TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
I thought Canada does subsidize television and movies there? Subsidizing, I have no problem with.
Quotas, on the other hand, seem to be going too far.
I thought Canada does subsidize television and movies there? Subsidizing, I have no problem with.
Quotas, on the other hand, seem to be going too far.
Yep, Canada (mostly through the provinces, I think) subsidises movies and TV productions. I believe music gets some money too. And quotas is just a way to make sure that this stuff gets an audience. I don't remember the exact numbers on Canadian content quotas, but it's small, something like a 1/4 or something like that?
The thing is, it works! Canadian artists have been doing well lately. In Quebec, some of the highest grossing movies are local productions.
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 61,703
Translation: quotas are a way to deny audiences their choice.
If they're doing so well, why do they need subsidies? How are subsidies not just a forced transfer of wealth from people who don't want to pay for those movies to people who are making them on the basis that the people making them are politically well-connected?
Leif Roar
Master Poster
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2002
- Messages
- 2,795
Sorry, but how does quotas limit a person's choice? While, for instance, demanding that cinemas must show both foreign and domestic movies might increase the average cost of going to see a movie, it can only serve to increase the selection of movies to choose between.
Certainly it must be better to be able to choose among an offering of both foreign and domestic movies than only among just foreign movies?
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
Quotas could limit choice if there were space for ten movies, five foreign, five domestic. The sixth foreign movie doesn't get shown, even if it's much better than any of the five domestic ones.
Consider also that there are two hundred-something countries. All of them must compete for the same foreign slots, whereas the domestics slots are much less competitive. In exchange for the guarantee that you'll always have a certain number of domestic movies to select from, you're giving up the necessity for those domestic movies to be as good as the foreign ones by eliminating their need to compete with the foreign ones.
I'd prefer to choose movies based on quality, not where they're from.
Well, multiplexes in Canada have enough space to show two simultaneous representations of the same god awful Hollywood action flick or family comedy. I guess they can spare a view screen or two to show some of the "indigenous" productions.
And Tragicmonkey, if you think "quality" is the main reason why a movie is played over another, I must tell you that you are sadly mistaken.
And Tragicmonkey, if you think "quality" is the main reason why a movie is played over another, I must tell you that you are sadly mistaken.
The majority of Canadians agree with canadian cultural policies. People don't mind paying taxes if their taxes insure that there is such a thing as a canadian movie industry. Canadians like to see themselves and their culture represented in the big screen, their TV and the radio.
Leif Roar
Master Poster
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2002
- Messages
- 2,795
Except that cinemas don't have a fixed number of screens in the long term. They rebuild and adjust their number of screens depending on the market conditions -- governmental regulations are one aspect of the market conditions.
Not so. Quotas only secure distribution, not profit. It ensures that domestic movies are made available; not that they actually earn money. If you want to actually make money, you still need to make a good movie.
But if domestic movies are unavailable in the cinemas, you won't be able to a) gauge their quality or b) go to see them, no matter what their quality is. The distribution of movies has little to do with the movies quality, and much to do with the economic muscle of the movie's producer and distribution.
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
Look, everyone knows most movies are crap. That's because enough people like crappy movies. If the movie stinks, don't go see it. They'll stop making them. The only reason they make movies is to make money. The only movies that are successful are the ones that make money. The only way the movies make money is if enough people pay to see it. You can talk about culture and distribution and blacklists and quotas and subtitles all you want, but the reason crap dominates is because that's what people like.
Anyone ever watch that show "The Critic"? There's a great speech in there about how the movie stinks, don't go.
Leif Roar
Master Poster
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2002
- Messages
- 2,795
What does that have to do with the discussion about quotas for domestic movies?
Why?
It seems that they have voted, with their pocketbooks.
Whatever it is, the Nazi's have done it before. Amazing.
Flo
Illuminator
Yes they have: some of the top grossing movies in Quebec are local productions. Same in France. And people have supported politicians who are for cultural protectionism. People have voted with their pocketbooks and their votes.
And even if few saw films other than US made movies, well, democracies aren't supposed to be dictatorships of the majority. But free markets often are dictatorships of the majority, specially when the purveying of goods have formed oligopolies... See, there's often a difference between what the people wants and what the industry thinks the people wants.
This entire argument applies to any form of culture, by the way.