The Canadian study found evidence that, in television projects, national joint ventures performed better than international joint ventures. However, in the case of large budget projects, it has been found that national joint ventures are not a viable alternative to international joint ventures. [20] In their subsequent study of co-production in Australia, the authors cited financial pooling as the main benefit and increased coordination costs as the main drawback. [21] This indicates that co-production is more suited to larger budget productions, particularly for films that need more capital but do not bear the same dollar-per-dollar coordination costs as smaller projects. In both cases, we are talking about very complex cooperation, where legal issues and communication on agreements require a high level of expertise. There are two aspects to the issue of co-development and production rights. The first relates to the rights that exist before the creation of co-development/production (underlying rights). These underlying rights should normally be transferred to co-production or, at the very least, the development agreement should confirm that the co-producer who holds these rights is doing so in favour of co-production. This may be related to the obligation for this co-producer to transfer the co-production rights to the relevant date. This should be taken into account when planning the project, so that the agreed timetable is as realistic as possible. Co-productions generally take time and need to be planned in depth to enable each stage to overcome all obstacles and exploit their full potential. It is easy to underestimate the total cost of an international co-production.

Some logistical aspects, such as the need for international planning meetings, are often overlooked during initial budgeting. The public authorities are well aware of these concerns. A review of Australia`s co-production rules confirmed the tensions between cultural and economic objectives and argued that “the need for the program`s objectives to be essentially economic or cultural would hinder the program and reduce its effectiveness in achieving either of these two outcomes.” [22] In response to internationalization, co-production offers both pros and cons. A 1996 survey of Canadian international and national joint ventures identified benefits such as: artists also initiated production cooperation with several partners in Creative Europe projects. See UPgrade Video CASE Asterions Hus. Development or production with someone else is useful for many reasons: it shares risk, opens up financing opportunities from other countries and can bring the experience of a more experienced producer. However, if you start co-developing or co-producing, it is important that the agreement between you and your co-producers is clear and stipulated in a contract. In Australia, some have suggested that a narrow definition of “local content” has limited Australia`s ability to work with international partners. Julia Hammett-Jamart reflects france`s and Australia`s different approaches to this and argues that a literal definition of Australian culture was “antagonistic to the collaborative nature of film production and in particular international co-production.” [17] [18] [19] The budget should normally be divided between the costs attributable to producer-specific overheads and the costs that third parties, such as screenwriters, pay for awarding the contract. If one of the two producers puts their own money into the development budget, make sure it is recovered from the film/program production budget.

The first and most important thing is to check the person you want to work with.

Comments are closed.