Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-11-16-Speech-3-320-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20111116.18.3-320-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"My hobby is writing film scripts so I declare an interest in this subject.
But whilst this report might claim to be about new ‘Cinema Paradiso’s, it is more likely to lead to ‘Cinema Disastroso’.
Why does the EU want to discriminate against non-European films?
Firstly, this is a form of non-tariff barrier and against WTO rules.
Second, filmmaking is incredibly international these days – defining a non-European film is difficult: is Harry Potter or James Bond an American film for its production, finance and distribution, or British by dint of talent, theme, location and studios used? The ‘Fifth Element’ may be directed by Frenchman Luc Besson but Bruce Willis is the star. Even the iconic French film ‘Chocolat’ had substantial US support.
Third, you simply cannot force people to watch films they do not want to see. European movies can be winners without giving away seats: ‘Chocolat’ took USD 71 million at the box office, ‘Amélie’ USD 152 million and “The King’s Speech” USD 386 million.
Any support for film is better targeted on developing good stories or in skills development, not in seeking to prop up films no one wants to see. That is why on principle I could not vote for this report, whilst being very much in support of the film industry."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples