Report comment

I'm surprised that the statistics are presented in this way since it doesn't bring any insights into what actually works and what doesn't. I'm sure that if we start by dividing all the films into two basic categories, films made with subsidies that most of the time are semi-political local stories, and secondly genre films that where made to be universal and commercial - we would see very different numbers. Further I would like to see each of the categories broken down by genre, this would I'm sure also highlight a huge difference between commercial genre films like comedy and horror and subsidised dramas for example. This would show that commercial genre films are far more lucrative and successful that subsidised dramas for example. Why hide this obvious fact and skew the data by mixing everything in the same pot? I suspect that it would show that the subsidised films are by far under performing compared to the commercial genre films. Not all films are equal under the sun, and they shouldn't be, there's need for all of them but don't hide the obvious difference.