Influential Films in Canada:

Participants were asked to identify influential Canadian films that they think remain timeless and relevant, appealing to audiences across generations. Below are the list of films that came out of the Northwest session. The participants were also asked what they think are the key factors for these films to be made and what connected the films to their audience.

Documentaries Cited by Filmmakers

1. Most Frequently Mentioned Films: 
   • Because We Are Girls  – A personal, socially charged story focusing on sexual abuse within an immigrant family. 
   • Fix: The Story of an Addicted City  – Addresses addiction and harm reduction in Vancouver. 
   • Not Your Butter Chicken – A documentary on South Asian LGBTQ+ experiences.
   • Mighty Jerome – Chronicles the rise and fall of Black Canadian sprinter Harry Jerome. 
   • Society Page – A look at diverse social narratives. 
   • Yintah – Explores Indigenous land sovereignty. Carts of Darkness – Combines homelessness, bottle collecting, and downhill racing. 

2. Common Themes Across Documentaries: 
   • Social justice and political activism. 
   • Community-based storytelling and representation of marginalized voices. 
   • Indigenous perspectives and sovereignty.
   • Personal and vulnerable storytelling. 

Key Factors That Enabled Film Production

1. Funding and Financial Support
   • Access to funding agencies (CMF, NFB, CBC, Canada Council).
   • Partnerships with organizations like the National Film Board, a frequent enabler of impactful documentaries.
   • Grants and government financial support critical to completing projects.
2. Perseverance and Drive
   • Grit, determination, and relentless effort were often cited as non-negotiable qualities.
   • Passion and commitment to the story helped overcome production hurdles.
   • Filmmakers emphasized the necessity of being persistent through financial, logistical, and personal obstacles.
3. Access and Relationships
   • Trusted relationships with subjects provided deeper insights and richer narratives.
   • Strong community ties allowed for authentic representation and cooperative storytelling.
   • Effective collaboration within the community and filmmaking team was vital.
4. Authenticity and Representation 
   • Films reflecting lived experiences and cultural connections felt more genuine. 
   • Indigenous sovereignty, where applicable, empowered Indigenous-led storytelling. 
   • Authentic narratives strengthened the film’s impact and integrity.
5. Creative Vision and Timing
   • A unique creative vision distinguished successful projects. 
   • Timing—waiting for the right cultural or social moment—enhanced relevance and reception. 
   • Patience and innovation in storytelling were pivotal. 

Key Elements That Created Audience Connection

1. Authenticity and Emotional Connection
   • Raw, honest, and vulnerable storytelling resonated deeply with viewers.
   • Emotional depth allowed audiences to empathize with subjects and stories. 
   • The authenticity of filmmakers’ perspectives enhanced credibility.
2. Relatable, Universal Themes
   • Themes of identity, resilience, and social justice echoed shared human experiences. 
   • Stories addressing universal struggles, such as addiction, marginalization, or personal triumph, were especially engaging.
3. Strong Characters and Community Connection
   • Compelling, multidimensional characters captivated audiences.
   • Community-driven stories created a shared sense of belonging and relevance.
   • Films portraying real-world struggles reinforced relatability and impact.
4. Unique Perspective and Innovation
   • Innovative narrative techniques (e.g., candid interviews, striking visuals) stood out. 
   • Unique story angles provided fresh takes on familiar issues. 
   • Creative risk-taking in storytelling methods enhanced memorability.
5. Social Impact and Representation
   • Films with political and social advocacy drew strong emotional and intellectual engagement.
   • Representation of underrepresented communities (BIPOC, LGBTQ+, Indigenous) amplified voices and broadened perspectives.
6. Relatability, Hope, and Feel-Good Elements
   • Stories with hopeful resolutions or uplifting themes created lasting positive impressions. 
   • Emotional arcs involving struggle and triumph provided a satisfying narrative experience. 

Conclusion

Filmmakers’ favorite documentaries are characterized by strong social commentary, authenticity, and community engagement. Funding, perseverance, and relationship-building are critical to getting films made. Audience impact is strongest when films offer authentic, relatable stories with strong emotional connections, diverse representation, and social relevance.

