Taiwan and Hong Kong's Film Industries in the Context of Globalization
by Ying-Ming Chiang
Ying Ming Chiang is from Taiwan and now an MA student in Media Studies program at the New School. He majored in Japanese literacy in college and joined several independent film productions. His interests include transcultural expressions in movie and art works, indie music sociology.
The
global trends
Walter Benjamin
pointed out the changes of meanings in art in his article_The work of
art in the age of mechanical reproduction_. Art is incorporated to the
capital system of cultural industries because of the birth of new technologies
and the fences between mass culture and art would disappear by efficient
and standardized making procedures. Now, with the great changes of capitalism
and the development of digital technologies, we are in a new age of mechanical
reproduction, Wolf called it the Digital Age (Wolf,M. 2000). Digital technologies
make the distribution of products much easier so that the selling markets
expand to as huge as the marketing activities can reach. Mass culture
increases its importance by providing a fertile field for capital industries
to compete. It looks like that cultural industries serve for mass culture.
On the other hand, in order to chase the most profits, capital industries
also create new needs and educate people to believe that these needs are
exactly what they want through the channels they control.
Cinema is kind of a synthesis of many complicated aspects and can be analyzed
in lots of fields such as art (progressive or reactionary)_culture (original
or cliche) _ industry (technological and economic)_business (making or
losing money), and politics (controlling or revolutionary). Now in the
trends of globalization, cinema is tightly enchained with the concern
of economics. Now I would like to focus on the changes of film industries
in Hong Kong and Taiwan to see how they react to the trends of Globalization
which force them to move on in new ways otherwise vanish from the world.
First of all, film industries in Asia actually play a “big”
part in the world. India produces 700-1000 films per year as the leading
producer of films rather than Hollywood(Ella Shohat and Robert).Asia produced
more films than any other regions around the world in 1997(Toby Miller,etc
2001).
Figure 1(Source (Toby Miller,etc 2001)
According to the data of productions, we are supposed to be able to see
many movies from Asia, but obviously we seldom do. Hollywood’s movies
still dominates global box office. Number one goes to “Titanic”,
and the gross is as high as 1.835 billion dollars. If we probe into the
list of non-US box-office, the chart is like the menu of “ Planet
Hollywood”. ( see table 1).
According to the data of productions, we are supposed to be able to see many movies from Asia, but obviously we seldom do. Hollywood’s movies still dominates global box office. Number one goes to “Titanic”, and the gross is as high as 1.835 billion dollars. If we probe into the list of non-US box-office, the chart is like the menu of “ Planet Hollywood”
Hollywood films are known to have high budgets, strong story lines, scripts with universal themes, well-known actors and directors, established technical film capabilities and advanced technologies and a proven track record of productions. Titanic sails all around the world and Star Wars are the wars that we grow up with. People know that 007 is an agent hero and also worry about the situation of Nemo. Kids want to go to Hogwarts to share the experience of Harry Porter. On the weekend, Tom Cruise tells you what Samurai is and Tom Hanks teaches you how to live at airport terminals. The top ten best-selling movies around the globe are all made from major US studios.Not until the 173rd position can we see movies from Asia in the worldwide box-office chart.
The number one profit-making studio in 2003 was Walt Disney Co. with the gross up to 3 billion dollars. It broke the record of 2.8 billion dollars made by Sony Pictures in 2002 when Spiderman hit the world box-office. In order to protect their leading and dominant position in this market, Hollywood studios invest more and more money for a superstar cast, amazing effects, or marketing activities to entertain the audience so that it becomes very difficult for other cinemas to cross the threshold of Hollywood’s fantasy world. Today, Hollywood’s cinemas are no longer 'cinemas', but also include DVDs, video games, TV programs, and digital entertaining services. New distribution technologies have created whole new markets for film beyond theaters. The whole film industry in a broad sense permeates our daily life and makes cinemas become our commodities in some ways. This has driven the film industries around the world to face and react to the trends.
