April 16, 2003

Kulture and Kommerce … Kunundrum or Cynergy?

In a bygone era - when Variety used to review virtually anything effecting persistence of vision - we scribblers had several shorthand euphemisms. One favorite that tipped the reader about some film’s dire commercial prospects was “perfect” or “ideal” for (name of country) film weeks. It was unlikely the movie in question ever became part of a touring program of Bulgarian or Malaysian cinema but it was a nice thought and perhaps the picture would resurface at some obscure festival as a result of the kindness.

Today, if you’re fortunate to live in one of roughly a dozen major cities in North America, you have the opportunity to take in annual programs of recent movies from, minimally, Spain, Germany, France and the United Kingdom. You might also receive exposure to Asian, Scandinavian or African movies at special festivals or via museum of gallery programs. Los Angeles recently saw the City of Lights series from France and is about to get a week’s worth of historic Russian cinema. The city - with such venues as the L.A. County Museum, UCLA, the American Cinematheque and the American Film Institute at Arclight - has now surpassed New York as a movie lover’s Mecca second only to Paris and London.

I’m not certain whether the irony of Los Angeles as a venue for the best and worst of international cinema is fully appreciated. When the late Gary Essert struggled to create an international film festival in L.A. back in the late 1960s, he had few allies (George Cukor, Gregory Peck) and certainly no supporters within the studio system. The era of raiding Europe and filching its best talent (Hitchcock, Fritz Lang, Garbo) was a distant memory and the cycle of wooing the likes of Verhoeven, Phil Noyce, Bandaras, Alfonso Cuaron and, appropriately, John Woo to these climes wouldn’t take hold for a decade.

Of course there’s a price for co-option. Sometimes the dumbing down of talent is so brutal, the creatives are compelled to crawl back to make Rabbit-Proof Fence or Amelie.

The allure of working in Hollywood for all but the few wearing blinders has little to do with an art cinema. For those who can swim in the town’s shark-infested waters there are literally rich rewards. Yes, there’s the opportunity to work with great artists and craftspeople but to what end. John Woo - albeit a director of popular films - will more justly be remembered for his Hong Kong movies including A Better Tomorrow than Mission: Impossible 2, Face/Off and certainly not Windtalkers.

The flip side is that often the most commercial and acclaimed filmmakers of any national cinema movement are virtually unknown beyond their native borders. If they are known at all it is because organizations such as Unifrance and Germany’s Export Union have at least the seed money to organize an event to showcase (and sub-title) films that would not otherwise reach the U.S. Still, let’s be clear that such ventures are not purely altruistic. Catherine Verret, who heads up Unifrance in North America says her events in Los Angeles and New York are mini-markets. Nine of the 12 selections of last years Rendezvous of French Cinema wound up with theatrical distribution subsequent to screening in the series and let’s not forget there’s still a huge market in making American versions of foreign hits as evidenced by recent sales of a handful of Korean movies that are begging for theatrical distribution.

The smartest person I’ve met (and canny to boot) in the film industry is Jorn Donner, a Finnish-Swede who made groundbreaking films in the 1960s and chaired Svenskfilm in the ‘70s (he’s currently a member of the European parliament) when it bankrolled Fanny and Alexander and Flight of the Eagle. I remember being on a panel with him at a festival 20 years ago when he observed that in Sweden, 80% of the movies shown in cinemas were from America. He paused to let that fact sink in and added that anyone objectively could say that in any given year, American movies did not constitute 80% of the best movies. Even the chauvinistic Oscars saluted such non-native fare this year as The Pianist, Talk to Her and Spirited Away.

Generally speaking, movie going is not a meritocracy. On a business basis, the two best events for the American film industry were the First and Second World Wars. At the end of each, the economies and infrastructures of the leading movie making nations were in a shambles. Hollywood was an exception and swept in with entertainment for the masses and established worldwide distribution systems that paved the way for its films to reach screens in every quarter of the globe. With the exception of a handful of countries that enforce strict quotas (China, India), movies from the United States dominate international marquees. Countries with active film industries such as Germany and Spain can command 10% to 15% of local ticket sales but barely make a dent in neighboring nations. French films account for a third of its annual movie revenues and Japan (with limited quotas in force) can rise as high as 40%.

If you live in the United States you’re probably hard-pressed to recall the last time you saw a film with sub-titles. Throughout the 1990s - with the exception of one year - foreign-language films accounted for less than 1% of the annual box office. The common perception is that it’s become increasingly difficult for non-English language films to find distribution or audiences in the U.S. Since 1980, films from abroad had been steadily losing ground to the new wave of so-called American independents. However, even in the halcyon years of the French new wave, Bergman, Kurosawa, neo-realism, et al, non-American, non-English films represented 4% to 5% of the audience.

The good news is that for the past five years the tide has begun to turn. Abetted by such factors as national film showcases and an “independent” scene that’s morphing into a cheaper version of the mainstream, films produced overseas are providing the alternative to Hollywood fare.

A little more than two years ago, China’s Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon became the first non-English language film to gross more than $100 million in North America and that occurred less than a year after the unprecedented business of Italy’s Life is Beautiful. In 2001, foreign-language films grabbed 2.3% of the marketplace. Last year, when the top non-English film Amelie grossed $18 million (excluding 2001 box office), the sector still accounted for 1.3% of business and such films as Y tu Mama Tambien, Brotherhood of the Wolf and Mostly Martha were potent performers. Fifty-four French-language films played commercially in North America during 2002, seven from Spanish-language countries, 33 from India (the sole remaining active ethnic circuit) and six to 10 from Germany, Italy, Scandinavia, Asia and the Middle East. Adding in a smattering of selections from other countries, the overall total was more than 150 titles.

Now, before you hit e-mail the author, I’m well aware that most of the country - even with museum and touring programs - sees a small percentage of these pictures in movie houses. The absolutely top question I receive on a consistent basis is: Why isn’t (name of picture) playing in my town and will I ever see it?

There is no definitive answer to why some films never make it to cinemas in Toledo or Savannah or Santa Fe. Theater owners in those centers and elsewhere believe, correctly or not, that the audience for foreign films will not sustain the costs of booking them. They are unwilling to take the chance of instituting a program that would develop a taste for anything that will deprive them of a screen for X-Men 2, The Hulk or The Last Samurai. It’s a slim consolation, but you have a better chance of finding Time Out, The Fast Runner and Bread & Tulips at your local video store and, unquestionably, on the web where they can spin competitively with Spider-Man.

Robert Mea Culpa

In last week’s column I hedged my bet about the originator of the quote that no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public. In haste I opted for the logical choice, P.T. Barnum and several readers correctly took me to task for it. Barnum, though a great showman, never rose to a remark of such wit or incisiveness. The honors should have justly been accorded to H.L. Mencken.

 

Email Leonard Klady