Documentary Filmmaking in the Northwest: Key Points

Diverse Funding Models

• Variety of funding sources: Filmmakers use a mix of self-funding, government grants, broadcast licenses, and community-driven projects.
• Traditional vs. Independent Funding: Some documentaries rely on traditional funding routes (e.g., government, broadcasters), while others are independently financed.

Ownership vs. Funding

• Trade-off: Filmmakers often face the decision of maintaining full ownership and creative control versus accepting external funding that may provide more resources but limit creative freedom. 

Roles in Documentary Filmmaking

• Multiple roles for small crews: Emerging filmmakers tend to take on multiple roles such as director, producer, editor, and director of photography (DP) within smaller teams.

Challenges with Canadian Content Regulations 

• CRTC and content restrictions: Canadian content regulations (e.g., CRTC) create difficulties for international co-productions and projects that require expertise not always available in Canada.
• Impact on Indigenous filmmakers: Borderless storytelling for Indigenous filmmakers is hindered by strict Canadian content rules, which can limit collaboration with international talent.

Cultural Sensitivity and Indigenous Concerns 

• Collaboration barriers: The Canadian content system may impede international collaborations, particularly for Indigenous filmmakers whose stories often transcend national borders. 

• Cultural sensitivity: Filmmakers stress the importance of understanding local cultures, particularly when creating stories with Indigenous or culturally sensitive content. 

Emerging Filmmakers

• Challenges for new filmmakers: Emerging and underrepresented filmmakers, including those from immigrant communities, face challenges navigating tax credits and securing funding.

International Collaborations and Local Sensitivity

• Hiring local talent: Filmmakers emphasize the importance of working with local crews when filming abroad, especially in culturally sensitive regions, to ensure the authenticity and integrity of the work.

Discoverability of Films: Key Points

Frustration with Traditional Gatekeepers

• Dissatisfaction with distributors: Filmmakers express frustration with broadcasters and platforms that hold distribution rights but fail to promote films effectively, limiting their visibility. 

Self-Promotion and Advocacy

• Filmmakers as promoters: Many filmmakers are increasingly taking responsibility for promoting their own work, believing they have a better understanding of their target audience than traditional distributors. 

Direct-to-Audience Models 

• Success of alternative distribution: Filmmakers are bypassing traditional channels by releasing films on platforms like YouTube, which allows them to directly connect with audiences and achieve significant reach. 

Strategic Partnerships

• Leveraging educational and community partnerships: Filmmakers are forming partnerships with educational institutions, community organizations, and impact-focused funds to build their audience and create sustainable distribution channels. 

Post-Production Support 

• Need for post-production resources: There is a demand for more resources, infrastructure, and guidance in post-production and distribution, areas often under-supported compared to the production phase. 

Ownership and Control

• Desire for control: Filmmakers increasingly want to maintain ownership and control over their content, even if it means taking on additional responsibilities rather than relinquishing control to larger distributors or platforms. 

Key Trends

• Agency and control: Filmmakers are increasingly seeking greater agency and control over how their films reach audiences. 

• Alternative distribution: Models such as YouTube and educational partnerships are gaining interest as alternatives to traditional broadcast channels. 

• Post-production infrastructure: There is a growing need for better support and infrastructure in the post-production and distribution phases of filmmaking. 

Systemic Changes in the Canadian Film Industry: Key Points

Exclusion of Asian Creators

• Underrepresentation of South Asian and East Asian filmmakers: Despite being significant minority groups in Canada, these filmmakers are often excluded from initiatives.
• Call for more inclusive policies: Filmmakers advocate for policies that do not prioritize one marginalized group over another, ensuring equal representation for all underrepresented communities.

Gatekeeper Issues

• Barriers created by gatekeepers: Funding and distribution decisions are largely controlled by gatekeepers who tend to favor established white male producers, limiting access for marginalized filmmakers.
• Systemic exclusion: Marginalized filmmakers face systemic exclusion from critical opportunities due to the bias of those in power.

