<p>This text deals with the shooting of a movie comedy. The author of this text was script writer as well as director. The film was extremely dependent upon the interpretation of the role of the leading female character, but the director and the leading actress, in spite of their willingness to cooperate, were unable to understand each other, and no creative meeting ever occurred.</p><p>The film dealt, in amused distance, with male and female strategies and shortcomings, but the lack of understanding between the director and the leading actress caused the subtleties of the text disappear, so that when the film was ready it was possible to interpret it in a way that partly opposed its intentions.</p><p>From the director’s point of view different aspects of the situation are investigated: what could she /should she have done? What are the obstacles for a better understanding? Is ”understanding” dependant only upon that which is verbal? Should the director not only be a director but also a kind of therapist? What is professional and what is private? Could a director who wasn´t also the script writer have seen other solutions? And how does it affect you as a female director never to have role models, only a very clear idea of what you <em>don’t</em> want your professional role to look like.</p><p>The director thought she was being constantly compromising, but finds out she was not, she had only a different, and in appearance, friendly but manipulative strategy in trying to reach her goal: that of enforcing and implementing her personal interpretation of the script.<strong> </strong></p><p>The role of director is also a role, and must be played. Men and women often do it in very different ways. Much more is permitted for men, in the name of”art.” The role of the artist is as such, defined by men. Women are expected to be reasonable and the (their) stage for action<strong> </strong>appears to be more limited. This is what is expected of them, and is also what many women try to live up to, often in direct conflict with their own interests. It is important to become a less reasonable but clearly defined person.  This often requires training. To become a good director you need knowledge, empathy and experience gained through many mistakes, and not least, you need what Aritsoteles calls fronesis.</p>

This text deals with the shooting of a movie comedy. The author of this text was script writer as well as director. The film was extremely dependent upon the interpretation of the role of the leading female character, but the director and the leading actress, in spite of their willingness to cooperate, were unable to understand each other, and no creative meeting ever occurred. The film dealt, in amused distance, with male and female strategies and shortcomings, but the lack of understanding between the director and the leading actress caused the subtleties of the text disappear, so that when the film was ready it was possible to interpret it in a way that partly opposed its intentions. From the director’s point of view different aspects of the situation are investigated: what could she /should she have done? What are the obstacles for a better understanding? Is ”understanding” dependant only upon that which is verbal? Should the director not only be a director but also a kind of therapist? What is professional and what is private? Could a director who wasn´t also the script writer have seen other solutions? And how does it affect you as a female director never to have role models, only a very clear idea of what you don’t want your professional role to look like. The director thought she was being constantly compromising, but finds out she was not, she had only a different, and in appearance, friendly but manipulative strategy in trying to reach her goal: that of enforcing and implementing her personal interpretation of the script. The role of director is also a role, and must be played. Men and women often do it in very different ways. Much more is permitted for men, in the name of”art.” The role of the artist is as such, defined by men. Women are expected to be reasonable and the (their) stage for action appears to be more limited. This is what is expected of them, and is also what many women try to live up to, often in direct conflict with their own interests. It is important to become a less reasonable but clearly defined person.  This often requires training. To become a good director you need knowledge, empathy and experience gained through many mistakes, and not least, you need what Aritsoteles calls fronesis.

The study researches the media habits and attitude of the Swedish youths toward the Swedish film industry. By using official sources and literature about the Swedish film industry and media statistics it becomes clear that Swedish film attracts a minority of the Swedish cinema attenders, and that the media habits of the Swedish youths favors foreign movies. It becomes clear that youths have a relatively negative attitude towards Swedish movies, which is seen as dull in comparison to foreign movies.

Svensk filmindustri idag finansieras huvudsakligen genom statliga medel. Dock finns det inte tillräckligt med finansiella medel jämfört det antal svenska filmer som produceras varje år. När finansieringen är otillräcklig kan det vara av största vikt att förstå och kunna arbeta med finansiell bootstrapping som verktyg för att kunna slutföra produktionen av filmen. Finansiell bootstrapping är ett begrepp som kan fungera som ett resursanskaffande verktyg för att tillföra resurser till en produktion till en lägre kostnad än marknadspriset, eller till ingen kostnad alls. Denna uppsats syftar till att undersöka om detta verktyg finns inom svensk filmproduktion – och i så fall vilka som använder verktyget och varför. Forskningen avser också att utreda tillvägagångssätt och tankar kring känslor om användandet, både inom kort- och långfilmsproduktioner. Vi har funnit att användning av finansiell boostrapping finns och är generellt sett mer frekvent använt i produktioner som inte är fullt finansierade. Förekomsten av användandet är oftast vanligare i kortfilm än i långfilm, men att det existerar inom båda formerna av filmproduktion samt att verktyget används av olika befattningshavare. Utsagorna om känslor kring användandet av finansiell bootstrapping är tvetydiga – det uppstår enligt respondenterna ofta positiva känslor när det finns en ömsesidig vinning mellan de berörda avtalsparterna, men också negativa känslor när utbytet av överenskommelsen är mest gynnsamt för den ena parten. / Contemporary Swedish film industry is financed mainly by government funding. However, there is potentially not enough funding in comparison to how many films are produced in Sweden every year. When funding is inadequate it could be paramount to master the concept and instrument of financial bootstrapping in order to complete a film. Financial bootstrapping is a term and tool regarding the acquirement of resources, albeit to a lower cost than market value or to no costs at all. This essay aims to investigate whether this phenomenon exist within the Swedish film industry, if so - who is using this tool and why. The research also intends to chart the approach and feelings of users both in short film as well as full feature film. We have found that utilization exists and is generally more frequent amongst films that are not fully financed. The occurrence is often more common in short films than in feature films; also it exists within the different levels of film production and is used by various positions. Thoughts regarding the practice of financial bootstrapping are ambiguous; there are positive approaches when there is a mutual gain between the relevant participants, but also, negative approaches when the benefits from the collaboration are divided unfairly.