the speed limits as an example.
There's always someone who thinks the speed sign is not for him.
So you have to force him for his own sake (and others).
Otherwise you get accidents with innocent people.

Fred.

[mattias]

Take the speed limits as an example.

those exist on public roads. you can drive as fast as you like on your own race track or whatever.

/matt

[mattias]

very good reply moviemat. i agree completely. that's the interesting angle on this. ideologies, while interesting to discuss, aren't really relevant.

/matt

[VideoFred]

Take the speed limits as an example.

those exist on public roads. you can drive as fast as you like on your own race track or whatever.

/matt

I do this already with my slotcars :lol:

Fred.

[VideoFred]

In fact Pop culture is way up there in the top UK industries. No art funding no Beatles no Franz Ferdinand.

Not in the Beatle days (1962-1969). There was no Pop culture!
The Beatles and others made it! Without art funding.
In those days... Pop music was bad :twisted: remember?

If I look at Pop culture now....
It's more Pop industry, right?


Fred.

[timdrage]

Uh... this started off topic and is now spectacularly so; shouldn't it maybe be moved to the Filmmaking forum?


Mike Jittlov on the original 1% income tax!!!:
http://www.wizworld.com/taxes/

The new union still had to support itself, so the Constitution allowed for tariffs on imports and exports, excise taxes on liquor, and support from issuing government bonds. Which seemed to work well - for the next 124 years, there was no individual income tax. Except for two brief periods - during 1862-1872 (an "income duty" to pay for the Civil War) and 1874-1875 (until the Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional) - this nation thrived without a national income tax imposed on its citizens. Americans were free to earn, save, use, build, invest, donate and bequeath their wealth without limit. With that freedom, the colonies of farming communities and hunter-gatherers developed into the greatest industrial nation on Earth.

[mattias]

Uh... this started off topic and is now spectacularly so; shouldn't it maybe be moved to the Filmmaking forum?

eh, because then it would be on topic? either way i tought the filmmaking forum was created to leave camera technology out of the filmmaking questions, not vice versa.

/matt

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

Mattias wrote:

kent, you sound like.....

Hah! Nah, I´m not one of those. ;)
I am a bit anti-goverment (or at least stupid goverments) but I do think we should have high taxes and free healthcare and all, but not as insanely high taxes as we are having now...

The money is often spent in very stupid ways, hundreds of millions to support "film-art" is one of those (in my opinion). And the "writers support" to people who make millions each year, to idiotic art and the likes is insane.

If someone wants to make ugly paintings they should do so on their spare time, not on tax money. If they can sell them, fine. If not, fine. (Hmmm I´m repeating myself...).

Mattias wrote:

who says healthcare for example is more important than art? if there's not enough money for both surely under a free system you should have the choice to choose either.

Ehhh, well I guess everyone who is in need for healthcare? Surely we can agree that healthcare is more important than my butterknifes? (damn, that means I´m not receiving my 0.5 million Euro for my "sole knifes" :evil: ) :lol:

Sunrise wrote:

If you where spending your time restoring old Victor Sjöström movies I'd gladly chip in

No need for such "cultural films" if the swedish politicians get to decide, hell they are copying everyones old HOME-MOVIES for free to DVD. Yep, my work. I spent about a million SEK soon I guess on equipment and stuff. They offer it for free. Paid with tax money.

"It is culture, we are about to loose our old films here and nobody is doing anything about it", well I guess nobody but the companies that do it for a living (such as myself). This is also one of the stupid things they do with tax money. Sheesh. And they offer crap-shit quality on the transfers too, with a waiting line that is about 2 - 3 years. :roll:

I actually think we should have high taxes, but we should use the money wisely too, not on stupid things and waste the money.

[mattias]

who says healthcare for example is more important than art? if there's not enough money for both surely under a free system you should have the choice to choose either.

Ehhh, well I guess everyone who is in need for healthcare? Surely we can agree that healthcare is more important than my butterknifes?

not in principle, no.

/matt

[VideoFred]

but not as insanely high taxes as we are having now...

Kent I understand this very very well.
The same in Belgium

Me and my wife are paying together about 25000 Euros/year for taxes, social security and so on.

While others are paying nothing and having all the benefits of the system.
I do not mean people who realy need it, I'm happy to pay for those.

Fred.

[VideoFred]

who says healthcare for example is more important than art? if there's not enough money for both surely under a free system you should have the choice to choose either.

Ehhh, well I guess everyone who is in need for healthcare? Surely we can agree that healthcare is more important than my butterknifes?

not in principle, no.

/matt

Come on, Matt.
You know better.

Fred.

[timdrage]

eh, because then it would be on topic? either way i tought the filmmaking forum was created to leave camera technology out of the filmmaking questions, not vice versa.

Well, it's generally about filmmaking, but not at all specifically about small guage film, so seems better in the other forum, that's alll...

Doesn;t bother me too much either way really, just saying!

[moviemat]

There was no pop culture in the Beatles days!! maybe I phrased it wrong but what i meant was to high light the real link between "unproductive" art and national economies.

Half of the Beatles were art students and they turned what they learnt from their deadbeat lifestyle or whatever into a cash machine that still dominates the UK economy.

We're talking about the 60s when the CIA was funding the Abstract impressionists as cold war strategy.

[sunrise]

Uh... this started off topic and is now spectacularly so; shouldn't it maybe be moved to the Filmmaking forum?

More than half the threads on this forum is related to cutting budget on film, gear, transfers, projection and so on. Discussing he should pay for this is not irrelevant.

Moviemat had some very good points on this. I guess Trollywood (or whatever it is called) is part of one such official marketing of an area.

And would someone please explain to me why you are more artistically free when noone supports you. Sufficient funding makes your artistic vision become possible. This was even true in the Soviet Union, the Russian film industry took a major blow both financially AND artistically after the fall of communism (and after Gorbatjov sold his country for a nobel prize).

michael

[mattias]

Come on, Matt.
You know better.

no you know better. think about it. there are plenty of people who would sacrifice a big part of their social security to pursue their dreams in one way or the other. the only way a forced health care system can be accepted is if the government at the same time allows us other freedoms, such as to pursue a career in handicrafts. nota bene that i'm using the "leftish" definition of freedom here. otherwise being given freedom by the government is of course an oxymoron.

/matt