Evidence of meeting #45 for Canadian Heritage in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was telefilm.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gord Brown
You are out of time.
Thank you very much, Mr. Young.
Mr. Nantel, you may go ahead for five minutes.
5 p.m.
NDP
Pierre Nantel NDP Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Mirkopoulos, I wanted to thank you for the work you do with young people, to help the next generation come up. Congratulations.
Now, I'd like to talk to Ms. Gadon and Mr. Waddell, from ACTRA.
Ms. Gadon, it's a privilege to have you with us. We know how busy you are. You star in a number of roles and you're also a director, if I'm not mistaken.
Thank you for your dedication, and I'd also like to thank ACTRA for, once again, bringing a witness who works directly in the field. Ms. Gadon is an actress, so hearing from someone like that with first-hand experience is always very insightful.
I really appreciate....
I'll switch to English. I feel that I can speak your language directly.
Ms. Gadon, the first time I really noticed you was when I saw the poetic image of Toronto in Enemy. Clearly, this was a co-production. I want to hear from both of you. What is your stance on co-production? Should we do more? Clearly, for you and for Denis Villeneuve, it was a moment to see, and it was very “heritagey” to see Toronto in such a poetic manner.
What is your stance on co-production?
5 p.m.
Member, Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA)
I have had a successful career as a product of co-productions, and the variety of co-productions that exist within Canada and abroad.
A Dangerous Method was the first film that I did with David Cronenberg. That was a co-production between Canada and Germany. Cosmopolis, after that, was a co-production between Canada and France. Then, of course, when I worked with Denis Villeneuve it was his first English-language film and a co-production as well.
I think it's important that we have co-productions within Canada because our industry is so widespread. We have brilliant performers and brilliant technicians coast to coast, and we need to be able to work with each other.
It's especially important for me, because it catapults us into the international spotlight. If I hadn't done Enemy, I wouldn't have had the opportunity to go to international film festivals. If I hadn't had the opportunity to work with David, I would have never gone to the Venice Film Festival, to Cannes. Because of that, I've been exposed to and been able to work with filmmakers all over the world.
It has been incredible for me, and I think it's the future of our industry.
5 p.m.
NDP
Pierre Nantel NDP Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC
Thank you.
Stephen, you may want to add to that, but I'll pitch another question.
We've been told by many witnesses here that if CBC/Radio-Canada had enough budget, they could play a larger role in the expansion and visibility of our cinematography.
What is your sense on this?
5 p.m.
National Executive Director, Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA)
We wish that the CBC would make the same commitment to Canadian productions that Radio-Canada does. We wish also that the parliamentary appropriations to the CBC would be restored. It's a death by a thousand cuts at CBC. It's unfortunate. It's our national public broadcaster. It, like the railroad in the 1800s, ties this country together.
It's a significant cultural institution in this country, and it's being hacked away at as a result of the lack of commitment to properly financing that organization
5:05 p.m.
National Executive Director, Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA)
That said, we have our own criticism of the CBC.
It also can do more, in our view, to promote Canadian production. We certainly would like it to promote more Canadian dramatic production in particular.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Pierre Nantel NDP Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC
Exactly.
Actually, I'll let my colleague from B.C. ask you something about hockey nights and music nights.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Kennedy Stewart NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
I don't know if I'm asking about hockey nights and music nights, but I am interested in how you develop a distinctly Canadian voice in the film industry. Do you have policy suggestions—just quickly because we're running out of time—about developing distinctly Canadian voices in the Canadian film industry?
That's for all three of you, if you have a chance. Thank you.
5:05 p.m.
Vice-President, Cinespace Film Studios
At the risk of sounding repetitive, Telefilm has quite a bit to do in that regard, helping to modify, streamline their system of delivering funds to film producers. They have to make sure that they catch the little fish that are getting through the net.
Some good young clients of mine are taking their film, Sleeping Giant, to Cannes in a couple of weeks. Unfortunately, when they went to Telefilm, it wasn't able to recognize the potential of the production team, the directing team. Now we have some great Canadian content at Cannes. That film could have been even better if it had the assistance of Telefilm.
There's a lot of streamlining and improving to do at Telefilm. I think it's a great funding mechanism; it just needs to get more feedback from the people who need its services the most.
5:05 p.m.
National Executive Director, Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA)
Sarah, do you want to take it?
5:05 p.m.
Member, Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA)
I think it's really important that Telefilm supports emerging Canadian filmmakers, especially in English Canada. If you look at the climate right now internationally, Canadians make films.
Québécois filmmakers are the ones making films, making waves internationally with their films. I would arguably say that they are given the opportunity to really hone a distinct voice in Quebec, using specifically Quebec actors, and specifically Quebec talent behind the camera as well. They are given a forum to hone that voice, which they can then later export.
Look at Xavier Dolan and his big success with Mommy, and Antoine Pilon who starred in that film. He is this young, beautiful Québécois actor, who might not have been given the opportunity if that were an English-language film, because they might have asked a bigger named American actor to star in that role.
