Jack’s campaign, ruined by election?
When the election was called, we thought, ‘This is ridiculous’. The demographic we were aiming for was exactly the demographic that cares about this country and they’re going to stick by the election process and the results. So our campaign actually got lost.
Director Nadia Tass on the box office results of her film Matching Jack.
Matching Jack was released on August 19, and the Federal Election was held on August 21. Heavily supported by Twentieth Century Fox, it earned a little more than $800,000.
In conversation with Jim Schembri at The Sydney Morning Herald, Tass and her partner and business associate David Parker said they “double-mortgaged” their house to make the film, yet they have no regrets about making it, and particularly not about making it in Australia – according to Tass, it could have been made in the US, where it would have been easier and ‘more fun’.
There’s a certain irony to that piece being written by Jim Schembri, who in his reviews for The Age has annihilated countless Australian productions with a frightening level of flippancy.
But is there any irony in the Nadia Tass quotes?
Oh c’mon…this is a telemovie at best..not a cinema release. Parker/Tass do you need to be water-boarded to be made to understand that the tastes of audiences are changing? I mean come on..the election..are you for real..just eat the humble pie and understand that the film just didn’t resonate with audiences because they simply weren’t interested, maybe this film is a good example of why we should go back to a kind of telemovie..movie of the week deal..might have a found an audience on TV, but in a cinema..why would I bother if there is so much else on offer. Who is the target audience for this film?
Oh well, I hear Parker / Tass have just gotten another whack of public funds from Film Victoria ( does this have anything to do with David Parker sitting on the development board of Film Vic? Nepotism in this country..no way)..heaven forbid that funding bodies might see such box office failures as a reason to give public funds to other filmmakers wanting to push the envelope and engage with audiences. No keep giving it to those that see failing upwards as a badge of honor. WHAT IS GOING ON WITH OUR FILM INDUSTRY? Our little cottage industry is turning into a Kafka novel for emerging filmmakers, while some seasoned and stale filmmakers still fail to make films that connect…and put out their hands for more public funds..and GET IT!!!!
The level of disconnect is astonishing…and is really moving into an arena that is beyond a joke. The recent Metro Screen panel http://vimeo.com/7318151 just reaffirms what a sorry state we are in, it really is a scary watch this discussion, if ever there was a reaffirmation of the mantra “Nobody knows anything” this panel was it…the mantra needs to be ” More development money for screenwriters” Screen Australia you need to create better pathways for discovering writing talent ASAP..enough is enough..the joke just isn’t funny anymore. Pragmatic and creative action is needed
Matching Jack bombed because it wasn’t very good. Simple as that.
I am a mass consumer marketer (and Producer) and I heard almost ‘Jack’ about this film. (Sorry for the pun).
I am not sure what ‘heavily supported by Twentieth Century Fox’ means because even doing a cursory check of Google Insights for Search, Facebook, YouTube and other Social Media Monitoring tools I have access to there is very little to zero buzz, word of mouth and conversations about this movie and therefore any awareness about this movie.
YouTube is the second largest search engine in the world and surprisingly there is only one upload of the trailer (usually many users and other movie sites uploaded the trailers) and importantly no different versions of the trailer. Worse still, the trailer has only 27,600 views. There is a ‘page’ on Facebook but it only has 5 ‘fans’ and in terms of other online conversations and share of voice there is almost nothing.
If the Australian film industry, screen agencies and in particular producers will not come to grips with how critical using current marketing and distribution techniques is to commercialising their film, then we are doomed as an industry. Most filmmakers and distributors (not all) are still stuck using marketing techniques from the 1990’s or just focusing on getting a theatrical release.