Marshall McLuhan said in his renowned work Understanding Media that "The movie offers as product the most magical of consumer commodities, namely dreams. . . The world eagerly lined up to buy canned dreams" (McLuhan 1964). Major US studios are definitely the dreams makers who invest as much as possible to create the fantastic world.
The situation in Taiwan is much worse. As one of the top ten markets for Hollywood’s movies, Taiwan deserves much more attention to understand how globalization impacts a local film industry and to see the processes of Hollywoodization.
Hong
Kong Film Industry
For decades, Hong Kong film-makers have thrilled film-lovers all over
the world with their distinctive cinematic styles, their adrenalin-pumping
action and their ability to tell stories from the East to an international
audience. Hong Kong in Asia is a so-called East Hollywood and produces
about 200 films per year (243 feature films were produced in 1993 and
the number declined to 150 films in 2000 but it still produces more films
than other countries in the region). The Hong Kong industry is kind of
a regional Hollywood exporting films as commercial products. Taiwan, Singapore,
Malaysia and Thailand are regarded as the target markets. Hong Kong’s
film industry is characterized by short production schedules, opportunistic
use of locations and the following of distinctive Hong Kong genres. In
general, themes are narrower in range, and often actors are the key marketing
tool of the local movies. In the 1990s, Hong Kong faced mighty challenges
from not only the rise of low-cost, in-home entertainment options such
as DVD’s and VCD’s but also the big brother--Hollywood-- in
these markets. The once-flourishing Hong Kong film industry comes to have
no market power not only in former target markets but also in the local
market during that period. Imports account for approximately 60 percent
of Hong Kong’s film market. Hollywood is the largest supplier, supplying
approximately 80 percent of Hong Kong’s imports.
Figure 3(Source HYPERLINK "http://www.rthk.org.hk/mediadigest/20021216_76_55191.html" )
Taiwan
art cinema
The historical context of Taiwan's domestic film industry can be divided
into three stages: beginning, golden era and decline. Beginning1954-1980:
To insure the growth of the domestic film industry, the Taiwanese government
constituted policies to restrict the number of imported films, the prints,
and screens which exhibited foreign films. These limitations worked as
barriers to resist unfair and unbalanced competition. By doing so, the
government controlled the access of foreign film industry in the local
market. The second stage is the Golden Era (1980-1988).Taiwan's government
deregulated portions of the restrictions and protections as the responses
to the Motion Picture Export Association (MPEA) requirement to open up
Taiwan’s local film market. The vigorous responses of Taiwanese
distributors can be related to the prosperity of American independents,
and allowed them to import various foreign films. Meanwhile, video technology
brought a lot of advantages to the local distributors. The third stage
is the Decline (1989-1999). During this period, the Hollywood Majors dominated
film industries worldwide. Taiwan removed almost all of its restrictions,
as a result becoming the tenth largest film market in Hollywood’s
global box office ranking. With the shortage of films, Taiwanese independents
have transformed into exclusive distributors of European films.
Before 1971, the numbers of film productions in Taiwan and Hong Kong were equally matched. Since then, Taiwan never had a chance to be equal again, not to mention exceed Hong Kong's output. Compared to Hong Kong’s business-oriented film industry, an art-oriented “New Cinema movement” started to appear and headed in a totally different direction from the beginning of the 1980s. Films escaped from the unceasing marketing activities and strategies and returned to their pristine origin as works of art. In this movement, auteurism becomes the main concept among the directors and each director has developed his own style and has made his own contribution to the New Cinema. They began to focus on individual expression and try to show the concerns of their life experiences and the homeland. An unprecedented concern with the daily lives of local people has been shown by the new directors, particularly with respect to native cultures. “City of Sadness” directed by Hou Hsiao-hsien was in receipt of the Golden Lion at Venice in 1989, the first major prize winner in the New Cinema movement. Hou’s personal victories have represented a triumph and vindication of the Taiwanese New Cinema. Since 1990, Taiwan's government has started to carry out a state-subsidized funding policy to support film productions. On one hand, the director can concentrate on the artistic aspects of film instead of being worried about where the money is to come from. On the other hand, the state-subsidized policy also has its political goals for increasing the awareness of Taiwan by cultivating outstanding films to work as a tool of propaganda for Taiwan government in international societies. The numbers of state-subsidized productions are about ten in average which are almost half the number of films made in Taiwan in the late 1990s.
