SCREENVILLE

25 octobre 2011

INDIA languages - World Cinema Stats (24)

- Cultural Diversity Awareness -

FILM DISTRIBUTION

* * *

FILM PRODUCTION

Source : NFDC / MIB (annual report 2011) / CBFC 2010 / UNESCO

Life in a Day (Macdonald)

Watch Life in a Day on YouTube (channel translated in 22 languages), 28 October 2011 (official website / FAQ)

Life In A Day is a historic global experiment to create a user-generated feature film shot in a single day. On July 24, you have 24 hours to capture a glimpse of your life on camera. The most compelling and distinctive footage will be edited into a feature film by Joe Walker, produced by Ridley Scott and directed by Kevin Macdonald.

On July 24, 2010, thousands of people around the world uploaded videos of their lives to YouTube (86000 videos; 5000 hours of footage) to take part in Life in a Day, a historic cinematic experiment to create a documentary film about a single day on earth. Now, it's time to watch their story unfold on the big screen. Directed by Kevin Macdonald, Life in a Day wowed audiences at the Sundance (27 January 2011), Berlinale, Panorama (16 Feb 2011) [PDF] and SXSW (16 March 2011) film festivals and during its YouTube world premiere in January.

Commercial theatre releases : Internet, Russia, Kazakhstan, Germany, UK, USA (35000 spectators, 19 screens), Serbia, Canada, Hong Kong, Japan

User-generated contributors (Shoot location)

Massoud Hossaini (Kabul, Afghanistan)
Cristina Bocchialini / Ayman El Sayed Hassan (Cairo, Egypt)
Soma Helmi (Bali, Indonesia)
Hiroaki Aikawa / Taiji Aikawa (Tokyo, Japan)
Marek Mackovic / Okhwan Yoon (Kathmandu, Nepal)
Alberto Rauizo Gonzalez / Cain Abel Tapia Chavez / Aveliro Tapia (Arequipa, Peru)
Renat Ardilanov / Alexander Bayturin (Moscow, Russia)
Patricia Marinez del Hoyo / Toniu Xou / Virginia Salvado Segu / Araceli Segu Muste (Barcelona, Spain)
Boris Grishkevich (Zakarpatska, Ukraine)
Harvey Glen (Dubai, United Arab Emirates)
Caryn Waechter (New York, NY - USA)
Christoper Brian Heerdt (Naperville, IL - USA)
David Jacques (Woonsocket, RI - USA)
Betsy DelValley (Urbana, IL - USA)
Bob Liginski, Jr. / Bobby Liginski III / Catherine Anne Liginsky (Grayslake, IL - USA)

Also featuring here : Berlin: Die Sinfonie der Großstadt / Berlin, symphony of a great city (1927/Walther Ruttmann/Germany) FULL FILM 1h02'

Related:

Cultural Diversity Awareness (series)

21 octobre 2011

Cinema Quotas

-Cultural Diversity Awareness-

"I do not defend protectionism, but I do defend the right of any state to promote its culture."

Joseph Stiglitz, 2001 Nobel Prize winner for Economics

* * *

What is a cultural policy? (protected by the Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity, UNESCO 2001)
Screening quotas for movies and nationally televised programs or broadcasting requirements for music by national artists.
Financial assistance programs for the performing arts, and for the production, editing and distribution of movies and books, public resources for public radio and television, subsidies for public theatres - this list is long, and no state implements exactly the same policies, fundamentally, each country should have the right to implement the policies it considers appropriate to ensure cultural diversity.

International Federation of Coalitions for Cultural Diversity [PDF]

* * *

Article IV: Special Provisions relating to Cinematograph Films
If any contracting party establishes or maintains internal quantitative regulations relating to exposed cinematograph films, such regulations shall take the form of screen quotas which shall conform to the following requirements:

Screen quotas may require the exhibition of cinematograph films of national origin during a specified minimum proportion of the total screen time actually utilized, over a specified period of not less than one year, in the commercial exhibition of all films of whatever origin, and shall be computed on the basis of screen time per theatre per year or the equivalent thereof;

With the exception of screen time reserved for films of national origin under a screen quota, screen time including that released by administrative action from screen time reserved for films of national origin, shall not be allocated formally or in effect among sources of supply;

Notwithstanding the provisions of subparagraph (b) of this Article, any contracting party may maintain screen quotas conforming to the requirements of subparagraph (a) of this Article which reserve a minimum proportion of screen time for films of a specified origin other than that of the contracting party imposing such screen quotas; Provided that no such minimum proportion of screen time shall be increased above the level in effect on April 10, 1947;

Screen quotas shall be subject to negotiation for their limitation, liberalization or elimination.

The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1947) World Trade Organisation

* * *

Country	since	Domestic film minimum	Imports restrictions	Domestic share
Argentina	2004	4/screen		16 %
Australia	1935			5 %
Austria	1926		1 national / 20 imported films	16 %
Brazil	1932	28-644 days		14 %
Canada		- Canadian programs should cover 60% of the total television broadcast time and 50 percent of the time during evening hours (6pm to 12am) - For Direct-to-Home (DTH) broadcast services, more than half of the channels received must show Canadian programs		1 %
China	1994		20 films / year	61 %
Denmark	1938			22 %
Egypt				81 %
EU27				35 %
France	1946	40 percent of the TV broadcasting must be exclusively of French origin and additional 20 percent must be of EU origin	110 since 1960	43 %
Germany	1921		zero in 1916	27 %
Greece		28 days		10 %
Hungary	1925			12 %
Italy		- Over 50 percent of the monthly TV transmission time including prime-time programming, is reserved for programs of EU origin - “Seat and screen” quotas which require all multiplex movie theatres of more than 1300 seats to reserve 15-20 percent of their seats, distributed over no fewer than three screens, for showing Italian and EU films		21 %
Japan		abolished in 1945	quotas on imports lifted in 1971	54 %
Malaysia	2005	14 days - Broadcasters are required, through licensing conditions, to devote 70-80 percent of airtime to local programming		13 %
Mexico	1949	10% since 1997		8 %
Portugal	1927			3 %
Russia				24 %
South Africa				2 %
South Korea	1962	73 since 2007 - Domestically produced programs must cover a minimum of 50% (nonterrestrial) and 80% (terrestrial) of the broadcasting time - Upper limit for the share of total foreign broadcasting time for any foreign films, animation or popular music, from a single country is kept at 60 percent	Registered companies allowed to produce/import 6<26 / 1989 : foreign prints limited to 12 (abolished in 1994)	46 %
Spain	1955	73-91 days		13 %
Taiwan		abolished in 2001		3 %
UK	1927	20% since 1935 (The Cinematograph Films Act of 1927, repealed in 1960)		16 %

