Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Bovril

Uk Film Council Axed

Recommended Posts

I am a newbie poster, but have been lurking for years.. just wondered what everyone thought of the UK Film Council being axed? I have worked with them for many years (not for them luckily) and I have always thought them to be a massive waste of our cash. They encourge UK film makers to make complete dross in order to tick all their boxes so that they can recieve funding from them (the taxpayer). And I've never quite understood why UK tax payers fund 'directors' from France etc to make their first short film. Shame for the 75 people that will be out of work though.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-10761225

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We were discussing this yesterday and wondered how much money went into films and how much into their salaries.

75 people at 240k each and nothing for films?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent news.

Not a shame for the 75 - go and make that movie and sell it! They've been arsing about DSFA for years since graduating from Film Studies. So go and make a film, documentary or short.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest sillybear2

I can't really see the point, it just seems like a way for luvvies to funnel public funds to cronies so they can produce unpopular politically correct polemics that will never be given a general release, or bomb at the box office, or a way of providing tax payer subsidy to highly commercial films that would be made anyway :-

"Alex Cox, director

It's very good news for anyone involved in independent film. The Film Council became a means by which lottery money was transferred to the Hollywood studios. It pursued this phoney idea that James Bond and Harry Potter were British films. But, of course, those films were all American – and their profits were repatriated to the studios in Los Angeles."

Those who make things people want to see will get commercial funding, getting the begging bowl out to the government seems like the last chance saloon of any failing enterprise or project. Obviously art house stuff that stands on its own artistic merits needs support, but that's what the BBC and Film4 are there for.

Remember the government is broke, so if it's a toss up between a school or a hospital or some niche films they will have to go philistine on their a$$es, because in general voters don't believe that the government should be funding long form propaganda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, they have (had) pots of money to give out. There are a number of different 'funds' hence all the staff, ranging from the cinema funds where the big boys go to scrounge and the funds for kids to make their first short films to try their hands at directing. They are saying £15m on the BBC news, but some years I think their funding has been closer to £30m. I am assuming wages are on top of this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a newbie poster, but have been lurking for years.. just wondered what everyone thought of the UK Film Council being axed? I have worked with them for many years (not for them luckily) and I have always thought them to be a massive waste of our cash. They encourge UK film makers to make complete dross in order to tick all their boxes so that they can recieve funding from them (the taxpayer). And I've never quite understood why UK tax payers fund 'directors' from France etc to make their first short film. Shame for the 75 people that will be out of work though.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-10761225

Have a loook at what people are being paid & pensions.

They have a quaint way of listing the salaries IMPO. At first it looks as if they are earning 150 quid per year... Um, nope - unless I am wrong!!!

http://www.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk/media/pdf/e/0/UK_Film_Council_Annual_Report_and_Accounts_2008-09_Final-laid_in_Parliament-20July09.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest sillybear2

Have a loook at what people are being paid & pensions.

They have a quaint way of listing the salaries IMPO. At first it looks as if they are earning 150 quid per year... Um, nope - unless I am wrong!!!

http://www.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk/media/pdf/e/0/UK_Film_Council_Annual_Report_and_Accounts_2008-09_Final-laid_in_Parliament-20July09.pdf

There are also specially constructed tax avoidance schemes, so there are quite a few pots to dip into. The lottery and licence fee are basically a conspiracy against the chavvy masses. I guess there's a delicious irony in getting the ignorant plebs to fund this stuff :lol:

Apparently these two also bid against each other on search engines for traffic :-

http://www.carbontrust.co.uk/

http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/home.html

Different branches of government basically act like a couple of dogs, with each trying to pee up as many lamp posts as possible, all with our money. It's hard to feel much sympathy for them, though I hope those directly affected find a new job doing something more productive. The government should just try and do a few vital things well, rather than trying to do everything badly.

Edited by sillybear2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take a look at what we were paying people to run this waste of space.