Marketing has changed totally from just 5 years ago and if you are marketing to anyone under 50 then focusing on critical reviews in print and radio will do nothing, releasing a single trailer 4-8 weeks from release will do little, taking out print ads will do nothing and simply putting up a website with trailer, synopsis and cast will do nothing. Here is a ‘Moviegoers 2010’ research report Gordon Paddison (Lord of the Rings, District 9 marketing), Stephanie Bohn (Warner Bros) and I released during our keynote at last year’s SPAA Conference http://bit.ly/eVDaHv
Most important of all, the box office represents only 19% of a films revenue but obviously in many cases the box office is crucial to downstream revenue. But even Hollywood big films let alone independents are now utilising different and innovative distribution strategies depending on the film. Warner Bros released ‘Red Cliff’ on Video On Demand before the Box Office and it actually helped Box Office revenue. Another example is Paranormal Activity – this was made for $15k but went on to make $180m worldwide. See my case study on Paranormal Activity here http://bit.ly/f1oDQ2 Paranormal Activity started on only 12 screens and other films like Lost In Translation and Pulp Fiction are other successful examples of niche films on few screens going on to bigger things.
However, not all stories scale to the big screen and many niche films being made today need more innovative distribution strategies. Here is Dr. Pearlman from AFTRS discussing the scale issue at a Metro Screen forum last year (which I agree with) http://vimeo.com/10429716
In many cases Video On Demand (VOD) is earning more for independent films than the Box Office. A US independent film ‘All Good Things’ made $4m from VOD and $367K from Box Office. Here is a good article on this topic; ‘For Indie Films, Video-on-Demand Fills in Revenue Gap’ http://on.wsj.com/ei663c
Anyway, it is still a total loss to me how the industry can have so much focus on creating and making films but almost nothing on marketing and distribution. In any other industry no product would get off the ground without a marketing (and distribution) plan and with the changes in consumer behaviour today, simply relying on distributors to do this at all, let alone successfully will not work.
If we keep blaming audiences or other macro or micro environmental issues and not the root causes then we just keep going around in circles.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome. As an industry we’ve still learned nothing and look outwards instead on inwards.
Oh and please Nadia Tass…go and make your films in the USA…please, it’d be easier and more fun and we’d save some public funds so somebody else could have a crack!
Martin Walsh- Please run Screen Australia
The trouble with preview screening feedback is that the audience is already sitting down, in the dark, waiting to watch the film.
Even if the outcome is glowing feedback from the focus groups – that just means the movie is good. It doesn’t address a very significant question:
How do I make people leave their house, part with $15 and sit down in the first place?
Finding ways to test, measure and improve that part of the process is challenging, but essential.
Maybe it’s not a fair comparison, but My Sister’s Keeper (2009) was released a year earlier than Matching Jack (2010) with a similar story, themes and target audience and made $8m in Australian box office – according to boxofficemojo.com
Good point Phil…so what are we saying here?
A) the film wasn’t that good
B) The film was the victim of bad timing (the federal election?)
C) The marketing strategy for the film was poor
D) Nadia Tass should go and make films in the US because it’s more “fun” and “easier”
E) Australians are just not connecting with OZ films that really don’t offer much to them in terms of entertainment value
I went and watched a dark and bleak film the other day “Blue Valentine”, it reminded me of the kind of films we are often bashed to death with in the OZ media for making..grinding social commentaries that challenge the audience. This film didn’t offer any real optimistic feel good message and was at sometimes hard going, but also rewarding, with some great acting. I swear, if this film had been Australian it would have been buried at the box office..but its been a roaring success. the cinema was packed and the demographic was broad 20’s-60’s. So what’s happening here…do we just hate ourselves..hate our actors..hate our culture…hate our cinematic interpretation of our culture..do we wish we were American? Do we not have the star power…does a film need to be foreign or a success before we will bother with it? We are in dark dark territory in our little cottage industry and only good scripts and quality stories are going to pull us out of the woods…don’t expect the funding bodies to come to the rescue that’s for sure…they’re too busy handing people like Parker and Tass more cash.
matching Jack? Never heard of it here in Adelaide….even though I keep a reasonable eye on the Production reports in Encore etc. Maybe I”ll check out the trailer.