Some countries without Quotas : USA (95% domestic share), Finland (27%), The Philippines (25%)...

Take a look at this World Box Office map and tell me which country is bullying all other countries who earn less and secured a smaller share of their own domestic markets to sell their domestic film production (Answer: USA with a worldwide BO 13 times higher than the next competitor and a domestic share at home of 95% !!!)

Hollywood is pissed off because in France, Japan, South Korea, China or Brazil they own less than 90% of the market, precisely because there are cultural policies in place that protect a minimum share for the local films. Hollywood wouldn't let more than 5% to 8% of foreign films (for the film industries of the entire world), because of cultural isolationism, poor taste and a lame job of the film press and film education in general, yet they have the nerves to slap on the hand of countries that watch Hollywood films with a share of 40-60% already. They think that the commercial mediocrity should contaminate 100% of the world market, no less... no room should ever be left for cultural diversity, let alone for countries to develop a personal, national culture that is not the adolescent dumbness of Hollywood blockbusters.

Cultural exception (French: l’exception culturelle) is a concept introduced by France in General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) negotiations in 1993. Some countries had voiced their concerns during the final negotiations of the Uruguay Round that implementation of the GATT principles on cultural goods and services "would undermine their cultural specificity (and unique status), in favour of their commercial aspects".
The purpose of Cultural exception is to treat cultural goods and services differently than other traded goods and services because of the intrinsic differences of such goods and services. Many countries defend the fact that cultural goods and services "encompass values, identity and meanings that go beyond their strictly commercial value". It notably allowed France to maintain tariffs and quotas to protect its cultural market from other nation's cultural products, most notably American films and television. South Korean policy in favor of its movie industry is another example of how cultural exception is used to protect the audiovisual market.

French "Exception culturelle" (Marrackech 1993) [PDF] wikipedia

Cultural Diversity Awareness (series)
Foreign friendly audiences / BO 2009 / Admissions per film nationality (USA-EU 2009)
MPAA not interested in democratized culture
Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity (UNESCO)
Cinema quotas (Wikipedia)
World Trade Organisation report on Japan quotas [PDF]
The Effect of Screen Quotas on the Self-Sufficiency Ratio in Recent Domestic Film Markets (Byoungkwan Lee, Hyuhn-Suhck Bae; 2004) [PDF]
Parleying Culture Against Trade: Hollywood’s Affairs With Korea’s Screen Quotas (Brian M. Yecies; 2007) [PDF]

Diversité / Fragmentation ? (Mondzain)

-Cultural Diversity Awareness-

Les nouveaux chemins de la connaissance (France Culture) 21-10-2011 [MP3] 59'
Entretien de Philippe Petit avec Marie-José Mondzain, philosophe et écrivain, directeur de recherche au CNRS.

Aujourd’hui nous allons parler de l’image, des images, nous allons parler du cinéma en compagnie de Marie-José Mondzain, une philosophe qui n’aime pas qu’on l’affuble du nom de spécialiste de l’image.
On se souvient de la phrase de l’écrivain Upton Sinclair à propos du cinéma. Elle fut prononcée en 1917 : « Avec le cinéma, disait-il, le monde s’unifie, c’est à dire qu’il s’américanise ».
On pourrait presque dire le contraire aujourd’hui. Avec le cinéma, le monde se fragmente, il y a de plus en plus d’Etats dans le monde, c’est à dire qu’il se diversifie. Mais on pourrait dire aussi que la diversité du cinéma engendre une richesse commune, propre à tous les hommes, au-delà de leurs particularités nationales et culturelles. Ce que Walter Benjamin appelait le fond commun des choses. On pourrait donc dire qu’en même temps qu’il se diversifie le cinéma facilite l’advenue d’un fonds commun de l’humanité, concernant l’environnement, l’amour, la sexualité, la richesse, la pauvreté, tout ce qu’on veut. Et on ajouterait que la désolation, telle celle qui règne dans le parc d’attraction « The World » à Pékin, filmé par le cinéaste chinois Jia Zhang Ke, ne doit pas être un obstacle à cette promesse.
Marie José Mondzain accorde de l’importance à cette question. « En quoi, consistent l’enchantement, la croyance, la magie du cinéma quand ils inscrivent férocement la trace d’un monde désenchanté » se demande-t-elle. …
Oui, en quoi, les images du cinéma, peuvent-elles renforcer notre croyance au monde ?
C’était la question de Rossellini après la guerre …
C’est encore la nôtre aujourd’hui…

Bibliographie:

Images (à suivre), de la poursuite au cnéma et ailleurs; Marie-José Mondzain, 2011
Voir ensemble, Marie-José Mondzain, 2003
L'image peut-elle tuer ?, Marie-José Mondzain, 2002
L'Image naturelle, Marie-José Mondzain, 1995

