Harry Potter to become an economic migrant?
Media Guardian reports that the UK film industry might lose production of the next Harry Potter film to the greener (well, cheaper) pastures of Eastern Europe. Apparently, this comes hot on the heels of a recent threat to pull another British hardy perennial, James Bond, overseas: The producers of Casino Royale, the latest Bond installment, "are in talks to take the franchise from its traditional UK base to Prague's Barrandov Studios." Notes the article:
Thses new threats would certainly be a blow for British film if carried out, especially in the wake of sharply increased domestic profits from last year (I talked about back on March 14). Of course the UK's film success in 2004 was largely due to precisely the sort of big-budget co-productions (Harry Potter et al) that would be hit by the move overseas.
Perhaps this is all just a negotiating ploy to nudge the UK government to provide more tax breaks. But it's interesting to see another example of global offshoring at work even in the world of media (somewhat similar to Reuters news agency taking its jobs from Wall Street to India and Singapore). And the UK has been down this sad road before - when its film industry collapsed in the early 1970s as Hollywood studios all pulled out to retrench at home. The Brits don't want to go down that path again.
Now as for the UK-US media trade, and just to reinforce how mobile movie production is: Americans still seem to like British movie stars and "British" films, and Britain has profited from that in recent years. But would US audiences even notice if a "British" film such as Harry Potter featured Czech locations and a Czech production crew - and reduced the British element to a few key actors? Would they care? Of course not! But the British exchequer sure would!
- What is also working against British production is the current confusion over the government's recent review of the Section 42 tax break, which until now has been a galvanising force in inward investment in the UK film industry.
Stymied by unfavourable economic conditions, Paramount recently announced it was pulling its $120m (£66m) production of the classic graphic novel Watchmen out of the UK.
Thses new threats would certainly be a blow for British film if carried out, especially in the wake of sharply increased domestic profits from last year (I talked about back on March 14). Of course the UK's film success in 2004 was largely due to precisely the sort of big-budget co-productions (Harry Potter et al) that would be hit by the move overseas.
Perhaps this is all just a negotiating ploy to nudge the UK government to provide more tax breaks. But it's interesting to see another example of global offshoring at work even in the world of media (somewhat similar to Reuters news agency taking its jobs from Wall Street to India and Singapore). And the UK has been down this sad road before - when its film industry collapsed in the early 1970s as Hollywood studios all pulled out to retrench at home. The Brits don't want to go down that path again.
Now as for the UK-US media trade, and just to reinforce how mobile movie production is: Americans still seem to like British movie stars and "British" films, and Britain has profited from that in recent years. But would US audiences even notice if a "British" film such as Harry Potter featured Czech locations and a Czech production crew - and reduced the British element to a few key actors? Would they care? Of course not! But the British exchequer sure would!
posted by hdougie at 1:21 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home