http://www.interlog.com/~lamedog/film/ctheque90.html) Ever since the policy was conducted, the works of New Cinema directors such as Tasi Ming Liang, Edward Yang and Ang Lee started getting awards in the international festival circuit and most of their films are receivers of state subsidization. According to a poll conducted by “Cinematheque Ontario”, there are four Taiwanese films in the best 25 films chart. Among the four films, three of them are subsidized by government funds , the exception being Goodbye South, Goodbye. (see Table 3 ).
However, a good reputation doesn’t necessarily correlate with good box-office. Standing in totally different category from Hollywood and Hong Kong films, New Cinema doesn‘t open a new page in Taiwan‘s film box-office. Festival-oriented New Cinema is enjoyed by only a small group of cinephiles and has no mass market power to compete with Hong Kong and Hollywood featured films. Telling from the table, the numbers of artistic productions fluctuate from 14 to 35 while the numbers of foreign movies are never less than 200. The situation of being dominated still exists. (see table 4 ).
The new directors all choose not to compete with the US major studios in the mass market, but take part in major international film festivals to gain global attention. Not until they pass this certification and accumulate prestige can they explore new markets around the world. Hollywoodization results in this kind of marketing activity that through the receipt of international awards, the directors themselves have earned outstanding reputations and become “labels” when it comes to copyright deals. The target markets of their films change from the local to the global.
Co-Productions
The above discussion shows that Taiwan and Hong Kong are both suffering
the depression of film economies by the invasion of Hollywood. The audiences
divert to plump for highly budgeted Hollywood films to find the pleasures
and amusement created by global capital of investment. The dominant economic
view emphasizes the structural power of capital, the ability of capital
owners to move production and money around the world in search of higher
rates of return. Films are also one of the tools for conglomerates to
accumulate profits. Following this logic, Taiwan and Hong Kong film industries
find a new way out.
In the marketing activities of the so-called art film, because the films
are all based on the auteurist ideology, the directors have become selling
points to be promoted just like Hollywood stars in commercial films. Obviously,
their works provide local aesthetic and transcultural appeals to audiences
which can expand potential sub-markets. In Taiwan, the new directors who
have been confirmed by the major film festivals have become well-known
labels worldwide so that they can attract foreign investments to support
the cost of production. For example, Hou Hsiao-hsien‘s such as Good
Men, Good Women, Flowers of Shanghai, Goodbye South Goodbye, and The Puppetmaster
were all sponsored by foreign investments from Japan as well as Tsai Ming-liang‘s
The Hole and What Time Is It There received most investments from France.
Also, Ang Lee’s world wide hit, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon was
mostly invested by Columbia Tristar. Edward Yang‘s Duli Shidai in1994
was the first Asia film produced by Warner. For the global major studios
and film distributors recognize the importance of regional proximity in
conquering new markets. Co-production integrates these outstanding foreign
directors to a globalized operation and creates a space for the directors
to brainstorm ideas so that they have become kind of research and design
units. The scene of co-production is a confirmation of global nativism
by combining global capitals and local characteristics (transnationalism
and nationalism).
Hong Kong film talent - either in front of or behind - the camera have
won new mainstream fans. Hong Kong’s well-developed film industry
shows much competitive ability in co-production. The exchange not only
appears in unilateral cost supporting, but also in employees, technologies
and creativity. Now through co-production Hong Kong productions put on
the appearance of Hollywood mainstream feature films and have a chance
to operate in the global market. On one hand, co-production pours exotic
phenomena and new aspects in Hollywood films. On the other hand, the familiar
actors and plots also help Hollywood films to create cultural empathy
when entering foreign markets. The "swordplay movie” is one
of the most well developed and distinctive genres in the historical context
of Chinese cinemas. It is also the most well-known Chinese film genre
in the international film market. In the context of globalization, “Crouching
Tiger, Hidden Dragon” and “Hero” are two good examples
that gross big returns in the global market. We can find out their continuity
and change from the ‘traditional’ swordplay movies and also
the cultural significance of that transformation in outer and inner forms.
