Changing Industry

“The films of this period, often referred to as the ‘cinema of narrative integration,’ no longer relied upon viewers’ extra-textual knowledge but rather employed cinematic conventions to create internally coherent narratives.”-Pg 23
During the stages of transitional cinema, it seems each country developed a style according to their cultural expectations. I especially find it interesting that the United States had a prejudice against foreign film. It provokes questions about how this might influence our culture today. Film as a medium reflects our society, along with political and traditional differences, the content matter of our films differ according to what is acceptable to each society. While American films have struggled with censorship and the rating system, it seems foreign film has always been more “loose” about their subjects of focus. Some Americans dislike foreign film because it doesn’t always follow the traditional narrative structure, foreign films seem to have more freedom to be obscure. Referring to America’s prejudice for foreign films, the book brings forth the American film industry’s tendency to discourage films that depict “un-american morals” or any content of criminal activity. Naturally, this limited the narrative options for American filmmakers. I believe this opposition is what developed into restrictions in our rating system and other issues with the FCC.
The early stages of developing film technique are reminiscent of the space race, when we were developing rocket ships against the U.S.S.R. For film, each country was developing new trends of filmmaking and editing, all sharing the goal to evolve film. I compare it to the space race because as we were trying to achieve travel into space, we were developing space crafts (film techniques) that are different from other countries’ models, sharing the goal to get to space (evolve film). If that makes sense.
I found it also especially interesting that European women were starring in films they produced. This information seems premature for its time, especially since women in America currently occupy 16% of the filmmaking industry.
It is no surprise that in time, America would dominate foreign countries’ film industry. According to the reading, in Britain, only 5% of British origin films were being screened. Complaints of the American dominance and the reflection of American views circulated even to Germany. Germany limited the number of American films imported to the country and Italy adjusted the number of imported films shown, to greater the ratio of Italian-speaking films. This reminded me of the Anderson article, “What is nationalism?” As America needs to dominate above other countries, it seems only a matter of time before American film became prevalent. I believe this apparent disposition is why America is stereotyped by other countries.
The First World War and the Crisis in Europe had several quotes I felt necessary to include. “War disrupted the trade patterns so crucial to the traditional European powers, it exacted a heavy price in terms of the lives, material and ongoing experimentation so vital to film production. And, in very different ways, it assisted in the successful transformation of the U.S., German and ultimately Russian industries.” -page 62
“The war would contribute to the growth of the studios by weakening foreign competition both domestically and internationally, opening the way for post-war U.S. domination. But in many cases, the seeds of change could already be found in the immediate pre-war years.”-Page 63.
I found this chapter especially fascinating. I especially found it interesting that because film stock was flammable and was a threat to “war-essential shipping”, in addition to Germany’s reliance on imported nitrates, the film stock could be used to manufacture explosives.
The piece written on Dziga Vertov had an interesting quote, “You who eat the meat of reindeer. Dipping it into warm blood. You sucking on your mother’s breast. and you, high spirited hundred-years-old man”.-page 92
“The man with the movie camera summarizes the kinoki movement: the image of the worker perfect as the machine, that of the filmmaker as socially useful as the factory worker, together with that of the super-sensitive spectator reacting to no matter how complicated a message the film offers to his or her attention.”-Page 93
One last quote that struck me was the workings entitled, “She”, wherein Vertov “trace the workings of the brain...Eponymous symphony of womanhood across the ages.”-Page 93
The word I chose to look up is the word oligopoly.
Ol-i-gop-o-ly
noun
a state of limited competition, in which a market is shared by a small number of producers or sellers.
This word was mentioned repeatedly throughout the reading, which is why I decided to look it up. It makes sense with the content matter of the reading.