Al Clarke
c/o Screen Australia Board
Screen Australia
Level 7, 45 Jones St
Ultimo 2007
1st. Nov. 2016
Dear Mr
Clarke
I like your
films. I really do. I reckon you’re a shit hot producer. And I reckon you’ll
like my story too. It’s called “Nest of Vipers’ – a 10 hour series. A thriller.
A bit like “True Detective” but better. Gotta believe in your work, eh!
Specially when you do it gratis. You know, no money. On a wing and a prayer!
If you read
the first 10 pages I reckon you’ll be hooked and before you know it you’ll get
to page 60 and think, “Shit, I wonder what happens next,” and you’ll open up
Episode Two, which’ll also keep you on the edge of your seat till you get to
page 60. Etc.
Like I
said, gotta believe in yourself in this business. The moment you begin to
think, “What if this is no good!?” you’re fucked. Doubt sets in and, well, you
know the story.
The problem
with ‘Vipers’ is not the story, though. It’s…well, this is pretty bloody hard
to admit, but I have to…I’ve been banned, see. Banned by Screen Australia. True!
Hard to believe, eh!? Not allowed to make any applications. Not even allowed to
talk to members of staff. I’m dangerous, they reckon. I place their staff at
risk. At risk of what you might ask! Me too. Screen Australia won’t say. I’ve
asked. I’ve asked lots. They reckon my asking is harassment, but there you go,
this is Australia 2016! I mean how risky is it to read a letter from me (too
risky Screen Oz reckons!) and how risky is it to talk with me on the phone? You
guessed it. Too fucking risky. I mean, what am I going to do on the phone?
Reach down it like Aunty Jack and rip their bloody arms off!
So I’m
banned! There was a bloke called Mc Carthy in the US that banned writers too, I
read on Google. Commies. Those fucking commies. Need to be careful of them.
They write a script for you and, hey, who knows what dreadful thing might
happen next! Too risky!
What this means
is even if you reckon these first four eps are shit hot and want to read the
other three I’ve written it’s only fair to warn you that there’s no way you and
me as a team (shit hot producer, shit hot writer!) could ask Screen Australia
for one brass razoo. Too risky J They’d see my name and it would be “Whoa!
Can’t read that! What the hell is Al Clarke doing associating with someone who
intimidates people and places them at risk.”
So, Mr
Clarke, I’ll understand if you don’t want to take the risk (J) of reading ‘Vipers’. I mean,
unless you’ve got megabucks to develop the last three episodes and then more
megabucks to re-write the whole fucking series a couple of times, why bother,
eh? Screen Australia won’t even read a page of it (might upset the staff!) and
sure as hell won’t touch it with a barge pole even if it was the best series
going. Not with my name on it. This is a weird thing about Australia, eh!? I
know you’ll understand this because you’re from another country. A Pom I hear?
Anyhow, if
you do happen to read a bit of ‘Vipers’ and then get to the end of Episode Four
and wonder whether Angela and Stair…no, I shouldn’t give it away…and if you do
have a lot of money stashed away somewhere and don’t need Screen Australia’s
development money, give me a bell.
yours
sincerely
You can
see the problem I have, Al. With this project I have both hands tied behind my
back as a result of Screen Australia’s ban. What producer in his or her right
mind is going associate themselves with a banned filmmaker whose applications
won’t even be read.
If you
weren’t on the Screen Australia board, if you were not one of those responsible
for continuing the ban on me (on the basis of evidence being kept secret from
me), you would be on my short list of producers to approach with “Nest of
Vipers.”
The
problem is that any producer on my short list is going to wonder, even if s/he
loves the project, “How the hell do I get development money from Screen
Australia for this with Ricketson’s name attached?”
Anyhow,
Al, you know the problem and, to date at least (more than two years now), have
shown no signs that you are in any way interested in finding a solution. Nor
has the board of which you are a part. So it goes! Small minded, vindictive and
petty bureaucracy protecting itself at all costs.
If you are
brave enough to take the risk, do set aside 10 minutes to read the first 10
pages. If you keep reading, if you get to the end of Episode Four and are
wondering if Stair and Angela do actually…you can report to your fellow board
members one of two responses: “Vipers is second rate crap and will never be
made so we don’t need to worry about our ban embarrassing us…” or “Shit, Vipers
is not bad at all and probably will be made and here we are making it
impossible for Ricketson to assemble a team of Australian filmmakers to make
it! Are we doing the right thing? Actually, why have we banned him at all? Have
any of you encountered any evidence at all that James intimidated, harassed and
placed at risk members of SA staff with his correspondence?”
Your
choice, Al.
cheers
James
4th November
Dear Members of the Screen Australia board
Your response to my banning is the same as that of all
previous members of the board – to bury your heads in the sand, hope that James
Ricketson will cease annoying you with his repeated requests for evidence in
support of the ban placed on him; hope that he will not have the financial
resources to pursue this matter in court.
Given Screen Australia’s refusal to provide evidence
of my guilt (along with the Office of the Ombudsman’s refusal to even ask for
it!) I will be pursuing this in
court.
A great deal of time, effort and money will be
consumed to achieve a result that could have been achieved at any point this
past four and a half years by (a) The SA board insisting that evidence of my
guilt be provided to me, (b) the Minister for the Arts insisting that evidence
be provided, (c) The Commonwealth Ombudsman insisting that evidence be provided
and (d) The Australian Director’s Guild asking that it be provided.
Acquisition of evidence of my alleged guilt could also
have been provided by Ms Louise Vardanega, Australian Government Solicitor
(acting) if Graeme Mason had, as the AGC client, given Ms Vardanega permission
to do so.
I wonder if the board has ever asked Graeme why the
evidence of my guilt, as presented to the then Australian Government Solicitor,
should be a secret?
As my barrister says, the facts of this mater are not
complex but the legal issues are difficult, as I am sure Screen Australia’s
legal counsel, Jane Supit, will acknowledge.
Even if my action in the Supreme court is not successful
Screen Australia will have no choice but to
(a) provide evidence that I intimidated and placed at risk members of
Screen Australia staff prior to May 2012 or (b) mount a credible legal argument
as to why SA is under no obligation to provide evidence of the offenses that
resulted in my being banned.
In the event that the Screen Australia board might
have a last minute desire to be transparent and accountable and to provide me
with evidence of my crimes, you might like to glance through the document I have
prepared for my barrister by way of introducing him to the issues involved. It
is attached. Given that none of you were actually members of the board when I
was banned you are, perhaps, relying on second and third hand accounts for the
reasons for my ban. Have you been told the truth? Have
you actually read, with your own eyes, any email or letter (even just a
paragraph, sentence or phrase) in which I have intimidated or placed at risk
members of SA staff?
As this document makes clear, Screen Australia has
consistently refused to provide evidence and has ignored my every suggested way
of resolving this matter without the need to resort to the Supreme Court.
best wishes
James Ricketson
No comments:
Post a Comment