Lack of Continuity in Mentorship Programs

• Limited mentorship support: Many mentorship programs end after a film is completed, providing no long-term support for filmmakers beyond production.
• Call for sustained mentorship: Filmmakers advocate for continuous mentorship that extends through all stages of filmmaking, beyond just the production phase.

Breaking into Industry Spaces

• Challenges accessing high-profile events: Filmmakers from marginalized backgrounds face financial barriers and an exclusionary atmosphere at major industry events, such as film festivals.

• Overwhelmingly white industry spaces: These events often lack diversity, making it difficult for marginalized filmmakers to network and gain visibility.

Collaboration Within Marginalized Communities

• Empowering BIPOC filmmakers: There is a push for greater collaboration within BIPOC communities, encouraging filmmakers to co-produce films within their own communities rather than relying on white producers.

• Building community-led narratives: Empowering marginalized voices through community collaboration is seen as a way to ensure more authentic and equitable storytelling.

Frustration with Limited Progress

• Slow systemic change: Despite the introduction of various initiatives, filmmakers express frustration with the slow pace of real change. 

• Need for addressing structural issues: Filmmakers believe that until gatekeepers and broader structural issues are addressed, change will remain superficial. 

Desire for Systemic Change

• Call for a fundamental shift: Filmmakers stress the need for a deep, systemic change in the industry. 

• Inclusive, sustainable approaches: There is a strong push for long-term, inclusive policies that tackle the root causes of exclusion and ensure equitable representation in the industry. 

Conclusion 

• Challenges in Northwest documentary filmmaking: Filmmakers in the Northwest face significant challenges around funding, creative control, and Canadian content regulations. 
• Advocacy for greater agency: Filmmakers are pushing for more control over their work through self-promotion and alternative distribution models to bypass traditional gatekeepers.
• Call for systemic change in Canada’s film industry: There is a strong emphasis on the need for racial equity, ongoing mentorship, and greater inclusivity, particularly for marginalized communities such as BIPOC and Indigenous filmmakers. 

CRTC Canadian Content Points System: Key Points

Overview of the Points System

• Points Allocation: The CRTC’s proposed points system allocates points to specific creative roles (e.g., director, producer, editor, DP) on a project to determine Canadian content (CanCon) eligibility.
  • Example: A project might need to accumulate 13 points across different roles to qualify.
• Challenges for Documentaries: Documentaries, which often lack certain roles (e.g., hair and makeup, art directors), face difficulty in filling all required points, especially for projects with minimal crew.

Pros of the Points System

Support for Canadian Content

• Promotes Canadian filmmakers: Ensures Canadian talent is supported and maintains Canadian identity within a competitive international market, especially dominated by U.S. content.
• Encourages Canadian hiring: Incentivizes Canadian projects to hire local talent, protecting the domestic industry.

Funding Access

• Gateway to financial resources: The system facilitates access to key funding bodies like Telefilm, Canada Media Fund, and tax credits (e.g., CAVCO).
• Crucial for emerging filmmakers: Provides independent filmmakers, especially those in early stages, with essential production and development funding.

Diversity of Filmmakers

• Opportunities for underrepresented groups: The system can support BIPOC, emerging, and marginalized filmmakers, ensuring they have access to funding and industry opportunities.

Cons and Challenges of the Points System

Difficulty in Fulfilling All Points

• Challenges for international co-productions: Projects with global themes or specific language/technical needs (e.g., hiring a DP who speaks Spanish or Fulani) may struggle to meet the points criteria. 
  
• Creative compromises: Filmmakers may be forced to choose team members to meet point requirements, potentially diluting the authenticity or artistic vision of the project.
• Frustration for emerging filmmakers: New filmmakers or those without established networks may find the system complex, potentially stifling innovation and unique storytelling. 

