Introduction and 1st paragraph
'' Rather than representing them as individuals, sections of the media use kind of shortland in the way in which they represent some groups of people.''
Despite the success of 'Slumdog Millionaire' why is it that there is still a lack of South Asian actors in Hollywood.?
Cameos, Cab drivers and Criticsism is what is to b expected of South Asian actors in Hollywood today. As we aproach the age of new and advanced digital technology it seems that the stereotypes and representations of South Asians still remain the same, despite the record breaking, global blockbuster 'Slumdog Millionaire' which was said to have changed the cinema landscape for South Asian actors wanting to break into Hollywood.
''Examples of bollwood slowly entering the western world can be easily displayed: Andrew Lloyd Webber successfully produced is new musical Bombay Dreams, Monsoon Wedding was a hit in western cinemas'' This quote which was from a few years back shows a glimmer of hope for South Asian Actors just like Slumdog Millionaire did when it first appeared in cinemas, yet nothing came from these as there havent been any further breakthoughs into the western cinema of any slight significance. You could argue that there have been breakthroughs into American Television which is a start, but even then this could be argued as even Dev Patel has made his feelings clear about the stereotypical roles of South Asians such as Cab Drivers, Doctors, Nurses, and Computer nerds being offered to him.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/aug/11/dev-patel-asian-roles-slumdog?INTCMP=SRCH (Article, full of quotes an good points i could add, unsure of which to add here..)
''It can be argued that this may be linked ideologically to such things as legislation promoting equal opportunity.''
Thursday 23 December 2010
Xmas Task #5
Essay plan
Break your ideas and research down into sections and paragraphs with headings, summaries and a list of references that you hope to include at each step.
1. Introduction - Basic introduction to my question and theories in relation to the context of South Asians in hollywood. Despite the success of 'Slumdog Millionaire' why is it that there is still a lack of South Asian actors in Hollywood.? begin by questioning
Examples for Bollywood slowly entering the western world can be easily displayed: Andrew Lloyd Webber successfully produced his new musical Bombay Dreams, Monsoon Wedding was a hit in Western cinemas
2. Stereotyping and representations
- How Asians are stereoyped, therefore given stereotypical roles in films.
Post 9/11 / Moral Panics
- Stereotyped and classed as terrorists -
(Harold and Kumar escape from Guantanamo Bay - Kal Pen plays a charcater who is represented as an Asian who is mis interpreted to be a terrorist because of his skin colour and ethnicity) Why is it that these films are appropriate. Is the Genre of Comedy a key feature in the films success and ratings
+
(My Name is Khan - Sha Rukh Khan plays a character who is single handingly proving the stereotype of Muslims in america wrong as even though his character has alzimers syndrome in the film, he still proves to be a role model and an example of an American Muslim proving they are not a terrorist and simply doing good deeds.)
'' The representation of groups, however, is not axed forever and its possible to observe how it changes over time.'' - The films shows this to us
3. Kal Penn (South Asian Actor)
- Talk about his succsess, and his roles in films,
He is most well known for his Van wilder movies and his lead roles in the Harold and Kumar Franchise
- How he became notticed through stereotypical comedy roles for South Asians.
(Cameos in Van Wilder, Superman returns, 24, Main role in Harold an Kumar, Main role in The Namesake)
4. Stereotypical roles in American Tv and cameo roles in films for South Asians
(Doctors, Nurses, Taxi drivers, assistants, Computer geeks, Corner shop owners)
- Paminder Nagra (ER)
- Kal Penn (Van Wilder)
''What do Kal Penn Modi, Parminder Nagra, and Sendhil Ramamurthy all have in common? Let me give you a hint Kal Penn, Sendhil, and Parminder are all doctors on television
This shows how South Asian actors are still subordinated and offered only these stereotypical roles. what choices do these actors have, they must take every opportunity they get as not a lot come easily in Hollywood and American TV. The affects of then taking these roles is that we see them in these characters and judge them immidatly as audiences and are given the view that they are best suited to these roles, when we actually dont know what roles they might be good at as they havent been given the chance.
5. Slumdog Millionaire (Film based on South Asians)
- The success of the film, as it had scooped up the majority of the awards in the grammys and was the best selling film in 2008 beating Chrsitopher Nolans - Batman 'The Dark Night'
- I will talk about the effect of the film and why it hasnt had the impact it sought out to as even though it was not advertised majorly before its release, it was still very popular and very big in cinemas across the western world.. What had gone wrong.. and did audiences get bored of it, or was it simply just a one hit wonder..
'' The film won eight Oscars out of 10 nominations in every conceivable category," he says. "Every category that is, except for acting ones." Which might have been a much stronger point were he not using Dev Patel and Freida Pinto ''
- http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/dec/22/south-and-east-asian-actors
''Slumdog Millionaire was described as being a globalised movie thanks to its meshing of western and eastern forms and locations, styles and sounds''
The key word that sticks out for me is WAS, as it seemed to haved done this yet it hasnt had the impact that was as powerful as expected.
6. Theories
Audience theories - Hyperdermic needle > Audiences are injected with steretypes of South Asians in Hollywood
- Audiences are used to being familirased by seeing thier favourite celebrities and hollywood icons in films as they have been injected by their star power, which would refrain them from looking at newer different stars. such as south asian actors.
Gender and Ethnicity - How ethnic characters are represented in Hollywood films, being given the same stereotypical roles. How audiences perceive them.
- ''Ethinicity is crucial to identity formation yet it is not something predetermined or complete. Ethinicity for Hall, is a 'project', or something that we continually shape through which we position ourselves.''
- ''By explaining cultural identity through biological makeup in this way, the concept of ethinicty can lead to reductionists conclusions and cultural essentialism: 'they are like that beacause its in thier blood' (Gillespie, 1995: 8). ''
7. Conclusion - unsure?
The Media is very powerfull, as it seems to have the power to influence audiences and viewers who passivly watch and intake what the media gives them, as the media uses societys stereotypes in thier films and portrays everything stereotypically in most majority of cases.
Break your ideas and research down into sections and paragraphs with headings, summaries and a list of references that you hope to include at each step.
1. Introduction - Basic introduction to my question and theories in relation to the context of South Asians in hollywood. Despite the success of 'Slumdog Millionaire' why is it that there is still a lack of South Asian actors in Hollywood.? begin by questioning
Examples for Bollywood slowly entering the western world can be easily displayed: Andrew Lloyd Webber successfully produced his new musical Bombay Dreams, Monsoon Wedding was a hit in Western cinemas
2. Stereotyping and representations
- How Asians are stereoyped, therefore given stereotypical roles in films.
Post 9/11 / Moral Panics
- Stereotyped and classed as terrorists -
(Harold and Kumar escape from Guantanamo Bay - Kal Pen plays a charcater who is represented as an Asian who is mis interpreted to be a terrorist because of his skin colour and ethnicity) Why is it that these films are appropriate. Is the Genre of Comedy a key feature in the films success and ratings
+
(My Name is Khan - Sha Rukh Khan plays a character who is single handingly proving the stereotype of Muslims in america wrong as even though his character has alzimers syndrome in the film, he still proves to be a role model and an example of an American Muslim proving they are not a terrorist and simply doing good deeds.)
'' The representation of groups, however, is not axed forever and its possible to observe how it changes over time.'' - The films shows this to us
3. Kal Penn (South Asian Actor)
- Talk about his succsess, and his roles in films,
He is most well known for his Van wilder movies and his lead roles in the Harold and Kumar Franchise
- How he became notticed through stereotypical comedy roles for South Asians.
(Cameos in Van Wilder, Superman returns, 24, Main role in Harold an Kumar, Main role in The Namesake)
4. Stereotypical roles in American Tv and cameo roles in films for South Asians
(Doctors, Nurses, Taxi drivers, assistants, Computer geeks, Corner shop owners)
- Paminder Nagra (ER)
- Kal Penn (Van Wilder)
''What do Kal Penn Modi, Parminder Nagra, and Sendhil Ramamurthy all have in common? Let me give you a hint Kal Penn, Sendhil, and Parminder are all doctors on television
This shows how South Asian actors are still subordinated and offered only these stereotypical roles. what choices do these actors have, they must take every opportunity they get as not a lot come easily in Hollywood and American TV. The affects of then taking these roles is that we see them in these characters and judge them immidatly as audiences and are given the view that they are best suited to these roles, when we actually dont know what roles they might be good at as they havent been given the chance.
5. Slumdog Millionaire (Film based on South Asians)
- The success of the film, as it had scooped up the majority of the awards in the grammys and was the best selling film in 2008 beating Chrsitopher Nolans - Batman 'The Dark Night'
- I will talk about the effect of the film and why it hasnt had the impact it sought out to as even though it was not advertised majorly before its release, it was still very popular and very big in cinemas across the western world.. What had gone wrong.. and did audiences get bored of it, or was it simply just a one hit wonder..
'' The film won eight Oscars out of 10 nominations in every conceivable category," he says. "Every category that is, except for acting ones." Which might have been a much stronger point were he not using Dev Patel and Freida Pinto ''
- http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/dec/22/south-and-east-asian-actors
''Slumdog Millionaire was described as being a globalised movie thanks to its meshing of western and eastern forms and locations, styles and sounds''
The key word that sticks out for me is WAS, as it seemed to haved done this yet it hasnt had the impact that was as powerful as expected.
6. Theories
Audience theories - Hyperdermic needle > Audiences are injected with steretypes of South Asians in Hollywood
- Audiences are used to being familirased by seeing thier favourite celebrities and hollywood icons in films as they have been injected by their star power, which would refrain them from looking at newer different stars. such as south asian actors.
Gender and Ethnicity - How ethnic characters are represented in Hollywood films, being given the same stereotypical roles. How audiences perceive them.
- ''Ethinicity is crucial to identity formation yet it is not something predetermined or complete. Ethinicity for Hall, is a 'project', or something that we continually shape through which we position ourselves.''
- ''By explaining cultural identity through biological makeup in this way, the concept of ethinicty can lead to reductionists conclusions and cultural essentialism: 'they are like that beacause its in thier blood' (Gillespie, 1995: 8). ''
7. Conclusion - unsure?
The Media is very powerfull, as it seems to have the power to influence audiences and viewers who passivly watch and intake what the media gives them, as the media uses societys stereotypes in thier films and portrays everything stereotypically in most majority of cases.
Tuesday 21 December 2010
Xmas Task #4
Additional Web Research
A-level Media Sites - research
Media Magazine
MediaEdu
Broadsheet Newspaper sites
Media Guardian
- Dev Patel Attacks Hollywood about the lack of roles for south asian Actors
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/aug/11/dev-patel-asian-roles-slumdog?INTCMP=SRCH
Slumdog Millionaire and Last Airbender star says he has struggled to find work beyond stereotypical roles of terrorists, taxi drivers and geeks
- Advertisers discriminate against Ethnic Minorities
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2006/dec/04/mondaymediasection32?INTCMP=SRCH
Independent Media
- Christmas Animation for Bollywood
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/bollywood-hopes-christmas-animation-is-a-draw-for-audiences-2168547.html#
Media education sites
Mcs
Media Literacy
Film Education
Screen Online
http://www.screenonline.org.uk/tv/id/521352/credits.html
Goodness Gracious Me 1998
Film Review sites
IMDb -
Slumdog Millionaire
Ratings 8.3 out of 10
Won 8 Oscars and was nominated for over 100 other awards
http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt1010048/
Harold and Kumar escape from Guantanamo Bay
Rated 6.7 out of 10
Won the best comedy TV Spot award.
http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0481536/
Rotten tomatoes
Slumdog Millionaire - Reviews
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/slumdog_millionaire/
Kal Penn
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/celebrity/kal_penn/biography.php
Film Magazines
Sight and sound
Guardian Film
Katrina Kaif: How Bollywood fell in love with a British unknown
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/dec/19/bollywood-belly-dance-british-star?INTCMP=SRCH
Bachchan and Khan head Indian player list
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2003/dec/03/bollywood.news?INTCMP=SRCH
Go south and east, Hollywood
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/dec/22/south-and-east-asian-actors?INTCMP=SRCH
South and east Asian actors may be enjoying higher profiles in the US on the small screen, but in mainstream films they haven't moved far away from comedy sidekicks and stereotypes
Slumdog Millionaire - Overview
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/movie/126911/slumdog-millionaire
English is Recast in Indian Films
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/oct/17/bollywood-english?INTCMP=SRCH
The lure of new markets and a healthy appetite at home for controversial storylines are prompting Bollywood to turn from song and dance to dialogue with global appeal, reports Randeep Ramesh
Bollywood aims for Hollywood
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/jul/02/film.india?INTCMP=SRCH
Empire
Wikipedia
Google scholars
Youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsf5VW7ZhQg&feature=related
The film won eight Oscars out of 10 nominations in every conceivable category," he says. "Every category that is, except for acting ones." Which might have been a much stronger point were he not using Dev Patel and Freida Pinto
A-level Media Sites - research
Media Magazine
MediaEdu
Broadsheet Newspaper sites
Media Guardian
- Dev Patel Attacks Hollywood about the lack of roles for south asian Actors
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/aug/11/dev-patel-asian-roles-slumdog?INTCMP=SRCH
Slumdog Millionaire and Last Airbender star says he has struggled to find work beyond stereotypical roles of terrorists, taxi drivers and geeks
- Advertisers discriminate against Ethnic Minorities
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2006/dec/04/mondaymediasection32?INTCMP=SRCH
Independent Media
- Christmas Animation for Bollywood
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/bollywood-hopes-christmas-animation-is-a-draw-for-audiences-2168547.html#
Media education sites
Mcs
Media Literacy
Film Education
Screen Online
http://www.screenonline.org.uk/tv/id/521352/credits.html
Goodness Gracious Me 1998
Film Review sites
IMDb -
Slumdog Millionaire
Ratings 8.3 out of 10
Won 8 Oscars and was nominated for over 100 other awards
http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt1010048/
Harold and Kumar escape from Guantanamo Bay
Rated 6.7 out of 10
Won the best comedy TV Spot award.
http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0481536/
Rotten tomatoes
Slumdog Millionaire - Reviews
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/slumdog_millionaire/
Kal Penn
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/celebrity/kal_penn/biography.php
Film Magazines
Sight and sound
Guardian Film
Katrina Kaif: How Bollywood fell in love with a British unknown
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/dec/19/bollywood-belly-dance-british-star?INTCMP=SRCH
Bachchan and Khan head Indian player list
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2003/dec/03/bollywood.news?INTCMP=SRCH
Go south and east, Hollywood
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/dec/22/south-and-east-asian-actors?INTCMP=SRCH
South and east Asian actors may be enjoying higher profiles in the US on the small screen, but in mainstream films they haven't moved far away from comedy sidekicks and stereotypes
Slumdog Millionaire - Overview
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/movie/126911/slumdog-millionaire
English is Recast in Indian Films
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/oct/17/bollywood-english?INTCMP=SRCH
The lure of new markets and a healthy appetite at home for controversial storylines are prompting Bollywood to turn from song and dance to dialogue with global appeal, reports Randeep Ramesh
Bollywood aims for Hollywood
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/jul/02/film.india?INTCMP=SRCH
Empire
Wikipedia
Google scholars
Youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsf5VW7ZhQg&feature=related
The film won eight Oscars out of 10 nominations in every conceivable category," he says. "Every category that is, except for acting ones." Which might have been a much stronger point were he not using Dev Patel and Freida Pinto
Xmas Task #3
HISTORICAL TEXT ANALYSIS & RESEARCH
- Mind Your Language - 1977
British comedy Tv series about multicultural students in Britain.
- Goodness gracious me -Peter sellars (Song/ Radio)
- Goodness gracious me - tv series (Showing Stereotypical ideologies of Indians)
- Bend it Like Beckham 2002
Film on about an indian girl, who is in love with football, and David Beckham, aspiring to be like him, although her religion and gender plays a wildcard as it doesnt make it easy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsmbObwStSQ - Film Trailer
Textual Analysis
The trailer is constructed very well, as it shows clearly how different ''Jess Bhamra'' (Parminder Nagra) really is compared to typical indian girls, ''who can cook aloo gobi''.
As the trailer begins by showing her family at her sisters wedding, showing the traditional side to Indians celebrating a wedding, Along with commentary explaining what INDIANS WANT, he then goes to say ''jess bhamra wants something more'' as the trailer moves onto her playing football in the park with boys and skilling them up, along with a flash to a scene of david beckham with the ball, trying to connote a similarity in playing styles. Jess is fouled, and then the screen immidiatly changes to her mum walking into her room and jess turining off the tv, which could show that she was just dreaming. Then in a conversation with her father, he says 'you must start behaving like a proper woman'' - Indicating that football is not for women More precisly Indian women, which is a bold statement to make. follwed by a scene showing her sister meeting her friends in a shop, and they over exaterate how women should act, and you can see how jess looks like the odd one out.
The next scene after shows her mum cooking/teaching her how to cook aloo gobi, and jess in the background trying to do keepy upies with the gobi. with her mum speaking, saying that she was married by her age, bringing in the historical view of indian girls should marry young.
There is then a montage of footballing clips followed by an immediate change to a club scene, in where jess actually looks like a girl, as she is dressed up and dancing.