The outer forms of these two films are not much different from the ‘traditional’
swordplay movies, except for the martial art actions and aesthetic characters
which change a lot because of the fulfillment of finance and high technology
under the conditions of globalized operation. In order to consider both
the West and East markets at the same time, these two movies have to change
the themes, characters and narratives to make Western audiences understand
and accept them. The inner forms of the films change essentially in such
a global context. The ‘traditional’ cultures have to transform
and adjust themselves in the global context in some ways that may not
hold positive meaning for the locals. The global phenomenon of Chinese
fever offers a great opportunity to rebuild the Chinese language film
industry again. By using specifically "our talents, our topics, and
our markets," Chinese language cinemas might overturn their status
as prey by asserting their subjectivity in the global market. Co-productions
give birth to the New Chinese film. These two films are successful cases
of a business operation, which may not have an all-pervading significance
for Chinese film, yet can be used as a reference point in this global
age.
Conclusion
The economic transformations of the past 20 years are changing the media
landscapes in America and around the world. Film industries in Taiwan,
Hong Kong had found themselves in a dilemma at the end of the 20th Century
when facing the trends of globalization. As we have seen in the past decades,
Hollywood is gradually consubstantiating the visual culture of the whole
world. Critics on cultural imperialism view this phenomenon-globalization
or Hollywoodization- as a loss of vitality in the other areas of the world,
including Chinese-speaking areas. The movie market in Taiwan is now 96%
occupied by the western movies. In short, hardly any living space is left
for the local movies. Thus people started to look for the elements that
put new life to the slumbering Chinese movies. The production factor for
Chinese language cinemas should focus on innovative and localized topics
of the Oriental culture, and finance by co-production to allocate risks,
and emphasize regional filming advantage. The reaction to global trends
is cross-country cooperation. Just like the other products, each movie
has its own product target and in film industry the key point is to stick
to the principal target of the movie. With regards to the non-communication
elements, two are essential, namely the cross-industry consortium and
the running schedule._In addition to saving marketing costs, the cross-industry
consortium can help further expand the scope of the target audience. In
the ground of deterritorialization (Arjun Appadurai 2003), we see exchanges
among different regions. At first, the flow begins in one direction. Now
studio executives have their eyes on Asia which is Hollywood’s fastest
growing regional market.
The 1990s had been deluged with a discourse about globalization. We are
told by virtually everyone that we are now living, and for the first time,
in an era of globalization. We are told that globalization has changed
everything: the sovereignty of states has declined; everyone’s ability
to resist the rules of the market has disappeared; our possibility of
cultural autonomy has been virtually annulled; and the stability of all
our identities has come into serious question. Globalization also brings
the aesthetic cosmopolitanism (Urry 1995). This state of presumed globalization
has been celebrated by some, and bemoaned by others. We do indeed stand
at a moment of transformation. But this is not that of an already established
newly globalized world with clear rules. Rather we are located is an age
of transition, transition not merely of a few backward countries who need
to catch up with the spirit of globalization, but a transition in which
the entire capitalist world-system will be transformed into something
else. The future, far from being inevitable and one to which there is
no alternative, is being determined in this transition that has an extremely
uncertain outcome.
Works Cited
Arjun Appadurai (1996) Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization,
Unniversity of Minnesota Press
Marshall McLuhan (2003)Understanding Media: the Extension of Man critical
edition, Gingko Press
Toby, Nitin Govil, John McMurria and Richard Maxwell (2001) Global Hollywood.
British Film Institute
.
Urry, J.(1995) Consuming Places. New York: Routledge.
Wolf Mark (2000) Abstracting Reality: Art, Communication, and Cognition
in the Digital Art. University Press of America.
Website reference:
Hong trade development Council