Exclusion of Collaborative International Work

• Barriers to working with international talent: The points system limits filmmakers from working with renowned international professionals (e.g., American composer) without risking CanCon certification.
• Cultural challenges: Filmmakers working abroad, particularly in countries like Senegal or the Dominican Republic, face challenges in hiring local talent due to the points system, which could be culturally insensitive and disrupt the collaborative process. 

Compromising Artistic Integrity

• Restrictions on talent hiring: Filmmakers may be forced to prioritize the points system over the needs of the project, such as hiring a Canadian over a more suitable international talent.
  • Example: A documentary about immigrant stories might require a bilingual DP (English and Spanish), but the points system may restrict hiring the best candidate if they are not Canadian. 
     
• Impact on Indigenous filmmakers: Indigenous filmmakers argue that the system fails to account for the transnational and borderless nature of many Indigenous stories, overlooking their cultural and historical context.
• Exclusion of diaspora stories: The system may also limit the ability to tell stories that cross national borders, especially for filmmakers from diaspora communities. 

Impact on Small Producers

• Financial burden on independent producers: Small-scale producers may struggle to meet the point requirements due to financial constraints, especially on low-budget projects.
• Challenges with student filmmakers: Emerging filmmakers who may not yet hold Canadian status (e.g., students or young filmmakers) may face tax credit restrictions, limiting their ability to pursue important projects.

Restricting Creativity

• Limited storytelling opportunities: The rigid criteria can result in stories being underrepresented or untold. For example, a filmmaker from a non-Canadian background may face difficulties hiring non-Canadian talent who is key to telling their story authentically.

Conclusion: Finding Balance and Flexibility

• Balancing CanCon support with creative flexibility: While the points system supports Canadian content and talent, it poses significant challenges for documentary filmmakers, especially those working on international or culturally-specific projects. 
• Need for flexibility in the system: Filmmakers argue for flexibility in the points system, especially for documentary films, which may not require traditional roles (e.g., actors, art directors).
• Encouraging global collaboration: To foster creativity and global collaboration, the system should be more adaptable, especially in the context of international co-productions, cultural exchange, and emerging filmmakers’ needs.

Ownership of Content: Key Points 

Filmmaker Control vs. External Funding 

• Ownership dilemma: Filmmakers often choose between retaining ownership of their work or accepting external funding from platforms like Netflix or CBC Gem, which may require giving up rights.
• Frustration with platforms: Filmmakers express frustration when platforms fail to promote their films effectively, leading them to believe they could have allocated promotional funds more wisely. 
• Lack of engagement: Even when films are available on streaming platforms, filmmakers note low viewer engagement and poor discoverability, despite having high-quality content. 

Indigenous Ownership

• Cultural sovereignty: Indigenous filmmakers, such as those working with the Sultan First Nation and Jessica Helen Back, emphasize the importance of communities retaining ownership of their stories. 
• Community-led projects: The decision to have Indigenous communities own the content reflects a commitment to cultural sovereignty and honoring the voices of the people involved. 

Education as a Path for Impact: Key Points

Educational Outreach

• Films as teaching tools: Filmmakers are exploring how their films can be used in educational settings. One filmmaker noted a university using their film to develop a curriculum, while another’s film was shown in 500+ schools, inspiring students to take action.
• Social impact: Educational outreach allows films to have a long-lasting impact beyond commercial gain, fostering learning and social change.

Financial and Impact Convergence

• Merging impact and financial outcomes: Filmmakers prioritize educational partnerships as a way to keep films relevant and visible, especially among younger generations, even if it doesn’t lead directly to financial profits.
• Vimeo for educational access: One filmmaker shared their success using Vimeo to make their film accessible to educators, bridging the gap between traditional distribution and impact-focused goals.

Discoverability and Platforms: Key Points

Struggles with Public Broadcasting Platforms

• Frustration with platforms like CBC Gem and NFB: Filmmakers criticize public broadcasters and free streaming platforms for failing to effectively promote films, leading to low engagement from viewers, even with free access.