There is another montage of short clips after, before there is text on the screen along with the commentary about ''fitting in''. which is what the film is about in some respects. Another onscreen text ''standing out''. with a final text which cleverly uses the footballing term ''Bending''
with the words ''all the rules''
The final clip somes up the films values and what its showing as its a clip of Mrs Bhamra (jess's mum) in a football studio with pundits who say ''You must be very proud of you daughter'' and her response in anger is negative as she replys by stating she is not happy her Indian daughter is running around kicking a ball, showing her legs, and that they shouldnt encourage her.
• How society has changed over the years and how these changes are reflected in different media texts?
- Society hasnt seemed to have changed much, even with the breakthrough of Slumdog Millionaire.
- There is still the steretypical representation of South Asians in Hollywood, as they are in predictable roles.
• how popular culture reflects the 'spirit of the age' or zeitgeist?
- How is it similar/different to your text?
Bend it like Beckham is similar to my text as its Main Character is South Asian. Both Are about the main characters struggle to break through and find happiness.
- How does this show how the genre/society has changed?
The argument is that society hasn't changed enough, if it has, and it needs to be more acceptance of South Asian Actors.
- Mind Your Language - 1977
British comedy Tv series about multicultural students in Britain.
- Goodness gracious me -Peter sellars (Song/ Radio)
- Goodness gracious me - tv series (Showing Stereotypical ideologies of Indians)
- Bend it Like Beckham 2002
Film on about an indian girl, who is in love with football, and David Beckham, aspiring to be like him, although her religion and gender plays a wildcard as it doesnt make it easy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsmbObwStSQ - Film Trailer
Textual Analysis
The trailer is constructed very well, as it shows clearly how different ''Jess Bhamra'' (Parminder Nagra) really is compared to typical indian girls, ''who can cook aloo gobi''.
As the trailer begins by showing her family at her sisters wedding, showing the traditional side to Indians celebrating a wedding, Along with commentary explaining what INDIANS WANT, he then goes to say ''jess bhamra wants something more'' as the trailer moves onto her playing football in the park with boys and skilling them up, along with a flash to a scene of david beckham with the ball, trying to connote a similarity in playing styles. Jess is fouled, and then the screen immidiatly changes to her mum walking into her room and jess turining off the tv, which could show that she was just dreaming. Then in a conversation with her father, he says 'you must start behaving like a proper woman'' - Indicating that football is not for women More precisly Indian women, which is a bold statement to make. follwed by a scene showing her sister meeting her friends in a shop, and they over exaterate how women should act, and you can see how jess looks like the odd one out.
The next scene after shows her mum cooking/teaching her how to cook aloo gobi, and jess in the background trying to do keepy upies with the gobi. with her mum speaking, saying that she was married by her age, bringing in the historical view of indian girls should marry young.
There is then a montage of footballing clips followed by an immediate change to a club scene, in where jess actually looks like a girl, as she is dressed up and dancing.
There is another montage of short clips after, before there is text on the screen along with the commentary about ''fitting in''. which is what the film is about in some respects. Another onscreen text ''standing out''. with a final text which cleverly uses the footballing term ''Bending''
with the words ''all the rules''
The final clip somes up the films values and what its showing as its a clip of Mrs Bhamra (jess's mum) in a football studio with pundits who say ''You must be very proud of you daughter'' and her response in anger is negative as she replys by stating she is not happy her Indian daughter is running around kicking a ball, showing her legs, and that they shouldnt encourage her.
• How society has changed over the years and how these changes are reflected in different media texts?
- Society hasnt seemed to have changed much, even with the breakthrough of Slumdog Millionaire.
- There is still the steretypical representation of South Asians in Hollywood, as they are in predictable roles.
• how popular culture reflects the 'spirit of the age' or zeitgeist?
- How is it similar/different to your text?
Bend it like Beckham is similar to my text as its Main Character is South Asian. Both Are about the main characters struggle to break through and find happiness.
- How does this show how the genre/society has changed?
The argument is that society hasn't changed enough, if it has, and it needs to be more acceptance of South Asian Actors.
Xmas Task #2
Bibliography So Far....
Key Quotes from Books
Nathans Abrams
''Studying Film''
Great Britain: Hoddler Headline Group : 2001
Abrams, N., Bell, I., & Udris, J. (2001). Studying film . London: Arnold ;.
'' There are 5 key elements to be considered when studying stars. The star as a real person, the star as a form of economic capital or commodity, the star in performance; as someone who takes on roles and characters, the star as an image, a persona, a celebrity, a star as a form of representations''
''Think about what this says about modern day stars. Is there a gap between thier star image and the real person?''
AS Media Studies : The Essential Introduction
Rayner, P., Kruger, S., & Wall, P. (2006). AS media studies: the essential introduction (2nd. ed.). London: Routledge.
(Stereotyping)
'' Rather than representing them as individuals, sections of the media use kind of shortland in the way in which they represent some groups of people.''
'' The representation of groups, however, is not axed forever and its possible to observe how it changes over time.''
''It can be argued that this may be linked ideologically to such things as legislation promoting equal opportunity.''
John Hartley
''Communication, Cultural and Media Studies :
The Key Concepts:
Third Edition''
Routledge Key Guides.
Hartley, J. (2002). Communication, cultural and media studies: the key concepts (3. ed.). London [u.a.: Routledge.
''Ethinicity is crucial to identity formation yet it is not something predetermined or complete. Ethinicity for Hall, is a 'project', or something that we continually shape through which we position ourselves.''
''By explaining cultural identity through biological makeup in this way, the concept of ethinicty can lead to reductionists conclusions and cultural essentialism: 'they are like that beacause its in thier blood' (Gillespie, 1995: 8). ''
BOOKS
Asian American Youth: Culture, Identity and Ethnicity.
Hollywood Cinema. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell
Links...
Media Guardian- Dev Patel Attacks Hollywood about the lack of roles for south asian Actors
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/aug/11/dev-patel-asian-roles-slumdog?INTCMP=SRCH
Slumdog Millionaire and Last Airbender star says he has struggled to find work beyond stereotypical roles of terrorists, taxi drivers and geeks
Advertisers discriminate against Ethnic Minorities
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2006/dec/04/mondaymediasection32?INTCMP=SRCH
Independent Media- Christmas Animation for Bollywood
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/bollywood-hopes-christmas-animation-is-a-draw-for-audiences-2168547.html#
Slumdog MillionaireRatings 8.3 out of 10Won 8 Oscars and was nominated for over 100 other awards
http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt1010048/
Harold and Kumar escape from Guantanamo BayRated 6.7 out of 10Won the best comedy TV Spot award.
http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0481536/
Rotten tomatoes - Slumdog Millionaire - Reviews
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/slumdog_millionaire/
Kal Penn
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/celebrity/kal_penn/biography.php
Katrina Kaif: How Bollywood fell in love with a British unknown
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/dec/19/bollywood-belly-dance-british-star?INTCMP=SRCH
Bachchan and Khan head Indian player list
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2003/dec/03/bollywood.news?INTCMP=SRCH
Go south and east, Hollywood
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/dec/22/south-and-east-asian-actors?INTCMP=SRCH
South and east Asian actors may be enjoying higher profiles in the US on the small screen, but in mainstream films they haven't moved far away from comedy sidekicks and stereotypes
Slumdog Millionaire - Overview
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/movie/126911/slumdog-millionaire
English is Recast in Indian Films
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/oct/17/bollywood-english?INTCMP=SRCH
The lure of new markets and a healthy appetite at home for controversial storylines are prompting Bollywood to turn from song and dance to dialogue with global appeal, reports Randeep RameshBollywood aims for Hollywood
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/jul/02/film.india?INTCMP=SRCH
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8dmSsObmkM Van wilder - intro of taj (Kal Penn)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lBZC-OCQFk - Van wilder 2 - Rise of taj (Trailer)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3M5TM94lqYY&feature=related - The namesake trailer (Kal Penn)
http://www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20clusters/Mass%20Media/Hypodermic_Needle_Theory.doc/ - Hyperdermic Needle
http://www.oppapers.com/essays/Influence-Media-Society/76555?read_essay - Influence of Media
http://www.oppapers.com/essays/Does-Media-Shape-We-Are/146698?read_essay - does the media shape who we are
http://www.oppapers.com/essays/Cultivation-Effect/394887?topic - Cultivation Theory Effects
http://www.oppapers.com/essays/Cultivation-Effect/394887?topic - Google scholar (University of toronto)
http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=uAltS3HHD5cC&oi=fnd&pg=PA32&dq=south+asian+actors+hollywood&ots=nNNVPwq-xa&sig=GbuR7Pmzluj7KTkgYLiD8ee9Hpc#v=onepage&q=south%20asian%20actors%20hollywood&f=false - Google scholar (Facing differences: race, gender and ethnicity)
http://www.grin.com/e-book/27389/bollywood-the-history-and-key-elements-of-bombay-cinema-with-an-excursus - Google Scholars (Bollywood - the history and key elements of the cinema)
http://mcs.sagepub.com/content/22/4/415.short - Google Scholars (Media Imperialism )
http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/cinema_journal/v047/47.4.hillenbrand.html - Google Scholars (Cinema Journal)
http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=hNoXnPNS7ngC&oi=fnd&pg=PA200&dq=south+asian+actors+in+hollywood&ots=oezYeZFg-y&sig=MHnVDEf4q4Gd77FlI9PbGh3Wnac#v=onepage&q&f=false - Google scholars (From Bollywood to hollywood - the globalisation of Hindi cinema)
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1525/ae.2002.29.3.728/abstract - Google Scholars (The karma of brown folk)
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1644285 - Google Scholars (Bollywood in Hollywood: Value chains, cultural voices and the capacity to aspire)
http://www.starcentralmagazine.com/the-ultimate-top-10-list/2010/04/12/top-ten-most-successful-hollywood-actors/ - ten most successful actors
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/104776/top_10_male_hollywood_actors_of_today.html - top 10 actors - audience prefferences
http://bollywood-tips.blogspot.com/2006/12/top-ten-bollywood-actors.html - succesfull actors in bollywood
http://muslimreverie.wordpress.com/2009/07/25/whats-wrong-with-this-picture/ - Prince of Persia - critism of cast
http://race.change.org/blog/view/hollywood_says_iranians_are_cool_so_long_as_theyre_persian_and_white - Critism of Hollywoods percption and representation of iranians
http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/006240.html - The last airbender critism over cast
http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/2006/may/31/theatre.india - Article from the Guardian
http://orvillelloyddouglas.wordpress.com/2007/11/28/south-asian-american-actors-can-they-just-be-doctors-on-television/ Article on some successfull South Asian actors in Hollywood.
http://www.altmuslim.com/a/a/n/2848 - The daily Show interview with Aasif Mandvi
http://www.imdiversity.com/villages/asian/arts_culture_media/archives/pns_indian_media_stereotypes.asp - Stereotypes constructed on asians and south asians
http://gleehab.com/2010/03/12/curry-bear-interview-with-iqbal-theba/ - Interview with Iqbal Theba - Principle figgins from 'Glee'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/may/28/eastenders-gay-love-affair - Guardian article on eastenders gay muslim storyline
http://youoffendmeyouoffendmyfamily.com/the-indian-american-comedy-invasion/ - Article suggesting Asians can break through into hollywood through comedy market
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell_Peters - Russel Peters (successfull Asian Canadian Comedian)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aziz_Ansari - Aziz Ansari Asian American Actor
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/dec/22/south-and-east-asian-actors - Article on the Guardian on Harold and Kumar
Key Quotes from Books
Nathans Abrams
''Studying Film''
Great Britain: Hoddler Headline Group : 2001
Abrams, N., Bell, I., & Udris, J. (2001). Studying film . London: Arnold ;.
'' There are 5 key elements to be considered when studying stars. The star as a real person, the star as a form of economic capital or commodity, the star in performance; as someone who takes on roles and characters, the star as an image, a persona, a celebrity, a star as a form of representations''
''Think about what this says about modern day stars. Is there a gap between thier star image and the real person?''
AS Media Studies : The Essential Introduction
Rayner, P., Kruger, S., & Wall, P. (2006). AS media studies: the essential introduction (2nd. ed.). London: Routledge.
(Stereotyping)
'' Rather than representing them as individuals, sections of the media use kind of shortland in the way in which they represent some groups of people.''
'' The representation of groups, however, is not axed forever and its possible to observe how it changes over time.''
''It can be argued that this may be linked ideologically to such things as legislation promoting equal opportunity.''
John Hartley
''Communication, Cultural and Media Studies :
The Key Concepts:
Third Edition''
Routledge Key Guides.
Hartley, J. (2002). Communication, cultural and media studies: the key concepts (3. ed.). London [u.a.: Routledge.
''Ethinicity is crucial to identity formation yet it is not something predetermined or complete. Ethinicity for Hall, is a 'project', or something that we continually shape through which we position ourselves.''
''By explaining cultural identity through biological makeup in this way, the concept of ethinicty can lead to reductionists conclusions and cultural essentialism: 'they are like that beacause its in thier blood' (Gillespie, 1995: 8). ''
BOOKS
Asian American Youth: Culture, Identity and Ethnicity.
Hollywood Cinema. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell
Links...
Media Guardian- Dev Patel Attacks Hollywood about the lack of roles for south asian Actors
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/aug/11/dev-patel-asian-roles-slumdog?INTCMP=SRCH
Slumdog Millionaire and Last Airbender star says he has struggled to find work beyond stereotypical roles of terrorists, taxi drivers and geeks
Advertisers discriminate against Ethnic Minorities
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2006/dec/04/mondaymediasection32?INTCMP=SRCH
Independent Media- Christmas Animation for Bollywood
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/bollywood-hopes-christmas-animation-is-a-draw-for-audiences-2168547.html#
Slumdog MillionaireRatings 8.3 out of 10Won 8 Oscars and was nominated for over 100 other awards
http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt1010048/
Harold and Kumar escape from Guantanamo BayRated 6.7 out of 10Won the best comedy TV Spot award.
http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0481536/
Rotten tomatoes - Slumdog Millionaire - Reviews
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/slumdog_millionaire/
Kal Penn
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/celebrity/kal_penn/biography.php
Katrina Kaif: How Bollywood fell in love with a British unknown
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/dec/19/bollywood-belly-dance-british-star?INTCMP=SRCH
Bachchan and Khan head Indian player list
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2003/dec/03/bollywood.news?INTCMP=SRCH
Go south and east, Hollywood
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/dec/22/south-and-east-asian-actors?INTCMP=SRCH
South and east Asian actors may be enjoying higher profiles in the US on the small screen, but in mainstream films they haven't moved far away from comedy sidekicks and stereotypes
Slumdog Millionaire - Overview
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/movie/126911/slumdog-millionaire
English is Recast in Indian Films
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/oct/17/bollywood-english?INTCMP=SRCH
The lure of new markets and a healthy appetite at home for controversial storylines are prompting Bollywood to turn from song and dance to dialogue with global appeal, reports Randeep RameshBollywood aims for Hollywood
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/jul/02/film.india?INTCMP=SRCH
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8dmSsObmkM Van wilder - intro of taj (Kal Penn)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lBZC-OCQFk - Van wilder 2 - Rise of taj (Trailer)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3M5TM94lqYY&feature=related - The namesake trailer (Kal Penn)
http://www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20clusters/Mass%20Media/Hypodermic_Needle_Theory.doc/ - Hyperdermic Needle
http://www.oppapers.com/essays/Influence-Media-Society/76555?read_essay - Influence of Media
http://www.oppapers.com/essays/Does-Media-Shape-We-Are/146698?read_essay - does the media shape who we are
http://www.oppapers.com/essays/Cultivation-Effect/394887?topic - Cultivation Theory Effects
http://www.oppapers.com/essays/Cultivation-Effect/394887?topic - Google scholar (University of toronto)
http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=uAltS3HHD5cC&oi=fnd&pg=PA32&dq=south+asian+actors+hollywood&ots=nNNVPwq-xa&sig=GbuR7Pmzluj7KTkgYLiD8ee9Hpc#v=onepage&q=south%20asian%20actors%20hollywood&f=false - Google scholar (Facing differences: race, gender and ethnicity)
http://www.grin.com/e-book/27389/bollywood-the-history-and-key-elements-of-bombay-cinema-with-an-excursus - Google Scholars (Bollywood - the history and key elements of the cinema)
http://mcs.sagepub.com/content/22/4/415.short - Google Scholars (Media Imperialism )
http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/cinema_journal/v047/47.4.hillenbrand.html - Google Scholars (Cinema Journal)
http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=hNoXnPNS7ngC&oi=fnd&pg=PA200&dq=south+asian+actors+in+hollywood&ots=oezYeZFg-y&sig=MHnVDEf4q4Gd77FlI9PbGh3Wnac#v=onepage&q&f=false - Google scholars (From Bollywood to hollywood - the globalisation of Hindi cinema)
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1525/ae.2002.29.3.728/abstract - Google Scholars (The karma of brown folk)
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1644285 - Google Scholars (Bollywood in Hollywood: Value chains, cultural voices and the capacity to aspire)
http://www.starcentralmagazine.com/the-ultimate-top-10-list/2010/04/12/top-ten-most-successful-hollywood-actors/ - ten most successful actors
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/104776/top_10_male_hollywood_actors_of_today.html - top 10 actors - audience prefferences
http://bollywood-tips.blogspot.com/2006/12/top-ten-bollywood-actors.html - succesfull actors in bollywood
http://muslimreverie.wordpress.com/2009/07/25/whats-wrong-with-this-picture/ - Prince of Persia - critism of cast
http://race.change.org/blog/view/hollywood_says_iranians_are_cool_so_long_as_theyre_persian_and_white - Critism of Hollywoods percption and representation of iranians
http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/006240.html - The last airbender critism over cast
http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/2006/may/31/theatre.india - Article from the Guardian
http://orvillelloyddouglas.wordpress.com/2007/11/28/south-asian-american-actors-can-they-just-be-doctors-on-television/ Article on some successfull South Asian actors in Hollywood.
http://www.altmuslim.com/a/a/n/2848 - The daily Show interview with Aasif Mandvi
http://www.imdiversity.com/villages/asian/arts_culture_media/archives/pns_indian_media_stereotypes.asp - Stereotypes constructed on asians and south asians
http://gleehab.com/2010/03/12/curry-bear-interview-with-iqbal-theba/ - Interview with Iqbal Theba - Principle figgins from 'Glee'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/may/28/eastenders-gay-love-affair - Guardian article on eastenders gay muslim storyline
http://youoffendmeyouoffendmyfamily.com/the-indian-american-comedy-invasion/ - Article suggesting Asians can break through into hollywood through comedy market
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell_Peters - Russel Peters (successfull Asian Canadian Comedian)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aziz_Ansari - Aziz Ansari Asian American Actor
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/dec/22/south-and-east-asian-actors - Article on the Guardian on Harold and Kumar
Xmas Task #1
Textual Analysis
Kal Penn - Van Wilder
Link - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyV1bM6JJF0 - Trailer for the film
Trailer highlighting Taj (Kal Penn)
- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8dmSsObmkM
South asian actor in a cameo role
Theories
- Representation and stereotyping
- Cameo role subordinates character, they are represented in a stereotypical role for comic purposes for audiences.
