One of Australia’s most successful film, television and digital content producers, AFTRS alum Sue Maslin has helmed award-winning feature and documentary films, including AACTA-winning hit feature—and one of Australia’s all-time highest-grossing films—The Dressmaker (2015), Brazen Hussies (2020), Road to Nhill (1997), Japanese Story (2003), Paper Trails (2017) and more. Maslin’s tremendous contribution to the industry has earned some of the country’s most prestigious honours, including the Order of Australia for distinguished service to the Australian film industry as a producer (2019), the inaugural Jill Robb Award for Outstanding Leadership, Achievement and Service to the Victorian Screen Industry (2012) and an induction into the Victorian Honour Roll of Women (2018). Most recently, Maslin is part of an industry group that has developed the Australian Feature Film Summit, a future-focused event aimed at growing the success of the Australian feature film sector, taking place virtually later this month. Maslin spoke to AFTRS’ Alumni Program Manager Christine Kirkwood about her time at AFTRS, connecting with local audiences, and looking positively to the future of the Australian screen industry.
––
Christine Kirkwood: Sue, you came to AFTRS to complete the Master of Screen Arts and Business and graduated in 2013. Coming to the school as an established producer with a well-known string of credits behind you, was it challenging to become a student again? And how did the course impact your career at that stage?
Sue Maslin: I came to the MASB with a very specific goal. While I had a fairly extensive career at that point, what I was setting out to do was to raise the finance for The Dressmaker, which I knew was going to require a significant private investment. So I came with the specific goal of really understanding how to put together a business plan that would speak to private capital and to make a business case for a feature film.
So often in this industry, we’re trained to present the case to pitch the project highlighting the creative elements. We all understand how screen funding bodies work and the producer offset, but when it actually comes to putting together a persuasive business case, many of us don’t have enough financial sophistication to really bring in serious private capital. It was an amazing two years at AFTRS. It not only gave me those skills to bring in $1.5 million into The Dressmaker, but more importantly, it had a strong focus on leadership skills. It was a really empowering and informative course to be part of.
CK: As you say, securing private funding is challenging in Australia. Do you think that it’s becoming easier or getting harder? And do you have any advice for producers who are struggling in that space?
I think it’s becoming more difficult. It’s not getting easier. The business has changed profoundly. Partly as a result of the pandemic, which really just fast-tracked a trend that was taking place anyway. And that is the rise and rise of the streamers – this has changed the business irrevocably. We have to look at how we’re going to work towards making films for the big screen in a different way, going forward. It is no longer a case of finding a great idea and hoping there will be an audience there. We have to be a lot more strategic and entrepreneurial.
We are really all in the same business, and hopefully coming up with great stories, great ideas and the desire to connect with audiences. We have a value chain where the creators are at one end, developing a whole bunch of work. And then at the other end, you’ve got the exhibitors who are the coalface with the audience, and the two ends are not really speaking to each other. That has to change. If we’re going to have a successful industry going forward, we have to use data better. We need to communicate better. We need to really understand more about what the value is of each proposition. What is going to work for the cinema? What is going to encourage somebody to spend the money and watch an Australian movie on the big screen, as opposed to viewing what is right in front of them: the myriad of offerings on their devices.
CK: So do you think it’s about being more strategic from the creative concept all the way through to distribution?
SM: Yes. I think it’s about being more informed about how the business really works. And this goes both ways. By-and-large exhibitors don’t really understand the job of filmmakers – where ideas come from, why producers will develop particular ideas over others, what actually goes into the process of putting together a film. Likewise, filmmakers don’t really understand what informs exhibition choices – the data, market conditions, and other factors that go into whether a film is given screens or stays on screens. We’ve been stuck in a cycle where we have a one-size-fits-all approach. Australian films have faced pressure to perform in the same way as big Hollywood pictures. They have to perform in the opening weekend, and if they don’t, they’re out.
I think we all need to learn more about how each of us along that value chain does business. Learning about how we can make films that will ultimately give the best possible chance of cutting through and connecting with audiences. The time is right to take on that challenge. We’ve just had this extraordinary 18 months where we haven’t had Hollywood in our marketplace and we’ve had well-crafted Australian films go out which audiences have flocked to, and they’ve performed way above what they might have otherwise. So we know the capacity is there.
CK: What are you doing at Film Art Media, as a small, independent business, to adapt to the challenges that have arisen over the past 18 months?
SM: Our goal has always been to connect ideas with people, and we do that through a variety of ways. We’re not just in the business of producing and making content. We’re actually in the business of developing intellectual property and finding ways to connect that with people. So, Film Art Media is actually a film rights management and distribution company. We therefore have a catalogue of content that we’ve developed over time.
