Bill C-10

[Vong]

Just finished watching The Hour's segment with George interviewing Charles McVety, the dude who supports Bill C-10 (http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=360511).

Watch the interview (http://www.cbc.ca/thehour/videos.html?id=719279688) and tell me this guy doesn't scream "I'm a Conservative douche-bag".

[someguy]

Ugh, this is a terrible bill. What's considered offensive is not objective and it should be left at that. There's a guy named Karim Hussain who makes films like Subconscious Cruelty that would definitely be considered as something 'offensive' but I'm perfectly fine with my tax money going towards his films. This is resting the decision on a small group of people rather than just letting things through and that will lead to problems. What if a movie like Ginger Snaps went through? Maybe someone would consider that offensive because of the genre. Do you think The Brood would have been made if this act was in place? Probably not. Videodrome? Dead Ringers? Exotica? Young People Fucking? Like I said, what's considered offensive is a subjective term and that should be it on the issue. It's just a censorship that cuts off the artist at the knees rather than doing it later on through deleted scenes and such. I don't know the current status on the bill but I hope it doesn't pass.

[unspoken]

It's just a censorship that cuts off the artist at the knees rather than doing it later on through deleted scenes and such. I don't know the current status on the bill but I hope it doesn't pass.

Here's where you're wrong. Censorship would be making it illegal to make a film with certain specific acts or words. This bill isn't outlawing anything, it's just saying that don't expect public funds to go towards your fringe movie full of disturbing shit that 7 people will go see.

I know I'm on a movie site and gonna catch heat for this, but I personally believe that we have better things to spend money on anyways, such as health care, giving our armed forces the tools they need, lowering taxes for working families who are feeling the pinch of rising energy prices.

And is there any type of system like this in the US? Not to my knowledge. Yet many indie filmmakers self-finance or get private financing to make their movies and do quite well.

One thing I do agree with you on... that McVety guy is Grade A douche. My arguments against gov't financing have more to do with business than they do with ethical issues.

[someguy]

I could see your 'spend on better things' argument as valid if the Canadian film industry was actually big enough to effect those parts of the government. Do you seriously think that the amount of money saved by not funding x amount of films every year will change Canada's health care around? It won't make any effect whatsoever. You might have actually brought up a different point that needs to be taken into consideration. The government might only approve the more mainstream films and find excuses to deem the smaller non-profitable movies as offensive. It's something that can happen if the bill is passed.

And you can't compare the US film industry to Canada. They're not the same and you know it.

[TheAxeGrinder]

Canada is more lenient in both its television and its film industry, which is why we get away with having the Trailer Park Boys and Kenny Vs. Spenny uncensored in the evening. Obviously, during the day, they're censored (though the TPB get away with saying 'shit').

I agree the bill needs to be reworked, but I can see what it's intentions are, namely show some self restraint when it comes to making some films. Wanting to challenge society's norms is one thing, but where does that turn from 'art' to 'obscene'?

[Jon Lyrik]

I could see your 'spend on better things' argument as valid if the Canadian film industry was actually big enough to effect those parts of the government. Do you seriously think that the amount of money saved by not funding x amount of films every year will change Canada's health care around? It won't make any effect whatsoever. You might have actually brought up a different point that needs to be taken into consideration. The government might only approve the more mainstream films and find excuses to deem the smaller non-profitable movies as offensive. It's something that can happen if the bill is passed.

And you can't compare the US film industry to Canada. They're not the same and you know it.

Yes, seriously, that was dumb. As expensive as funding films is, it's a drop in the bucket compared to most government arms. Multi-million dollars a pop at a stretch vs. multi-multi-billion. Not to mention, if the government won't help fund weird productions, who will?

[unspoken]

I could see your 'spend on better things' argument as valid if the Canadian film industry was actually big enough to effect those parts of the government. Do you seriously think that the amount of money saved by not funding x amount of films every year will change Canada's health care around? It won't make any effect whatsoever. You might have actually brought up a different point that needs to be taken into consideration. The government might only approve the more mainstream films and find excuses to deem the smaller non-profitable movies as offensive. It's something that can happen if the bill is passed.

Maybe not, but if they just back on a lot more other wasteful stuff, the money would be there to make a change.

Also, the "mainstream films" are getting tax breaks already. I read an interview with David Cronenberg, one of the most vocal people against this, and he said that he got gov't help from both A History Of Violence and Eastern Promises. Both of these movies had studios backing them and became quite profitable after DVD. Should he really have gotten the gov't help? Perhaps he should have to pay it back.


And you can't compare the US film industry to Canada. They're not the same and you know it.

The industries are different. The process is not. American filmmakers self-finance (or get private financing, usually which they have to pay back) their projects, make them, take them to film festivals and hope they get bought by studios. I don't see a rule preventing Canadians from doing the same thing.

Also, how many industries can you think of where failure is rewarded? There's a few that hit bad times and need a bit of gov't help, but not on a consistent basis like this. It also says something about the level of confidence some of these people have in their work when the only measure of success is whether or not the gov't kicks in some favours with zero accountability attached to it.