The Commercial Film Industry: why is Hollywood still globally dominant?

Transcription

1 The Commercial Film Industry: why is Hollywood still globally dominant? Can you remember the last Hollywood production you watched? Whether it was one of the latest blockbusters in the cinema or whether it was viewing a high concept film at home there is very little doubt about the fact that Hollywood dominates the global commercial film screens. But when was the last time you saw a domestic film, a British, French or Spanish film? The topic of Hollywood and its popularity with a global audience is one that leaves room for a large number of different points of discussion, whether it is the creative milieu of the industry with its famous actors, directors and producers, or whether it is the history of film itself, such as the creation and production of it. Previously having studied Hollywood as a general concept, this review is specifically interested in examining reasons behind the dominance of Hollywood films in the global commercial film industry, a field that has been discussed widely over the past years. Since the creation of the first Hollywood film studio in 1911 (Dangcil 2007). American films have started to impact viewing habits of audiences all over the world. Researchers have attempted to find reasons for Hollywood s global dominance in the commercial film industry by approaching the topic from a variety of viewpoints: Whereas some focus on the economic success of the American film industry and the importance of marketing, others concentrate on the appeal of the typical Hollywood narratives or point to the structure of the organisation as a whole. In order to understand the reasons behind Hollywood s global success, an integrative approach needs to be taken, namely one that combines elements of economic, political, cultural and social nature. By looking at the main arguments and research conducted in each of these fields as well as examining pleasures that audiences gain from Hollywood film productions, an overview of the different lines of reasoning and significant studies will be provided and drawn together in the end. Many researchers acknowledge Hollywood s superior position as a clear dominating power in the media industry from the early 20s on. Most of them, as will also become clear later, are likely to agree to the statement that Hollywood early on emerged as a global industry. (De Zoysa & Newman 2002: 189) However, more recently, some studies have taken a different stand, opposing this view and hypothesizing that there was a change in the demand for Hollywood films that only emerged in the 1980s. (Garncarz 2002) One of the advocates of this theory, Garncarz, argues that all theories dealing with Hollywood s superior international role are flawed from the beginning. He criticises that most research simply assumes that Hollywood has always dominated the world film market and reasons that this alleged fact is merely an unfounded assumption. (Garncarz 2002) Even though both views acknowledge the dominance of Hollywood productions today, they have opposing views on when the industry started to become the major player in commercial film around the world. Caution is required when assessing Hollywood s degree of impact on global audiences, because it needs to be acknowledged that the level of popularity might differ in relation to time and location of a given audience. Discussing the emergence of Hollywood as the global player in film industry, some research has focused on economic and political factors that helped the American Industry grow as quickly as it did. Amongst them is the fact that from early on, American films were available for export all over the world. It has been found that by the late twenties, 35% of its [Hollywood] profits were generated overseas and notably it secured early governmental support, as realization of its importance for trade and cultural promotion became apparent. (De Zoysa & Newman 2002: 190) Suddenly, Hollywood became important to politicians, as they realised its economic potential and soon became interested in the promotion of Hollywood outside of the domestic settings. Garncarz reasons that the concerted action of the US government and the US film industry guaranteed the international success of Hollywood films. When examining the relationship between the exporting and the 1

2 importing country, only the large exporting country is credited with playing a significant role; the smaller importing country is described as nothing but a black box or at most as playing a defensive role. (Garncarz 2002: 3) In contrast to other studies that will be referred to later, his view however lacks the mention of audience power, which can severely influence the trends of the market. Wasser too assumes that Hollywood s global popularity was facilitated by the historical emergence of global financing strategies. (Wasser 1995)He claims that Hollywood aimed most of its economic consideration at the American middle class, which proved to be a valuable target group. (Wasser 1995) In their economic analysis about Hollywood, Semati and Sotirin take this argument further, asserting that this homogenizing strategy paved the way for Hollywood s transnationalism. (Semati & Sotirin 1999) In their study of Hollywood from a political point of view, De Zoysa and Newman have found that after World War II, over 50% of the total revenues of the American film industry were generated overseas, arguing that this is the point where Hollywood effectively became internationalized. They see the dubbing of films as one of the main factors that helped the quick growth of foreign consumption. (De Zoysa & Newman 2002: 190) Other work that considers the period of the 1980s and 1990s especially sees reasons for the emerging power of Hollywood in its newly adopted marketing strategies. Tino Balio argues that the growth of the overseas market during the 1980s resulted from the upgrading of motion picture cinemas, the emancipation of state controlled broadcasting, the spread of cable and satellite services, and the pent up demand for entertainment of all types. (Balio 1998: 59) He concludes that two factors boosted the foreign box office: better cinemas and more effective marketing. (Balio 1998: 60) In their analysis about the globalisation process of Hollywood, De Zoysa and Newman argue that there are two main factors that have helped Hollywood to grow into the most influential film industry in the world today: Firstly the rapid spread of the English language worldwide that aided films being widely available for export and secondly the internet that enables a world community to take part in the experience of watching a film. (De Zoysa & Newman 2002: 189) One thing all these studies have in common is the fact that they recognise that the process of globalisation has played a major role in boosting Hollywood s prominence around the world. As Hollywood productions were performing exceptionally well on the foreign market, the importance of marketing greatly increased from the 1990s on. Relating to this, Kerry Segrave points out: "Typically a major film opened in foreign countries months after its U.S. release. In the 1990s that time span regularly shortened to a few weeks. (...) A second reason was to take advantage of a more homogenized ad campaign (...). Foreign audiences were plugged into what was hot on American marquees. (Segrave 1997: 241). Griffith and Taylor, too, identify the profit driven business behind film production to play a role in increasing Hollywood s popularity: From being legendary Los Angeles based dream factories solely dedicated to the creation of cinema entertainment for the masses, they have become involved in a vast range of business activities beyond just movies. (Griffith & Taylor 1996: 645) Research such as this shows that as it became increasingly popular, Hollywood evolved from a mere creative space into one of the biggest businesses worldwide that learned to make use of intense marketing strategies and business opportunities. Some studies have also taken a different approach by looking not so much at the political and economic aspects of Hollywood s global dominance but rather focusing on the social and cultural appeals of the American film industry and their impact on audiences. Buscombe has put forward the argument that Hollywood films are so powerful and popular (Buscombe 1981: 150) because they give audiences a vivid knowledge of the dynamism and force of its social life, represented in a style at once concrete and multi faced. (Buscombe 1981: 150). Something that De Zoysa and Newman mention in their work is that American film became part of the socialization process from early childhood for people all over the world, its stars and idioms, basic assumptions and subtext familiar 2