Films cités:

Tropical Malady (2004/Apichatpong Weerasethakul/Thailand)
Dersu Uzala (1975/Akira Kurosawa/Russia)
The Night of the Hunter (1955/Michael Laughton/USA)
Pickpocket (1959/Robert Bresson/France)
The Birds (1963/Alfred Hitchcock/USA)
La sortie des usines Lumière (1895/Lumière/France)

Voir aussi:

Cultural Diversity Awareness (series)
Hors champ: Marie-José Mondzain (Laure Adler; France Culture; 21 nov 2011) [MP3] 44'
La question politique est une question esthétique et inversement; entretien avec Marie-José Mondzain (La vie manifeste; 4 juin 2011) [MP3 episode 1-2-3-4] 1h31'
Ce qui nous peuple, ce qui nous dépeuple; entretien avec Marie-José Mondzain (à bout de soufle, webradio; 11 juin 2009) [MP3] 2h10'
Image, sujet, pouvoir. Entretien avec Marie-José Mondzain; Michaela Fiserova & Marie-José Mondzain (Sens Public; 8 Janvier 2008) [PDF]
Marie-José Mondzain : Qu'est-ce que voir une image ? conférence (Le Monde, 30 juin 2004) [RM] 1h23'

18 octobre 2011

Films from the South

-Cultural Diversity Awareness-

The Case For Global Film : a British website (ITP, in the picture) about "Discussing everything that isn’t Hollywood (and a little that is)"
They are doing a series titled "Films from the South" this October 2011 (Oslo's 21st "Films From the South" festival) :

Where Do We Go Now? (2011/Nadine Labaki/Lebanon/Fr/It/Egypt)
Man Without a Cellphone / Bidoun Mobile (2010/Sameh Zoabi/Palestine/Israel/Fra/Bel/Qatar)
Finding Ali (2011/Pål Hollender/Sweden)
Be With Me (2005/Eric Khoo/Singapore)
The Year Without Summer / Wu zhi xia nian (2010/Tan Chui Mui/Malaysia)
So Hard to Forget / Como Esquecer (2010/Malu de Martino/Brazil)
Aballay / Aballay, el hombre sin miedo (2010/Fernando Spiner/Argentina/Spain)
Fireworks Wednesday / Chaharshanbe-soori (2006/Asghar Farhadi/Iran)
About Elly / Darbareye Elly (2009/Asghar Farhadi/Iran)
The Journals of Musan / Musanilgi (2010/Park Jung-bum/South Korea)
Carancho (2010/Pablo Trapero/Argentine/Chile/France/S. Korea)
Tatsumi (2011/Eric Khoo/Singapore)
Interview with Eric Khoo
The Benghali Detective (2011/UK/India//USA)
Virgin Goat / Ladli Laila (2009/India)
Final thoughts

Cambodge : culture exterminée

-Cultural Diversity Awareness-

Cambodge : mémoires contemporaines, du documentaire à la fiction

Bibliothèque Publique d'Information, Centre Georges Pompidou, Paris. 10 Octobre 2011 [PDF]
2h18' video + MP3

Comment témoigner à chaud de guerres civiles ou de conflits? Le silence et l’oubli sont souvent considérés comme les conditions du retour à la paix. Mais lorsque l’apaisement repose sur la dénégation, on sait malheureusement que le retour de la violence est probable.
Écrivains, artistes, cinéastes prennent donc la parole et s’engagent à rendre compte en inventant de nouvelles formes de récit telles que la bande dessinée documentaire ou les films mêlant documentaire et fiction. Comment la fiction – dans le roman, le théâtre, la bande dessinée ou le cinéma – parvient-elle à toucher au plus près cette mémoire immédiate? La création artistique, l’imaginaire, peuvent-ils désamorcer le retour de la violence ? Pourquoi faire appel à de nouvelles formes de récit ? Quelles particularités chaque conflit présente-t-il qui appelle à ce renouvellement? Quels liens se tissent entre la fiction et le travail documentaire basé sur le recours critique aux archives, aux témoignages ?

avec :

James Burnet (remplaçant Rithy Panh à la conférence): ancient journaliste, collaborateur de Rithy Panh, centre de ressources audiovisuelles Bophana
Jean-Baptiste Pouh : Auteur, metteur en scène et comédien
Séra : auteur de bande dessinée historique, peintre, graveur, chargé de cours aux universités Paris I Paris 8. (Il est également connu comme peintre sous le nom de Phoussera)
Ariane Matthieu : Journaliste au magazine "L'Histoire"

Vann Nath (décédé le 5 Septembre 2011), 1 des 7 survivants des 17000 prisonniers du camp d'extermination S21, face à ses tortionnaires

Filmographie et bibliographie sélectives

Rithy Panh

Les Gens de la rizière, 1994
La Terre des âmes errantes, 1999
S21, la machine de mort Khmère rouge, 2003
Le papier ne peut pas envelopper la braise, 2009
Un barrage contre le Pacifique, 2009

Lire aussi : Cahiers du cinéma, n°487, février 2004 (consacré à Rithy Panh et S21)

Séra

BD Ciné, 2004
L’Eau et la Terre, 2005
H.K.O.1997, Impasse et rouge en 1995
Lady Mage Kane en 1986
Lendemains de cendres en 2007
Mon frère, le fou en 2009
Les Processionnaires de 2001 à 2003
Secteur 7, 2005
Sortie de route, 2000
Le Tour du monde en bande dessinée, 2009

Cultural Diversity Awareness (series)

17 octobre 2011

Reductive Foreign Stereotypes

Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity (UNESCO)

-Cultural Diversity Awareness-

"[..] That the wide diffusion of culture, and the education of humanity for justice and liberty and peace are indispensable to the dignity of man and constitute a sacred duty which all the nations must fulfil in a spirit of mutual assistance and concern [..]"

