Winston Peters makes his state of the nation speech today, Ukrainian missile attack is said to be an attempt to disrupt the Russian election and India's election is expected to be the world's largest in the latest NZ Herald headlines.
Video / NZ Herald / AP
Former Prime Minister Dame Jacinda Ardern is distancing herself from a new, part-publicly funded documentary film focusing on her leadership amid a backdrop of rising extremism.
The $3.2 million documentary has already had $800,000 of public money approved by the Film Commission – and is likely to beeligible for a further $1.2 million in taxpayer money through the government’s screen production rebate (SPR) scheme.
Film and media industry sources have told the Herald that Ardern and her team are unhappy about the project but through a spokesman she refused to comment.
However, it is clear she is distancing herself from the film - she has had nothing to do with the project and has not engaged with either the NZFC or the filmmakers.
“The filmmakers have been in contact with Ardern’s team to discuss the film, but Ardern has chosen not to communicate her thoughts on the documentary to the filmmakers,” said the documentary’s producer, Emma Slade of Firefly Films.
Slade said that the documentary was being “independently produced, without any involvement or editorial control from Jacinda Ardern”.
“It is authored by New Zealand filmmakers who have firsthand experience of this significant period in New Zealand’s recent history. It’s important to note that this film is not a biopic of Jacinda Ardern, but rather it is focused on the reaction to her leadership.”
In a synopsis, the documentary is described as “a social excavation of the rise and fall of the young female leader, Jacinda Ardern, exploring how the mania that propelled her rise later collided with a backlash of hate, told through a bold mash-up of media and peer archive”.
Some senior production industry sources have questioned whether the film - which is being developed by highly regarded documentary filmmakers Pietra Brettkelly and Justin Pemberton - will suffer without Ardern’s endorsement or PR support.
They have also questioned the $3.2 million cost of producing a feature film when such a project might be better suited for the small screen, with smaller production costs.
NZFC chief executive Annie Murray.
NZFC chief executive Annie Murray said last week that the as-yet-untitled movie was neither authorised nor endorsed by Ardern but had received “significant foreign investment and international interest”.
However, as well as the $800,000 already agreed in public funding from the NZFC, the project will be eligible for a further $1.2 million in taxpayer money through the screen production rebate, say production industry sources.
Murray refused to confirm this, saying: “There are strict confidentiality obligations which mean NZFC can’t disclose information about specific applications until we make formal announcements after a rebate is approved.”
She said a rebate may be paid after a film was released and “a final application for the rebate is received and approved by NZFC”.
“In general terms, eligible New Zealand productions can apply for a rebate of up to 40 per cent of their New Zealand qualifying spend, and an application must be accepted by NZFC within six months of a film’s release.”
On the question of whether the NZFC had spoken to Ardern, Murray said: “We do not engage with documentary subjects or other types of cast members on any projects we fund, and in line with this, we have not corresponded with Jacinda Ardern about this project.
“We always expect a range of views on films, particularly where subjects are well known. We are confident in our processes and look forward to the film being completed.”
Production is expected to start later this year with a likely release date of August 2025.
Former Prime Minister Dame Jacinda Ardern during her valedictory speech in Parliament. Photo / Mark Mitchell
Slade said that implying that a film’s “vitality solely hinges on its box office performance is an oversimplification which overlooks the multifaceted journey that every film undertakes”.
“The true life of a film lasts well beyond the silver screen, as it moves through various mediums to reach the collective consciousness of audiences worldwide.
“From the communal experience of theatre screenings to the intimacy of personal screens, films travel diverse mediums, through television, streaming platforms, and even in-flight entertainment.
“To reduce a film’s legacy solely to its box office earnings is to overlook its enduring impact, as it finds its home in the hearts and minds of viewers across the globe, hopefully resonating through generations and leaving its mark on history.”
Murray believed a small-screen version would not have been as attractive to an international audience, and might therefore not have received the same level of foreign investment.
“Decisions on formats are made well before projects come to us for funding approval – those are really questions for the producers to determine at the outset of a project,” she said last week.
“It may be possible to produce something like this at a lower budget for television, however it would be unlikely to attract the same level of international investment and would therefore be more difficult to sell the project internationally. It would primarily be for local audiences only.”
Editor-at-Large Shayne Currie is one of New Zealand’s most experienced senior journalists and media leaders. He has held executive and senior editorial roles at NZME including Managing Editor, NZ Herald Editor and Herald on Sunday Editor and has a small shareholding in NZME.