Alternative Distribution Models

• Direct distribution: Filmmakers seek more control over distribution, using platforms like YouTube to connect directly with their audiences. One filmmaker found success through organic reach and partnerships with health organizations.
• Audience connection: Filmmakers believe they know their audience better than distributors and are increasingly bypassing traditional channels for direct engagement.

Funding and Resource Sharing: Key Points

Self-Funding vs. External Investment 

• Burnout from self-management: Filmmakers express stress and burnout from handling every aspect of production, marketing, and distribution on their own, often without sufficient resources for festival submissions or audience engagement.
• Concerns about poor distribution: There is a general lack of confidence in distributors’ ability to promote films effectively, leading filmmakers to prefer maintaining control over their work. 

Alternate Funding Models

• Grassroots, community-based funding: Filmmakers call for funding models that prioritize community-driven distribution, such as educational grants and marketing funds for theatrical releases.
• Telefilm Canada program: Some filmmakers were unaware of Telefilm’s theatrical marketing assistance program, which provides funds for films suitable for indie theater screenings. 

Advocating for Your Own Project: Key Points

Filmmakers as their own advocates

• Self-promotion: Filmmakers increasingly take charge of promoting their films, believing they know their work best and can allocate resources more effectively than larger distributors.
• Networking and learning: Filmmakers emphasize the importance of learning from others in the industry, particularly regarding post-production, distribution, and audience engagement.

Building support networks

• Post-production support: There is a call for creating resources and communities to support filmmakers through the post-production phase, particularly with distribution and audience outreach.

What’s Working with Systemic Changes in Diversity and Equity Policies:

1. Funding and Mentorship Programs
   • Access to Resources: Programs aimed at marginalized communities help emerging BIPOC filmmakers access funding, mentorship, and networking opportunities that would otherwise be out of reach.
   • Career Continuity: Some mentorship programs extend beyond production, supporting filmmakers’ long-term careers and offering guidance after the completion of their first projects.
   • Collaborative Co-Productions: BIPOC filmmakers are starting to collaborate within their communities, creating stronger networks and more diverse content, especially through Indigenous and racialized partnerships.
2. Representation and Gatekeeping Awareness
   • Industry Conversations: Growing awareness within the industry about the need to change who holds decision-making power (gatekeepers) and the need for more inclusive, racially diverse content.
   • Targeted Programs: Some events and programs, such as the Whistler Film Festival, are making strides in creating targeted programming for underrepresented groups.
3. Opportunities for Collaboration
   • Community Building: BIPOC creators are working together more frequently, sharing resources, and co-producing content to ensure diverse representation.
4. Industry Events and Festivals
   • Delegations & Networking: Some initiatives are connecting BIPOC filmmakers with industry leaders, offering exposure and networking opportunities for future projects.

What’s Not Working with Systemic Changes in Diversity and Equity Policies:

1. Short-Term Programs and Lack of Long-Term Support
   • Sustained Support Missing: Many mentorship and funding programs are short-term and do not provide long-term guidance or career continuity, leaving filmmakers without a clear path forward after their initial projects.
   • Insufficient Support for Asian Communities: South Asian and East Asian communities feel overlooked, with these groups being notably underrepresented in Canadian media and excluded from many programs.
2. Exclusion from Gatekeeping Roles
   • Continued Power Imbalance: Systemic issues persist, with funding and decision-making still dominated by established, predominantly white male producers, leading to continued exclusion of diverse voices
   • Tokenism vs. Real Change: Industry’s focus on “diversity” is often seen as a checkbox exercise, rather than addressing deeper systemic issues. BIPOC creators are still competing with each other for limited resources, instead of tackling the root causes of inequality.
3. Financial Barriers to Industry Participation
   • Festival Costs: The high costs associated with attending industry events (travel, accommodation) remain a major barrier for many emerging BIPOC filmmakers. Without financial support, they miss out on critical networking and career advancement opportunities.
4. Limited Impact of Industry Events
   • Superficial Diversity: Many marginalized filmmakers report feeling excluded from key industry events and spaces, where diversity initiatives are seen as superficial and not integrated into the broader industry culture.