I think we need to look at that system to see what's working and apply it to English Canada and English Canadian feature films, if we want to make films that have a distinct voice.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I think Mr. Young was right to ask you about the consequences of the cuts that are happening in the Ontario government, but I wish that my Conservative colleagues would ask the same questions about the cuts done by their own government.
Can you tell us, the three of you, if I'm not wrong, whether you are asking for better funding for Telefilm Canada
It was Mr. Mirkopoulos who said that we should avoid having too dispersed help and that we should focus more on quality for fewer beneficiaries in order to be more effective.
If we increase the funding of Telefilm, is there a danger that we'll do the opposite, that although there will be more money, it will be more dispersed? How can we avoid that?
5:05 p.m.
Vice-President, Cinespace Film Studios
I consulted a number of my producer clients before coming here today, so I could speak intelligently on all of the issues, including ones that I don't deal with on a day-to-day basis, namely the financing and production of film. The general consensus was that if low-budget producers were given a little bit more to play with, they could actually put more quality on the screen.
If there were an increase in funding to Telefilm, with some specific changes made, in consultation with maybe a panel of senior producers, but especially a panel of younger producers, as Sarah mentioned, to find out what amounts they could really succeed with, that could be a model to move forward with.
Certainly, there is a danger that you could get it wrong if you increase the funding but narrow the focus too much. As Stephen mentioned, there are a lot of very talented young people in Canada and there's no shortage of them.
Telefilm has the mandate to promote Canadian culture, but also to help these films be successful from the business point of view. I think that the more consultation the better and I think there is a way to make Telefilm work even better than it does right now.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
Mr. Waddell or Madam Gadon, do you have a view about reinvesting in Telefilm and how can we optimize this new investment?
5:10 p.m.
Member, Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA)
Investing in young filmmakers is really the key to our future and Canadian filmmaking, especially in English-speaking Canada. I don't think that investing more capital will be a bad thing. It will only increase the quality of those films and those filmmakers.
They need resources and an incentive to stay here because if they achieve commercial success and Telefilm wasn't a part of that, what's stopping them from going south of the border to the United States to make those films? If we invest in people at the beginning of their careers in that way, we'll be able to keep them and then keep the industry thriving.
5:10 p.m.
National Executive Director, Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA)
Clearly, I would echo the comments that Jim and Sarah have both made, but would like to make one other point.
In terms of the CBC and other Canadian broadcasters, we're not seeing Canadian feature films, whether they're high-budget or low-budget or no-budget, being exhibited by Canadian broadcasters. As we mentioned in our speaking notes, it's because the CRTC has let them off the hook with respect to content requirements.
City TV and CBC used to show feature films and don't do it anymore. As we said, if Canadians can't see Canadian films, then it's a great loss. We would hope that the CRTC would see this as being an issue and mandate broadcasters to broadcast Canadian feature films.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
I would now like to ask the three of you to comment on the orientation the CRTC is taking about the definition of Canadian content. What is a Canadian movie? They decided, if I'm not wrong, to simply change the definition. It came as a bit of a surprise.
Do you think it was the right thing or the wrong thing to do?
5:10 p.m.
National Executive Director, Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA)
They're trying an experiment with Canadian content and they've got a couple of experiments in which they're using Canadian-based materials but otherwise allowing for more flexibility.
It's useful that they're suggesting that Canadian producers and distributors consider Canadian source material for Canadian features, but it's wrong to mess with the Canadian content structure that exists.
In ACTRA's view—if I can just speak institutionally—a Canadian movie is one that is produced, directed, written, and performed by Canadians. It doesn't have to be about beavers and Mounties, but it should be produced, directed, and written by Canadians.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
5:10 p.m.
Vice-President, Cinespace Film Studios
I don't necessarily disagree at all, but I'd be open to a discussion about what defines Canadian content, simply because there are too many people in this industry who are finding that they're not being supported. Co-production, as Sarah mentioned, is an excellent way to get more opportunities for Canadian artists, whether they're behind the camera or in front of the camera.
Creativity brought us something in television called the Canadian co-venture. Two of my clients at our Kipling Avenue facility are TV series financed by CBS that air on a cable network in the United States called the CW Network, but they are Canadian co-ventures, which means that they are produced by Canadians, that their either number one or number two actor has to be Canadian, and that the director of every single episode has to be a Canadian director.
The Canadian Film Centre, which graduates I don't know how many directors a year, now has a great pool of directors available to shows that are being watched by Americans. But I would argue that these Canadian directors would never have had the opportunity to direct every single episode of those TV series called Beauty and the Beast and Reign that they have as a result of this unique arrangement.
I think creativity can be a wonderful thing. Actor number one or actor number two are Canadian in both of those shows, but every single director of those episodes, which now number I think more than 80 episodes, has been Canadian. How often do Canadian directors get the opportunity to have their art watched by such huge markets?
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
David Yurdiga Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks to the witnesses for participating in today's study.
My first question is for Mr. Mirkopoulos. I understand that your facility is one of the largest campuses of its kind in Canada. Does this allow for a wide array of films to be produced at your studios?
