Owing to Bill C-110, which is an attempt to curb government funding of “offensive” material, some producers are uncertain what the new criteria for tax credits for film and TV productions are. While the Conservative government wants to control what Canadians are allowed to see on their screens, they are also sensitive to the needs of the marketplace. In order to alleviate uncertainty (and, perhaps, fuel an investor panic) on this point, we have created a simple algorithm to help clarify the issue.
| 1. | Is the project Canadian? | |
| NO | 2. | What is a “Canadian” film or television project? This is not a “Mommy, why is the sky blue?” kind of question, although you might think it was from some of the journalistic commentary on this issue. There is a formula for determining whether or not a production is “Canadian” for purposes of governmental support, and, again, contrary to popular, it is not impossible to figure out. Not only are several NASA scientists fluently conversant with the definition of Canadianness, but Stephen Hawking is apparently writing a For Dummies book on the subject. The important thing is that if a project is NOT deemed Canadian, give it every possible financial advantage. It doesn’t matter if it’s a straight to DVD slasher film. The government doesn’t care if it’s soft core porn headed for Hustler TV. The important cultural principle at work here is: we love foreign currencies. |
| YES | 3. | Have the producers applied for a tax credit? |
| NO | 4. | Over 90% of “Canadian” productions apply for a tax credit. If this isn’t one of them, GO TO the Canadian Film and Television Provincial Censorship Board Guidelines Algorithm. Bastards aren’t going to get away that easily. |
| YES | 5. | Does the production contain scenes of overt expressions of human sexuality? |
| YES | 6. | Do not allow the producers to claim the tax credit. Paperback Hero would have to be rejected on this basis (Kier Dullea and Elizabeth Ashley were definitely NOT washing themselves in the shower sequence). |
| NO | 7. | Does the production contain nudity not directly related to scenes of sexuality? |
| YES | 8. | Do not allow the producers to claim the tax credit. Of course, this would mean that the government would not support one of the highest grossing films in Canadian history – Porky’s – but that’s a price the Conservative government is willing to bear. It would also mean that David Cronenberg Eastern Promises would not be eligible, but, really, would it have killed Viggo Mortensen to wear a towel in the sauna? |
| NO | 9. | Does the production contain sexual promiscuity, implied or actual, without nudity or sexuality? |
| YES | 10. | Do not allow the producers to claim the tax credit. This would have eliminated The Decline of the American Empire, but, what the hell, it was French, as well as Goin’ Down the Road (Jayne Eastwood as an unmarried pregnant hairdresser is just wrong on so many levels!). It would have also made Away From Her ineligible, because, let’s face it, Alzheimer’s is no excuse for taking up with another man while still married. Okay, we might have made an exception in this case, but only if the filmmakers could guarantee before shooting that the film would win seven Genies. |
| NO | 11. | Does the production contain overt scenes of violence or the effects of violence? |
| YES | 12. | Do not allow the producers to claim the tax credit. You know, we actually laughed when the body fell apart in Bon Cop/Bad Cop, but it’s bad for children, so it’s out. As is Shivers. And, Rabid. And, The Brood. And, Scanners. And…you know what? Pretty much anything by David Cronenberg. |
| NO | 13. | Does the production contain too much foul language? |
| YES | 14. | Do not allow the producers to claim the tax credit. If we hadn’t already rejected Porky’s, we would reject it on this basis. And, of course, The Trailer Park Boys. |
| NO | 15. | Does the production contain depictions of drug use, including excessive alcoholism? |
| YES | 16. | Do not allow the producers to claim the tax credit. If we hadn’t already written off David Cronenberg, Naked Lunch would definitely be rejected on this basis. And, of course, The Trailer Park Boys. |
| NO | 17. | Does the production contain depictions of criminality that go unpunished? |
| YES | 18. | Do not allow the producers to claim the tax credit. The Silent Partner would probably qualify (although some people would argue that Christopher Plummer’s fierce performance was punishment enough for Elliott Gould). And, of course, The damn Trailer Park Boys! |
| NO | 19. | Is the production religiously blasphemous? |
| YES | 20. | Do not allow the producers to claim the tax credit. Hey, CodCo, sketches about Priests molesting children don’t seem so funny now, do they? |
| NO | 21. | Fund Anne of Green Gables. Over and over again. Forever. |
We hope this is now clear. If you have any further questions, please direct them to Charles McVety, president of the Canada Family Action Coalition.