Preamble of the UNESCO constitution [PDF] 16 November 1945

Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 27; 10 Dec 1948

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION ON CULTURAL DIVERSITY
Adopted by the 31st Session of the General Conference of UNESCO (Paris, 2 November 2001) [PDF] (translated in 6 languages)

"[..] Affirming that respect for the diversity of cultures, tolerance, dialogue and cooperation, in a climate of mutual trust and understanding are among the best guarantees of international peace and security, Aspiring to greater solidarity on the basis of recognition of cultural diversity, of awareness of the unity of humankind, and of the development of intercultural exchanges, Considering that the process of globalization, facilitated by the rapid development of new information and communication technologies, though representing a challenge for cultural diversity, creates the conditions for renewed dialogue among cultures and civilizations, [..]

Proclaims the following principles and adopts the present Declaration:

Article 1 – Cultural diversity: the common heritage of humanity
Culture takes diverse forms across time and space. This diversity is embodied in the uniqueness and plurality of the identities of the groups and societies making up humankind. As a source of exchange, innovation and creativity, cultural diversity is as necessary for humankind as biodiversity is for nature. In this sense, it is the common heritage of humanity and should be recognized and affirmed for the benefit of present and future generations.

Article 2 – From cultural diversity to cultural pluralism
In our increasingly diverse societies, it is essential to ensure harmonious interaction among people and groups with plural, varied and dynamic cultural identities as well as their willingness to live together. Policies for the inclusion and participation of all citizens are guarantees of social cohesion, the vitality of civil society and peace. Thus defined, cultural pluralism gives policy expression to the reality of cultural diversity. Indissociable from a democratic framework, cultural pluralism is conducive to cultural exchange and to the flourishing of creative capacities that sustain public life.

Article 3 – Cultural diversity as a factor in development
Cultural diversity widens the range of options open to everyone; it is one of the roots of development, understood not simply in terms of economic growth, but also as a means to achieve a more satisfactory intellectual, emotional, moral and spiritual existence. [..]

Article 6 – Towards access for all to cultural diversity
While ensuring the free flow of ideas by word and image care should be exercised so that all cultures can express themselves and make themselves known. Freedom of expression, media pluralism, multilingualism, equal access to art and to scientific and technological knowledge, including in digital form, and the possibility for all cultures to have access to the means of expression and dissemination are the guarantees of cultural
diversity.

Article 7 – Cultural heritage as the wellspring of creativity
Creation draws on the roots of cultural tradition, but flourishes in contact with other cultures. For this reason, heritage in all its forms must be preserved, enhanced and handed on to future generations as a record of human experience and aspirations, so as to foster creativity in all its diversity and to inspire genuine dialogue among cultures.

Article 8 – Cultural goods and services: commodities of a unique kind
In the face of present-day economic and technological change, opening up vast prospects for creation and innovation, particular attention must be paid to the diversity of the supply of creative work, to due recognition of the rights of authors and artists and to the specificity of cultural goods and services which, as vectors of identity, values and meaning, must not be treated as mere commodities or consumer goods.

Article 9 – Cultural policies as catalysts of creativity
While ensuring the free circulation of ideas and works, cultural policies must create conditions conducive to the production and dissemination of diversified cultural goods and services through cultural industries that have the means to assert themselves at the local and global level. It is for each State, with due regard to its international obligations, to define its cultural policy and to implement it through the means it considers fit, whether by operational support or appropriate regulations.

Article 10 – Strengthening capacities for creation and dissemination worldwide
In the face of current imbalances in flows and exchanges of cultural goods at the global level, it is necessary to reinforce international cooperation and solidarity aimed at enabling all countries, especially developing countries and countries in transition, to establish cultural industries that are viable and competitive at national and international level. [..]"

117 signatories member-states (since 2005): Afghanistan, Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Chad, Chile, China, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, ;Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lesotho, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Mozambique, Namibia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Romania, Saint Lucia, Saint and the Grenadines, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sudan, Sweden, Switzerland, Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad, Tunisia, Ukraine, UK, Uruguay, Viet Nam, Zimbabwe

Notable member-states missing approval : USA, Japan, Russia, Indonesia, The Philippines, Belgium, Thailand, Turkey, Iran, Taiwan, Singapore, Venezuela, Malaysia, Serbia, Israel, Morocco, Colombia, Pakistan, Lebanon, Kyrgyzstan... apparently these guys are pondering since 2001 whether protecting Cultural Diversity within their borders and abroad is more beneficial to them than reckless free market.

Canadian campaign to support the Coalition for Cultural Diversity [French version] 5'03" more promotional videos here

History:

1989 : Growing pressure is exerted on countries to waive their right to enforce cultural policies, and to put all aspects of the cultural sector on the table when negotiating international trade agreements.
1993 : Pressure grows during the Uruguay Round of negotiations for the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). The list for the services sector includes intellectual property and, more specifically, cinematographic and audiovisual works. Several countries take strong positions in favour of excluding culture from the negotiations. A very large majority of countries agree not to make liberalization commitments for cinematographic and audiovisual services. But without full exclusion the question remains unresolved.
1995 : Immediately following the Uruguay Round, new multilateral negotiations are initiated, notably as part of the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) under the auspices of the OECD (abandoned in 1998), and by the WTO at its Seattle Summit and the Doha round of negotiations which began in 2001. Bilateral negotiations are also initiated, particularly by the United States, which put pressure on a number of countries to waive their right to adopt cultural policies.
1998 : Cultural professionals and political authorities mobilize around the initiative of implementing an international legal instrument that could offset the free trade agreements by affirming the right of States to define and implement cultural policies.
2001 : Adoption of the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity. Hollywood’s share of the international motion picture market was 80%.
2003 : Start of negotiations at UNESCO with the aim of adopting the Convention.
2005 : The Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions is adopted by UNESCO. It changes the landscape: for the first time, countries in favour of cultural policies are no longer on the defensive at the negotiating table. Now they can go on the offensive.
2007 : The Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions enters into force on March 18, 2007. Three months later, the 56 Member States that ratified the Convention meet in Paris for the first Conference of the Parties to begin work on implementing the Convention.