Issues and Debates
- Gender and ethinicity
- Shows ethnic character in a minor role, acting in an ethnic view purposely and exaterating the stereotype such as accents and beleifs.
M.I.G.R.A.I.N
S.H.E.P
Analysis Write up
The link that shows Kal penn in van wilder, highlights how a South Asian actor is portrayed and represented in hollywood, as overall he is given just a cameo role in the film. An in his role he is shown to be stereotypically south asian.
The 1st thing you nottice from the text above is the music, as immediatly as Kal Penn enters, there is a stereotypical indian herbal remedy tune played in the background. which can be seen as offensive and racist to some viewers. Also he is given the impression of being steretypical in shyness and awkwardness in when he 1st enters the room. Another very interesting element is his name in the fact that it is so long, connoting the stereotype of South Asians having large names. An how his name contains the word 'Taj Mahal' (a famous indian land mark and one of the 7 wonders of the world) clearly shows the director and hollywoods interpretation of him, portraying him in a very controversial and stereotypical role.
He is shown to be bottling up a lot of passion in the fact that whe he speaks he is shocked at what he says himself, and then goes onto a rant about what he wants to do which shows his Gender very strongly and how Guys in university are very horney and after sex.
Kal Penn - Van Wilder 2 - the rise of taj
Link - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQKcME-Eh0E&list=QL&playnext=1
South Asian actor in a lead role
Theories
- Representation and stereotyping
Even though he is given the lead role, he still shows how he is represented and stereoryped as a south asian.
Issues and Debates
- Gender and ethinicity
Points to look at
- M.I.G.R.A.I.N
- S.H.E.P
Analysis Write up
The trailer for Van wilder : The rise of taj, shows Kal Penn in a leading role in a film. His character is the same as of that from the 1st film, which is why he presented as a stereotypical south asian. Although he has seemed to have adapted to american lifestyle of partying and drinkning. The trailer shows his ethnicity to be some sort of sex appeal to women. which is interesting as this makes his portrayal of an South Asian actor to be possitive.
Although as this sequel was not on cinema or even very much on Tv highlights that having a south asian actor in a lead role was a bad choice.
The trailer opens with a small introduction which is mainly commentary introducing van wilder through what he ''taught us'' and then they show Taj walking in front of a group, showing him as the leader, indicating his rise from his role in the 1st film as just an assistant.
it then shows Taj speak for the 1st time, and you nottice that he speaks the same as he did in the 1st film showing his herritage as he has a slight accent. Its interesting though as it shows his growth in confidence as he flirts with a women on a plane, and the next scene is of them getting frisky in the airplane toilets. Then the next scene shows him introducing himself to his roomates, indicating he has grown a lot in confidence enough to approach strangers and introduce himself.
They immidatly respond to him, and automatically give him the role as a leader which is unusual for someone of his skin colour in america.
It also shows him giving advice to other 'nerdy' charcaters about posture and confidence.
He seems to have stepped into Van wilders shoes and has become the leader and the party instigater of their university. He is shown to have learned a lot from van as he has come across rivalry which he deals with in a cheeky manor giving a cheeky remarks and comments back.
It then shows a montage of partying clips, before showing Taj lying in a bed.. with a girl ready to pounce on him, before his parents and family unexpectadly arrive and spoil the fun before it began. Although his father seems to be impressed with him being so radical with girls. Reffereing to him as a 'hound doggy'.
Kal Penn - Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay
Link - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_NOc6yH5JY - film trailer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQZkwiH0r5Q - racial stereotypes (fan made)
Theories
- Post 9/11
- His character is claimed to be a terrorist because of his skin colour, he is 'randomly' searched in the airport.
Issues and debates
- Gender and ethnicity
Analysis Write up
This film is a sequel to Harold and Kumar go to white castle, Its interesting as its a comedy and it looks at most races, as there are comic spoofs about 'the kkk being racist' 'rednecks being ' 'black people and coolae' 'the goverment being racist'.
The trailer opens with them in the airport, showing that Kal Penn a South Asian American gets chosen for a 'random' security check at the airport, even though he didnt beep on the alarm. showing how since 9/11 that because of his skin colour he is being randomly searched.
Also in the next scene there is the scene in which an old lady keeps starring at him, and pictures him as a terrorist because of his skin colour and ethnic decent. She also shouts terrorist when picturing him with a stereotypical big beard and dorague which is assosiated with terrorists.
then in the next scene, when they are held by the goverment, the official is racist towards both Kal Penn and John Cho. reffering to them as ''North Korean'' and ''Al Queida''. And also reffers to John Cho as 'Hellp Kitty'.
Kal Penn - Van Wilder
Link - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyV1bM6JJF0 - Trailer for the film
Trailer highlighting Taj (Kal Penn)
- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8dmSsObmkM
South asian actor in a cameo role
Theories
- Representation and stereotyping
- Cameo role subordinates character, they are represented in a stereotypical role for comic purposes for audiences.
Issues and Debates
- Gender and ethinicity
- Shows ethnic character in a minor role, acting in an ethnic view purposely and exaterating the stereotype such as accents and beleifs.
M.I.G.R.A.I.N
S.H.E.P
Analysis Write up
The link that shows Kal penn in van wilder, highlights how a South Asian actor is portrayed and represented in hollywood, as overall he is given just a cameo role in the film. An in his role he is shown to be stereotypically south asian.
The 1st thing you nottice from the text above is the music, as immediatly as Kal Penn enters, there is a stereotypical indian herbal remedy tune played in the background. which can be seen as offensive and racist to some viewers. Also he is given the impression of being steretypical in shyness and awkwardness in when he 1st enters the room. Another very interesting element is his name in the fact that it is so long, connoting the stereotype of South Asians having large names. An how his name contains the word 'Taj Mahal' (a famous indian land mark and one of the 7 wonders of the world) clearly shows the director and hollywoods interpretation of him, portraying him in a very controversial and stereotypical role.
He is shown to be bottling up a lot of passion in the fact that whe he speaks he is shocked at what he says himself, and then goes onto a rant about what he wants to do which shows his Gender very strongly and how Guys in university are very horney and after sex.
Kal Penn - Van Wilder 2 - the rise of taj
Link - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQKcME-Eh0E&list=QL&playnext=1
South Asian actor in a lead role
Theories
- Representation and stereotyping
Even though he is given the lead role, he still shows how he is represented and stereoryped as a south asian.
Issues and Debates
- Gender and ethinicity
Points to look at
- M.I.G.R.A.I.N
- S.H.E.P
Analysis Write up
The trailer for Van wilder : The rise of taj, shows Kal Penn in a leading role in a film. His character is the same as of that from the 1st film, which is why he presented as a stereotypical south asian. Although he has seemed to have adapted to american lifestyle of partying and drinkning. The trailer shows his ethnicity to be some sort of sex appeal to women. which is interesting as this makes his portrayal of an South Asian actor to be possitive.
Although as this sequel was not on cinema or even very much on Tv highlights that having a south asian actor in a lead role was a bad choice.
The trailer opens with a small introduction which is mainly commentary introducing van wilder through what he ''taught us'' and then they show Taj walking in front of a group, showing him as the leader, indicating his rise from his role in the 1st film as just an assistant.
it then shows Taj speak for the 1st time, and you nottice that he speaks the same as he did in the 1st film showing his herritage as he has a slight accent. Its interesting though as it shows his growth in confidence as he flirts with a women on a plane, and the next scene is of them getting frisky in the airplane toilets. Then the next scene shows him introducing himself to his roomates, indicating he has grown a lot in confidence enough to approach strangers and introduce himself.
They immidatly respond to him, and automatically give him the role as a leader which is unusual for someone of his skin colour in america.
It also shows him giving advice to other 'nerdy' charcaters about posture and confidence.
He seems to have stepped into Van wilders shoes and has become the leader and the party instigater of their university. He is shown to have learned a lot from van as he has come across rivalry which he deals with in a cheeky manor giving a cheeky remarks and comments back.
It then shows a montage of partying clips, before showing Taj lying in a bed.. with a girl ready to pounce on him, before his parents and family unexpectadly arrive and spoil the fun before it began. Although his father seems to be impressed with him being so radical with girls. Reffereing to him as a 'hound doggy'.
Kal Penn - Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay
Link - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_NOc6yH5JY - film trailer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQZkwiH0r5Q - racial stereotypes (fan made)
Theories
- Post 9/11
- His character is claimed to be a terrorist because of his skin colour, he is 'randomly' searched in the airport.
Issues and debates
- Gender and ethnicity
Analysis Write up
This film is a sequel to Harold and Kumar go to white castle, Its interesting as its a comedy and it looks at most races, as there are comic spoofs about 'the kkk being racist' 'rednecks being ' 'black people and coolae' 'the goverment being racist'.
The trailer opens with them in the airport, showing that Kal Penn a South Asian American gets chosen for a 'random' security check at the airport, even though he didnt beep on the alarm. showing how since 9/11 that because of his skin colour he is being randomly searched.
Also in the next scene there is the scene in which an old lady keeps starring at him, and pictures him as a terrorist because of his skin colour and ethnic decent. She also shouts terrorist when picturing him with a stereotypical big beard and dorague which is assosiated with terrorists.
then in the next scene, when they are held by the goverment, the official is racist towards both Kal Penn and John Cho. reffering to them as ''North Korean'' and ''Al Queida''. And also reffers to John Cho as 'Hellp Kitty'.
Monday 13 December 2010
3 texts in which Kal Penn is acting in, 2 Lead roles and 1 cameo role.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8dmSsObmkM
Van wilder - Intro of Kal Penn as Taj..
Released in 2002
Box office
Budget - $5 million
Marketing cost - $15 million
Opening Weekend Gross (Domestic) - $7,302,913
Total Domestic Grosses - $21,305,259
Total Overseas Grosses - $16,970,224
Total Worldwide Grosses - $38,275,483
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lBZC-OCQFk
Van wilder 2 - the rise of taj - Kal Penn in more of a leading role
Although sequel was not released in cinemas and has been very niche for audiences.
went very bad with critics, Kal Penn was the only familar face in a cast full of nobodies. which says it all about the film.
released in 2006 - straight to DVD
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3M5TM94lqYY&feature=related
The Namesake - Kal Penn in 1st major leading role
Although he plays a stereotypical role for his character and the film is in relation to his ethnic background and includes other south indian actors. which could be argued that it is a very safe role for him to play. The film touches on stereotpes and rasicm.
Released in 2006
Top ten lists
The film appeared on several critics' top ten lists of the best films of 2007
6th - Peter Rainer, The Christian Science Monitor
8th - Carrie Rickey, The Philadelphia Inquirer
8th - Claudia Puig, USA Today
9th - James Berardinelli, ReelViews
Awards and nominations
Won - Love is Folly International Film Festival (Bulgaria) - "Golden Aphrodite" - Mira Nair
Nominated - Casting Society of America - "Best Feature Film Casting" - Cindy Tolan
Nominated - Gotham Awards 2007 - "Best Film" - Mira Nair & Lydia Dean Pilcher
Nominated - Independent Spirit Award - "Best Supporting Male" - Irrfan Khan
Van wilder - Intro of Kal Penn as Taj..
Released in 2002
Box office
Budget - $5 million
Marketing cost - $15 million
Opening Weekend Gross (Domestic) - $7,302,913
Total Domestic Grosses - $21,305,259
Total Overseas Grosses - $16,970,224
Total Worldwide Grosses - $38,275,483
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lBZC-OCQFk
Van wilder 2 - the rise of taj - Kal Penn in more of a leading role
Although sequel was not released in cinemas and has been very niche for audiences.
went very bad with critics, Kal Penn was the only familar face in a cast full of nobodies. which says it all about the film.
released in 2006 - straight to DVD
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3M5TM94lqYY&feature=related
The Namesake - Kal Penn in 1st major leading role
Although he plays a stereotypical role for his character and the film is in relation to his ethnic background and includes other south indian actors. which could be argued that it is a very safe role for him to play. The film touches on stereotpes and rasicm.
Released in 2006
Top ten lists
The film appeared on several critics' top ten lists of the best films of 2007
6th - Peter Rainer, The Christian Science Monitor
8th - Carrie Rickey, The Philadelphia Inquirer
8th - Claudia Puig, USA Today
9th - James Berardinelli, ReelViews
Awards and nominations
Won - Love is Folly International Film Festival (Bulgaria) - "Golden Aphrodite" - Mira Nair
Nominated - Casting Society of America - "Best Feature Film Casting" - Cindy Tolan
Nominated - Gotham Awards 2007 - "Best Film" - Mira Nair & Lydia Dean Pilcher
Nominated - Independent Spirit Award - "Best Supporting Male" - Irrfan Khan
Sunday 12 December 2010
Critical investigation 2010-11[1]
View more presentations from Ranjot Rai.
Www:
Good overall knowledge on subject and topic
Look at specific texts
Ebi:
Could look more into political issues
Could look more into books for quotes
Audience Theories
Hyperdermic Needle Theory -
The Media 'Injects' audiences with its views and opinions without the audiences realising, like a doctors syringe injects drugs into the body.
- This draws attention to the power of the media producers over its audiences.
- It makes audiences seem 'passive' and 'powerless'
- Audiences are used to being familirased by seeing thier favourite celebrities and hollywood icons in films as they have been injected by their star power, which would refrain them from looking at newer different stars. such as south asian actors.
http://www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20clusters/Mass%20Media/Hypodermic_Needle_Theory.doc/
''The theory suggests that the mass media could influence a very large group of people directly and uniformly by ‘shooting’ or ‘injecting’ them with appropriate messages designed to trigger a desired response.
Both images used to express this theory (a bullet and a needle) suggest a powerful and direct flow of information from the sender to the receiver. The bullet theory graphically suggests that the message is a bullet, fired from the "media gun" into the viewer's "head". With similarly emotive imagery the hypodermic needle model suggests that media messages are injected straight into a passive audience which is immediately influenced by the message. They express the view that the media is a dangerous means of communicating an idea because the receiver or audience is powerless to resist the impact of the message. There is no escape from the effect of the message in these models. The population is seen as a sitting duck. People are seen as passive and are seen as having a lot media material "shot" at them. People end up thinking what they are told because there is no other source of information.''
http://www.oppapers.com/essays/Influence-Media-Society/76555?read_essay
The Influence Of Media On Society
One such theorist stated that the new found media was manipulating the mainstream masses and deliberately causing crime and violence for financial gain. Although this argument has been cast aside man times it always returns in modern society when there is a severe outbreak of violence on TV.
http://www.oppapers.com/essays/Does-Media-Shape-We-Are/146698?read_essay
Does The Media Shape Who We Are?
Introduction
The Mass Media is an important feature of modern society; its development has undoubtedly been a core factor to rapid social and technological change and also to the rise in personal income and standard of life as well as the decline of some social traditions. Mass media can be defined as venues for messages that are created for consumption by large numbers of people. It is a term used to denote a section of the media specifically envisioned and designed to reach a very large audience such as the population of a nation state.
The degree to which the mass media has influenced society today has been (and still is) debated upon for decades. It can be argued that the mass media is used as “an instrument”, both more powerful and more flexible than anything in previous existence, for influencing people into certain modes of belief and understanding within society.
Cultivation theory
- As audiences watch more and more TV and films they gain more opinions and views on the world. They follow the status quo and Hegemony.
