BAFTA and the "British" films

This week, the nominations were announced for the 2014 EE BAFTA awards which will be hosted on Sunday 16th of February. 

Luke Evans (most recently of The Hobbit fame) and Helen McCrory (or Draco Malfoy's mother for you Harry Potter fans out there), were up bright and early to present the list at BAFTA HQ and luckily the whole thing was live-screened for the rest of us mere mortals. You can watch it below or on BAFTA's Youtube channel

Some of the results were expected with American Hustle, 12 Years A Slave, Captain Phillips and Gravity each scooping a serious handful of nominations in several categories. However, the category that really got people talking was Best Outstanding British Film.

It raised the question - what exactly constitutes a British Film? Gravity, Rush and Saving Mr Banks don't immediately jump out as "British". According to the British Film Institute in order to qualify, films must meet the requirements of one of the following:

• The cultural test for film
• One of the UK’s official bilateral co-production agreements
• The European Convention on Cinematographic Co-production

In order to pass the cultural test, at least one of the film production companies must be registered in the UK. The cultural test is a points-based test where the project needs 16 of a possible 31 points to pass across four categories.

Source: Olswang

 My personal feeling is all of these points should apply for a film to be truly defined as "British" but some would argue that to do so would be too limiting and prevent individuals getting the recognition they deserve for having worked on such films.

Take Gravity for example. Predominantly filmed at UK based Shepperton Studios using a crew of British artists and technicians, the special effects were overseen by British company Framestore and it was produced by the British David Heyman, (best known for his work on the ‘Harry Potter’ films). However it was the brainchild of Mexican direction Alfonso Cuarón (best know for Y Tu Mamá También) and financed by US company Warner Bros. So would you call it a British film? I wouldn't.

There's no denying it ticks the right boxes to qualify as a British film but it hasn't stopped a few feathers being ruffled, especially at a time when the British film industry is struggling to expand and places such as Pinewood may see their future drawn into question if they can't expand and big hitters like Disney and Marvel are threatening to go elsewhere.

You can sign the petition to expand Pinewood here

It also doesn't help when the BFI publishes statistics suggesting British films barely return any profit - how can we be proud of our film culture if the very body that is supposed to represent it is saying that it's quite frankly, not really worth it because you won't get your money back?

Producer Ken Marshall wrote a very strong article in response to the BFI which I highly recommend - read it here . His excellent film, Filth, which is what I would consider a "British film", didn't even get a look in in a single category. I know the BAFTAs have recently become seen as good indicator of how films will fare in the Oscars but as the British Academy Film Awards, I'd like to see a little more recognition of the excellent homegrown talent and films we produce in the UK. If the BFI itself has no faith, I predict we will see more and more films like Gravity being claimed as British in the years to come.