UK tax financier Tower Film Productions has partnered with fellow funding operation UKFS to bankroll a slate of films involving Dennis Hopper, Andy Garcia, Ringo Lam, Jean-Claude Van Damme, Gina Gershon and Dominique Swain.
Most of the titles are being produced through Philippe Martinez's US-based Bauer Martinez. Tower chief executive Stephen Marsden said that he has 30% of a slate worth £130m - or £39m.
Working exclusively with UKFS, Tower arranges 25% of the budgets through UK tax-based equity and 5% through sale and leaseback. UKFS raises the remainder through a patchwork of financing including pre-sales, bank loans and overseas subsidies.
The Bauer Martinez projects include Lam's supernatural action film After Death, starring Van Damme; Out Of Season, a suspense thriller starring Hopper, Gershon and Swain; and Modigliani, starring Garcia. Non-Bauer Martinez titles include saucy UK comedy School For Seduction.
Tower's apparent popularity with investors comes despite several rivals finding it tough to secure funding. The high-profile Monument Film Fund has had to push back its cut-off date to August, although co-founders Ed Atkinson and Michael Henry are still confident that they will raise more than the company's minimum target of £5m.
"We need to wait seven or eight weeks to see," said Henry.
Backed by the US' Comerica Entertainment Group, the ambitious fund initially aimed to raise up to £50m. Around 20 filmmakers signed up, including Iris director Richard Eyre, Shakespeare In Love producer David Parfitt and Mike Leigh's producer, Simon Channing-Williams.
By partnering with UKFS, Tower has wooed investors with a structure where, unusually for a UK tax production scheme, they do not have to pay back any loans from banks.
Investors are also able to exit after three and a half years, although Marsden said the fund discouraged such departures.
However, tax experts point out that Tower and UKFS' partnership still comes with a significant risk. Tower's investors must be active partners in the production, a situation which the Inland Revenue could challenge retrospectively as it has done, for different reasons, on schemes such as Evolution Films.