Hegemony - a theory of ideologies and beleives that reiterate dominant ideologies.
- It draws attention to the fact that audiences gain a lot of thier knowledge from the media. Although it does encourage false measures.
The more audiences are used to seeing Hollywood films dominated by 'White' actors the more they will be used to and familiarised with this and would beleive this is the right choice.
http://www.oppapers.com/essays/Cultivation-Effect/394887?topic
Cultivation Effects
Cultivation theory is a social theory designed in the 1950s and '70s to examine the role of television on Americans. Another kind of cultivation effect is Computer Mediated Communication or (CMC) this kind of communication is done by email, list servers, use net groups and chat rooms. Steve Jobs labeled these “interpersonal computers” rather than” personal computers” because of all the different ways to communicate by way of computer (Walther & Burgoon, P.51). There are many factors that make this different from face to face communication, some aspects of CMC are absence of context cues, the record ability of conversation, the rate of exchange, the level of formality, the anonymity of the user.
The Media 'Injects' audiences with its views and opinions without the audiences realising, like a doctors syringe injects drugs into the body.
- This draws attention to the power of the media producers over its audiences.
- It makes audiences seem 'passive' and 'powerless'
- Audiences are used to being familirased by seeing thier favourite celebrities and hollywood icons in films as they have been injected by their star power, which would refrain them from looking at newer different stars. such as south asian actors.
http://www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20clusters/Mass%20Media/Hypodermic_Needle_Theory.doc/
''The theory suggests that the mass media could influence a very large group of people directly and uniformly by ‘shooting’ or ‘injecting’ them with appropriate messages designed to trigger a desired response.
Both images used to express this theory (a bullet and a needle) suggest a powerful and direct flow of information from the sender to the receiver. The bullet theory graphically suggests that the message is a bullet, fired from the "media gun" into the viewer's "head". With similarly emotive imagery the hypodermic needle model suggests that media messages are injected straight into a passive audience which is immediately influenced by the message. They express the view that the media is a dangerous means of communicating an idea because the receiver or audience is powerless to resist the impact of the message. There is no escape from the effect of the message in these models. The population is seen as a sitting duck. People are seen as passive and are seen as having a lot media material "shot" at them. People end up thinking what they are told because there is no other source of information.''
http://www.oppapers.com/essays/Influence-Media-Society/76555?read_essay
The Influence Of Media On Society
One such theorist stated that the new found media was manipulating the mainstream masses and deliberately causing crime and violence for financial gain. Although this argument has been cast aside man times it always returns in modern society when there is a severe outbreak of violence on TV.
http://www.oppapers.com/essays/Does-Media-Shape-We-Are/146698?read_essay
Does The Media Shape Who We Are?
Introduction
The Mass Media is an important feature of modern society; its development has undoubtedly been a core factor to rapid social and technological change and also to the rise in personal income and standard of life as well as the decline of some social traditions. Mass media can be defined as venues for messages that are created for consumption by large numbers of people. It is a term used to denote a section of the media specifically envisioned and designed to reach a very large audience such as the population of a nation state.
The degree to which the mass media has influenced society today has been (and still is) debated upon for decades. It can be argued that the mass media is used as “an instrument”, both more powerful and more flexible than anything in previous existence, for influencing people into certain modes of belief and understanding within society.
Cultivation theory
- As audiences watch more and more TV and films they gain more opinions and views on the world. They follow the status quo and Hegemony.
Hegemony - a theory of ideologies and beleives that reiterate dominant ideologies.
- It draws attention to the fact that audiences gain a lot of thier knowledge from the media. Although it does encourage false measures.
The more audiences are used to seeing Hollywood films dominated by 'White' actors the more they will be used to and familiarised with this and would beleive this is the right choice.
http://www.oppapers.com/essays/Cultivation-Effect/394887?topic
Cultivation Effects
Cultivation theory is a social theory designed in the 1950s and '70s to examine the role of television on Americans. Another kind of cultivation effect is Computer Mediated Communication or (CMC) this kind of communication is done by email, list servers, use net groups and chat rooms. Steve Jobs labeled these “interpersonal computers” rather than” personal computers” because of all the different ways to communicate by way of computer (Walther & Burgoon, P.51). There are many factors that make this different from face to face communication, some aspects of CMC are absence of context cues, the record ability of conversation, the rate of exchange, the level of formality, the anonymity of the user.
Key Quotes from Books
Key Quotes from Books
Nathans Abrams
''Studying Film''
Great Britain: Hoddler Headline Group : 2001
'' There are 5 key elements to be considered when studying stars. The star as a real person, the star as a form of economic capital or commodity, the star in performance; as someone who takes on roles and characters, the star as an image, a persona, a celebrity, a star as a form of representations''
''Think about what this says about modern day stars. Is there a gap between thier star image and the real person?''
AS Media Studies : The Essential Introduction
(Stereotyping)
'' Rather than representing them as individuals, sections of the media use kind of shortland in the way in which they represent some groups of people.''
'' The representation of groups, however, is not axed forever and its possible to observe how it changes over time.''
''It can be argued that this may be linked ideologically to such things as legislation promoting equal opportunity.''
John Hartley
''Communication, Cultural and Media Studies :
The Key Concepts:
Third Edition''
Routledge Key Guides.
''Ethinicity is crucial to identity formation yet it is not something predetermined or complete. Ethinicity for Hall, is a 'project', or something that we continually shape through which we position ourselves.''
''By explaining cultural identity through biological makeup in this way, the concept of ethinicty can lead to reductionists conclusions and cultural essentialism: 'they are like that beacause its in thier blood' (Gillespie, 1995: 8). ''
Nathans Abrams
''Studying Film''
Great Britain: Hoddler Headline Group : 2001
'' There are 5 key elements to be considered when studying stars. The star as a real person, the star as a form of economic capital or commodity, the star in performance; as someone who takes on roles and characters, the star as an image, a persona, a celebrity, a star as a form of representations''
''Think about what this says about modern day stars. Is there a gap between thier star image and the real person?''
AS Media Studies : The Essential Introduction
(Stereotyping)
'' Rather than representing them as individuals, sections of the media use kind of shortland in the way in which they represent some groups of people.''
'' The representation of groups, however, is not axed forever and its possible to observe how it changes over time.''
''It can be argued that this may be linked ideologically to such things as legislation promoting equal opportunity.''
John Hartley
''Communication, Cultural and Media Studies :
The Key Concepts:
Third Edition''
Routledge Key Guides.
''Ethinicity is crucial to identity formation yet it is not something predetermined or complete. Ethinicity for Hall, is a 'project', or something that we continually shape through which we position ourselves.''
''By explaining cultural identity through biological makeup in this way, the concept of ethinicty can lead to reductionists conclusions and cultural essentialism: 'they are like that beacause its in thier blood' (Gillespie, 1995: 8). ''
Sunday 28 November 2010
Media Magazine
1) Freedom from Hollywood – Slumdog Millionaire
http://www.englishandmedia.co.uk/mm/subscribers/downloads/archive_mm/_mmagpast/mm28_slumdog.html
Tiny budget, unknown cast, no Americans – and massive critical, commercial and Oscar success. Austin McHale explains how Slumdog Millionaire thrived on its freedom from Hollywood.
London. February. Slumdog Millionaire has just swooped through the grey slush of the West End in a blaze of colour and sound to scoop seven BAFTA awards, including Best Film and Best Director and an extraordinary eight Oscars. Yet this film does not fit the template of Hollywood success. There are no American accents, few special effects and no big stars. It is the antithesis of glamour – a climactic sequence involves the hero, a Mumbai slum kid, diving through a cesspit and emerging covered in very realistic excrement (in fact peanut butter and chocolate), all to get a signed photograph of a Bollywood actor. Yet it has achieved the Holy Grail of cinema – made cheaply, it appeals to many different audiences, has become a critical and popular success and is set to make huge profits. How has a low budget British film reconciled these opposites without selling its soul? Perhaps our old friend MIGRAIN, inducer of headaches to generations of Media Students, can offer us a way in.
Media language
The media language of the film is indicated in the poster, a kaleidoscope of energy and colour. Against an impressionistic cityscape of blurred neon lighting, a boy and a girl burst through the darkness, both in motion but facing opposite ways. Anxiety but also hope is clear in their tense expressions. The lettering of the title is ragged, uneven, lowercase, progressing from the red of danger to the yellow of hope. In the foreground is the familiar graphic design of a question from the quiz show Who Wants to be a Millionaire? doubling as the tag line, ‘What does it take to find a lost love?’. The theme and narrative are outlined, the fragmented urban, visual style powerfully established.
The cinematography of the film is unusual for an Oscar contender. The Mumbai street scenes are filmed with a kinetic energy and a gritty realism which recalls documentary rather than Hollywood – or Bollywood – studio glamour. This look is achieved through the use of small, very manoeuvrable digital video cameras and on occasion the stuttering images of still cameras at 11 frames per second, far slower than normal film camera speed. This key artistic decision was to some extent forced on the film crew. The influence of mainstream Indian cinema is so pervasive in Mumbai that filming in the slums with traditional large cameras would have encouraged stylised Bollywood moves rather than realistic behaviour, so the film-makers had to disguise themselves as tourists and film unobserved to achieve the naturalism that they wanted.
Sound – non-Bollywood style
Another significant aspect of media language is sound, 70% of the impact of a film according to director Danny Boyle. As with visual language, creative decisions in this area involved a radical departure from the Bollywood norm. Bollywood films are made largely on sound stages, with music and ambient noise dubbed on at a later stage, because Mumbai streets are so loud. However, to Danny Boyle Mumbai street sounds were essential signifiers of the slums, so the diegetic sounds stayed. The non-diegetic musical score was just as important, aiming at a fusion of styles to engage Western as well as Indian audiences. The basic soundtrack was composed by the famous Bollywood musician A.R. Rahman, but it was overlaid by an urban Hip-Hop and Rap track prominently featuring the British Sri-Lankan MIA, reflecting the eclectic ‘masala’ mixture both of Mumbai and of Western cities.
Institutional perspectives
Institutionally Slumdog Millionaire is a fascinating case study. It was made for 13 million dollars, a tiny sum compared with the 167 million dollars of Oscar rival The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, largely raised via the French and British production companies Pathé and Film4. For a film with an almost entirely Indian cast and no stars apart from the Bollywood Indian actor Anil Kapoor, even this budget would have been a challenge to raise without Boyle’s track record as the director of a series of low budget, profitable and critically successful films such as Trainspotting, 28 Days Later and Millions. Casting threw up an unusual problem. Boyle was committed to casting locally, but every actor with Bollywood ambitions was implausibly ‘buff’ for a slumdog, having worked out every day in the approved Bollywood manner. Boyle discussed this with his 17-year-old daughter one evening and received the following piece of succinct advice, ‘If you want a loser, have a look at Skins!’ Hence the inspired casting of Dev Patel, who can project vulnerability as well as determination, and whose slow, shy smile is one of the delights of the film.
Slumdog Millionaire, like all Danny Boyle’s films, is difficult to pigeonhole in generic terms. It is a hybrid of gritty realism and aspiration, of drama documentary and love story. ‘Feelgood’, with its connotations of cliché and stereotype, is a description understandably resisted by Boyle, but despite the poverty, the child torture and the prostitution, it is indisputably an uplifting film.
Genre connections
Slumdog Millionaire’s representation of Mumbai is starkly different from two familiar though opposite stereotypes. One is the glamorous dreamworld of Bollywood, in which no-one is poor (for long, at least) and in which characters more likely to be seen dancing on a Swiss mountain or a Scottish glen than in a Mumbai railway station. The other is the English tabloid newspaper nightmare of teeming, unsanitary ghettoes populated by passive recipients of Western charity, where the only growth industries are begging, prostitution and terrorism. By contrast the slumdogs of the film are resourceful, energetic and independent citizens of one of the world’s great cities – 20 million and growing. This positive ideology, that poverty and apathy can be conquered by communal celebration, is exemplified in the film’s final sequence. As the credits roll, Dev Patel and co-star Frieda Pinto are joined by what appears to be the whole of Mumbai in an exuberant dance number. The location is the city’s main railway station, the Chapatri Shivaji Terminus, host to a thriving sub-culture of recent rural immigrants, the main artery of Mumbai. It was also one of the sites of a murderous terrorist attack last November which made headlines internationally. Despite the film sequence being shot many months before, it is being seen in India as a positive counterbalance to the images of a burning, blood-soaked Mumbai which led the TV news bulletins worldwide.
Audience and ideology
This iconic sequence appeals to many different audiences. It can be seen as the film’s one major concession to Bollywood, an explosion of sound and spectacle which is likely to attract a mainstream Indian audience. The energy of the youthful dancers, the frequent close-ups of the familiar face of Dev Patel and the Hip-Hop/Bollywood fusion of the soundtrack will hold a Western audience, particularly the sought-after demographic of 16-25 with its high level of disposable income. Finally the aspirational ideology, the community’s refusal to be defined by the squalor of the slums, their commitment to celebration, growth and change, intersects with the narrative arc of classic Hollywood cinema, in which seemingly impossible obstacles are overcome in order to fulfil a dream. This is attractive to mainstream Western media outlets.
Narrative structure
This dream, however, is not the traditional American Dream. Comfort and wealth are apparently promised by the film’s narrative structure, cleverly built around the cumulative questions of Who Wants to be a Millionaire? which, remarkably, all relate to incidents in Jamal Malik’s (Dev Patel’s) life. However, this apparent endorsement of a crudely materialist ideology is skilfully undercut, both by the corruption of Anil Kapoor’s quizmaster and by Jamal’s motivation for success, which it would be unfair to reveal. It can in fact be read as a sly critique of the system of values in our status-obsessed society, which prioritises uncontextualised academic knowledge over the real human experience acquired painfully by Jamal in the slums of Mumbai.
Much publicity has recently been given to more negative views of the film. It has been accused of poverty porn, implying that the harsh life of the slums is merely a picturesque travelogue catering for Western audiences, who remain distanced from and uninvolved in the events they see. The slum dwellers, it is said, are patronised and stereotyped. Most bizarrely, Slumdog Millionaire is said to be a derogatory term implying that Mumbai citizens are less than human, when Danny Boyle’s preferred meaning is clearly intended to be an echo of ‘underdog’, evoking connotations of bravery, resilience and moral justification. To me, these spectacular misreadings are travesties of the film’s ideological standpoints. Indeed, cynical observers have seen them as evidence of a ‘dirty tricks’ campaign, orchestrated by unscrupulous publicists of rival films in the run-up to the Oscars. Large amounts of money have been invested, for example, in the effects-laden Brangelina vehicle The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (five years in the making and 13 times the cost of Slumdog Millionaire), and of course the best short-cut to recouping costs and making a sizeable profit is via Oscar success. Why should a cheap British film, entirely shot in India without one American star, win a competition devised by Hollywood studios for Hollywood studios? Perhaps for the same reason that a Mumbai ‘charwallah’ (teaboy) from the slums should win a competition devised by the Indian elite for the Indian elite – to expose prejudice and celebrate our common humanity. After the film’s spectacular success at the Oscars, we now know that the slumdog can become a millionaire twice over.
Austin McHale is Head of Media Studies at Ellen Wilkinson School, Ealing.
This article first appeared in MediaMagazine 28, April 2009.
http://www.englishandmedia.co.uk/mm/subscribers/downloads/archive_mm/_mmagpast/mm26_seasia_film.html 2) Film as business in India
A film needs to take two to three times its production and marketing costs to break even. The Happening demonstrates how co-production can support this process. It looks like an American movie, with familiar US settings and stars. Its director, M. Night Shyamalan was born in Pondicherry in South India but grew up in Pennsylvania. The Happening was a flop in North America ($64 million), continuing the downward trend of box office for Shyamalan’s films since his mammoth success with The Sixth Sense (1999), but thanks to a co-production deal between 20th Century Fox and Indian media group UTV, its dismal American performance was balanced by an international take of over $100 million. This means that with DVD sales and television rights, a film that cost up to $90 million will still see a profit. To properly understand what this kind of co-production means, we need to consider film as a business in India.
Understanding the context of Indian film
Since the 1990s India has produced more films than any other country and these have generated the world’s largest audiences. Each year there are over 800 films made in India and audiences are over 3 billion – more than twice the size of the audience in North America. Most cinema tickets in India are very cheap, some as low as 20p each, and as yet the industry is not comparable with Hollywood in revenue terms. However, a number of factors mean that the situation is changing quickly:
– new cinema building in India is bringing modern multiplexes with digital screens to major cities
– the Indian middle class, with enough money to match Western spending patterns, is growing rapidly
– NRIs or ‘non-resident Indians’ in the UK and North America pay Western prices to watch Indian films.
Two things have happened in response to these factors. In Los Angeles, Hollywood studios have started to think about how they can sell films in India. Up to now, Indian audiences have generally ignored Hollywood films. Even those that have been successful, such as March of the Penguins and the Spider Man films, have not topped the biggest Indian films. Hollywood has reacted in two ways: Sony, a Japanese company with long-standing interests in both China and India, last year produced its first Bollywood film in India, Saawariya. The other option is to co-operate with Indian distributors who know the local market. March of the Penguins was released by Adlabs, an innovative company in the Indian media market.
Not just Bollywood!
