Europudding or Europaradise? A performance evaluation of the Eurimages co-production film fund, twenty years after its inception

Abstract

This article focuses on Eurimages, the Council of Europe fund for the coproduction, distribution and exhibition of European films. The core investigation of this paper relates to the benefits this public fund has had for the European film sector. Reflecting on the fund's twenty-year existence, what output has been realized, both in economic and cultural terms? Turning to the future, what are the fund's prospects now that the sector is facing the technological challenge of digitization? In order to evaluate the performance of the fund, the author takes a closer look at the economic, cultural and technologically innovative results achieved by Eurimages and relates these to the objectives that were set at its establishment. This evaluation is carried out by using statistical data as well as insights gained from policy documents, literature and expert interviews.

Transborder Film Production Between Mainland China and Hong Kong After CEPA: The Interplay Between Political Orientation and Market Forces

“…While this integration has successfully released the commercial potential of the film industries on both sides, its impacts in the cultural domain are, at least, still debatable. By illustrating these divergent economic and cultural outcomes of co‐production, our study echoes the call for a more nuanced approach that considers the distinctive structure and organisation of cultural industries (De Vinck 2009; Otmazgin 2011). The long‐term impacts of CEPA and other national policies on Mainland–Hong Kong co‐production deserves further investigation.…”

“…As such, studies on media economics and cultural studies have cautioned that the entangled economic, social, and cultural forces do not necessarily result in a promising direction, as anticipated by policy designers (De Vinck 2009; Christopherson & Rightor 2010). The special operational mechanisms of specialised flexibility, capital accumulation, and ideological logics all exert their impacts on co‐production and, more often than not, lead to unintended effects.…”

Audio-Visual Production as a Path of Cooperation in Europe. Eurimages Funds

“…Thus, with this study, we expect to make a contribution to the literature on the topic of cinema co-production in Europe by updating the impact made by the Eurimages program until 2016, since previous studies provide data from its origin to 2006 (De Vinck, 2009, 2011, or from 2007 to 2011 (Olsberg SPI, 2013), supposing in this sense a continuation of previous studies. For this purpose, a statistical analysis will be carried out using the Lumiere database, the European Audiovisual Observatory reports, as well as those of national film institutions (such as the Instituto de la Cinematografía y de las Artes Visuales (ICAA) in Spain, or the Centre National du Cinéma et de L'Image Animeé (CNC) in France), or even the websites of Eurimages and Ibermedia.…”

“…Crusafon (2010) In general, throughout its history, the MEDIA program has been focused (financially) on two key lines: pre-production (training and film development) and postproduction (distribution and promotion). In this way, production aid, usually provided by national film institutions, or the Eurimages funds (in the case of co-productions), was omitted (De Vinck, 2009). These MEDIA program grants do not exceed 50 % of each project's budget.…”

The role of film production policy in stimulating a Flemish identity (1964–2002)

“…Here, the role of film policy enters the discussion. Indeed, various governments are not only involved in the film production process via regulations, but also, particularly in a European context, in the financing and production of films via various support mechanisms (De Vinck, 2009;Finney, 2002;Moran, 1996). Despite the fact that various authors acknowledge and even emphasize the importance of government policy in the relationship between film and national identity, this aspect is rarely studied in depth.…”