"I'm in favour of paying the relatively small price for maintaining diversity, rather than the large price of its loss."

Wim Wenders

"The UNESCO Convention is a piece of legislation which ensures freedom, since it is aimed at enabling governments to allow their cultures to thrive."

Bertrand Tavernier

Cultural diversity Awareness (series)
UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation) / Coalition for Cultural Diversity / International Federation of Coalitions for Cultural Diversity
Artificial barriers against free circulation of world cinema

13 octobre 2011

Hollywood émigrés

- Cultural Diversity Awareness -

In Memoriam of all the foreign artists who brought their talent to Hollywood to give a major contribution to its success then and now.

During WW2 and in the post-WW2 era this was called the "brain drain" : facilitate the emigration of the most talented people from Europe to install them in America and kill two birds with one stone. One, it makes European countries less competitive, since they lose the best of their intelligentsia. Two, it makes the USA more competitive by adding this intellectual capital to the development of their economy. Just like the economy of the USA, the success and later worldwide hegemony of Hollywood benefited greatly of this positive emigration towards their shores. The great names in Hollywood, for a large part, be it producer, director, actor, cinematographer... come from Europe (Germany, France, UK, Eastern Europe...), and later from Asia (Hong Kong, Japan...), Canada or Mexico... Whether to move permanently there (like Hitchcock or Lubitsch), or to give a try at a single film (like Wong Kar-wai or Jean-Pierre Jeunet) they always credit that much more to the record books of Hollywood instead of their homeland. And this practice, although partially favored by the attraction of big budgets, the star system and fame, was not an all-out manipulative campaign. The objective appeal of the Hollywood market is undeniable, at least as far as Entertainment is concerned. Artists do go there willingly, for the "American dream", in the hope of improving their access to celebrity and wealth. Hollywood doesn't discriminate, and treats foreigners as well as the homegrown talents, as long as they make money... thereafter they are dumped and forgotten as fast as they got in. This is the rule of the game. Only then do they realise they might have sold their soul too quickly.

Unfortunately this cultural "exchange" is a one-way highway. Hollywood doesn't give back the help they received from foreign industries... As soon as these emigrés work for Hollywood, they are considered "American" and they make "American" films, forgetting all about their heritage and their identity. Oblivious of what they owe to foreign countries, and the development of new artists for the next generation, ungrateful Hollywood shows no mercy on the global market, crushing domestic cinema in these very friendly countries by imposing the exclusive domination of their blockbusters on foreign screens, by fighting off the quotas that help the survival of a local industry. Hollywood only cares about making more money, they don't care about cultural diversity in the world, the kind nursing of struggling national industries outside of the USA, or even the welcoming of foreign films on American screens!

This is sad, and disrespectful, especially when Hollywood makes way more than any other film industry in the world and is the last industry that suffers from "unfair competition"!

You would think that an ex-nihilo nation entirely built on immigration, on the melting-pot of foreign culture, on cosmopolitan and multi-cultural traditions would show, as a people, more interest, curiosity, appetite for foreign cinema, foreign stars, foreign artists... it's the contrary. Americans, the multicultural Americans watch less foreign films than any other countries in the world! If they don't do it out of respect for world culture, I wish they would at least show a better representation of their own multi-culturalism in Hollywood films (which are all made for WASPs).

I think this should change and quickly! At least to reach the level of cultural diversity usual in the industrialised countries of the Western World.

When will America grow out of a business intensive industry and make some room (a decent minor share) for foreign culture?

Melting Pot (2002/Ad Council/USA) 1'

Some examples of the foreign contribution to the Hollywood "tradition de qualité" (only focusing on filmmakers):