3 to all. (De Zoysa & Newman 2002: 189) Many researchers have failed to mention this aspect of familiarity from an early age on. For example the fact that many children around the world are exposed to Disney films is likely to create a first connection for them to the Hollywood industry. Arguably this hype is able to persist all around the world not only because the American film industry puts great effort into promoting it but also because audiences overseas have come to accept and enjoy films from Hollywood as an integral part of their culture. Semati and Sortirin describe this as follows: Hollywood becomes ours and the nationalism of cinema collapses into the transnationalism of Hollywood. (Semati & Sotirin 1999: 180). Especially among young audiences, the US is often perceived as a trendsetter in fashion, arts and music something that the film industry is clearly aware of. In relation to this, Kracauer argues that Hollywood's attitude toward the presentation of any given piece of information ultimately depends on its estimate of how the masses of moviegoers respond to the spread of that information through fiction films. (Kracauer 1949: 57) The argument that follows from that, the fact that Hollywood, and any national film industry for that matter, is both a leader and follower of public opinion (Kracauer 1949: 53) has also been captured by De Zoysa and Newman who say that the industry follows demand rather than creating it. (De Zoysa & Newman 1999: 189) Nowell Smith, who has examined reasons for the popularity of Hollywood productions in Britain, argues that the cinema has always been international, both culturally and economically, because the audience has always been very cosmopolitan (Nowell Smith 1985: 154). At this stage it becomes very obvious that an integrative approach needs to be taken in order to fully comprehend the popularity of Hollywood film as part of an economic industry worth millions cannot be separated from film as a mere cultural medium to entertain, give pleasure and in parts educate its audience. The global demand for commercial film productions needs to be taken into consideration and acknowledged when analysing the Hollywood industry. The appeal of Hollywood films has also been approached by researchers in face of the variety of pleasures that spectators gain from these. Bordwell and Thompson see one pleasure in the value of self sufficiency: as protagonists dominate and control the events of the film by needing to achieve a goal, the course of the narrative's development will most likely involve the process of achieving that goal. (Bordwell & Thompson 1993: 82) Achieving the set out goal mostly concludes in a Happy End, arguably one of the reasons why Hollywood films are likely to appeal to audiences of all age groups. Additionally, the aspect of emotionalizing the audience plays a major part in creating pleasure for the audience, something that Hollywood has always been a pioneer in. (Garncarz 2002: 14) He identifies that apart from the excitement of seeing stars perform in films, the appeal of Hollywood films lies not solely in the story but in their spectacular action and the special effects. (Garncarz 2002: 15) In one of his studies, Herbert focuses on the typical narratives provided by Hollywood films and compares them to British domestic films. According to him, Hollywood films are enormously popular in Britain because they fill a cultural gap left open by British mass media. Herbert argues that Hollywood films focus their narrative on classless heroes who have to achieve an individual goal, whereas British film focus on individualists struggling against the system or authorities. (Herbert 1962) The former seems to be more appealing to mass audiences. When investigating reasons for Hollywood s popularity abroad, many researchers come to look at the opposition of European and Hollywood cinema. In the available literature, there are contrasting views about this. Morris puts forward that Hollywood s popularity in a foreign market limits the popular appeal of local film products in economic, cultural and social terms. (Morris 1988, cited in Semati & Sotirin 1999: 178) Kerry Segrave argues along the same lines and identifies the fact that Hollywood films get far more coverage from the local press than ( ) European product (Segrave 1997: 245) as one of the reasons for the popularity of Hollywood films over domestic ones. Furthermore, the author argues that by driving the cost of a film higher and higher, Hollywood made it impossible for anyone to compete on that level. (Segrave 1997: 246) Seen from this point of view, one could conclude that domestic films do not stand a chance in the competition for audience 3