Dolly, I believe it’s too late, the damage is done in this country – the average person and average y-gen is aware of the corruption in the Aus film industry and the funding bodies. I have seen people pick up movies in video stores, show interest and then realise it’s ‘screenAus’ funded, laugh and put it back – these are young kids doing it.
But we live in a world dominated by greed and personal gain. Those in power in this industry who have been put there too ‘promote Australian talent’ end up doing the opposite. Aus talent go overseas and these corrupt cretins contnue to fund themselves and there friends, in doing so they rape the country of it’s film and culture.
It’s hilarious they say it would be ‘fun’ and ‘easy’… Ha! If that were true then u would be doing it – otherwise u have just admitted to being a masochist ….. The question is not, will Aus film progress and change, rather will anything change and progress in a hyper conservative, aging culture? Not for a while.
Where are the filmmakers pushing the envelope in this industry? David Michod and the crew at Blue Tongue gives a glimmer of hope…but where are the ambitious screenwriting development programs at State and Federal Funding levels that aim to nurture emerging writing/producing talent. Its the arrogance of this supposed “elite” a term of phrase I personally hate..the term inspires a false sense of confidence in a generational posse that presumes to know but is in fact highly ignorant of a new wave of ambitious filmmakers and the shifting taste’s of a more sophisticated cinema savvy, content saturated time poor audience.
Where are the ambitious and pragmatic funding programs designed to help production teams to produce quality content for the Web 2.0 sphere? Funding bodies seem to be oblivious to the hidden potential here. Why aren’t the companies like Canon, Sony , Red etc etc getting into bed with funding bodies and launching practical and ambitious funding programs for writer/director teams to produce content for this growing market? Allowing creative teams to test drive concepts, develop skills with low budgets hinged on exceptional creativity and solid scriptwriting.
We have some serious cultural problems developing in this country across a variety of issues and one issue that is becoming strikingly obvious is the increasingly monoculture, narrow mindedness and conservative nature of our funding bodies that seem mute to engaging in any debate or any real dialogue about how to fix an industry that is suffering predominately because of a lack of ideas driven by quality scriptwriting.
see this http://vimeo.com/7318151 …its a sad watch
This is the real root cause of the current problems within our industry locked in a dysfunctional relationship with funding body readers who also carry a conservative mindset. How is something highly original and entertaining going to be developed?
And if something is original and well crafted how is this to pass the layers of solidified fossils that make up the vanguard of conservative minded readers who are usually failed or unambitious producer/directors or struggling/seasoned writers themselves looking to develop their own productions/screenplays or have given up altogether and simply bitch about the lack of quality screenplays being written by Gen X&Y as they mill around the watercooler and fleetingly dream of a time when they seemed to possess a glimmer of creative ambition
I have no doubt that scriptwriters and scriptwriting in this country are as good as anywhere in the world, but the industry, such as it is, draws from a very small pool and the funding bodies cater to producers they know who also have their favorite writers. The creative pool is therefore stagnant.
I write commercial feature scripts, but there is really nowhere for me to go in this country, so I market them to the US and UK, where the industries are more open to new talent. As an individual writer, there is little in the way of support or development programmes through Screen Australia (unless you have a producer attached) and production companies (with a few exceptions) rarely respond and even more rarely request a script read.
And the type of screenplays I write – romantic comedies, thrillers and action stories – seem to be too light for the market here. I suppose the problem is is that they are movies people might want to see and therefore unsuitable for production in this country.
I’m currently going through the funding route with a director partner, as I want to work in this country, but like my network of Australian screenwriter friends, the future is very much offshore.
If the government invested in the industry – instead of handing out grants – and put pressure on the funding bodies to provide a return, we might see a commercial industry that can support the less commercial fare currently dominating the local output and help promote the movies brave enough to buck the trend and appeal to the mass audience.