Overall Takeaways: 

• What’s Working: Mentorship programs, funding initiatives, and collaborative co-productions are helping BIPOC filmmakers access resources, build networks, and increase diverse representation. Some events are making strides in supporting underrepresented groups.
• What’s Not Working: The pace of change is slow, with systemic exclusion still prevalent due to the dominance of white male gatekeepers. Many programs fail to provide lasting support, and financial barriers prevent access to key industry events. Real systemic change requires dismantling privilege and changing who controls resources, narratives, and opportunities in the film and media industry. 

Influential Films in Canada:

Participants in the discussion highlighted a range of documentaries that were praised for their storytelling, emotional connection, and relevance to contemporary issues. Films were noted by the number of times they were mentioned:

• Foster Child
• Flashback
• CKUA: Radio Worth Fighting For
• Dogwalker
• Kanehsatake: 270 Years of Resistance
• Navalny
• Singing Back the Buffalo
• The Line

Key factors for the above films to be made

Participants identified several critical elements that helped bring these documentaries to completion:

1. Compelling, Fresh Stories
   The central factor for success was having a great story with fresh, engaging content. Unique perspectives, underrepresented voices, or previously untold stories were pivotal.
2. Funding and Institutional Support
   Funding from established organizations was essential. Institutions like the National Film Board, Telefilm, and Alberta Media Fund were frequently credited. Government tax credits and initiatives such as the Gil Cardinal Legacy Fund also played a role.
3. Passionate Filmmakers
   Filmmakers’ drive and perseverance were key. Many pushed beyond standard efforts to secure funding, access subjects, and realize their creative vision.
4. Access to Unique Subjects and Locations
   Authentic storytelling depended on direct connections to people, communities, and events. The ability to gain trust and capture genuine narratives distinguished successful films.
5. Collaborative Teams
   Strong partnerships with skilled editors, cinematographers, and production teams contributed significantly. A collaborative approach often elevated technical quality and storytelling impact.
6. Focus on Social and Political Issues
   Many films were motivated by a desire to highlight pressing social concerns, historical injustices, or human rights issues. Advocacy-driven content often provided compelling, urgent narratives.

Examples:

• ‘Kanehsatake: 270 Years of Resistance’ benefited from strong institutional support, including backing from the National Film Board.
• ‘Navalny’ gained traction due to its relevance to global political movements and timely storytelling.

Key Elements Connecting Films to Audiences

Factors that were mentioned most frequently: 

1. Emotional Impact 
   Films that evoked strong emotional responses were most effective. Personal stories reflecting universal experiences like love, justice, perseverance, and struggle created deep connections.
2. Timeliness and Political Relevance 
   Documentaries addressing contemporary social or political issues felt urgent and necessary. Timely content often increased a film’s resonance with viewers.
3. Universal Themes
   Stories exploring broad human conditions—poverty, inequality, belonging—transcended cultural boundaries, making them relatable to a wide audience.
4. Authenticity
   Grounded, real-world depictions of human experiences enhanced credibility and audience engagement. Films like My Octopus Teacher and The Angry Inuk were praised for authenticity.
5. Community and Local Impact
   Many films, such as Singing Back the Buffalo, connected deeply with specific communities by telling stories of cultural or historical significance.
6. Effective Distribution and Promotion
   Visibility was a recurring theme. Participants noted that partnerships with broadcasters, commissioning editors, and promotional strategies, including social media, were crucial. Award recognition and high-profile events (e.g., the Oscars) could greatly amplify a film’s reach. 

Examples: 

• Free Solo succeeded due to its universal theme of human ambition paired with breathtaking cinematography. 
• Fire of Love merged scientific exploration with human drama, blending imagination with factual storytelling.