Remuneration

For the year

Ended 31

March 2009

£000

Total

Remuneration

For the year

Ended 31

March 2008

£000

John Woodward

Chief Executive Officer

195-200 205-210

Sally Caplan

Head of Premiere Fund

165-170 160-165

Will Evans

Head of Business Affairs

155-160 150-155

Tanya Seghatchian

Head of Development Fund

(from 1.5.07)

150-155 125-130

Colin Brown

British Film Commissioner

140-145 155-160

Peter Buckingham

Head of Distribution

& Exhibition

140-145 145-150

Alan Bushell

Chief Operating Officer

110-115 110-115

Lenny Crooks

Head of New Cinema Fund

110-115 100-105

Rachel Grant

Head of Communications

(from 17.1.08 to 1.2.09)

60-65 10-15

Lisa Tremble

Head of Communications

(to 21.9.07)

- 40-45

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take a look at what we were paying people to run this waste of space.

Remuneration

For the year

Ended 31

March 2009

£000

Total

Remuneration

For the year

Ended 31

March 2008

£000

John Woodward

Chief Executive Officer

195-200 205-210

Sally Caplan

Head of Premiere Fund

165-170 160-165

Will Evans

Head of Business Affairs

155-160 150-155

Tanya Seghatchian

Head of Development Fund

(from 1.5.07)

150-155 125-130

Colin Brown

British Film Commissioner

140-145 155-160

Peter Buckingham

Head of Distribution

& Exhibition

140-145 145-150

Alan Bushell

Chief Operating Officer

110-115 110-115

Lenny Crooks

Head of New Cinema Fund

110-115 100-105

Rachel Grant

Head of Communications

(from 17.1.08 to 1.2.09)

60-65 10-15

Lisa Tremble

Head of Communications

(to 21.9.07)

- 40-45

Yes, by leaving 'K' off the end of those figures it looks as if they are not being paid obscene sums.

Money is so vulgar to luvvies is it not!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let us not forget the hard working directors

Directors’ remuneration (including daily allowances) paid

in the year ending 31 March 2009:

2008/09

£

2007/08

£

Andrew Eaton (retired 19 Oct 2008) 645 1,044

Rebecca O’Brien 2,580 2,298

Alison Owen (retired 19 Oct 2007) - 1,044

Heather Rabbatts CBE 1,935 1,880

Marc Samuelson

(retired 19 Oct 2007)

- 1,671

David Sproxton CBE

(retired 19 Oct 2008)

1,392 3,702

Amanda Walsh 2,150 -

_____________________________________________________________

2 MILLION A YEAR TO BE A DIRECTOR OF THE B L O O D Y, F U C K I N G Film Council

GOOD RIDDANCE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let us not forget the hard working directors

Directors’ remuneration (including daily allowances) paid

in the year ending 31 March 2009:

2008/09

£

2007/08

£

Andrew Eaton (retired 19 Oct 2008) 645 1,044

Rebecca O’Brien 2,580 2,298

Alison Owen (retired 19 Oct 2007) - 1,044

Heather Rabbatts CBE 1,935 1,880

Marc Samuelson

(retired 19 Oct 2007)

- 1,671

David Sproxton CBE

(retired 19 Oct 2008)

1,392 3,702

Amanda Walsh 2,150 -

_____________________________________________________________

2 MILLION A YEAR TO BE A DIRECTOR OF THE B L O O D Y, F U C K I N G Film Council

GOOD RIDDANCE

I am absolutely certain that Amanda Walsh was not paid £2M.

having had a look it is clear that she was paid just over £2,000. She probably only had to do a couple of days' work.

Edited by RealtyFisch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those accounts are, IMPO, deliberately confusing. Read them again.

The expenses are shown in Pounds & Pence but the salaries are shown as, for example, 155-160 - that is salary in the 155K to 160K bracket.

Go back and read the figures again in that PDF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 MILLION A YEAR TO BE A DIRECTOR OF THE B L O O D Y, F U C K I N G Film Council

GOOD RIDDANCE

I don't think I've ever read those expletives in that particular word group construct. Kinda funny! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those accounts are, IMPO, deliberately confusing. Read them again.

The expenses are shown in Pounds & Pence but the salaries are shown as, for example, 155-160 - that is salary in the 155K to 160K bracket.

Go back and read the figures again in that PDF.