Filmed entertainment in India faces a unique set of problems and opportunities. Contrary to what you may have read in many textbooks and newspaper articles, ‘Bollywood’ is not the whole of the Indian film industry. It isn’t even the biggest sector in terms of the number of films it produces. There are about 200 Bollywood films per year, made largely in Mumbai, in Hindi. Bollywood is therefore roughly the same size as Hollywood in terms of the number of features. However, a larger number of films (over 300) are made in the South of India, especially in Chennai and Hyderabad, in the Tamil or Telugu languages; there are 75 million Telugu speakers and 60 million Tamils in India. Films are also made in as many as six other languages. Bollywood films have the biggest budgets, but not necessarily the biggest stars – the Tamil cinema star Rajnikanth is often listed as the highest earner and his last two films have topped the Indian box office. Adlabs was careful to release March of the Penguins in English and also dubbed into Hindi, Tamil and Telugu.
So it’s important to know and understand the Indian market. You can download a free guide to Indian Cinema from http://www.cornerhouse.org/education/schoolsandcolleges.aspx?page=48260
The new Indian ‘majors’
Until recently, Indian film production companies have been relatively small. Although India had a Hindi ‘studio system’ (in Bombay, Pune and Calcutta) not unlike Hollywood in the 1930s-60s, it didn’t develop the ‘media conglomerates’ of modern Hollywood. But something like the Hollywood model is now emerging. Four companies stand out: UTV, Adlabs, Eros and Yash Raj. Each of these companies has interests in television, DVD distribution, film distribution and ‘new media’. One of the most important mergers this year has seen Eros, a largely Bollywood-focused company, merge with Ayngaran, the major distributor of Tamil language films worldwide.
These new Indian media majors see the need to think both nationally and internationally. Over the next few years we will see an increasing number of co-production deals between the six Hollywood majors and the four Indian majors. One of the most eagerly anticipated moments in international cinema is the first crossover film that will bring Indian cinema to American audiences (i.e. not just the NRI audience). Where is the Indian Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon? Where is the Indian Jet Li or John Woo? We probably won’t have too long to wait to find out. There are plenty of talented filmmakers in India. What Indian producers need to do is to professionalise their practice. Some producers in India have simply stolen ideas from other film cultures – re-making successful films without paying for rights. But this is changing. As the Indian middle class becomes more affluent it is more able to pursue the leisure habits of the West, so a distribution for American, European and East Asian art films is emerging (see Shackleton, 2008) in the new India.
Whether the Indian majors are yet able to properly exploit the potential of their films in the West is another question. Although they have successfully marketed to the NRI audience in the UK and North America, they haven’t yet joined the UK or North American industry in following ‘institutional practice’. So, in the UK and US, you will rarely see their films reviewed in mainstream press or on television, because they aren’t previewed for journalists outside the Asian media; and distributors seem unconcerned to get the films into cinemas outside what they deem as Asian local markets. This will change.
http://www.englishandmedia.co.uk/mm/subscribers/downloads/archive_mm/_mmagpast/mm21_Bollywood.html
3)Bollywood
moving beyond boundaries
What makes a Bollywood movie – and why have they become so popular worldwide? Juno Kurian and Keith Randle put Bollywood in the picture.
The beginning of 2007 saw an unprecedented rise in the use of the term ‘Bollywood’ by the UK media. As Channel 4’s Celebrity Big Brother, featuring Indian actress Shilpa Shetty, was engulfed in a row over racist bullying, Bollywood was being taken from the specialist DVD section in the local video library to our living rooms.
BB generated massive publicity both for the actor and for Bollywood itself. As a result, Metro was given a red carpet premiere in Leicester Square, a first for any Bollywood film. So, what makes a Bollywood movie and how can we account for their rising popularity outside India?
What is Bollywood?
The name ‘Bollywood’, is believed to have been coined by Amit Khanna, the president of the Guild of TV & Film producers, and was used jokingly to refer to that slice of the Indian film industry centred on Bombay which has a penchant for Hollywood style and glamour. Bollywood films make up one-third of the Indian film industry which, in turn, is the largest in the world in terms of both the number of films produced and cinema admissions. With a total audience of over one billion, some 12 million inhabitants of the Indian sub-continent visit the cinema every day.
Apart from Bollywood, the Indian film industry is made up of regional film sub-industries consisting of Tamil, Malayalam, Telugu, Marathi and Bengali language films and the parallel cinema movement fostered by Satyajit Ray, Adoor Gopalakrishnan, G Aravindan and Mrinal Sen. But it is Bollywood films that have begun to make inroads into the international film market.
Bollywood films are characterised by song, dance and spectacle which they have inherited from the Indian theatre tradition. Early Indian films were based on mythology and epic stories and portrayed the mighty deeds of various heroes and gods. Though later films portrayed the stories of ordinary people, they retained the larger-than-life elements of these early films in their portrayal of heroes and their escapades.
Both Bollywood and mainstream regional films are frequently set in picturesque locations. Switzerland and Scotland often masquerade as Indian landscapes, representing either the place the story is set or a fantasy locations where the hero and heroine dance. Apart from the aesthetic appeal, they create a fantastic look which underlines the escapist philosophy of many of the films. For much of the population the only way they can ever hope to see those places is on a movie screen. Bollywood films, therefore, are not only the primary source of entertainment for a vast number of the Indian population but also a window to the outside world.
Bollywood abroad
For the non-resident Indian (NRI) population, scattered across the globe, including a sizeable population in the UK, watching Bollywood films is a way of keeping in touch with home and its culture. As the NRI population (estimated at around 20 million worldwide) grew in many countries and an increasing number of Indian students started to go abroad for studies, demand for Bollywood films to be made available in the international market also grew. In 1994 Rajshree Production’s Hum Aapke Hai Kaun (HAHK) was released in the UK. The success of HAHK encouraged others to release their films in overseas territories. The following year saw the release of Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jayenge (DDLJ) in several overseas territories including the UK, the USA and the Middle East. The phenomenal success of the film overseas prompted Yash Raj films, a prominent production and distribution house, to open a distribution office in the UK. In 1999, 19 Bollywood films were released in the UK by Indian distributors. In the same year Hum Saath Saath Hai produced by Rajshree Productions was placed 5th in the BFI’s chart of the Top 20 foreign language movies. During 2007 there has been at least one Bollywood film in the Top 15 film list of UK box office takings published by the UK Film Council.
How can we account for the rise in popularity of Bollywood, with its own vocabulary and unique culture, to the point where it exports to nearly 100 other countries? Can an industry which does not have huge marketing budgets at its disposal compete against Hollywood and the world’s national film industries?
Bollywood’s overseas appeal
According to Amitabh Bachchan, a veteran actor with 169 Bollywood movies to his credit, whenever a country becomes economically strong, everything about it starts to be noticed and with the opening of the Indian economy, Indian clothing, Indian food, and Indian films have all begun to be appreciated across the globe. In the UK, Indian restaurants have long been a mainstay of the country’s food culture but more recently we have seen the success of Andrew Lloyd Webber’s musical Bombay Dreams, and a 23-day festival of Bollywood fashion in the department store Selfridges, both in London’s West End.
But can the interest in Bollywood films be linked solely to the country’s rising economic strength? A closer look at the industry reveals an industry hungry for new markets and one moving strategically to increase its brand equity in the international market.
Since 2000, the International Indian Film Academy (IIFA) has held an annual awards night in a different world city outside India. The events organized by IIFA are always in conjunction with the local and regional film bodies of the host cities, ensuring local cooperation. IIFA established the awards to celebrate the achievements of the Indian film industry in the arena of world cinema. From a day long celebration in London in 2000, it has grown to a weekend of events.
This year, five UK cities Leeds, Bradford, Sheffield, York and Hull jointly co-hosted it. As celebrities from Bollywood, followed by the media, descended on each city enough publicity was generated to spark the interest of locals in Indian movies.
Bollywood film-makers have also been raising its profile by ensuring a presence in the world’s major film festivals, such as Cannes, Venice and Toronto. Holding premiers of films in major world cities is a strategy that is also gaining popularity. Mani Ratnam, a renowned film-maker, premiered his latest film, Guru in New York and Toronto. The rumour of an engagement between the lead actors created huge publicity and drew large crowds of fans for the events. The timely capitalization on the publicity surrounding actors, such as those in Guru, or by the makers of Metro of Shilpa Shetty, shows a dynamic and flexible marketing machinery.
Holding film festivals in emerging and potential markets such as the eastern European and Scandinavian countries, creating specific marketing strategies to utilize the popularity that certain actors enjoy abroad (such as Shah Rukh Khan’s fan base in Poland and John Abraham’s in Norway), or conducting lecture tours in universities worldwide, are all done with an eye to the future. And all serve to take brand Bollywood further, raising its profile and brand equity.
So, a rising interest in Indian culture has been fuelled by some clever marketing strategies. At the same time directors may be realising the limitations overseas of a restricted and unique film culture and, like Hindi-English Bollywood success Monsoon Wedding, look to producing movies in English with stories that will suit a global market.
Keith Randle is Director of the Creative Industries Research and Consultancy Unit, University of Hertfordshire. Juno Kurian is a research assistant there.
from MediaMagazine 21, September 2008.
http://www.englishandmedia.co.uk/mm/subscribers/downloads/archive_mm/_mmagpast/BIK%20Beckham.html
4) Bend it like Beckham
Sadia Choudhury was an A Level Media student at Islington Sixth Form Centre who went on to graduate in Media Studies at Sussex University. She is now a researcher for two Scottish MPs in Parliament. She is still a keen fan of film, popular media and football – and found these passions linked into her own experiences in Gurinder Chadha’s box-office smash Bend It Like Beckham, which she reviews below.
Bend It Like Beckham (Gurinder Chadha 2002), is a very funny and entertaining film about two girls with a passion for football and the ways their respective families deal with the issues around it. As an Asian girl who has played football for many years, mostly with boys/men like the central character, Jess Bhama, I was intrigued to find out how the film would handle the subject.
It would be silly to compare this film to East Is East (McDonnell 1999) or any other film of the ‘Asian’ genre simply because one of the main characters is Asian. East is East touched on serious issues within a mixed race marriage and the comedy element of that film was necessary to alleviate some of the painful scenes of physical and social abuse. Bend It Like Bechkam, on the other hand, is a humorous look at how an Asian girl and her family deal with the conflicts of a popular male-dominated sport and the traditional role of a young Eastern girl growing up in Britain. But the film doesn’t stop there: it juxtaposes this situation with that of an English teenage girl, Jules, and her parents’ attitude to her membership of the Hounslow Harriers squad.
The filming of the football was very well shot, and I really wanted to be on that pitch with Jess and Jules. They genuinely played like they were part of a team. I particularly understood the name-calling incident as it had happened to me in a game when I was playing for Chelsea Ladies about four years ago. The referee handled the situation very well in my case; we were both fined for unsporting behaviour. In the film, however, Jess was punished for letting the team down. The referee sent her off so she couldn’t finish the game, and she was told by the manager that he understood because he was Irish. The film did not acknowledge that this name-calling was wrong and didn’t attempt to resolve it in the way that it would have been tackled in any real game.
The comedy is produced through the culture-clash between Asian and white cultures. One of the most memorable moments for me is when Jess is called a lesbian by Jules’s mother, and an old Asian woman says ‘No – she is Indian’. The humour in this scene is poignant because there is a misunderstanding of language and race on both sides. Jules’s mother does not understand her daughter’s fascination with football, and misreads her friendship with Jess. The word ‘lesbian’ is misunderstood by the Asian women as an ethnic origin.
In my opinion, the film’s narrative is weakest at the end when Jess’s Sikh father explains his resistance to her footballing on the grounds that he was excluded from a cricket club when he first came to Britain; he doesn’t want Jess to be disappointed as he was. Jess challenges her father by saying things have changed, and points to the fact that Nasser Hussein is now captain of the England Cricket Team. I feel Gurinder Chadha could have handled this issue better because, from my experience, this would not be the primary reason for an Asian father stopping his daughter playing football. In my opinion this was a wasted opportunity in the film; from an Asian point of view there would be many more cultural reasons for his disapproval. For example, Asian girls often face a variety of pressures – from the community, from the temple or mosque, peer pressure, family honour – all of which Gurinder Chadha touched on throughout the film but failed to deliver at the crucial point of the narrative. Overall, though, the film is well worth watching whether you are white or Asian. MM
- Sadia Choudhury
- This article first appeared in MediaMagazine 1, September 2002
http://www.englishandmedia.co.uk/mm/subscribers/downloads/archive_mm/_mmagpast/Who_Runs_Hollywood_MM17.html
http://www.englishandmedia.co.uk/mm/subscribers/downloads/archive_mm/_mmagpast/mm28_slumdog.html
Tiny budget, unknown cast, no Americans – and massive critical, commercial and Oscar success. Austin McHale explains how Slumdog Millionaire thrived on its freedom from Hollywood.
London. February. Slumdog Millionaire has just swooped through the grey slush of the West End in a blaze of colour and sound to scoop seven BAFTA awards, including Best Film and Best Director and an extraordinary eight Oscars. Yet this film does not fit the template of Hollywood success. There are no American accents, few special effects and no big stars. It is the antithesis of glamour – a climactic sequence involves the hero, a Mumbai slum kid, diving through a cesspit and emerging covered in very realistic excrement (in fact peanut butter and chocolate), all to get a signed photograph of a Bollywood actor. Yet it has achieved the Holy Grail of cinema – made cheaply, it appeals to many different audiences, has become a critical and popular success and is set to make huge profits. How has a low budget British film reconciled these opposites without selling its soul? Perhaps our old friend MIGRAIN, inducer of headaches to generations of Media Students, can offer us a way in.
Media language
The media language of the film is indicated in the poster, a kaleidoscope of energy and colour. Against an impressionistic cityscape of blurred neon lighting, a boy and a girl burst through the darkness, both in motion but facing opposite ways. Anxiety but also hope is clear in their tense expressions. The lettering of the title is ragged, uneven, lowercase, progressing from the red of danger to the yellow of hope. In the foreground is the familiar graphic design of a question from the quiz show Who Wants to be a Millionaire? doubling as the tag line, ‘What does it take to find a lost love?’. The theme and narrative are outlined, the fragmented urban, visual style powerfully established.
The cinematography of the film is unusual for an Oscar contender. The Mumbai street scenes are filmed with a kinetic energy and a gritty realism which recalls documentary rather than Hollywood – or Bollywood – studio glamour. This look is achieved through the use of small, very manoeuvrable digital video cameras and on occasion the stuttering images of still cameras at 11 frames per second, far slower than normal film camera speed. This key artistic decision was to some extent forced on the film crew. The influence of mainstream Indian cinema is so pervasive in Mumbai that filming in the slums with traditional large cameras would have encouraged stylised Bollywood moves rather than realistic behaviour, so the film-makers had to disguise themselves as tourists and film unobserved to achieve the naturalism that they wanted.
Sound – non-Bollywood style
Another significant aspect of media language is sound, 70% of the impact of a film according to director Danny Boyle. As with visual language, creative decisions in this area involved a radical departure from the Bollywood norm. Bollywood films are made largely on sound stages, with music and ambient noise dubbed on at a later stage, because Mumbai streets are so loud. However, to Danny Boyle Mumbai street sounds were essential signifiers of the slums, so the diegetic sounds stayed. The non-diegetic musical score was just as important, aiming at a fusion of styles to engage Western as well as Indian audiences. The basic soundtrack was composed by the famous Bollywood musician A.R. Rahman, but it was overlaid by an urban Hip-Hop and Rap track prominently featuring the British Sri-Lankan MIA, reflecting the eclectic ‘masala’ mixture both of Mumbai and of Western cities.
Institutional perspectives
Institutionally Slumdog Millionaire is a fascinating case study. It was made for 13 million dollars, a tiny sum compared with the 167 million dollars of Oscar rival The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, largely raised via the French and British production companies Pathé and Film4. For a film with an almost entirely Indian cast and no stars apart from the Bollywood Indian actor Anil Kapoor, even this budget would have been a challenge to raise without Boyle’s track record as the director of a series of low budget, profitable and critically successful films such as Trainspotting, 28 Days Later and Millions. Casting threw up an unusual problem. Boyle was committed to casting locally, but every actor with Bollywood ambitions was implausibly ‘buff’ for a slumdog, having worked out every day in the approved Bollywood manner. Boyle discussed this with his 17-year-old daughter one evening and received the following piece of succinct advice, ‘If you want a loser, have a look at Skins!’ Hence the inspired casting of Dev Patel, who can project vulnerability as well as determination, and whose slow, shy smile is one of the delights of the film.
Slumdog Millionaire, like all Danny Boyle’s films, is difficult to pigeonhole in generic terms. It is a hybrid of gritty realism and aspiration, of drama documentary and love story. ‘Feelgood’, with its connotations of cliché and stereotype, is a description understandably resisted by Boyle, but despite the poverty, the child torture and the prostitution, it is indisputably an uplifting film.