At the beginning of the pandemic, we had just completed a feature documentary called The Show Must Go On, which was all about mental health and wellbeing in the arts and entertainment sector. It screened on ABC TV and we started an impact strategy around mental wellbeing because the industry hasn’t really had those conversations in the past, or there’s been stigma attached to those conversations. So we set up a whole range of live events. Unfortunately on that first Monday in March 2020 when the lockdowns started we had to cancel them all. We then changed the offering and put it online. There were about a dozen events lined up at that point, and we ended up tripling business as a result of making them virtual.
By being flexible, we scale up, we scale down, according to what we have capacity to do. Our success really is because of that flexibility. We keep going back to that central principle ‘what is the best way of connecting that idea with that audience?’
We distributed Brazen Hussies last year, which is a feature documentary about the second-wave feminist movement in Australia. We had a theatrical release scheduled for October. Things were still uncertain three months earlier when we needed to start the campaign but we took a risk, banking on the fact that some cinemas would be starting to open. As it turned out a film like Brazen Hussies which as a feature documentary might normally go out on 10-15 screens for a few weeks, went out on 56 screens nationally and lasted three months in the cinema! That’s what I mean about being flexible, being able to jump and grab opportunities. In this instance, it really paid off.
CK: As you said, your flexibility is key to your success, but it sounds like it is also about not underestimating your audience, taking those risks and giving them the opportunity to find the content they really want.
SM: Yes, at the time of financing Brazen Hussies five years ago, feminism was pretty ‘on the nose’. It was really difficult to get that film financed. But if the filmmakers (Philippa Campey, Andrea Foxworthy and Catherine Dwyer) hadn’t taken the creative risk, the film wouldn’t have had that success [which swelled following the #metoo movement].
The Dressmaker was also regarded as a high-risk film that would only appeal to a female-skewed audience (“not commercial”) and therefore wouldn’t justify a big budget. Sometimes, creative development and financing are happening under a climate where it doesn’t sound appealing to the prevailing market, but by the time you get to the finish line, the world has changed.
CK: So tell, tell us about the Australian Feature Film Summit – how it came about and its aims.
SM: Around 2018 I was starting to despair at the negative press that the Australian film industry was receiving. Filmmakers can get caught in a trap in a subsidised industry where they start to think about making films that fit guidelines, as opposed to films that actually speak to audiences. And I just posed the question publicly: ‘Are we turning into a vanity publishing industry?’ That got people talking and it led to an event organised by SPA called Prism, which was a round table event where industry representatives who had either a policy interest or a commercial interest, started speaking to some of the key challenges facing the industry.
From there, a group of us said we want to explore this further and ask how could we do things differently. We called ourselves the Australian Feature Film Working Group. The group was made up of exhibitors, distributors, producers, screen agencies, funding bodies, festivals, etc. It was just the most fantastic experience to hear everybody’s perspectives because we all realised we didn’t know enough about each other’s particular challenges, which affected all of us. We decided that we wanted to put together an event that would for the first time bring everyone together in the one room.
So on 22 October, we are going to come together online to look at how we can work differently to build the success of the Australian feature film industry because we recognise that going back to the way we did ‘business as usual’ is just not an option. The summit is an opportunity for us to learn more about how each sector works and how we can best share information.
As a result of Covid-19, and more importantly, the rise of streamers, we want to ask ourselves ‘What does success look like and how might we get there by working differently today?’ It’s going to be a very forward future-looking event, as will the follow-up event in February 2022.
CK: It sounds like some really vital conversations are going to happen and continue from those events. Is government is going to have a voice at the summit?
We want government in the room, but we actually want them to be there to listen. It will be a good opportunity to bring in the governments and agencies, all of whom support this event, to hear from the industry. What we want is to have an industry-driven, rather than government-driven, top-down discussion. And we hope that by having these conversations government can hear first-hand the kind of priorities that lay ahead for exhibitors, distributors and producers going forward. That will hopefully help in turn to shape policy.
CK: Can you speak to what kind of threat streamers might pose to the traditional feature film model [in terms of theatrical release] and how they might fit together in Australia’s cultural landscape going forward?
SM: Look, streaming is not a threat to feature films, per se. In fact, streamers have opened up a whole new avenue for financing and supporting feature films. And there’ll be many feature films that will increasingly do deals with the streamers where the priority is going out on that platform. Some releases might see a two-to-three week window in theatres to build brand awareness around the film, but the main game may be getting it onto the streaming platform and encouraging subscribers to watch that film. Streaming services are brilliant at understanding their audiences, getting data and developing content that speaks to those audiences. We want to make sure that films that are destined for the big screen are not lost though. I think everyone who’s going to be part of the summit is going to be there because they have a passion for cinema and the experience with an audience in a cinema setting.
The big question will be ‘What is the value proposition that we give the audience that is different to what they can get from a streaming platform? What is the essence of cinema? Why do people go to the movies? How are we going to meet that challenge all the way along the value chain?’.
CK: What are your thoughts on quotas for local content on Australian streaming platforms?