Those salaries are disturbing. I have met those types at the Arts Council, and they are above doing anything too, they do sweet FA. The mind boggles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest sillybear2

Those accounts are, IMPO, deliberately confusing. Read them again.

The expenses are shown in Pounds & Pence but the salaries are shown as, for example, 155-160 - that is salary in the 155K to 160K bracket.

Go back and read the figures again in that PDF.

poster_bribery.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am absolutely certain that Amanda Walsh was not paid £2M.

having had a look it is clear that she was paid just over £2,000. She probably only had to do a couple of days' work.

Good point. Clearly I was suffering from hysteria having just read that John Woodward, the Chief Executive Officer was paid between ONE HUNDRED AND NINETY FIVE THOUSAND POUNDS AND TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND POUNDS IN THE MOST RECENT YEAR.

No misreading there, there is a £000 at the top of the column.

I suppose when you are paying someone such a ludicrously inflated salary, trying to narrow the salary down to within a mere FIVE THOUSAND POUNDS is clearly not worth the bother.

These f u c k e r s must think they've died and gone to heaven when they get offered these jobs. In the real world you have to run a bloody successful business to make money like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point. Clearly I was suffering from hysteria having just read that John Woodward, the Chief Executive Officer was paid between ONE HUNDRED AND NINETY FIVE THOUSAND POUNDS AND TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND POUNDS IN THE MOST RECENT YEAR.

No misreading there, there is a £000 at the top of the column.

I suppose when you are paying someone such a ludicrously inflated salary, trying to narrow the salary down to within a mere FIVE THOUSAND POUNDS is clearly not worth the bother.

These f u c k e r s must think they've died and gone to heaven when they get offered these jobs. In the real world you have to run a bloody successful business to make money like that.

They love and support the UK Film Industry so much they milk millions out of it. As an aside, when oh when with The Guardian go out of business?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ah we're just jealous we all "missed the boat" on that gravy train :(

Note to ones self:

Must seek out the next gravy train.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ah we're just jealous we all "missed the boat" on that gravy train :(

Note to ones self:

Must seek out the next gravy train.

It is not a question of missing the gravy train but seeing it in the station and not being allowed on... but being forced to pay for others to enjoy the journey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I challenge everyone earning minimum wage on here to apply for a £100K job now. You have nothing to lose.

Write a fantastic CV and just sell yourself. Familiarise yourself with the Freemason handshake, invest in a new suit, talk the talk, walk the walk. Always put a positive spin on things, learn long words (invest in a thesaurus), and speak as if you always have great visions of the future, no matter how deluded they sound.

If you need help, start here:

http://www.mindtools.com/selfconf.html

http://www.startyourowncult.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=4&id=13&Itemid=26

These kind of jobs can be blagged (think "I am politician!")

OK the chances of winning such a place on a gravy train are slimmer now post crunch, but you never know eh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those accounts are, IMPO, deliberately confusing. Read them again.

The expenses are shown in Pounds & Pence but the salaries are shown as, for example, 155-160 - that is salary in the 155K to 160K bracket.

Go back and read the figures again in that PDF.

Staff salaries are in £000s. Director remuneration is clearly stated as being in £s. There is nothing deliberately misleading about this at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/jul/26/john-woodward-film-council

The Grauniad thinks scrapping it is 'a catastrophe'. Confirmation if any were needed that it was a complete waste of money.

I bet they do. :)

One of my close friend's partners used to work for a similar government quango (not the Film Council but something else equally useless) they got a contract abroad for a couple of years and were hoping to return soon to recieve a similarly obcene salary from the quango on their return.

Suddenly though the money in that particular sector has stopped dead and if they were to return to the UK soon they are looking at a significantly reduced salary if they are able to find a job at all, it is certainly not in the 'executive' bracket of salary and expenses anymore they were expecting to return to.

There is going to be an awful lot of upset Guardian readers once they realise that the money is no longer there to fund their luxurious livestyles off the back of the rest of us in the guise of 'working in the public sector'. Champagne socalists in the extreme working for 'charities' yet earning a small fortune.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 238 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.