Insights and Takeaways

1. Strong Stories with Unique Access
   Films with exclusive access to subjects, communities, or significant events were more impactful. Documentaries that revealed hidden stories or perspectives stood out.
2. Institutional and Financial Support
   Leveraging funding sources was essential, but networking with key industry players also made a difference. Filmmakers highlighted the importance of having well-connected mentors or collaborators.
3. Emotional and Social Connection
   Emotional resonance combined with socially relevant themes created lasting impressions.
4. Authenticity and Local Relevance
   Grounded, genuine narratives—especially those rooted in marginalized or lesser-known communities—drove engagement.
5. Promotion and Visibility
   Even the best films struggle without proper marketing. Early consideration of target audiences and promotional strategies was recommended.

Challenges Identified:

1. Lack of funding for marketing and promotion was a common issue in Canada. While production funding was often available, filmmakers found it harder to secure resources for visibility and audience outreach.
2. Filmmakers stressed the importance of broadcaster support and incorporating promotional strategies early in production.

Conclusion 

The discussion highlighted several factors that contribute to a documentary’s success, including the importance of a great story, funding, passionate filmmaking, and effective promotion. Films resonated most with audiences when they captured universal themes, were timely, and provided authentic, emotionally engaging narratives. Institutional support, strategic distribution, and leveraging awards and social media further enhanced a documentary’s impact. 

Challenges Faced by Alberta Filmmakers in Documentary Production

This part of the discussion centered around the challenges faced by filmmakers in Alberta, particularly in terms of funding, distribution, and the overall sustainability of their work. Key points included:

1. Lack of Local Broadcasters:
   The absence of major local broadcasters (CTV, City TV) for the past 15-20 years forces filmmakers to travel to hubs like Toronto, incurring high costs.
2. Funding Challenges:
   Emerging and diverse filmmakers struggle to secure funding due to limited local options, jury bias, and difficulty accessing national grants.
3. Limited Distribution Channels:
   Without local broadcasters, filmmakers face challenges meeting with distributors and sales agents, with fragmented access through platforms like CBC Gem.
4. Emerging Filmmakers’ Barriers:
   New creators lack mentorship, resources, and access to larger markets. Programs like Story Hive offer small budgets but are insufficient for major projects.
5. Networking and Resource Gaps:
   Alberta’s film community is small, with limited local networking and insufficient support for filmmakers of color and diverse stories.
6. Disconnect Between Production and Marketing:
   Funding for marketing is scarce, making it difficult for well-made films to reach audiences.
7. Complex Funding Requirements:
   Programs like the TELUS Fund require filmmakers to demonstrate large audiences or community engagement, adding to access barriers.
8. Tax Credits and Local Grants:
   Alberta tax credits and grants are complex to navigate, particularly for smaller-budget films.
9. Diversity and Authenticity:
   TELUS Originals supports diversity-focused, community-driven stories but provides smaller budgets and limited marketing support.
10. Reduced NFB Support:
    The National Film Board’s diminished role has left a gap in regional documentary production support.
11. Audience and Impact:
    Successful films must balance timeliness, impact, and budget constraints, focusing on clear audiences and authentic storytelling.
12. Fiscal Sponsorship Restrictions:
    Unlike the U.S., Canada’s laws restrict charities from acting as fiscal sponsors, limiting access to private funding with tax receipts.
13. Limited Foundation Culture:
    Canada lacks robust private foundation support for independent films, making filmmakers reliant on broadcast licenses for government funding.

Conclusion: 
Alberta filmmakers face significant systemic challenges, including funding gaps, lack of local infrastructure, and regional biases. Despite opportunities from TELUS Originals, creative freedom comes with budget and distribution limitations. Authentic, community-driven storytelling remains impactful, but navigating fragmented support systems requires resilience and innovation.

Discoverability and Marketing Support for Alberta Filmmakers

Participants were asked about the type of ‘discoverability’ or marketing support they need to connect audiences to their films on online platforms or other exhibition windows.