SM: I think it’s going to be essential—whether it’s quotas or minimum spend—that there is a framework for Australian content on the streamers. I don’t for a minute think that there will be any real incentive to increase local production without them in the long term. The significant revenue that’s raised every year through streaming subscriptions is destined for offshore and has not necessarily filtered back into the local industry. That means ultimately that we will always have an underfunded and impoverished production sector unless some of that is shared back to the local industry.
It is certainly not a level playing field by any means, in terms of the spend that’s required to get films theatrically released. All of the risk is taken upfront, particularly by the filmmakers, the investors and the distributor before the very first ticket is sold. In the past, we used to be able to offset that. We knew that there might be an ancillary market through home entertainment, through pay-TV, through free-to-air television, and so on to offset that risk and to really get behind Australian films. Those days have gone.
At the moment fewer Australian feature films are made for cinema because of that level of risk. So we’ve kind of got this perfect storm of audiences flocking in droves to streaming platforms. Therefore we have to find different ways of connecting with audiences. And I think for a start we could learn from the streamers about effectively understanding audience behaviour and Australian audiences. How could data be used to inform the entire value chain so that we provide a better product for audiences in the long run – better films, better stories, better experience.
CK: Since your career began, we’ve seen the role of the producer morph and change. Filmmakers have to be more agile and adaptable than ever before, how do you see the role of the producer moving forward?
I don’t know if the role of the producer has fundamentally changed all that much. Certainly, as we’ve moved more to streaming platforms, we’ve seen a bigger demand for series style television. We’ll often see a number of producers get involved such as story producers, or showrunners, but the fundamental role of the producer is to be the beneficial holder of the copyright and the project, whose job it is to get the creative vision on the screen, whatever screen it is, get the film made on budget, and on schedule.
I think it’s for the better that you see a much more entrepreneurial, business approach amongst producers. So that is definitely something that has shifted over the last 10 to 15 years. We’ve also seen shifts in the sense of a more business-focused approach to developing content, across a number of formats. Producers like myself and many others now work across all types of screens.
CK: You said in a recent ScreenHub article “When it works, there’s nothing like it, it’s exhilarating” [in terms of seeing a project to completion and witness its connection with audience]. What’s been the most exhilarating project for you so far?
SM: By far The Dressmaker was the most exhilarating project I’ve worked on, as well as the most stressful. Seeing that film connect with audiences made me realise that everybody who told me along the way that there was no commercial audience for this film was wrong. And it opened the door for so many other films that could make the case that, yes, there is an audience for films with female protagonists, or strong gutsy, female-driven stories, and that, women do come out and watch those movies in force. That’s the thing I’m most proud of – not only the success of The Dressmaker but the fact it’s paved the way for so many other female-driven films. [The Dressmaker involved several alumni including writer/director Jocelyn Moorhouse, co-writer PJ Hogan, and Director of Photography Don McAlpine]
CK: You were the Executive Producer of the documentary Brazen Hussies as mentioned earlier, which is about the rise of feminism in Australia. Do you feel hopeful at the moment for women’s progress, particularly in the film and television industries? Are we going to see a time soon where we can – as you say – ‘follow the money’ [Screenhub] to find more women?
SM: I have been really interested in the position of women in the industry ever since I started out myself. I was very involved in setting up WIFT (Women In Film and Television) in Victoria in the late eighties. And then more recently as President of the Natalie Miller Fellowship (2011-2021), where the focus is very much on encouraging women to explore their leadership ambitions. It’s not enough just to have more women in the industry – we need to look at who gets to make the decisions, who gets to greenlight productions, who decides which films get screened. Certainly, over the last ten years of the Natalie Miller Fellowship, we’ve seen that women now are moving into senior roles in broadcasting, in streaming, in the cinema industry, in ways that just weren’t possible a decade ago.
I think the focus of the Gender Matters Taskforce in looking at women and key creative roles has been important because it’s shifted policy guidelines and really put a focus on increasing the number of women writers and directors in particular. And we’re seeing those numbers gradually improve, particularly in television. There’s now a recognition that Australia has an incredible talent base and an untapped amount of creative talent.
CK: What projects are you currently working on that we might see on screens soon?
SM: We are working across the full gamut of genres. We’re about to release a new feature documentary about Courtney Barnett called Anonymous Club that will come out in cinemas next year. We’re in development on a six-part series based on Heather Rose’s bestselling novel Bruny. I’m working with Charlotte Seymour (Master of Arts (Film & Television) Producing, 1997) on that. We’re also working on a feature film called The Little Qipao Shop, which will see the return of Clara Law and Eddie Fong to Australian screens. In the meantime, we’re developing a feature documentary with Daryl Dellora called The Search for the Palace Letters, which is about Professor Jenny Hocking’s battle all the way to the High Court of Australia to see the release of the letters between Queen Elizabeth and Sir John Kerr who was Governor-General at the time and instrumental in the Whitlam dismissal. So quite a variety of different projects underway, and amongst all of that, organising the Australian Feature Film Summit.