4 attention against Hollywood productions given their superiority in available resources. Higson, however, takes a different approach by arguing that Hollywood has been an integral and naturalised part of the national culture, or the popular imagination, of most countries in which cinema is an established entertainment form. (Higson 1989: 4) He therefore aims at looking at Hollywood productions as part of cultural life instead of contrasting them to the popularity of national cinema. More recent studies and research have looked at Hollywood as an organisational network with impacting marketing strategies and structures that allow the place to exercise such a widespread influence. Research by Olson has sought to show that the US has a competitive advantage in film and TV areas mainly because of the extensive number of skilled labour force that is available to film producers and distributors. (Olson 1999) In the US, universities and colleges throughout the country turn out more than the needed number of qualified writers, producers and directors (Olson 1999), thereby increasing the competition on the market and allowing space for only the best to survive. Feiwel argues along the same lines by saying that Hollywood as a place allows a great variety and diversity of film production and marketing in a very concentrated space. He reasons that rapid communication working within a perfectly functioning network of filmmakers, distributors and creative minds enables to create a milieu that dominates the film scene around the world. (Feiwel 2002) In conclusion, it can be said that the attempt to find reasons behind Hollywood s global dominance in the commercial film market is still taken up by many researchers and studies. It is a field that allows a variety of different views to coexist, because there is not just one simple answer to the question as to why Hollywood productions are so popular amongst audiences around the world. The fact that no answer to this investigation is ever exclusive makes this a very interesting topic to debate. Most research has shown to acknowledge the fact that Hollywood is the major global player in the film industry, providing evaluations of economic, political and cultural nature. Hollywood films have become an integral part of everyday culture and have greatly impacted viewing habits of audiences for the past decades. The place of Hollywood seems to be many things at the same time a creative space for film makers, producers and distributors, a valuable source for profit, a political vehicle and a place that is full of opportunities and economic potential all of these factors together creating an industry that has achieved to fascinate and captivate mass audiences around the world. References Acheson, K., Maule, C. (1994). Understanding Hollywood s organization and continuing success. Journal of Cultural Economics, 18 (4), Balio, T. (1998). A major presence in all of the world's important markets. The globalization of Hollywood in the 1990s. In Neale, Steve & Smith, Murray (eds.), Contemporary Hollywood Cinema. London and New York, Routledge: pp Bordwell, D.,Thompson, K. (2010). Film Art: An Introduction. New York et al.: McGraw Hill. Buscombe, E. (1981). Film History and the Idea of a National Cinema. Australian Journal of Screen Theory, 9 (10), Dangcil, T. (2007). Hollywood Studios (Postcard History). South Carolina: Arcadia Publishing. De Zoysa, R., Newman, O. (1999). The American Dream in the Information Age. London: Palgrave Macmillan. De Zoysa, R., Newman, O. (2002). Globalization, soft power and the challenge of Hollywood. Contemporary Politics, 8 (3), Garncarz, J. (2002). Germany Goes Global: Challenging the Theory of Hollywood's Dominance on International Markets. In: Media in Transition: Globalization and Convergence, Griffith, M.W., Taylor, B. (1996). The Future for Multimedia the Battle for World Dominance. Long Range Planning, 29 (5),

5 Herbert, G. (1962). Hollywood film on British Screens: An analysis of the functions of American popular culture abroad. Social Problems, 9 (4), Higson, A. (1989). The Concept of National Cinema. Screen, 30 (4), King, G. (2000). Spectacular narratives: Hollywood in the age of the blockbuster. London: I.B.Tauris. Kracauer, S. (1949). National Types as Hollywood Presents Them. Public Opinion Quarterly, 13 (1), Kupferberg, F. (2002). Classical Hollywood as a Creative Milieu: Networks, Newcomers and Nothingness. In: International Sociological Association, Brisbane, Nowell Smith, G. (1985). But Do We Need It? In Auty, M. and Roddick, N., British Cinema Now. London: British Film Institute: 154 Olson, S.R. (1999). Hollywood Planet: Global Media and the Competitive Advantage of Narrative Transparency. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Scott, A. (2004). Hollywood and the world: the geography of motion picture distribution and marketing. Review of International Political Economy, 11 (1), Segrave, K. (1997). American films abroad: Hollywood's domination of the world's movie screens from the 1890s to the present. North Carolina: McFarland. Semati, M., Sotirin, P. (1999). Hollywood s Transnational Appeal: Hegemony and Democratic Potential?. Journal of Popular Film and Television, 26 (4), Trumpbour, J. (2007). Selling Hollywood to the World: U.S. and European Struggles for Mastery of the Global Film Industry, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wasser, F. (1995). Is Hollywood America? The Trans nationalization of American Film Industry. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 12 (4),