Genre connections
Slumdog Millionaire’s representation of Mumbai is starkly different from two familiar though opposite stereotypes. One is the glamorous dreamworld of Bollywood, in which no-one is poor (for long, at least) and in which characters more likely to be seen dancing on a Swiss mountain or a Scottish glen than in a Mumbai railway station. The other is the English tabloid newspaper nightmare of teeming, unsanitary ghettoes populated by passive recipients of Western charity, where the only growth industries are begging, prostitution and terrorism. By contrast the slumdogs of the film are resourceful, energetic and independent citizens of one of the world’s great cities – 20 million and growing. This positive ideology, that poverty and apathy can be conquered by communal celebration, is exemplified in the film’s final sequence. As the credits roll, Dev Patel and co-star Frieda Pinto are joined by what appears to be the whole of Mumbai in an exuberant dance number. The location is the city’s main railway station, the Chapatri Shivaji Terminus, host to a thriving sub-culture of recent rural immigrants, the main artery of Mumbai. It was also one of the sites of a murderous terrorist attack last November which made headlines internationally. Despite the film sequence being shot many months before, it is being seen in India as a positive counterbalance to the images of a burning, blood-soaked Mumbai which led the TV news bulletins worldwide.
Audience and ideology
This iconic sequence appeals to many different audiences. It can be seen as the film’s one major concession to Bollywood, an explosion of sound and spectacle which is likely to attract a mainstream Indian audience. The energy of the youthful dancers, the frequent close-ups of the familiar face of Dev Patel and the Hip-Hop/Bollywood fusion of the soundtrack will hold a Western audience, particularly the sought-after demographic of 16-25 with its high level of disposable income. Finally the aspirational ideology, the community’s refusal to be defined by the squalor of the slums, their commitment to celebration, growth and change, intersects with the narrative arc of classic Hollywood cinema, in which seemingly impossible obstacles are overcome in order to fulfil a dream. This is attractive to mainstream Western media outlets.
Narrative structure
This dream, however, is not the traditional American Dream. Comfort and wealth are apparently promised by the film’s narrative structure, cleverly built around the cumulative questions of Who Wants to be a Millionaire? which, remarkably, all relate to incidents in Jamal Malik’s (Dev Patel’s) life. However, this apparent endorsement of a crudely materialist ideology is skilfully undercut, both by the corruption of Anil Kapoor’s quizmaster and by Jamal’s motivation for success, which it would be unfair to reveal. It can in fact be read as a sly critique of the system of values in our status-obsessed society, which prioritises uncontextualised academic knowledge over the real human experience acquired painfully by Jamal in the slums of Mumbai.
Much publicity has recently been given to more negative views of the film. It has been accused of poverty porn, implying that the harsh life of the slums is merely a picturesque travelogue catering for Western audiences, who remain distanced from and uninvolved in the events they see. The slum dwellers, it is said, are patronised and stereotyped. Most bizarrely, Slumdog Millionaire is said to be a derogatory term implying that Mumbai citizens are less than human, when Danny Boyle’s preferred meaning is clearly intended to be an echo of ‘underdog’, evoking connotations of bravery, resilience and moral justification. To me, these spectacular misreadings are travesties of the film’s ideological standpoints. Indeed, cynical observers have seen them as evidence of a ‘dirty tricks’ campaign, orchestrated by unscrupulous publicists of rival films in the run-up to the Oscars. Large amounts of money have been invested, for example, in the effects-laden Brangelina vehicle The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (five years in the making and 13 times the cost of Slumdog Millionaire), and of course the best short-cut to recouping costs and making a sizeable profit is via Oscar success. Why should a cheap British film, entirely shot in India without one American star, win a competition devised by Hollywood studios for Hollywood studios? Perhaps for the same reason that a Mumbai ‘charwallah’ (teaboy) from the slums should win a competition devised by the Indian elite for the Indian elite – to expose prejudice and celebrate our common humanity. After the film’s spectacular success at the Oscars, we now know that the slumdog can become a millionaire twice over.
Austin McHale is Head of Media Studies at Ellen Wilkinson School, Ealing.
This article first appeared in MediaMagazine 28, April 2009.
http://www.englishandmedia.co.uk/mm/subscribers/downloads/archive_mm/_mmagpast/mm26_seasia_film.html 2) Film as business in India
A film needs to take two to three times its production and marketing costs to break even. The Happening demonstrates how co-production can support this process. It looks like an American movie, with familiar US settings and stars. Its director, M. Night Shyamalan was born in Pondicherry in South India but grew up in Pennsylvania. The Happening was a flop in North America ($64 million), continuing the downward trend of box office for Shyamalan’s films since his mammoth success with The Sixth Sense (1999), but thanks to a co-production deal between 20th Century Fox and Indian media group UTV, its dismal American performance was balanced by an international take of over $100 million. This means that with DVD sales and television rights, a film that cost up to $90 million will still see a profit. To properly understand what this kind of co-production means, we need to consider film as a business in India.
Understanding the context of Indian film
Since the 1990s India has produced more films than any other country and these have generated the world’s largest audiences. Each year there are over 800 films made in India and audiences are over 3 billion – more than twice the size of the audience in North America. Most cinema tickets in India are very cheap, some as low as 20p each, and as yet the industry is not comparable with Hollywood in revenue terms. However, a number of factors mean that the situation is changing quickly:
– new cinema building in India is bringing modern multiplexes with digital screens to major cities
– the Indian middle class, with enough money to match Western spending patterns, is growing rapidly
– NRIs or ‘non-resident Indians’ in the UK and North America pay Western prices to watch Indian films.
Two things have happened in response to these factors. In Los Angeles, Hollywood studios have started to think about how they can sell films in India. Up to now, Indian audiences have generally ignored Hollywood films. Even those that have been successful, such as March of the Penguins and the Spider Man films, have not topped the biggest Indian films. Hollywood has reacted in two ways: Sony, a Japanese company with long-standing interests in both China and India, last year produced its first Bollywood film in India, Saawariya. The other option is to co-operate with Indian distributors who know the local market. March of the Penguins was released by Adlabs, an innovative company in the Indian media market.
Not just Bollywood!
Filmed entertainment in India faces a unique set of problems and opportunities. Contrary to what you may have read in many textbooks and newspaper articles, ‘Bollywood’ is not the whole of the Indian film industry. It isn’t even the biggest sector in terms of the number of films it produces. There are about 200 Bollywood films per year, made largely in Mumbai, in Hindi. Bollywood is therefore roughly the same size as Hollywood in terms of the number of features. However, a larger number of films (over 300) are made in the South of India, especially in Chennai and Hyderabad, in the Tamil or Telugu languages; there are 75 million Telugu speakers and 60 million Tamils in India. Films are also made in as many as six other languages. Bollywood films have the biggest budgets, but not necessarily the biggest stars – the Tamil cinema star Rajnikanth is often listed as the highest earner and his last two films have topped the Indian box office. Adlabs was careful to release March of the Penguins in English and also dubbed into Hindi, Tamil and Telugu.
So it’s important to know and understand the Indian market. You can download a free guide to Indian Cinema from http://www.cornerhouse.org/education/schoolsandcolleges.aspx?page=48260
The new Indian ‘majors’
Until recently, Indian film production companies have been relatively small. Although India had a Hindi ‘studio system’ (in Bombay, Pune and Calcutta) not unlike Hollywood in the 1930s-60s, it didn’t develop the ‘media conglomerates’ of modern Hollywood. But something like the Hollywood model is now emerging. Four companies stand out: UTV, Adlabs, Eros and Yash Raj. Each of these companies has interests in television, DVD distribution, film distribution and ‘new media’. One of the most important mergers this year has seen Eros, a largely Bollywood-focused company, merge with Ayngaran, the major distributor of Tamil language films worldwide.
These new Indian media majors see the need to think both nationally and internationally. Over the next few years we will see an increasing number of co-production deals between the six Hollywood majors and the four Indian majors. One of the most eagerly anticipated moments in international cinema is the first crossover film that will bring Indian cinema to American audiences (i.e. not just the NRI audience). Where is the Indian Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon? Where is the Indian Jet Li or John Woo? We probably won’t have too long to wait to find out. There are plenty of talented filmmakers in India. What Indian producers need to do is to professionalise their practice. Some producers in India have simply stolen ideas from other film cultures – re-making successful films without paying for rights. But this is changing. As the Indian middle class becomes more affluent it is more able to pursue the leisure habits of the West, so a distribution for American, European and East Asian art films is emerging (see Shackleton, 2008) in the new India.
Whether the Indian majors are yet able to properly exploit the potential of their films in the West is another question. Although they have successfully marketed to the NRI audience in the UK and North America, they haven’t yet joined the UK or North American industry in following ‘institutional practice’. So, in the UK and US, you will rarely see their films reviewed in mainstream press or on television, because they aren’t previewed for journalists outside the Asian media; and distributors seem unconcerned to get the films into cinemas outside what they deem as Asian local markets. This will change.
http://www.englishandmedia.co.uk/mm/subscribers/downloads/archive_mm/_mmagpast/mm21_Bollywood.html
3)Bollywood
moving beyond boundaries
What makes a Bollywood movie – and why have they become so popular worldwide? Juno Kurian and Keith Randle put Bollywood in the picture.
The beginning of 2007 saw an unprecedented rise in the use of the term ‘Bollywood’ by the UK media. As Channel 4’s Celebrity Big Brother, featuring Indian actress Shilpa Shetty, was engulfed in a row over racist bullying, Bollywood was being taken from the specialist DVD section in the local video library to our living rooms.
BB generated massive publicity both for the actor and for Bollywood itself. As a result, Metro was given a red carpet premiere in Leicester Square, a first for any Bollywood film. So, what makes a Bollywood movie and how can we account for their rising popularity outside India?
What is Bollywood?
The name ‘Bollywood’, is believed to have been coined by Amit Khanna, the president of the Guild of TV & Film producers, and was used jokingly to refer to that slice of the Indian film industry centred on Bombay which has a penchant for Hollywood style and glamour. Bollywood films make up one-third of the Indian film industry which, in turn, is the largest in the world in terms of both the number of films produced and cinema admissions. With a total audience of over one billion, some 12 million inhabitants of the Indian sub-continent visit the cinema every day.
Apart from Bollywood, the Indian film industry is made up of regional film sub-industries consisting of Tamil, Malayalam, Telugu, Marathi and Bengali language films and the parallel cinema movement fostered by Satyajit Ray, Adoor Gopalakrishnan, G Aravindan and Mrinal Sen. But it is Bollywood films that have begun to make inroads into the international film market.
Bollywood films are characterised by song, dance and spectacle which they have inherited from the Indian theatre tradition. Early Indian films were based on mythology and epic stories and portrayed the mighty deeds of various heroes and gods. Though later films portrayed the stories of ordinary people, they retained the larger-than-life elements of these early films in their portrayal of heroes and their escapades.
Both Bollywood and mainstream regional films are frequently set in picturesque locations. Switzerland and Scotland often masquerade as Indian landscapes, representing either the place the story is set or a fantasy locations where the hero and heroine dance. Apart from the aesthetic appeal, they create a fantastic look which underlines the escapist philosophy of many of the films. For much of the population the only way they can ever hope to see those places is on a movie screen. Bollywood films, therefore, are not only the primary source of entertainment for a vast number of the Indian population but also a window to the outside world.
Bollywood abroad
For the non-resident Indian (NRI) population, scattered across the globe, including a sizeable population in the UK, watching Bollywood films is a way of keeping in touch with home and its culture. As the NRI population (estimated at around 20 million worldwide) grew in many countries and an increasing number of Indian students started to go abroad for studies, demand for Bollywood films to be made available in the international market also grew. In 1994 Rajshree Production’s Hum Aapke Hai Kaun (HAHK) was released in the UK. The success of HAHK encouraged others to release their films in overseas territories. The following year saw the release of Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jayenge (DDLJ) in several overseas territories including the UK, the USA and the Middle East. The phenomenal success of the film overseas prompted Yash Raj films, a prominent production and distribution house, to open a distribution office in the UK. In 1999, 19 Bollywood films were released in the UK by Indian distributors. In the same year Hum Saath Saath Hai produced by Rajshree Productions was placed 5th in the BFI’s chart of the Top 20 foreign language movies. During 2007 there has been at least one Bollywood film in the Top 15 film list of UK box office takings published by the UK Film Council.
How can we account for the rise in popularity of Bollywood, with its own vocabulary and unique culture, to the point where it exports to nearly 100 other countries? Can an industry which does not have huge marketing budgets at its disposal compete against Hollywood and the world’s national film industries?
Bollywood’s overseas appeal
According to Amitabh Bachchan, a veteran actor with 169 Bollywood movies to his credit, whenever a country becomes economically strong, everything about it starts to be noticed and with the opening of the Indian economy, Indian clothing, Indian food, and Indian films have all begun to be appreciated across the globe. In the UK, Indian restaurants have long been a mainstay of the country’s food culture but more recently we have seen the success of Andrew Lloyd Webber’s musical Bombay Dreams, and a 23-day festival of Bollywood fashion in the department store Selfridges, both in London’s West End.
But can the interest in Bollywood films be linked solely to the country’s rising economic strength? A closer look at the industry reveals an industry hungry for new markets and one moving strategically to increase its brand equity in the international market.
Since 2000, the International Indian Film Academy (IIFA) has held an annual awards night in a different world city outside India. The events organized by IIFA are always in conjunction with the local and regional film bodies of the host cities, ensuring local cooperation. IIFA established the awards to celebrate the achievements of the Indian film industry in the arena of world cinema. From a day long celebration in London in 2000, it has grown to a weekend of events.
This year, five UK cities Leeds, Bradford, Sheffield, York and Hull jointly co-hosted it. As celebrities from Bollywood, followed by the media, descended on each city enough publicity was generated to spark the interest of locals in Indian movies.
Bollywood film-makers have also been raising its profile by ensuring a presence in the world’s major film festivals, such as Cannes, Venice and Toronto. Holding premiers of films in major world cities is a strategy that is also gaining popularity. Mani Ratnam, a renowned film-maker, premiered his latest film, Guru in New York and Toronto. The rumour of an engagement between the lead actors created huge publicity and drew large crowds of fans for the events. The timely capitalization on the publicity surrounding actors, such as those in Guru, or by the makers of Metro of Shilpa Shetty, shows a dynamic and flexible marketing machinery.
Holding film festivals in emerging and potential markets such as the eastern European and Scandinavian countries, creating specific marketing strategies to utilize the popularity that certain actors enjoy abroad (such as Shah Rukh Khan’s fan base in Poland and John Abraham’s in Norway), or conducting lecture tours in universities worldwide, are all done with an eye to the future. And all serve to take brand Bollywood further, raising its profile and brand equity.
So, a rising interest in Indian culture has been fuelled by some clever marketing strategies. At the same time directors may be realising the limitations overseas of a restricted and unique film culture and, like Hindi-English Bollywood success Monsoon Wedding, look to producing movies in English with stories that will suit a global market.
Keith Randle is Director of the Creative Industries Research and Consultancy Unit, University of Hertfordshire. Juno Kurian is a research assistant there.
from MediaMagazine 21, September 2008.
http://www.englishandmedia.co.uk/mm/subscribers/downloads/archive_mm/_mmagpast/BIK%20Beckham.html
4) Bend it like Beckham
Sadia Choudhury was an A Level Media student at Islington Sixth Form Centre who went on to graduate in Media Studies at Sussex University. She is now a researcher for two Scottish MPs in Parliament. She is still a keen fan of film, popular media and football – and found these passions linked into her own experiences in Gurinder Chadha’s box-office smash Bend It Like Beckham, which she reviews below.
Bend It Like Beckham (Gurinder Chadha 2002), is a very funny and entertaining film about two girls with a passion for football and the ways their respective families deal with the issues around it. As an Asian girl who has played football for many years, mostly with boys/men like the central character, Jess Bhama, I was intrigued to find out how the film would handle the subject.
It would be silly to compare this film to East Is East (McDonnell 1999) or any other film of the ‘Asian’ genre simply because one of the main characters is Asian. East is East touched on serious issues within a mixed race marriage and the comedy element of that film was necessary to alleviate some of the painful scenes of physical and social abuse. Bend It Like Bechkam, on the other hand, is a humorous look at how an Asian girl and her family deal with the conflicts of a popular male-dominated sport and the traditional role of a young Eastern girl growing up in Britain. But the film doesn’t stop there: it juxtaposes this situation with that of an English teenage girl, Jules, and her parents’ attitude to her membership of the Hounslow Harriers squad.
The filming of the football was very well shot, and I really wanted to be on that pitch with Jess and Jules. They genuinely played like they were part of a team. I particularly understood the name-calling incident as it had happened to me in a game when I was playing for Chelsea Ladies about four years ago. The referee handled the situation very well in my case; we were both fined for unsporting behaviour. In the film, however, Jess was punished for letting the team down. The referee sent her off so she couldn’t finish the game, and she was told by the manager that he understood because he was Irish. The film did not acknowledge that this name-calling was wrong and didn’t attempt to resolve it in the way that it would have been tackled in any real game.
The comedy is produced through the culture-clash between Asian and white cultures. One of the most memorable moments for me is when Jess is called a lesbian by Jules’s mother, and an old Asian woman says ‘No – she is Indian’. The humour in this scene is poignant because there is a misunderstanding of language and race on both sides. Jules’s mother does not understand her daughter’s fascination with football, and misreads her friendship with Jess. The word ‘lesbian’ is misunderstood by the Asian women as an ethnic origin.
