6 ms·

Supply and demand. Pay 2x or 3x or... and you will get people you need.

• Symbiote 7y ago
  That might work for some roles (you can bring anyone from within the EU with little to no paperwork) but there will be a limited number of people who speak Danish and are familiar with or have contacts in the country. Cost of living is already very high here, so it is presumably already more expensive than filming almost anywhere else in Europe. 2–3× may go beyond a reasonable budget.
  • Svip 7y ago
    Also quite expensive, since the Danish government provides a lacklustre funding for filming, according to Danish film makers. Even Danish productions often goes to places like the Czech Republic to film, because financial advantages are much better there.
    • tomcam 7y ago
      Do Danish filmmakers feel it's essential that the government fund their work?
      • goto11 7y ago
        Absolutely. Very few Danish production could have been made without government funding. "The Rain" is unique in being financed by Netflix.
      • Symbiote 7y ago
        Many European governments subsidise (tax breaks or direct funding) TV and film related to their country, in order to promote their culture, language, industry and for tourism. In some cases it's a region within a country, such as Yorkshire: http://www.creativeeuropeuk.eu/other-eu-funding-case-studies/yorkshire-content-fund http://www.creativeeuropeuk.eu/other-eu-funding-case-studies... It does seem Denmark doesn't need to do this at present.
      • Svip 7y ago
        My honest opinion is that they are just whining. Considering how well the Danish television industry is doing, it seems like they aren't short on cash. Danish films, on the other hand, has definitely taken a back seat to television production. When they say other countries do more funding, they are not wrong. But we don't talk about Czech film/television production in the same way we talk about the Danish counterpart. There are plenty of film makers out there who still think television is beneath them, and I am sure some of those film makers are Danish, and they therefore cannot cash in on the Danish television success.
        • goto11 7y ago
          > There are plenty of film makers out there who still think television is beneath them I find that very hard to believe. After all, Lars von Trier (the most famous Danish director) made a tv series ("The Kingdom") and all the biggest actors (like Mads Mikkelsen) have had roles in tv shows. The less famous people in the business are typically just happy to be employed.
      • matsemann 7y ago
        Aren't most films subsidized in some ways, even the huge successful ones? Lots of communities bend over backwards to get them to come and film. Tax breaks, cheap studio rent or whatever. New york gave out $621M a year in tax breaks, that's as much as $31 dollar per person living there, according to wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movie_production_incentives_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movie_production_incentives_in...
        • aliceryhl 7y ago
          Perhaps, but as the article says: "Unlike other European countries, Denmark does not offer tax incentives to production companies."
      • coldtea 7y ago
        Many european filmmakers but also many European publics, feel that it's not just essential that the state fund such work, but also part of the role of state. They don't consider the government some hateful opponent entity (or rather, they don't consider the state that. They can still hate this or that particular party / person running the government, protest its decisions, etc.). The government is people they have voted into power to pass laws and guide the state machinery. They expect from the state to promote arts and fund culture, the same way they expect of it to make roads and maintain public infrastructure. The US doesn't need that because (a) there's not an emphasis on culture in the European sense, it's more about entertainment, most don't even believe there's a distinction between these two (b) it dominates globally and has the most money, so they can push their culture everywhere anyway and teach global audiences to prefer their ware from a young age (after enough Spielberg and Michael Bay and superhero stuff kids become desensitized to movies with no SFX and explosions -- that happened to European cinema -- once equally or more popular as the American in Europe -- after the late 80s and the rise of the Spielberg era), (c) it still gives all kinds of incentives, tax breaks, government (e.g. army) support for movies anyway, just doesn't call it for what it is
        • samatman 7y ago
          Curious that you didn't cite the most salient reason why the film industry in the US isn't directly funded by the government: it is a wildly profitable industry. Various states, notably Georgia, provide tax breaks and other incentives to lure studios into filming in their jurisdiction.
          • brnt 7y ago
            So, you're saying that US governments in fact do fund the American movie industry?
    • deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
• deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]