The key thing for me is to secure medium-term funding for the Roundhouse studios. It costs around £2m a year to run, but we want to grow it, and of course that will cost more.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I have a real interest in pushing some of the limits of things that studios don't want to make.
The U.K. needs more first class studio space to encourage the growth of the film and TV sector.
I'm willing to give up a little control but not a lot. So I say I want the money, but when push comes to shove, I'm not sure I'll be able to compromise in order to make the big studio movie. Maybe something in between would be okay, like a low-budget studio film.
I don't really want to be doing high budget, where they've got cranes and everything. That just sounds boring, having to do the same thing over and over again.
In the U.S., it would be so much better if the studios made many more smaller films for niche markets rather than a few tent pole films that swamp cinemas and Hoover up all the funding.
Build into each budget the cost of hiring and don't lump yourself with capital investment.
We need to work out who is paying for film; in the U.K., it is increasingly difficult to get production funds - and pre-sales demand more and more shot/cut material.
If I had all the money in the world, I don't think I'd want to be in the studio for longer.
I know I'm in the exceptional position of having money, but I didn't have it for many decades. I'm always trying to get shows put on for 25 per cent less production costs.
I used almost every penny I ever made to build recording studios in every city I lived in. I don't have much to show for all the TV money except a lot of musical gear and a lot of songs.