Very well put Carl…but the most irritating thing is that all of us writing/ranting here and slinging some well deserved mud at a system that has moved into the realm of dysfunction know that nothing will change that the people in control of the purse strings will continue to get it wrong and not induce any real ambitious change and those with their snouts in the public trough will continue to gorge themselves senseless why others look on in horror. Why, as a culture do we have no faith in each other? Do we have to wait until a climate driven disaster to see the real and hidden human potential embedded into our society?
Everyday I see and meet with fellow filmmakers who can’t get a break because they lack that elusive something, yesterday I met a Director who seem so resigned to banging his head against the public funding wall, he was talking in such an apathetic tone of despair that it made me so enraged at a system that simply has, predominately, faith in sycophantic hacks that fail to connect with audiences whilst investing now and then in obvious talent. I simply said to this Director “maybe you need to go overseas”
he replied ” I think its the only thing I can do”
The brain drain continues…
Well put,everyone. In this case, were Parker and Tass too close to their dream? Where was the objective producer eye in the project? Neither lead was comfortable in the role, the scenes between them were hokum (ok in a telemovie). Overdressed sets and generally affluent ambiance in the film removed it from anything anyone in Australia might believe in or relate to.
The American actress could have registered in a net-based promotion, since she does have looks, but in a theatrical trailer her limitations must have been so obvious.
Reminded me of the 1970s international productions, big in pretensions but ill-fitting combination of disparate elements.
OMG. It’s Australia Day and as a typical ‘hermit’ writer I’m trawling the internet not outside in the sweaty sunshine and what do I find – enough comments to make me realise that my dream of one day soon being a professionally successful and financially successful scriptwriter maybe not be so soon afterall, may not be ever. I’m still relying on my day job to pay bills and even though I’m new to this industry – only last night completing the 2nd draft of my 2nd filmscript – I have realised that relying on winning filmscript competitions is the slow, unreliable way to success. But until today I did hold (maybe too tightly) a belief that I could rely on the funding bodies and/or someone with an eye for a good story to get my script to market. I can see now that the film industry is like all the other industries I have ever worked in. Why did I think otherwise – is it the naive child inside or is it something else? Who knows? I think I’ll go out into the sunshine today and contemplate the choice I have made, but then again I do know who I am and I’m of the belief that if one knows who they are, they (and their stories) resonate with others and more importantly resonate with life. So I guess I’m thinking right now that even if I don’t make it, I’m doing what I enjoy doing and that is all one can ask of in life and that is all we can take away at the end of it. HAPPY AUSTRALIA DAY FELLOW FILM FOLLOWERS!
Laney..Writing is a solitary pursuit and there are a multitude of ways to get your script/concept out into the market…Australian funding bodies aren’t the only way and have proven to many Australian screenwriters over the years that they have little interest in developing new and innovative content with pragmatic ambitious and innovative funding programs. The current script development programs at Screen Australia and Film Victoria for example are a wall of red tape designed to benefit the old snouts sniffing the same public trough with the same tired old ideas…with the odd original concept let through the gates to dispel rumors of closeted industry.
Put simply..as a writer you need to think out of the box, there are interesting developments happening online and camera technology is allowing filmmakers to cut their to teeth and access a global market.
So don’t despair…just be innovative and don’t get caught up and pissed off about that Kafka like catch 22 of trying to access public funds with innovative ideas, funding bodies are simply not interested and have the established clique to worry about. Just remember that screenwriting is a craft not an art, a craft that produces and invitation to others to collaborate on the potential to make a piece of artistic entertainment. Master the craft and the rest will..in time, fall into place..and one day the same old snouts in the public trough will look ridiculous for trying to feed the same old tired ideas while a generation of talent simply passed them by..happened in the 60’s and 70’s and its happening again..the changing of the guard
its not perfect and is slowly evolving as it “listens” to public feedback but check this out http://studios.amazon.com/
Would be interesting to see Screen Australia and the State funding bodies develop a similar concept..but I doubt they will
Have you seen the guidelines for the Amazon Studio deal? You basically give away all rights, including the right to rewrite and any reasonable expectation of being paid more than the prize money, and they own the product, the franchise (if there is one) and all the characters.
Amazon is about making films cheaply by paying writers the least amount possible. And they tie up all rights in the process. The Guilds have had a field day with this program and none but the desperate have taken up the quest. Would you voluntarily surrender any control (even of drafts) to online strangers, letting them rewrite whatever you’ve submitted – on your behalf – without any recourse or certainty of reply? Really?
While I get why people might want to take any opportunity that means they get their work read, there are better programs out there that don’t walk all over creative rights. God forbid Screen Australia go anywhere near this kind of arrangement.
I’ll think you might find its a work in progress and evolving via feedback. I don’t think that the present Amazon process is at all the way to go, but the model..tweaked and altered can be of a benefit…but think of the current system..send a package in for getting funding at state or federal level…no you didn’t get it? Oh well…why? What were you up against? I mean the current system we have is equally as absurd..why not have another avenue? We need to spread the net wider, get around the nepotism.. to find more talent…the current way of appraising what is worthwhile…amongst the mindsets of fifty people is simply outdated and ridiculous…
Hey
We make a living from soley from the film and TV industry . Have done so for the last 25 years. We get no Government support, never have. We exist because we are good at what we do and we work hard, take risks and strive to service our market. We are a business first and a creative enterprise second.
Government funding is a habit . Just break it. If no one applied for funding it would be obvious the system doesn’t work and the pollies would put their money into a different pork barrel.
Every “Film Maker” with their hand out for “Development Funding” is supporting this situation and all of them deserve the result.
Break the habit and the gatekeepers will disappear.
Within two years the film business will re emerge as a sound and sustainable thing because everyone involved will be struggling to be the provider of some thing they can sell to the mass Aust. public. Entertainment. Stars will be born and we will be able to bank on them to attract private finance.
WE DO NOT NEED GOVERNMENT FINANCE. WE NEED PEOPLE TO MAKE PROFESSIONALLY PRODUCED ENTERTAINING FILMS FOR MASS CONSUMPTION ..NOW.
John McGlynn
I’m very late on this particular bandwagon.
Who is John McGlynn?
Getting back to ‘Matching Jack’ — it was VERY bad in that it had taken a one-size-fits-all approach (via funding bodies?) to appeal to very personalised subject matter. But still, I think, with a great big mind-cast back to the Disney work that Tass & Parker had more recently been involved with.
The script did an enormous disservice to its excellent actors.
Ridiculous detail — (Kids dressed in costume escaping hospital reception vigilance? Where does Kid get the money for the taxi to go to Luna Park?).
You might well draw a political parallel Nadia, whom I used to admire, in saying that Politics Did You In.
Unfortunately, you did ‘Matching Jack’ in. Perhaps with funding body politics that didn’t set an astute-enough watchdog on the flaws of the script … of the film … that you wanted to make.
Hey guys..matching Jack tanked…but what the hell.. who cares hold…put your hand out Cascade and we’ll give you another grant..and while you’re here..since you sit on the development committee at Film Victoria..who do you think we should give some development money to? Me! You’ve already gottten some. Can I have some more? Okay meet me in the parking lot!
Wrong Wrong Wrong…and somehow we are supposed to have faith in this nepotistic system. The mind boggles.
‘I’ve got a an idea. Why don’t we apply an ‘actual’ business model to the Australian Film Industry. Stimulus works in many other industries why can’t it work in ours. If we said to producers yes you can access a greater amount through government funding but you can only access it on a one off basis, this is in order to stimulate the creation of your film and consequently your business . If you only have one shot you are going to do whatever it takes to create, market and distribute that piece of work as best you can. If you are successful then you have to reinvest in your own company to build that business up. If it tanks then move on and find something else to do, because you are obviously not cut out to create stories for the silver screen. This would make producers think more long term, build sustainable businesses and cut out the shithouse operators from our industry.