For my first blog, I want to take an in-depth look at Andrew Higson’s “The Concept of National Cinema.” It was an article he wrote based on one of his PhD theses published in 1989. This particular article is an excerpt from “The European Cinema Reader,” edited by Catherine Fowler, chapter 14, pages 132-142.
In this article, Higson uses four criteria to define a country’s production of “national cinema.” First off, he talks about defining cinema in economic terms. This is in regards to whether or not the funds for the film and its distribution came from the home country of the film or whether funds were allocated from outside countries. This concept asks questions such as “where are these films made, and by whom? Who owns and controls the industrial infrastructures, the production companies, the distributors and the exhibition circuits?” (132). The second criteria he talks about is the “possibility of a text-based approach” (132). This talks about what the actual content and message of what the film is about. The “text” of the film explores the national identity of the home country and the issues at hand during the time period of the making of the film. The third is an exhibition approach, which concerns what the audience is actually watching and how many American-based films compared to foreign films are being viewed in certain countries. The more films from a different country that are widely viewed, the more influence that country’s ideals will have on the foreign land. Because of the major financial advantage to American filmmaking, Hollywood based films are vastly seen throughout the world by many people, creating strong influences in their cultural norms. The fourth criteria Higson talks about is a criticism-led approach which classifies a film as more then just a movie but as a “quality art cinema…rather that one which appeals to the desires and fantasies of the popular audiences” (133). These criteria that Higson discusses are more of a “prescriptive” approach because he states that there is no one concrete definition of national cinema but more of an idea surrounding it. His article “is intended as an exploration of some of the implications of using the term ‘national’ in discourse about cinema” (132).
Higson argues that there are two ways to define a nation’s cinema in relation to another nation’s cinema: externally and internally. Externally identifying a national cinema is to look at the major cinematic styles and common themes that separate the typical and normative styles. These are what can separate a “typical German film” from a “typical Bosnian film.” These distinctions are also based on an international opinion brought on by an overall acceptance by the community. An internal approach to identifying national cinema is how the country decided to classify itself in regards to its national status and creates and identifies its own unique artistic style. Hollywood complicates the discussion of national cinema because it has become the universal norm of filmmaking by popularity. The financial prosperity of the thriving culture has helped to fund the theatrical release of many of its films globally and has, therefore, set the bar for other cultures. It has “been an integral and naturalized part of the national culture, or the popular imagination, of most countries in which cinema is an established entertainment form…Hollywood has become one of those cultural traditions which feed into the so-called national cinemas” (134). Hollywood has grasped the entertainment industry and created a threshold of what national cinema “should be.” This is why Higson prefers to take an inward approach at looking at national cinema because the best possible definition of national cinema is the self definition upon which one gives themselves.
Some of the most “classic” films are that of big production budgets, or at least marketing budgets. Therefore, due to these budgetary advantages, it is these films that consumers are able to view, which would ultimately set the mold of what the nation’s cinematic culture should be. Nationally popular movies, often time, are based upon how much influence the United Staes has had on either the distribution or financing of the film. Consumption practices are important because the nation’s culture decided on what to consume more then what the company trying to do business there has to say. It gives it an internal look at itself, in an unbiased, honest judgement.
Film Chatting 