by FilmInk Staff
When Christopher Amos built Chrysaor Studios on the Gold Coast, he says he was trying to solve a problem he had encountered himself: he wanted to make a low-budget independent feature using virtual production, but could not do it in Queensland.
So he built the facility he needed.
Screen Queensland helped. Its Capital Grants Program provided support that allowed Chrysaor to establish its virtual-production capability, something Amos has acknowledged as critical to getting the studio off the ground.
Six months on, however, Amos is asking a more difficult question: what happens after the infrastructure has been built?
According to ScreenHub, Chrysaor has had 76 live conversations with producers since opening, hosted dozens of tours and staged nine productions and activations — yet has no major bookings for the remainder of 2026. Amos says the problem is not a lack of interest in the studio but the difficulty that domestic producers, particularly in Queensland, face getting projects financed and into production.
That experience raises a bigger question about Screen Queensland’s priorities.
The agency has a dual role: investing in locally made films, series and games while also attracting international and interstate productions.
Screen Australia’s 2024–25 Drama Report found that 85 per cent of Queensland’s total drama production expenditure came from a number of high-budget international titles, with the state recording $925 million in drama production expenditure.
International productions employ Queenslanders, bring skills and infrastructure and inject substantial money into the economy.
But Amos’s experience highlights the other side of the equation: an industry can attract productions without necessarily developing enough locally owned production to sustain itself when those productions leave.
That question becomes more important as public funding tightens.
In August, the Queensland Government announced $50 million in incentives for Screen Queensland over two years. Media Watch subsequently examined the way the announcement was reported as a $50 million “boost”, pointing out that compared with the previous two budgets it represented a $30 million funding cut. ABC News reported that the new allocation was at least $13 million a year below the previous annual level.
Screen Queensland CEO Jacqui Feeney says the agency is revising its incentive rates to balance momentum with sustainability.
But with less money available, the balance between attracting international productions and developing Queensland-owned work becomes harder to ignore.
None of this means international production should disappear.
But Amos’s experience poses a legitimate challenge to Screen Queensland: is enough attention and funding reaching the local producers who have to build the industry between the blockbusters?
Chrysaor is already there. The infrastructure exists. The talent exists. What Amos says is missing is the finance and visibility to turn that capacity into Queensland-owned production.
If 85 per cent of the state’s drama expenditure is coming from high-budget international titles, perhaps the next measure of success should not simply be how many productions Queensland can attract — but how many Queensland productions it can help create, own and sustain.
That is the harder test for Screen Queensland under Jacqui Feeney.
