Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1506448
2000, to be precise – deems 'worthwhile', in view of the much larger sums of money that would have been (assum- ing the system functions as it is SUPPOSED to) invested in the local economy. As such, its success cannot be measured in terms of 'how much Malta pays out, in con- trast to how much it receives'... even if, by that yardstick, Malta seems to have done rather well out of the transaction. (Always assuming that the above reg- ulations were adhered to: we paid out €47 million, in return for over €70 million of 'foreign direct investment'. I call that a bargain, myself...) Conversely, however: the suc- cess of this scheme can only be truly measured in terms of how it lives up to its original purpose; i.e., to help the local film-servic- ing sector (which, last I looked, accounted for over 85% of the entire industry). And at this lev- el... things almost immediately become a little 'murkier'. Having dispensed with all the frivolous/factually incorrect objections... let's look at a few of the valid criticisms (which, unsurprisingly, tend to come from Maltese film-makers, and film-servicers.) 1) There are many, serious question-marks surrounding the official figures released by the Malta Film Commission: starting with the sum paid out to 'Gladiator 2'. A strict application of the cash-rebate system, as de- scribed above, implies that the money can only be paid, 'once filming has been completed'. Yet it is an open secret that filming on 'Gladiator 2' – far from being completed – has barely even STARTED, yet... because the entire production has been stalled, for the fore- seeable future, by the ongoing Hollywood actor's strike. This raises the possibility that those €47 million is limited on- ly to filming that was already completed, five months ago (suggesting, in turn, that Mal- ta may end up paying tens of millions more, by the time the whole movie wraps up... if it ev- er even does that, at all.) But it is debatable how much 'filming' had actually happened, before last March; and even then, we are left to ponder the second line of criticism. Namely... 2) The sheer generosity of our cash-rebate may be 'unsustain- able', in the long run. This is where the 'capping' ar- gument comes in. Personally, I don't see any exaggeration, in the amount of money allegedly spent on 'Gladiator 2' so far. It is, after all, a historical epic... and those are notoriously ex- pensive films to make, even by current Hollywood standards. But given that the actual pro- duction is on stand-by (and has been, since the beginning of summer)... what, exactly, are they spending all that money on? According to Clayton Barto- lo, the answer is: 'the renting of film studios'. "They are paying a lot of mon- ey to rent them. There are tax payments in Malta made both by extras and foreign actors, the renting of vehicles, ac- commodation, and they stay in the best hotels in the country, there are the catering estab- lishments they eat at, other entertainment establishments that crews and actors go to [...]. Aside from that, then you have extras who are paid. An extra on a film is paid around €100 per day. There are some who are paid more, others less..." Now: all of that is indeed cov- ered, by the eligibility criteria. But there are a few caveats, re- member? Including that ALL the money had to be spent here, in Malta; and that the re- bates are given out in exchange for detailed receipts. In the case of 'Gladiator 2', however: it is highly questiona- ble, whether the '€111 million' figure represents money that has been spent 'here, in Mal- ta'... or whether it also includes the wages of that movie's ac- tors – including the rather highly-paid Denzel Washing- ton – who are currently being paid 'not to even act, at all.' Meanwhile, it is unlikely that there are even any 'extras' ac- tually left, on the studio's pay- roll... given that, for obvious reasons, no crowd-scenes are currently being shot. In any case, however: for the rebates to have already been paid out, those receipts must indeed exist. So Clayton Barto- lo could give us a much clearer answer: by simply publishing the full, submitted audit re- port (which is SUPPOSED to already be in his possession, anyway). Without that information, it is quite frankly impossible to gauge whether this €47 million expenditure was 'worthwhile', or not... or even whether the rebate itself is 'sustainable', for that matter. One thing, howev- er, remains certain. Malta's cash rebate IS, in fact, a necessary investment: if we really want our film industry to remain competitive, in such a cut-throat market. But, in or- der to function properly... it al- so has to be a LOT more 'trans- parent', than it currently is. Just saying, that's all... maltatoday | SUNDAY • 27 AUGUST 2023 OPINION 11 Malta paid out €47 million to only one production: 'Gladiator 2', directed by Ridley Scott, pictured here in Mdina while on a location scouting tour of Malta