EUROPE

AUSTRIA : Edgar G. Ulmer, Karl Freund, Fritz Lang, Otto Preminger, Billy Wilder, Fred Zinnemann, Erich von Stroheim, Josef von Strenberg, Max Steiner, Max Reinhardt...
BELGIUM : Jacques Feyder, Chantal Akerman, Jean-Claude Van Damme, Alain Berliner...
former CZECHOZLOVAKIA : Milos Forman, Gustav Machaty, Ivan Passer...
DENMARK : Benjamin Christensen, Nicolas Winding Refn, Susanne Bier, Lone Scherfig, Niel Arden Oplev ...
FRANCE : André Deed, Alice Guy, Emile Chautard, Maurice Tourneur, George Archainbaud, Max Linder, Léonce Perret, Robert Florey, Jean Renoir, Jean-Pierre Jeunet, Agnès Varda, Alain Resnais, Alexandre Aja, Barbet Schroeder, Bertrand Tavernier, Christopher Gans, Claude Chabrol, Jean-Luc Godard, Jacques Demy, Jacques Deray, Max Ophüls, Maurice Tourneur, Jacques Tourneur, Julie Delpy, Julien Duvivier, Louis Malle, Matthieu Kassovitz, Michel Gondry, René Clair, René Clément, George Sluizer, Luc Besson, Xavier Gens, Jean-Jacques Annaud, Olivier Megaton, Yann Samuell, Louis Gasnier, Albert Capellani, Georges Fitzmauritce...
GEORGIA : Ruben Mamoulian...
GERMANY : Douglas Sirk, Ernst Lubitsch, F.W. Murnau, Fassbinder, G.W. Pabst, John Brahm, Max Ophüls, Paul Leni, Robert Siodmak, William Dieterle, William Wyler, Werner Herzog, Wim Wenders, Wolfgang Petersen, Roland Emmerich, Christian Alvart, Curtis Bernhardt, Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck, Conrad Viedt, Pola Negri, Arthur Robinson, Guad André Dupont...
GREECE : Costa-Gavras, M. Cacoyannis...
HUNGARY : Michael Curtiz, Laslo Benedek, Alexander Korda, Andrew Marton, John Auer, André de Toth, Charles Vidor, Pál Fejös...
ICELAND : Baltasar Kormakur...
IRELAND : Rex Ingram, Herbert Brenon, Sidney Olcott, Neil Jordan, Kirsten Sheridan...
ITALY : Frank Capra, Bernardo Bertolucci, Francesco Rosi, Michelangelo Antonioni, Sergio Leone, Vittorio de Sica, Lina Wertmüller...
LITHUANIA : Jonas Mekas...
NETHERLANDS : Paul Verhoeven, Theo van de Sande...
POLAND : Roman Polanski, Agnieszka Holland, Max Nosseck, Rudolph Maté...
RUSSIA : Anatole Litvak, Sergei Eisenstein, Lewis Milestone, Andrei Konchalovsky, Timur Bekmambetov...
SPAIN : Luis Buñuel, Nacho Vigalondo...
SWEDEN : Jan Troell, Mauritz Stiller, Viktor Sjöström, Lasse Hallström...
UK : James Whale, Stan Laurel, Charles Chaplin, Charles Laughton, Edmund Goulding, Ken Annakin, John Schlesinger, Tony Richardson, Alexander Mackendrick, Alfred Hitchcock, Christopher Nolan, John Boorman, Percy Aldon, Stephen Frears, Danny Boyle, Matthew Vaughn, Ridley Scott, Tony Scott, Roland Joffé, Alan Parker, Kenneth Branagh, Michael Apted...

ASIA

HONG KONG : Bruce Lee, Chen Kaige, John Woo, Ringo Lam, Jacky Chan, Tsui Hark, Wayne Wang, Wong Kar-wai...
INDIA : Mira Nair, Shekhar Kapur, M. Night Shyamalan...
JAPAN : Nagisa Oshima, Akira Kurosawa, Takashi Shimizu, Hideo Nakata, Takeshi Kitano, Ryuhei Kitamura...
KOREA : Jennifer Yuh, Dennis Lee, Park Chan-wook, Kim Ji-woon, Ahn Byeong-ki, Bong Joon-ho...
TAIWAN : Ang Lee...
THE PHILIPPINES : Lav Diaz...

AMERICA

ARGENTINA : Harry d'Abbadie d'Arrast, Hugo Fregonese...
BRAZIL : Walter Salles, Fernando Meirelles...
CANADA : Mack Sennett, Sidney J. Furie, Norman Jewison, Jason Reitman, Paul Haggis, James Cameron, David Cronenberg, Ivan Reitman, Jean-Marc Vallée...
CHILE : Reuben Gonzalez, Alejandro Amenábar...
COLOMBIA : Rodrigo Garcia...
MEXICO : Emilio Fernández, Luis Mandoki, Alfonso Cuarón, Guillermo del Toro, Alejandro González Iñárritu...

OCEANIA

AUSTRALIA : Bill Bennett, John Farrow, Stephen Elliott, Fred Schepisi, Jocelyn Moorhouse, Bruce Beresford, Gillian Armstrong, George Miller, Richard Franklin, Jane Campione, Baz Luhrmann, Simon Wincer, Paul J. Hogan, Peter Weir, Philip Noyce, John Hillcoat...
NEW ZEALAND : Roger Donaldson, Peter Jackson, Andrew Dominik, Jane Campion...

MIDDLE EAST

ARMENIA : Sylvette Artinian, Aram Avakian, Tina Bastajian, Nigol Bezjian, Roxanne Bezjian, Theodore Bogosian, Varktes Cholakian, J. Michael Hagopian, Ara Madzounian, Rouben Mamoulian, Bill Omanesian, Richard Sarafian, William Saroyan, Setrag Vartian...

note: more examples welcome

* * *

Let's put this in regard to the amount of foreign films watched by the American audience :

To Steal talents abroad to improve the quality of Hollywood output : HELL YES!
To screen, and buy tickets in theatres on American soil to support foreign films : FORGET IT!!!

Nothing but greed and cultural blindness could explain this graph...

Related:

Cultural Diversity Awareness (series)
Foreign-friendly audience / Slow release / Weak's cutoff / To America everything foreign is SLOW
MPAA not interested in democratized culture / American Isolationism 1-2
Admissions per film nationality (USA-EU 2009)
"Exiles in Hollywood: Major European Film Directors in America", Gene D. Phillips, 1998
"Passport to Hollywood: Hollywood films, European directors", James Morrison, 1998
"Hollywood Destinies: European Directors in America, 1922–1931", Graham Petrie, 2002
"The Hollywood Exiles", John Baxter, 1976
"European exiles in '40s Hollywood" (Noir City Sentinel; Nov 2006) [PDF]
Le cinéma Hollywoodien (Patrick Brion; 14 juillet 2004; Université de tous les savoirs; Canal-U) video 94'43"

11 octobre 2011

World Cruise 2010 (Eikawa Yuki)

-Cultural Diversity Awareness-

director : 永川優樹 EIKAWA Yuki (born in Nagasaki in 1978) released a Blu-ray/DVD (official website)

"Cruising 17 cities in ten countries, everyday people's lives from dawn to midnight are captured with one DSLR with handheld stabilizer. No narration or background music clutter this film - instead, natural sounds recorded in each locale present a true-to-life environment. Amazing perspective opens before your eyes, and the bustle of the cities fills the air. Now you can travel the world right from your armchair."