In my opinion, the film’s narrative is weakest at the end when Jess’s Sikh father explains his resistance to her footballing on the grounds that he was excluded from a cricket club when he first came to Britain; he doesn’t want Jess to be disappointed as he was. Jess challenges her father by saying things have changed, and points to the fact that Nasser Hussein is now captain of the England Cricket Team. I feel Gurinder Chadha could have handled this issue better because, from my experience, this would not be the primary reason for an Asian father stopping his daughter playing football. In my opinion this was a wasted opportunity in the film; from an Asian point of view there would be many more cultural reasons for his disapproval. For example, Asian girls often face a variety of pressures – from the community, from the temple or mosque, peer pressure, family honour – all of which Gurinder Chadha touched on throughout the film but failed to deliver at the crucial point of the narrative. Overall, though, the film is well worth watching whether you are white or Asian. MM
- Sadia Choudhury
- This article first appeared in MediaMagazine 1, September 2002
http://www.englishandmedia.co.uk/mm/subscribers/downloads/archive_mm/_mmagpast/Who_Runs_Hollywood_MM17.html
5) Who runs Hollywood?
Have you ever thought about who runs Hollywood? Is it the directors, film stars, scriptwriters, or the big cheese execs who hold the purse strings? Have you ever thought that, in fact, it might be you, the audience? Drawing on research by the BBC World programme Talking Movies, Helen Dugdale peeks behind the big screen to find out who really calls the shots in Hollywood.
Each year the film industry spends millions of dollars researching the habits of cinemagoers; they want to know what we like so they can give us more of it. After all, astonishingly, every year more cinema tickets are sold than there are people on the planet! As a group, we cinemagoers have an extremely powerful voice that moviemakers listen to. But how much power do we really have? Does the audience rule the roost – or does Hollywood rule us?
People power
On average Hollywood’s studios make in the region of $25 billion a year globally from moviegoers. However, in the last 12 months there has been a 7% drop in box office sales, showing that things are changing. Actor Tilda Swinton, star of The Chronicles of Narnia explains why she thinks this is:
The studios are panicking because the numbers are down. But that can only be a good thing for filmmakers, because it means that the audience is saying that it wants something new. It’s not just that the diet of films is possibly unappealing, it’s also that audiences want to consume films away from cinema, and watch them at home.
The popularity of DVDs and downloading has inevitably had some impact on the number of people going to the cinema. If the audience can choose whether to go to the cinema or stay at home and still get to view new movies then surely the audience has power over Hollywood. If audiences stop buying as many cinema tickets, then box office figures will continue to fall, with major financial implications for the studios. Did you ever think that your decision to rent a DVD or watch the film on the big screen was such an important one?
Tony Angellotti, a top Hollywood public relations and marketing guru, believes that the audience holds the power.
If you break it down and look at it as a business then the audience has the greatest power. It’s the audience that tells you what they like. So if the audience tells you they like a particular superstar, then Hollywood is forced to use the superstar and that star then becomes extremely powerful.
The power of promotion
But not everyone agrees that the audience calls all the shots. Many people see Hollywood as a manipulating machine with the power to brainwash audiences all around the world. American Professor Toby Miller totally disagrees with the Angellotti school of thought:
In a world where money spent on the budget of a film often sees 50% going on promotion as opposed to what you actually see onscreen, the idea that we have a world where the consumer can exercise authority is absurd. This industry is like any other. Of course it has to sell things, but it doesn’t rely on waiting, listening, responding to what audiences want and then delivering that to them. It relies on knowing which parts of the world and the media need its products and will pay for them.
Filmmaker Terry George worked on location in Africa while shooting Hotel Rwanda. He’s astounded by the international reach of the American film industry and the way it cashes in on audiences seduced by the films that the Hollywood Dream Machine delivers.
The penetration of Hollywood in Africa and Asia is huge. It’s almost like it’s a surrogate emigration. Clearly American and Western values are spread particularly by movies and television, and I’m not so sure that’s a good thing.
Boys and their toys: the audience which matters most
If the audience does have any kind of clout, then according to many industry experts it’s one particular audience demographic that dominates. Professor Toby Miller explains:
The main focus for Hollywood for some years has been the young male audience member because they are deemed to be the people who buy the merchandise, who take repeat trips to the movies and who participate in electronic video games associated with the product. These are the people who are supposed to make major household decisions in the future about everything from the favourite blend of whiskey to which car to drive next, and those whose consuming preferences haven’t been set in stone.
While Hollywood caters to the tastes of young males, the industry largely ignores other demographics, including the elderly and different ethic groups. However, the lack of true global representation doesn’t stop international audiences tripping over themselves for a ticket to the latest Hollywood release. The major growth area for the American film industry now exists beyond the US borders. Global box office accounts for sixty per cent of its income.
Stars, directors and the studio
So where do the directors and film stars fit in? Surely they must have some say? Opinions are divided:
Once I’m working on a film I feel that people might listen to my opinion, but I don’t think I have a lot of power. Ralph Fiennes
In terms of getting films financed, it’s all about the actors nowadays. It’s all about who’s your cast, and the stars. But that’s constantly changing for them – Tom Cruise might be at the top one minute and then down five the next. I think it’s like a war that’s ongoing. The actors are very dependent on press; the press is dependent on the companies and the industry, so it’s an intertwined, complicated thing. I don’t know who literally has the power. Mike Mills, Director
Does anyone know?
A look at the Warner Brothers Matrix series may reveal who has the power. Despite the fact that all his films have taken $5 billion around the world, the producer, Joel Silver, works with Warner Brothers and he remains a well-paid subordinate:
The studio makes the decision of what movies they want to make. That’s where the powers is. When they say we’ll make this movie or we won’t, that’s the power to say yes or no. I don’t really have that power. I can influence them and persuade them to let me try to make a certain movie I want to make, but they have the power.
Steven Spielberg is one of the most powerful players in Hollywood. He is a co-founder of a studio, a producer, director and screenwriter. His commitment to a project will guarantee it will be made. Hardly any other players rival his power.
Reaching for the stars
Top directors also hold sway, but most filmmakers’ power is limited by the stars attached to their project. John Madden discovered from working with Gwyneth Paltrow on Proof in 2005 that:
The bigger the star you have in the movie, the more doors open for you. It’s still true, and will always remain so, that people will go see a movie largely because of who’s in it. It perhaps becomes slightly less true at the upper art-house end of the market, but that’s important. Stars aren’t stars for no reason, they’re stars because they’re extraordinary and they’re stars because their presence is unusual, because their charisma is palpable and because, generally speaking, they’re wonderful actors. So I’ve no argument with that system.
So what about the stars themselves – how much power do they have? It’s only those in the stratosphere, who receive more than $25 million a picture, who become a formidable, independent controlling force.
PR guru Tony Angellotti again:
Among actors, you have a select group who represent a genre. Tom Cruise is and has been for many years an action star. Now he’s three-times Oscar nominated, so he’s got credentials, he does big action pictures, which was surprising to me that he went in that direction. Julia Roberts is probably still the reigning female actor, because she can do any kind of film. She’s in the Ocean’s Twelve commercial films, she doesn’t have any problems with that, and she can be in a tiny little theatrical-type picture, like Closer, which is still a big picture, but a four-character drama. So she probably wields as much clout as any actress in Hollywood.
Julia Roberts has immense power because studio executives will approve almost any film she makes, knowing her presence will generate good box office. Such power is given to any actor who can guarantee a big audience, even child stars such as Dakota Fanning, whose name attached to a film means that it will almost definitely get the go-ahead because of her very strong fan base. For an eleven-year-old it’s bit hard to understand why she has more influence than most other actors in Hollywood:
I don’t even know about that, I just enjoy the movies I do and I’m glad that people enjoy the work that I’ve done and that everyone else has done as well.
Obviously, the more awards stars have to their name, the more weight they can throw around. Charlize Theron confirms this perception:
The only thing that was incredible – besides the honour of winning an Oscar – is that it opens a lot of doors, and I would be very naïve to sit here and say it didn’t change anything in my career. It did, as far as the quality of material that I get, and also I don’t have to audition anymore. So do I have the power to make any movie happen? I would never want to think that, that’s just power that nobody should have, and if I do have any more power now, I really hope that I use it in a smart way.
Other people benefit from star power, like the agents who represent them, but there’s a downside for the writers; screenwriters like Terry George have found that a star-driven system doesn’t empower the storyteller:
If it’s a Hollywood-financed project the screenwriter is basically a very well paid typist. It’s whatever stars you can get that determine the budget, the publicity and the greenlighting of the picture itself.
The government and Hollywood
Ever since the birth of Hollywood, its power to influence has made it a top concern for politicians and government. At times Hollywood has become an overt propaganda machine for the state; but the corporate bods that control the studios also have the power to influence public policy.
One area in which the US government and Hollywood routinely work together is on films where the military’s hardware and personnel are involved, such as War of the Worlds. Major Breasseale, a US army liaison officer to the entertainment industry, was on the set of the Spielberg film giving advice.He explains that the army has a vested interest:
The Army gets a chance to educate the public on what it is the Army does. Even if it’s a Science Fiction project. I know that seems kind of silly – how can you tell the Army’s story in a Science Fiction project? Well, you can tell the Army’s story in showing that it’s men and women who fight these fights. You can tell the Army’s story in saying; this is the most plausible way we would do this.
However, author and journalist David Robb, who has studied a great many military films, claims the army’s real aim is to promote America’s fighting forces in the way it sees fit. War films provide many examples where the government can influence film content unbeknownst to the public by requiring filmmakers to submit their scripts and hand over editorial control in exchange for use of the military’s sought-after resources, whether it be submarines, aircraft or tanks. David Robb:
When you give your script to the military, not only do they get to read it first, but when you shoot the film they actually have military minders on the set to make sure you shoot the film just the way you agreed to do it. This isn’t the way films are made at all, because changes are made all the time. You have to do it just the way you agreed and then after the film is shot, they pre-screen it for the Pentagon admirals and generals before it’s released to the public.
Early on in his career, Tom Cruise starred in Top Gun, which some say is a classic example of military image-tampering. He played a heroic top navy pilot in the film which showed off shiny new US military hardware in several aerial scenes. Professor Toby Miller:
Top Gun was done with the direct participation of the Defense Department, which was not only involved in scripting but also in product placement of its aircraft. And immediately after the release of that film, which was tremendously successful, recruitment rates went through the roof, to become the kind of pilot that Tom Cruise was.
At the time, Tom Cruise wasn’t pleased with the idea that his film might be propaganda glorifying combat; but by holding back its co-operation on films that portray the armed forces in ways it doesn’t like, isn’t the US military engaging in propaganda and trying to obscure the truth?
So who does rule the roost?
Hollywood certainly talks the talk and walks the walk as the big ‘I am’! But behind the arrogance, pomp and glam facade sits a long line of people who are all important ingredients in the Hollywood magic. Without the studios and the executives, there would be no money; without the scriptwriters and directors there would be no stories or productions; without the stars there would be no characters to love or hate; and without the audience there would be no-one to watch. Everyone involved has something to say; it is just that some people are listened to more than others are. Remember to use your ‘audience power’ at all times, and be sure to tell Hollywood what you really think if it comes knocking.
- Helen Dugdale is a freelance writer.
- Follow it up
- www.bbcworld.com
- www.screendaily.com
- This article first appeared in MediaMagazine 17.
Have you ever thought about who runs Hollywood? Is it the directors, film stars, scriptwriters, or the big cheese execs who hold the purse strings? Have you ever thought that, in fact, it might be you, the audience? Drawing on research by the BBC World programme Talking Movies, Helen Dugdale peeks behind the big screen to find out who really calls the shots in Hollywood.
Each year the film industry spends millions of dollars researching the habits of cinemagoers; they want to know what we like so they can give us more of it. After all, astonishingly, every year more cinema tickets are sold than there are people on the planet! As a group, we cinemagoers have an extremely powerful voice that moviemakers listen to. But how much power do we really have? Does the audience rule the roost – or does Hollywood rule us?
People power
On average Hollywood’s studios make in the region of $25 billion a year globally from moviegoers. However, in the last 12 months there has been a 7% drop in box office sales, showing that things are changing. Actor Tilda Swinton, star of The Chronicles of Narnia explains why she thinks this is:
The studios are panicking because the numbers are down. But that can only be a good thing for filmmakers, because it means that the audience is saying that it wants something new. It’s not just that the diet of films is possibly unappealing, it’s also that audiences want to consume films away from cinema, and watch them at home.
The popularity of DVDs and downloading has inevitably had some impact on the number of people going to the cinema. If the audience can choose whether to go to the cinema or stay at home and still get to view new movies then surely the audience has power over Hollywood. If audiences stop buying as many cinema tickets, then box office figures will continue to fall, with major financial implications for the studios. Did you ever think that your decision to rent a DVD or watch the film on the big screen was such an important one?
Tony Angellotti, a top Hollywood public relations and marketing guru, believes that the audience holds the power.
If you break it down and look at it as a business then the audience has the greatest power. It’s the audience that tells you what they like. So if the audience tells you they like a particular superstar, then Hollywood is forced to use the superstar and that star then becomes extremely powerful.
The power of promotion
But not everyone agrees that the audience calls all the shots. Many people see Hollywood as a manipulating machine with the power to brainwash audiences all around the world. American Professor Toby Miller totally disagrees with the Angellotti school of thought:
In a world where money spent on the budget of a film often sees 50% going on promotion as opposed to what you actually see onscreen, the idea that we have a world where the consumer can exercise authority is absurd. This industry is like any other. Of course it has to sell things, but it doesn’t rely on waiting, listening, responding to what audiences want and then delivering that to them. It relies on knowing which parts of the world and the media need its products and will pay for them.
Filmmaker Terry George worked on location in Africa while shooting Hotel Rwanda. He’s astounded by the international reach of the American film industry and the way it cashes in on audiences seduced by the films that the Hollywood Dream Machine delivers.
The penetration of Hollywood in Africa and Asia is huge. It’s almost like it’s a surrogate emigration. Clearly American and Western values are spread particularly by movies and television, and I’m not so sure that’s a good thing.
Boys and their toys: the audience which matters most
If the audience does have any kind of clout, then according to many industry experts it’s one particular audience demographic that dominates. Professor Toby Miller explains:
The main focus for Hollywood for some years has been the young male audience member because they are deemed to be the people who buy the merchandise, who take repeat trips to the movies and who participate in electronic video games associated with the product. These are the people who are supposed to make major household decisions in the future about everything from the favourite blend of whiskey to which car to drive next, and those whose consuming preferences haven’t been set in stone.
While Hollywood caters to the tastes of young males, the industry largely ignores other demographics, including the elderly and different ethic groups. However, the lack of true global representation doesn’t stop international audiences tripping over themselves for a ticket to the latest Hollywood release. The major growth area for the American film industry now exists beyond the US borders. Global box office accounts for sixty per cent of its income.
Stars, directors and the studio
So where do the directors and film stars fit in? Surely they must have some say? Opinions are divided:
Once I’m working on a film I feel that people might listen to my opinion, but I don’t think I have a lot of power. Ralph Fiennes
In terms of getting films financed, it’s all about the actors nowadays. It’s all about who’s your cast, and the stars. But that’s constantly changing for them – Tom Cruise might be at the top one minute and then down five the next. I think it’s like a war that’s ongoing. The actors are very dependent on press; the press is dependent on the companies and the industry, so it’s an intertwined, complicated thing. I don’t know who literally has the power. Mike Mills, Director
Does anyone know?
A look at the Warner Brothers Matrix series may reveal who has the power. Despite the fact that all his films have taken $5 billion around the world, the producer, Joel Silver, works with Warner Brothers and he remains a well-paid subordinate:
The studio makes the decision of what movies they want to make. That’s where the powers is. When they say we’ll make this movie or we won’t, that’s the power to say yes or no. I don’t really have that power. I can influence them and persuade them to let me try to make a certain movie I want to make, but they have the power.
Steven Spielberg is one of the most powerful players in Hollywood. He is a co-founder of a studio, a producer, director and screenwriter. His commitment to a project will guarantee it will be made. Hardly any other players rival his power.
Reaching for the stars
Top directors also hold sway, but most filmmakers’ power is limited by the stars attached to their project. John Madden discovered from working with Gwyneth Paltrow on Proof in 2005 that:
The bigger the star you have in the movie, the more doors open for you. It’s still true, and will always remain so, that people will go see a movie largely because of who’s in it. It perhaps becomes slightly less true at the upper art-house end of the market, but that’s important. Stars aren’t stars for no reason, they’re stars because they’re extraordinary and they’re stars because their presence is unusual, because their charisma is palpable and because, generally speaking, they’re wonderful actors. So I’ve no argument with that system.
So what about the stars themselves – how much power do they have? It’s only those in the stratosphere, who receive more than $25 million a picture, who become a formidable, independent controlling force.
PR guru Tony Angellotti again:
Among actors, you have a select group who represent a genre. Tom Cruise is and has been for many years an action star. Now he’s three-times Oscar nominated, so he’s got credentials, he does big action pictures, which was surprising to me that he went in that direction. Julia Roberts is probably still the reigning female actor, because she can do any kind of film. She’s in the Ocean’s Twelve commercial films, she doesn’t have any problems with that, and she can be in a tiny little theatrical-type picture, like Closer, which is still a big picture, but a four-character drama. So she probably wields as much clout as any actress in Hollywood.
