Menzies House

New Documentary questions the role of govt in Australian filmmaking

Australia produced the world's first feature film with The Story of the Kelly Gang in 1906, but today the film industry is struggling. Since the 1980s Australian films' total share of the local box office has fallen steadily from over 23% to below 4%. During this time the Australian Government's involvement in filmmaking has increased.

 

Today the government funds most local films, as well as locally produced Hollywood films. Yet in spite of the government's growing involvement in filmmaking, and spending hundreds of millions on production, the box office slide has continued unabated - leading to concerns for the future viability of the industry.

 

The question is, what's wrong with Australian films? And can Australia ever hope to reverse the slide and build a self-sufficient commercial film industry?

 

One group of industry insiders and corporate executives believe it is possible. They have formed an initiative called Pure Independent Pictures, which is dedicated to supporting independent filmmaking. They believe Australia can build a thriving independent film sector to rival the likes of Hollywood. But is it really possible?

 

Join Amie Bransgrove as we hear from experts in economics, finance, marketing, and filmmaking on such questions as, is our economy large enough to make commercial films, can we ever compete with Hollywood, do we have enough scripts, does the Australian accent work in films, and do Australian's really want to make films?

 

This documentary will change the way you see Australian films.

 

What's Wrong With Australian Films is screening on community television and Foxtel through September to October. Please check your local guide for details or go to Pure Independent Pictures for a full schedule.

 

 

 

Screenings:

 

Brisbane - Digital 31

September 8th Mon 6.30, 10th Wed 3pm, 11th Thurs 6pm, 14th Sun 9pm

 

Sydney - TVS

September 8th Mon 10.30pm, 10th Wed 11.30pm, 11th Thurs 1.30am

 

Melbourne - C31

September 6th Sat 10.30pm, 9th Tues 3pm

 

Perth - West TV

September 13th Sun 1pm (more TBC)

 

National - Aurora

October 5th Sun

 

 

Pure Independent Pictures

 

 

Lead by Donkeys

Is it any wonder why politicians elected under an undemocratic system would defend that system? Well, that’s exactly what they are doing. 

While we can’t stop people making uninformed choices at the polling booth, donkey voting is very much a symptom of compulsory voting.

Some people select candidates at random, take a stab in the dark, confuse party names, or treat the election as if it were a Melbourne Cup horse race and pick the party, or should I say donkey, with the best sounding name, irrespective of form.

Australia's Orwellian Democracy

Around 1.4 million Australian eligible voters are not registered to vote. This is why the government recently made voter enrolment automatic. The Australian Electoral Commission is now contacting unregistered voters to pressurize them into joining the electoral roll.

The AEC is ‘getting out the vote’ in traditional Labor and Green demographics, at universities, unionized workplaces, minorities, and indigenous communities. And before the election they will campaign widely to make sure everybody knows the penalties for non-compliance.

Rudd began his election campaign stating he would seek to motivate young people to vote. Well, the Australian Electoral Commission is doing his job for him. Who needs democracy when you have force?

In Australia’s Orwellian Democracy, where freedom equals to conformity, parties can win elections in two ways: They can either offer good policies, effective implementation, and quality leadership, or they can just say they offer good policies, effective implementation, and quality leadership. They can just lie, or use Newspeak. Ruddspeak.

Can't beat Hollywood, may as well join them

One of the biggest hurdles for Australian filmmakers is competing with the big budget American studio films. Indeed, this is one of the reasons the government gives for subsidizing Australian films. However, it seems to be at odds with the support given to American films like 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.

When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty

Compulsory voting is more popular with the left wing. The Liberals have opposed automatic voter enrollment while the ALP pushed it through, and the LNP in Queensland have suggested voluntary voting while Gillard and Swan bitterly opposed it. 

Liberals around the country have come out in favour of voluntary voting. Unlike Gillard and Swan, many Liberals feel that their decision to vote should be their own. Gillard and Swan know that compulsory voting favours their side of politics.

Unfortunately for the Liberals, the first line of defense against compulsory voting is to not comply. People can secretly (or openly) break the law and take the view that when injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty. And many do.

Why Australian leaders don't lead

People seem to be scratching their heads and wondering why the standard of our political debate has reached an embarrassing low and our politicians are unpopular and uninspiring. 

Liberal blames Labor and Labor blames Liberal but our political discourse is only as good as the average of its parts. It takes two to tango.

Maybe the politicians blame their audience. Maybe they think the Australian people are too stupid to understand complex political debate or ideological principals. Well, they’re partly right because compulsory voting means it’s only the disinterested swinging voters who decide our election outcomes. But that’s not the worst of it.

Under compulsory voting our politicians don’t need to inspire people to vote. They don’t need to motivate support from the people. They don’t need to lead, or at least not in the democratic way. Our leaders rely on force to compel people to attend the polling booth whether they support the candidates or not.

This oppressive system leaves us with a large part of the electorate who file into the polling booth like donkeys to avoid a fine.

In democracies around the world, voting is democratic. This means the leaders need to motivate support from the people using peaceful means. Democratic means.

In true democracies, the people hold the supreme power—which means that to earn support leaders must sell themselves and even sell the very notion of democracy, because if they don’t they won’t be elected. A more inspiring candidate could take their place.

It would be better if our leaders needed to inspire & empower people to vote rather than relying on threats and fines.

We’d get better leaders if our decision to vote were democratic.

Jason Kent

Free Our Right To Vote

Both Liberal & Labor fear democratic voting

Recently I wrote an article about Australia’s slide towards totalitarianism and how compulsory voting centralizes the major political parties at the totalitarian end of the political spectrum. The recent debate over electoral reform is an example of this.

Where will the 1.5 million new voters turn? Jail?

At the next federal election 1.5 million new voters will be forced to attend the polls. This could make a big difference to the election outcome. 

Not only will we have another 1.5 million disinterested or disengaged voters throwing their hat into the ring but far worse than this, not all of the 1.5 million new voters will actually vote.

There are people out there who know in their hearts that their decision to vote should be their own. They know that their decision to vote should be free from any government coercion, in spite of what our government tells us.

So how do these people who believe in freedom react to being forced against their will to attend the polls? Some of them will ignore the laws and cop fines, while others grudgingly show up and make a donkey vote – a protest for freedom, but the trouble is it’s a protest that is all-but mute. These people’s voices will go unheard and make no difference to the election outcome.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the political divide, there is another group of people who will vote. They will cast a formal ballot. They won't object to being forced to the polls. They won’t react against the government’s nanny state rules. They won’t oppose the government’s heavy-handed coercion. They will trust their government knows best and vote accordingly. Can you guess whom these people are more likely to vote for?