NEW YORK / USA 04:31
TOKYO / JAPAN 05:35
LONDON / UK 04:00
CHEFCHAOUEN / MOROCCO 05:08
AMALFI / ITALY 03:03
KYOTO / JAPAN 05:15
VARANASI / INDIA 03:50
CUZCO / PERU 04:26
VENICE / ITALY 04:03
OLD DELHI / INDIA 01:59
ISTANBUL / TURKEY 04:18
XITANG / CHINA 03:18
ROME / ITALY 03:18
SHANGHAI / CHINA 03:09
FES / MOROCCO 03:06
BANGKOK / THAI 03:07
UCHISAR / TURKEY 03:06
WORLD - CRUISE 28:07

Cruise 2010 by 永川優樹 EIKAWA Yuki (egawauemon; 36 videos)

Amalfi - Italy (28 April 2010) 15'27"

Xitang - China (22 Sept 2010) 13'04"
Cappadocia - Turkey (20 Sept 2010) 7'35"
Yakushima - Japan (14 Aug 2010) 6'
Tokyo - Japan (13 May 2010) 19'28"
Varanasi -India (21 March 2010) 10'25"
Bangkok - Thailand (28 Fev 2010) 10'01"
Fukuoka - Japan (11 Jan 2010) 10'
Osaka - Japan (25 Nov 2009) 10'
Kyoto - Japan (17 Oct 2009) 10'

Walking in Tokyo by 永川優樹 EIKAWA Yuki (egawauemon; 22 videos)

Asakusa, Tokyo - Japan (27 Aug 2009) 23'
Shibuya, Tokyo - Japan (21 Apr 2009) 7'11"
Shinjuku, Golden Town , tokyo - Japan (11 Apr 2009) 6'22"
Ueno, Tokyo - Japan (30 Nov 2008) 9'45"
Ginza, Tokyo - Japan (20 Sept 2008)

Originally posted at Unspoken Cinema

09 octobre 2011

France exports (uniFrance) - World Cinema Stats (24)

-Cultural Diversity Awareness-

Projection Privée (France Culture) 8 Octobre 2011 - MP3 radio webcast 59'
Michel Ciment (Positif) reçoit Régine Hatchondo (directrice générale d' uniFrance)

France is the 2nd largest exporter of national cinema in the world (with 2 or 3% of the global market share = 60 Million admissions = 0.42 Billion $) behind the USA (21.2 Billion $). Notice the huge discrepancy between the leader and the first runner-up.

The American cinema industry was built early on with a powerful commercial format, formulaic film genres and the star system, and the commercial trade was patterned after big international corporations such as Boeing.

The French model of domestic distribution is quasi-unique, where multiplex screen artfilms alongside mainstream entertainment, the arthouse circuit is well developed in most major cities, supported by subsidies and by a loyal audience. To the point where commercial multiplexes (in Paris notably) that sell the largest number of artfilm admissions in Europe, complain about the unfair competition that state subsidies introduce on the market of such artfilms (since aid only goes to small independent exhibitors and not to multiplex brandname franchises... (the art & essai label that guarantees subsidies is a complicated business in France!)

Whereas the USA only has a weak arthouse circuit to rely on for artfilm distribution (and now shifted almost entirely to DVD distribution instead of hoping for a theatrical circulation).

Meanwhile in most countries, the option of an arthouse circuit doesn't even exist today as an alternative circuit, and never even existed in the first place, which explains the domination of Hollywood imports on their screens. Multiplexes often built with American investments (like the campaign in China to bypass the restrictive import quotas, they co-finance multiplexes and studios to appropriate from the inside a share of the "domestic" share).

Certain foreign films make their best box office in France, higher than the admissions they sell on their domestic market! Some even get only released in France, while they are banned or censored in their own country.

Basically, French cinema and by extension European cinema is essentially screened and viewed in arthouses, while the multiplexes (except in Paris) mainly show Hollywood blockbusters, like everywhere else in the world. That's why the development of multiplexes in suburban areas has considerably damaged the survival of the downtown arthouses.

In Germany, 20 cities lost their last arthouse in recent years. In Italy over 300 arthouses have been shut down in 3 years.

On 25 million admissions sold on the USA market by French cinema, 20 million come from English-spoken film productions made-in-France (by EuropaCorp), such as Taken or The Ghost Writer, fabricated according to the Hollywood formula. Which is telling about the American audience, the French films they prefer are the ones shot in English, with American actors, which plot structure resembles the Hollywood format... Open-mindedness towards World culture and cinema diversity fail!

The usual market share French cinema (in French language, with French actors) could expect on the USA exhibition circuit is between 6 and 8 million admissions.

In the Cannes line-up, 50% of the films selected are either French, or co-produced by French investments. Among the foreign films selected by the Oscars, the films representing Finland (Le Havre), Lebanon (Where do we go now?); Morocco (Omar m'a tuer) are French co-productions that wouldn't exist without the aid of France, like for Lou Ye (China) or Brillante Mendoza (The Philippines). At TIFF this year, 35 French productions, 55 French co-productions out of 300. This is the richness and cultural diversity of the French system, "terre d'accueil" for foreign artists.

Last year, the score for French productions in the USA lowered considerably because of the absence of the Hollywood-lookalike such as Taken, but the French spoken films gained 20%, and the number of titles was larger too.