1. Audience Targeting
   Filmmakers stressed the importance of focusing on niche audiences rather than broad appeal, as targeting specific, passionate viewers leads to more effective marketing. Audience research, ideally supported by technical expertise, was highlighted as a critical step to identify interested viewers.
2. Marketing Funding Gaps
   A major challenge is the lack of financial support for marketing once a film is completed. Existing local funds are often insufficient, and filmmakers must often self-fund marketing efforts. Early-stage funding for audience research could help secure larger production budgets and refine marketing strategies.
3. Role of Streaming Platforms
   Streaming platforms prioritize high-profile projects, leaving independent films with little promotional support. Filmmakers proposed that platforms offer free advertising space to highlight indie content, improving discoverability amidst vast content libraries.
4. Social Media and Digital Strategy
   Funders increasingly require social media campaigns, but filmmakers lack the necessary financial support. Many face burnout from handling digital marketing on their own, often without compensation.
5. Alternative Platforms
   Platforms like YouTube offer filmmakers more control over content and marketing. Some filmmakers already benefit from passive income and expressed interest in learning from creators with large online followings.

Ownership of Intellectual Property (IP)

Participants were asked about their thoughts on ownership of their intellectual property. Key points included:

1. Owning IP: Filmmakers strongly value retaining IP to generate passive income and maintain control. Educational distributors and digital platforms like Amazon provide long-term financial stability.
2. Non-Exclusive Licensing: This model allows broader distribution without sacrificing ownership, enabling multiple licensing deals for the same content.
3. Ethical IP Challenges: In community-based or Indigenous filmmaking, ethical concerns about story ownership arise. Clear agreements and potential returns of IP to communities were discussed as potential solutions.
4. Broadcast Deals vs. Independent Ownership: While some filmmakers may accept funding in exchange for relinquishing IP, many prefer independent ownership due to the long-term benefits of retaining distribution control and revenue potential.

Conclusion 
Filmmakers need stronger funding for marketing and audience research to boost discoverability. Retaining IP, using non-exclusive licenses, and leveraging alternative platforms provide sustainable ways to monetize and control content while balancing ethical considerations in sensitive projects.

Systemic Change in Alberta’s Documentary Industry

Here’s a summary of what is working and what is not working in bringing systemic change towards equality in the documentary industry in Alberta, based on the discussion.

What’s Working:

1. Increased Programs and Opportunities
   • Expansion of fellowships, mentorships, and training programs for BIPOC filmmakers provides valuable market access.
   • Free memberships for BIPOC filmmakers through organizations like DOC have improved accessibility.
2. Representation of Diverse Stories
   • More diverse voices and stories are being told, with filmmakers from various racial and cultural backgrounds involved in production.
3. Organizational Support
   • Organizations like Doc Alberta and FAVA offer dedicated spaces and support for BIPOC filmmakers.
4. Efforts at Building Capacity
   • Initiatives such as the “Elevate” program help emerging producers advance within the industry.
   • Recognition of the need to build institutional capacity in production companies to support diversity.

What’s Not Working:

Overtraining and « Forever Emerging » Model

Excessive focus on training keeps BIPOC filmmakers in a cycle of being considered “emerging” despite experience.

Many feel undervalued, facing lower pay and limited career advancement despite proven expertise.

Box-Ticking Without Real Change

Programs are perceived as fulfilling diversity quotas rather than driving meaningful systemic shifts.

Tokenism occurs, where BIPOC filmmakers contribute to stories about their communities without fair compensation or creative control.

Systemic Barriers in Funding and Decision-Making

Oversubscribed funding bodies like Telefilm limit access to resources for BIPOC filmmakers.

Funding streams with restrictive criteria reduce storytelling freedom for underrepresented voices.

Eurocentric leadership in decision-making perpetuates biases.

Limited Impact on Larger Structures

Policy changes in arts organizations have had little influence on corporate or major funding bodies, maintaining structural inequalities.

Geographical and Community-Specific Challenges

Alberta’s filmmakers face fewer resources and opportunities compared to larger cities.

Arab filmmakers, in particular, report greater difficulty accessing training and funding compared to Black or Indigenous filmmakers.

Exclusion from Political Conversations

Funding systems often categorize political or human rights stories, especially from Arab filmmakers, as « political, » restricting support.