Julia Roberts has immense power because studio executives will approve almost any film she makes, knowing her presence will generate good box office. Such power is given to any actor who can guarantee a big audience, even child stars such as Dakota Fanning, whose name attached to a film means that it will almost definitely get the go-ahead because of her very strong fan base. For an eleven-year-old it’s bit hard to understand why she has more influence than most other actors in Hollywood:
I don’t even know about that, I just enjoy the movies I do and I’m glad that people enjoy the work that I’ve done and that everyone else has done as well.
Obviously, the more awards stars have to their name, the more weight they can throw around. Charlize Theron confirms this perception:
The only thing that was incredible – besides the honour of winning an Oscar – is that it opens a lot of doors, and I would be very naïve to sit here and say it didn’t change anything in my career. It did, as far as the quality of material that I get, and also I don’t have to audition anymore. So do I have the power to make any movie happen? I would never want to think that, that’s just power that nobody should have, and if I do have any more power now, I really hope that I use it in a smart way.
Other people benefit from star power, like the agents who represent them, but there’s a downside for the writers; screenwriters like Terry George have found that a star-driven system doesn’t empower the storyteller:
If it’s a Hollywood-financed project the screenwriter is basically a very well paid typist. It’s whatever stars you can get that determine the budget, the publicity and the greenlighting of the picture itself.
The government and Hollywood
Ever since the birth of Hollywood, its power to influence has made it a top concern for politicians and government. At times Hollywood has become an overt propaganda machine for the state; but the corporate bods that control the studios also have the power to influence public policy.
One area in which the US government and Hollywood routinely work together is on films where the military’s hardware and personnel are involved, such as War of the Worlds. Major Breasseale, a US army liaison officer to the entertainment industry, was on the set of the Spielberg film giving advice.He explains that the army has a vested interest:
The Army gets a chance to educate the public on what it is the Army does. Even if it’s a Science Fiction project. I know that seems kind of silly – how can you tell the Army’s story in a Science Fiction project? Well, you can tell the Army’s story in showing that it’s men and women who fight these fights. You can tell the Army’s story in saying; this is the most plausible way we would do this.
However, author and journalist David Robb, who has studied a great many military films, claims the army’s real aim is to promote America’s fighting forces in the way it sees fit. War films provide many examples where the government can influence film content unbeknownst to the public by requiring filmmakers to submit their scripts and hand over editorial control in exchange for use of the military’s sought-after resources, whether it be submarines, aircraft or tanks. David Robb:
When you give your script to the military, not only do they get to read it first, but when you shoot the film they actually have military minders on the set to make sure you shoot the film just the way you agreed to do it. This isn’t the way films are made at all, because changes are made all the time. You have to do it just the way you agreed and then after the film is shot, they pre-screen it for the Pentagon admirals and generals before it’s released to the public.
Early on in his career, Tom Cruise starred in Top Gun, which some say is a classic example of military image-tampering. He played a heroic top navy pilot in the film which showed off shiny new US military hardware in several aerial scenes. Professor Toby Miller:
Top Gun was done with the direct participation of the Defense Department, which was not only involved in scripting but also in product placement of its aircraft. And immediately after the release of that film, which was tremendously successful, recruitment rates went through the roof, to become the kind of pilot that Tom Cruise was.
At the time, Tom Cruise wasn’t pleased with the idea that his film might be propaganda glorifying combat; but by holding back its co-operation on films that portray the armed forces in ways it doesn’t like, isn’t the US military engaging in propaganda and trying to obscure the truth?
So who does rule the roost?
Hollywood certainly talks the talk and walks the walk as the big ‘I am’! But behind the arrogance, pomp and glam facade sits a long line of people who are all important ingredients in the Hollywood magic. Without the studios and the executives, there would be no money; without the scriptwriters and directors there would be no stories or productions; without the stars there would be no characters to love or hate; and without the audience there would be no-one to watch. Everyone involved has something to say; it is just that some people are listened to more than others are. Remember to use your ‘audience power’ at all times, and be sure to tell Hollywood what you really think if it comes knocking.
- Helen Dugdale is a freelance writer.
- Follow it up
- www.bbcworld.com
- www.screendaily.com
- This article first appeared in MediaMagazine 17.
Wednesday 24 November 2010
Google scholars
- University of Toronto Press Journals
- http://utpjournals.metapress.com/content/6765421383187752/
- Asian Culture” and Asian American Identities in the Television and Film Industries of the United States
Abstract: “Asian” culture has long been fodder for films and television shows produced in the United States. Four main stereotypes of Asians and Asian Americans emerged from the imagination of primarily white cultural producers in Hollywood: “Yellow Peril,” “Dragon Lady,” “Charlie Chan,” and “Lotus Blossom.” These images can be understood as “controlling images” in the sense that negative stereotypes provide justifications for social control and positive stereotypes provide normative models for Asian thought and behavior. Resistance to these images became substantial in the 1960s when Asian American filmmakers developed “triangular cinema,” a strategy for Asian American community building, political mobilization, and the creation of an Asian American film aesthetic. The films of triangular cinema are “liberating images” that stake out a position for independence and autonomy for Asian American communities.
Facing difference: race, gender, and mass media By Shirley Biagi, Marilyn Kern-Foxworth
http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=uAltS3HHD5cC&oi=fnd&pg=PA32&dq=south+asian+actors+hollywood&ots=nNNVPwq-xa&sig=GbuR7Pmzluj7KTkgYLiD8ee9Hpc#v=onepage&q=south%20asian%20actors%20hollywood&f=false
Bollywood - The History and Key Elements of BombayCinema; With an Excursus on Gurinder Chadha′s CrossCultural Film "Bend It Like Beckham"
http://www.grin.com/e-book/27389/bollywood-the-history-and-key-elements-of-bombay-cinema-with-an-excursus
Abstract: Examples for Bollywood slowly entering the western world can be easily displayed: Andrew Lloyd Webber successfully produced his new musical Bombay Dreams, Monsoon Wedding was a hit in Western cinemas, the album The very Best of Bollywood Songs recently reached the UK charts, the BBC’s advertising campaign includes colourful trailers with female Indian dancers and Pot Noodle even created a new flavour named Bombay Bad Boy (Sardar, page 14-17; Shamsie, page 26-29)!
Media imperialism revisited: some findings from the Asian case
http://mcs.sagepub.com/content/22/4/415.short
Abstract: The media imperialism thesis has long argued that the expansion of Western media production into developing countries has resulted in the domination of their national media environments and the consequent destruction of their indigenous media production. This article examines the empirical tenability of this claim with regard to Asia. Delineating the region's media developments, it identifies forces such as national gate-keeping policies, the dynamics of audience preference and local competition, all of which inhibit and restrict the proliferation of Western cultural production. On the basis of this empirical evidence, the article argues that the claims made by proponents of the media imperialism thesis seem overstated in the Asian context. In conclusion, the article suggests that although media imperialism is perceived as a very real danger by governments, there are in fact several other problematic trends such as the rampant growth of commercialization and the decline of public broadcasting, the dominance of entertainment programming and a lack of genuine diversity in program genres and formats that collectively represent a more significant threat to media systems in Asia.
Of Myths and Men: Better Luck Tomorrow and the Mainstreaming of Asian America Cinema
Cinema Journal - 47, Number 4, Summer 2008, pp. 50-75
http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/cinema_journal/v047/47.4.hillenbrand.html
Abstract: This article explores the problems of cinematic representation faced by Asian American men, arguing that Justin Lin’s Better Luck Tomorrow offers a way out of the impasse. The essay contends that the strategies of parody and metacinema allow Asian American film to join the mainstream while retaining an oppositional edge.
From Bollywood to Hollywood: The globalization of Hindi Cinema
http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=hNoXnPNS7ngC&oi=fnd&pg=PA200&dq=south+asian+actors+in+hollywood&ots=oezYeZFg-y&sig=MHnVDEf4q4Gd77FlI9PbGh3Wnac#v=onepage&q&f=false
The postcolonial and the global By Revathi Krishnaswamy, John Charles Hawley
The Karma of Brown Folk. Vijay Prashad. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2000. vii. 251 pp., photographs, notes, index.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1525/ae.2002.29.3.728/abstract
Bollywood in Hollywood: Value Chains, Cultural Voices, and the Capacity to Aspire
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1644285
Abstract:
The Indian film industry provides an important case study for examining the rise of cultural expressions from the developing world and an interesting counterpoint to the analysis of global value chains that locate core coordination or production activities in the developed countries. The increasing importance of the Indian film industry globally both in terms of its revenues and its cultural impact is counter-intuitive despite its large size. India produces the highest number of films, over 1000 in 2009. It has a large domestic audience, over three billion tickets sold per year, providing a per capita consumption of nearly three films for every person in India. Nevertheless, the film industry in India historically consisted of family-run businesses or partnerships with precarious sources of financing, low budget films with predictable plots, and uneven distribution practices. The government of India did not recognize films as an industry until 2000. It is hardly the kind of case study to examine how sophisticated value chains from the South would begin to parallel or challenge those in the North. The growing success stories from Bollywood do not parallel the industries, especially from East Asia, touted for global success with a mix of government incentives, protectionism, and sophistication of the low-end product cycle that allowed these countries to utilize a mix of low-wages and capital to make a mark in a variety of manufacturing industries.
The Bollywood case shows that slight changes in domestic regulation and policy combined with global market opportunities can allow a film industry to flourish, especially if the films constitute an important cultural narrative about the country. This essay outlines three factors for the success of the Bollywood value-chain: a cultural ‘capacity to aspire’, increasing opportunities to exploit global value-chains, changes in domestic incentives. These factors now allow Bollywood to undertake arms-length contractual relationships, replacing the highly personal, even criminal, hierarchical relationships that limited its potential in the past. After detailing these factors conceptually, the paper presents a historical case study of Bollywood that underscores key changes in its value chain. The paper traces the evolution of Bollywood, the Bombay/Mumbai-based film industry, from a family-driven and financed business to one that not only harnesses global production networks but is itself becoming a key node in this network. Bollywood and India challenge Hollywood’s hegemony in various ways. India is the largest producer of motion pictures. Instead of Hollywood films dominating the Indian markets, Hollywood majors such as Disney, Sony, Miramax and Warner Brothers are producing Bollywood-type films in Mumbai in local languages. On the other hand, Indian media firms such as Reliance Entertainment are investing in Hollywood productions and co-producing films alongside a who’s who of Hollywood heavyweights. Both industries are also sharing talent these days as Hollywood directors such as Woody Allen are casting popular Bollywood actors and Hollywood producers and executives are advising their Mumbai counterparts on production, distribution, and marketing practices.
What colour ‘success’? Distorting value in studies of ethnic entrepreneurship
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-954X.00184/abstract
- http://utpjournals.metapress.com/content/6765421383187752/
- Asian Culture” and Asian American Identities in the Television and Film Industries of the United States
Abstract: “Asian” culture has long been fodder for films and television shows produced in the United States. Four main stereotypes of Asians and Asian Americans emerged from the imagination of primarily white cultural producers in Hollywood: “Yellow Peril,” “Dragon Lady,” “Charlie Chan,” and “Lotus Blossom.” These images can be understood as “controlling images” in the sense that negative stereotypes provide justifications for social control and positive stereotypes provide normative models for Asian thought and behavior. Resistance to these images became substantial in the 1960s when Asian American filmmakers developed “triangular cinema,” a strategy for Asian American community building, political mobilization, and the creation of an Asian American film aesthetic. The films of triangular cinema are “liberating images” that stake out a position for independence and autonomy for Asian American communities.
Facing difference: race, gender, and mass media By Shirley Biagi, Marilyn Kern-Foxworth
http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=uAltS3HHD5cC&oi=fnd&pg=PA32&dq=south+asian+actors+hollywood&ots=nNNVPwq-xa&sig=GbuR7Pmzluj7KTkgYLiD8ee9Hpc#v=onepage&q=south%20asian%20actors%20hollywood&f=false
Bollywood - The History and Key Elements of BombayCinema; With an Excursus on Gurinder Chadha′s CrossCultural Film "Bend It Like Beckham"
http://www.grin.com/e-book/27389/bollywood-the-history-and-key-elements-of-bombay-cinema-with-an-excursus
Abstract: Examples for Bollywood slowly entering the western world can be easily displayed: Andrew Lloyd Webber successfully produced his new musical Bombay Dreams, Monsoon Wedding was a hit in Western cinemas, the album The very Best of Bollywood Songs recently reached the UK charts, the BBC’s advertising campaign includes colourful trailers with female Indian dancers and Pot Noodle even created a new flavour named Bombay Bad Boy (Sardar, page 14-17; Shamsie, page 26-29)!
Media imperialism revisited: some findings from the Asian case
http://mcs.sagepub.com/content/22/4/415.short
Abstract: The media imperialism thesis has long argued that the expansion of Western media production into developing countries has resulted in the domination of their national media environments and the consequent destruction of their indigenous media production. This article examines the empirical tenability of this claim with regard to Asia. Delineating the region's media developments, it identifies forces such as national gate-keeping policies, the dynamics of audience preference and local competition, all of which inhibit and restrict the proliferation of Western cultural production. On the basis of this empirical evidence, the article argues that the claims made by proponents of the media imperialism thesis seem overstated in the Asian context. In conclusion, the article suggests that although media imperialism is perceived as a very real danger by governments, there are in fact several other problematic trends such as the rampant growth of commercialization and the decline of public broadcasting, the dominance of entertainment programming and a lack of genuine diversity in program genres and formats that collectively represent a more significant threat to media systems in Asia.
Of Myths and Men: Better Luck Tomorrow and the Mainstreaming of Asian America Cinema
Cinema Journal - 47, Number 4, Summer 2008, pp. 50-75
http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/cinema_journal/v047/47.4.hillenbrand.html
Abstract: This article explores the problems of cinematic representation faced by Asian American men, arguing that Justin Lin’s Better Luck Tomorrow offers a way out of the impasse. The essay contends that the strategies of parody and metacinema allow Asian American film to join the mainstream while retaining an oppositional edge.
From Bollywood to Hollywood: The globalization of Hindi Cinema
http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=hNoXnPNS7ngC&oi=fnd&pg=PA200&dq=south+asian+actors+in+hollywood&ots=oezYeZFg-y&sig=MHnVDEf4q4Gd77FlI9PbGh3Wnac#v=onepage&q&f=false
The postcolonial and the global By Revathi Krishnaswamy, John Charles Hawley
The Karma of Brown Folk. Vijay Prashad. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2000. vii. 251 pp., photographs, notes, index.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1525/ae.2002.29.3.728/abstract
Bollywood in Hollywood: Value Chains, Cultural Voices, and the Capacity to Aspire
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1644285
Abstract:
The Indian film industry provides an important case study for examining the rise of cultural expressions from the developing world and an interesting counterpoint to the analysis of global value chains that locate core coordination or production activities in the developed countries. The increasing importance of the Indian film industry globally both in terms of its revenues and its cultural impact is counter-intuitive despite its large size. India produces the highest number of films, over 1000 in 2009. It has a large domestic audience, over three billion tickets sold per year, providing a per capita consumption of nearly three films for every person in India. Nevertheless, the film industry in India historically consisted of family-run businesses or partnerships with precarious sources of financing, low budget films with predictable plots, and uneven distribution practices. The government of India did not recognize films as an industry until 2000. It is hardly the kind of case study to examine how sophisticated value chains from the South would begin to parallel or challenge those in the North. The growing success stories from Bollywood do not parallel the industries, especially from East Asia, touted for global success with a mix of government incentives, protectionism, and sophistication of the low-end product cycle that allowed these countries to utilize a mix of low-wages and capital to make a mark in a variety of manufacturing industries.
The Bollywood case shows that slight changes in domestic regulation and policy combined with global market opportunities can allow a film industry to flourish, especially if the films constitute an important cultural narrative about the country. This essay outlines three factors for the success of the Bollywood value-chain: a cultural ‘capacity to aspire’, increasing opportunities to exploit global value-chains, changes in domestic incentives. These factors now allow Bollywood to undertake arms-length contractual relationships, replacing the highly personal, even criminal, hierarchical relationships that limited its potential in the past. After detailing these factors conceptually, the paper presents a historical case study of Bollywood that underscores key changes in its value chain. The paper traces the evolution of Bollywood, the Bombay/Mumbai-based film industry, from a family-driven and financed business to one that not only harnesses global production networks but is itself becoming a key node in this network. Bollywood and India challenge Hollywood’s hegemony in various ways. India is the largest producer of motion pictures. Instead of Hollywood films dominating the Indian markets, Hollywood majors such as Disney, Sony, Miramax and Warner Brothers are producing Bollywood-type films in Mumbai in local languages. On the other hand, Indian media firms such as Reliance Entertainment are investing in Hollywood productions and co-producing films alongside a who’s who of Hollywood heavyweights. Both industries are also sharing talent these days as Hollywood directors such as Woody Allen are casting popular Bollywood actors and Hollywood producers and executives are advising their Mumbai counterparts on production, distribution, and marketing practices.
What colour ‘success’? Distorting value in studies of ethnic entrepreneurship
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-954X.00184/abstract
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)