For instance certain French films fare much better abroad, like Coco Chanel & Igor Stravinski which killed in Japan, or Ne te retourne pas thanks to the popularity of Sophie Marceau in China (300000 spectators!), Persepolis made 1870000 spectators abroad (1.2 million in France), Le Fils de l'épicier (debut without stars) thanks to Germany, Spain and Australia. Entre les murs (Palme d'Or) made 2.4 million admissions, of which 600000 in the USA (1.6 million at home). L'heure d'été made 690000 admissions (420000 at home). Amélie = 23 million admissions. Coco avant Chanel = 5 million.

2 factors influence greatly the success of French films abroad, for their distribution and their popularity with the (cinéphile) audience : the selection and awards in Cannes and the Oscars.

Rendez-vous with French Cinema : junket for French films exports. 120 journalists, from 30 European countries (+ Canada), are invited all expenses paid for 4 days to interview stars (916 interviews made last year for TV, press, internet and radio), plus about 250-320 European distributors (+ Kazakhstan, Vietnam), to discover 40 some undistributed French films in exclusivity. Same with American journalists, and Australian journalists on other dates.

International markets to sell French cinema supported by uniFrance : Marché du Film (Cannes; France), TIFF (Toronto; Canada), European Film Market (Berlin; Germany), American Film Market (LA; USA), Hong Kong FILMART (China)

As well as the major festivals, and the international festivals in each country.

One difficulty French cinema promotion faces is that unlike the Hollywood system (where stars are contractually obligated to promote the film worldwide, in junkets, at festivals, at premiere screenings) facilitated by a simultaneous release in all countries in a very short period of time, French films international distribution might take 2 years, and stars can't be available for junkets and promotions for such a long period of time because of schedule conflicts and ongoing shootings.

uniFrance organises French-only mini-festivals in New York city, Tokyo, Rio de Janeiro (+22 Brazilian cities), China, Russia, India, Australia... (like "Rendez-vous with French Cinema") which do a lot for the promotion of French cinema abroad, and might explain how France is number 2 in cinema exports in the world. (Although these titles are usually the mainstream blockbusters of the French market, and only give a mainstream stereotype of what might be French cinema...)

The USA market is the largest in the world, unfortunately a number of specialty divisions have shut down, the auteur-cinema is not a priority on the American market. The number of titles and the number of admissions is stable for French films in the USA... however the turnover is much quicker, and the opening weekend screens are always fewer. Which is a global phenomenon throughout the world within the commercial distribution.

American niche audience (French-friendly), mainly students or the older generation, prefer Assayas, Desplechin, Audiard, Claire Denis, Akerman, Audrey Tautou, Catherine Deneuve...

Europa Cinema (MEDIA) is a European fund granting subsidies to exhibitors in the world that screen at least 25% of European films.

VOD might be the only alternative to niche distribution for remote locale where screenings are not profitable. Like IFC on Demand. uniFrance created an online festival for this purpose.

Netflix = 23 million subscribers (USA+Canada), there only propose 2 French film titles in their collection !

The Russian audience prefers French comedies. Japanese audience has a cinephile tendency like the USA, they prefer Luxury theme (Coco Chanel), Woman, Environment, Desplechin, Dumont... 2 arthouses in Tokyo screen almost exclusively French films. In China, only 4 French films per year are released (due to the import quotas imposed by the government).

French film exports in foreign theatrical projections

	2010	2009	2008	2007
Total exported titles	419	419	403	375
Gross BO (€)	338537170	350747471	416240687	354047926
Spectators	59872217	67227078	83219327	71724251
Prints	8007	8312	8757	7604
Importing countries	64	62	67	50

TV broadcasting of French film abroad

	2010	2009	2008	2007
Total titles	335	1887	1752	1750
Total cumulative runs	2262	7519	6406	6032
Number of networks/stations	33	124	93	95

Comparative table USA-France, respectively 1st and 2nd cinema exporters on the world market :

	USA 2010	France 2010	Korea 2009
Total titles in theatres	560	419	260
Number of countries importing	150+	64	41
Gross BO (M$) abroad	21100	423.5	14.1
Total titles broadcast on foreign TV		335

Artificial barriers against free circulation of world cinema

- Cultural Diversity Awareness -

Languages barriers (transnational)

Film Criticism circulation delimitations (domestic)

Cinema aesthetics inflences delimitations (worldwide)

Cinema exhibition market restrictions (domestic)

TV sets restrictions

AVI-MPEG Torrent restrictions (worldwide)

DVD region restrictions

MP3 restrictions (worldwide)

Blu-ray region restrictions

Internet penetration (source) 2011

Cultural Diversity Awareness (series)

07 octobre 2011

Global Lives

-Cultural Diversity Awareness-

Global Lives Project (website [EDIT: server back on]) Wikipedia

Berkeley, USA. 2004-2010

Our mission is to collaboratively build a video library of human life experience that reshapes how we as both producers and viewers conceive of cultures, nations and people outside of our own communities.

Framed by the arc of the day and conveyed through the intimacy of video, we have slowly and faithfully captured 24 continuous hours in the lives of 10 people from around the world [China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Kazakhstan, Lebanon, Malawi, Serbia, Brazil, USA]. They are screened here in their own right, but also in relation to one another.

There is no narrative other than that which is found in the composition of everyday life, no overt interpretations other than that which you may bring to it.

By extending the long take to a certain extreme and infusing it with the spirit of cinema verité, we invite audiences to confer close attention onto other worlds, and simultaneously reflect upon their own. The force and depth of human difference and similarity are revealed in this process. Gaps which mark cultural divides feel, at once, both wider and narrower. This sense - that we, as humans, are both knowable and unknowable, fundamentally different as well as the same - opens a space for dialogue.

24h unedited video footage (plan sequences) available online on their website; here are the trailers: