That was the theory, in any case. In practice, the strategy was almost catastrophic. The
nfb had had a fraught relationship with broadcasters since the 1960s, when it began making more daring forays into social-issue filmmaking. In a pre–Michael Moore world, many of them viewed the board’s films as overly personal and biased. In 1982, for example, Montreal filmmaker Terre Nash made
If You Love This Planet, a short documentary that captured the lecture of no nukes crusader Dr. Helen Caldicott. The film was branded propaganda by the Reagan administration, a view shared by the
cbc, which refused to screen it on the grounds that it didn’t show both sides of the argument. (Caldicott questioned this critique, saying that they’d have a hard time finding someone in favour of nuclear war.) Eventually, the film won an Oscar, and the
cbc, bowing to pressure, had a change of heart. Four years later, in 1986, the
nfb produced the documentary miniseries
Reckoning: The Political Economy of Canada, an examination of our business and political relations with the world, particularly our main trading partner, the United States. Again, the
cbc refused to screen the series, citing its bias. This put many Canadians, whose tax dollars paid for the production, in the odd position of having to tune in to
pbs to see it.
The publicity surrounding these controversies only added to the sense among more conservative Canadians that, as one of my right-leaning friends back in Alberta put it, the
nfb is merely a “lesbian communist daycare centre for people of colour.” And Perlmutter now admits that trying to force the
nfb’s films into the more conservative template of television was a mistake. Broadcasters could and would dictate aspects of content and production. Filmmakers were pushed to conform to the standards of the medium. “The question then was, how do we reach our audiences? It seemed the only way was through television. But being on TV was damaging to the
nfb, because we disappeared. We were lost amid the range of products. The
nfb was always about doing things the private sector cannot do. The broadcasters are important partners, but they can’t be the be-all and end-all.”
Everyone agrees that the
nfb’s main strength has been its ability to take risks. Some of its most-praised films, including the controversial poverty exposé
The Things I Cannot Change (1967),
If You Love This Planet, and the Academy Award–winning
I’ll Find a Way (1977), were made by novice filmmakers. But taking risks can be expensive, which is why some insiders feel that, even with stalwart leadership, occasional awards, and praise from abroad, the
nfb is doomed to irrelevance. “I just don’t think we have the money to be cutting edge and risky anymore,” says one senior producer. “You have to allow for some failures, and if you have only twenty projects you can independently fund every year, that doesn’t leave you a lot of room for taking chances. In my experience, the craziest ideas are the ones that end up making for great movies. How can we even think about crazy ideas when the
nfb is so seriously strapped for cash?”
Even Perlmutter, still relatively new at the job, has had to resort to cost cutting, something he views as ugly but unavoidable. In June, it was announced that twenty employees would be let go, among them two of the
nfb’s most prominent staffers, Paul Cowan and Beverly Shaffer. (Shaffer won an Oscar in 1978 for
I’ll Find a Way, her crowd-pleasing portrait of a young girl living with spina bifida.) The plan drew sharp criticism from many at the board, who felt Perlmutter was betraying their trust, and the best interests of staff. “We’ve had no increase to our allocation for years,” Perlmutter says. “We have been in financial decline simply because costs have gone up, which has meant a significant loss in purchasing power. We have to use our operating budget in the best ways we can.” The cuts generated a series of not terribly favourable headlines, like the one that appeared in the June 9 Montreal
Gazette: “National Film Board Is Being Starved into Submission.”
Still, Perlmutter insists that the
nfb remains vital and relevant: “We’ve made the economic arguments for the
nfb in the past. I think we have to move beyond that. We’re in a country that’s one of the great social experiments. How do you create a post-nation-state civil society founded on common social values while still respecting diversity? That demands dynamic exchange, and the film board excels at that. We’ve given voice to a number of communities that were previously voiceless.”
Despite the failure of the television initiative, Perlmutter is now looking to another medium to make the
nfb more accessible. Some of the savings from the June cuts will pay for the digitizing of over 500 films from the
nfb’s library, all of which will be put online this year. “The cinema has always been about artists using new technologies,” Perlmutter says. The irony is a rich one: while most in the film industry’s private sector are panicking about what the Internet will mean for their profitability — daunted by the apocalypse that has already swept through the music and newspaper industries — some see online streaming as a logical distribution route for the
nfb, where making money isn’t necessarily the main goal. “This will be crucial in creating a better sense of brand awareness,” says Perlmutter. “If people can actually get at the
nfb films, I think that will make a real difference.”
In September, one of the
nfb’s co-productions,
Examined Life, premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival. The film is an entirely unique meditation on the thoughts of some prominent philosophers, including Cornel West, Martha Nussbaum, and Judith Butler. After the screening, during a Q&A session with the audience, filmmaker Astra Taylor marvelled at the
nfb and the freedom she was granted while making her documentary. “I don’t know where else in the world I would have been able to make this film,” she said enthusiastically. The audience burst into applause.
The
nfb has won the support of a group of Toronto philosophy enthusiasts. Now, if only it could reach the other 99.6 percent of the Canadian population.