If you had to name the five most acclaimed international filmmakers in the world right now, they would be: Wong Kar-wai Abbas Kiarostami Andrei Sokurov Hou Hsiao-hsien Leos Carax Only one has ever had a film released theatrically in the U.S. (Kar-wai) and that is because Tarantino personally made it happen. If you took the five most acclaimed foreign filmmakers from the 1950's, 60's, 70's and 80's, you would find that almost all of their films received theatrical distribution in the U.S. The death of the foreign film in the 1990's can be pinned almost exclusively on two fat old men. Death to Miramax.
I wouldn't say exclusively. Rise of multiplexes in the 70s and 80s didn't help either. Plus, mergermania in media, publishing and entertainment industries resulted in decreased quality of products in all forms of entertainment, and the death of foreign films is just one of the many symptoms. Small movie houses and "true" independent studios simply can't compete with multinationals.
Re: Re: The death of foreign films in the U.S. But despite this, a strong niche market for foreign cinema still exists. The difference now is that Bob and Harvey alone choose what to feed it. And your average consumer thinks "Amelie" is the avante-garde of French cinema rather than "Pola X."
Re: Re: Re: The death of foreign films in the U.S. I get you now. People forget that Miramax is just Disney in sheep's clothing. They made some decent movies at first but they've put out some god awful films in recent years.
Rosenbaum wrote a great book on the subject with "Movie Wars." I can't find excerpts on the net, but here's a review of it: Despite its silly title, Jonathan Rosenbaum's new collection Movie Wars is a knockout. In it, the Chicago Reader's much-admired film critic names the guilty men, women and studios behind what he calls the "media-industrial complex" designed to limit the choices available to film audiences in the US. Rosenbaum believes that a combination of a spoon-fed mainstream press that has abnegated its responsibility to report film as anything other than a business, coupled with the cowardice and self-interest of studios who worship at the altar of test screenings, has resulted in a situation where bad movies thrive and good ones don't get seen. He reserves particular venom for Miramax and its co-chairman Harvey Weinstein, who, with the eager co-operation of particular critics, has managed to propagate the perception that his company is somehow an underdog independent specialising in "alternative" film - this despite being owned by Disney (who paid the Weinstein brothers $60 million) and cornering the market in middlebrow fare such as Shakespeare in Love and Chocolat. Rosenbaum brings Miramax to book for refusing to make available prints of films it has bought the rights to, releasing only half the films it actually picks up, and keeping the others under wraps, either to reduce competition for their favoured releases or because the film-makers won't agree to the cuts and changes Weinstein wants. Rosenbaum's seniority and refusal to run with the pack indemnify him to some degree, but it is still surprisingly refreshing to read him accuse the likes of The New York Times film critic Janet Maslin of wilful ignorance of non-US cinema and being a propagandist for the Miramax juggernaut. His cheerfully bitchy demolition of her dismissive report on the 1999 Cannes festival, where she devoted eight paragraphs to the views of the disgruntled Weinstein and only two to the major prize-winners, are worth the price of admission alone: ' ... she had little desire to hang out with critics more interested and knowledgeable about movies than she was, because this might make her at least faintly aware that she might be missing something. (I'm ruling out some of the titles that interest me the most ... because I couldn't imagine her sitting through them, but surely there were other, less demanding items she might have enjoyed.)'
The idea that Bob & Harvey killed high-quality foreign films is absurd. It's like the countless arguments that we have on these boards concerning whether or not the Big Five record labels or ClearChannel is most to blame for lousy music. The public taste is being sated mostly by crap, so blame the public. Miramax, like all other companies, are out to turn a profit. If they had any indication that "Pola X" had an audience, they'd buy the distribution rights to it. If anybody believed that these films were commercially viable, they'd buy the distrib rights. Maybe you can blame people for not releasing Won Kar-wai films out of the goodness of their hearts, but if that bothered enough people to do something about that it's a problem that would solve itself. Art films have rarely made money. Foreign films have rarely made money. Foreign art films, therefore, are the kiss of death.
Thanks for bringing up this issue. When I was in my late teens and early twenties I enjoyed going to the local second-run cinema and seeing some great eye-opening movies from around the world. This is something I miss now, since these kind of movie houses are closing down. I'm sure there are a combination of reasons why such as the uncertainty of financial gain for investors, the narrowing interests of the American public and the shift to vcr and dvd viewing. I'd like to know more about the filmmakers listed and if there are others to recommend.
Yay! Finally, and end to the nonsensical triple and quadruple meanings layered atop blasing symphonic melodies, drowing out what's left of the dialoge, no matter how funny it is to listen to. Finally, an end to the black-and-white ancient world of foreign cinema, obviously never having been blessed with the gift from God that is Ted Turnered magical color technology which has brought so, so much joy to every little boy and girl in this great land we call Colorful America. Finally, an end to the notion that every sinister character in every dramatic cell must be sweaty, slightly unshaven, and of course, donning a swarthy mustache. And at last, finally, and end to the bottom-of-the-screen reading that has taken our eyes away from the guts of the film so that we may make sense of their third-world wrong talk that they so cleverly disguise with whimsical names such as "french" or "Portugese." Oh. You didn't mean Death To Foreign Films in the US was a good thing, did you? My bad. Nevermind.
Obie- you're assuming that Arthouse distribution operates within a free and open market. This is not the case. A handful of distributors controls the Arthouse circuit. Thus, there are an extremely limited number of foreign film slots in any given calendar year. It's not that Bob and Harvey don't think Kiarostami's earthquake trilogy won't make money. It's that they think "Horseman on a Roof" will make more money. So they buy all four and then shelve the Kiarostami trilogy to prevent any competition.
I think considering movies like those of Ahn Hung Tran are still getting widespread distribution is a pretty good sign. You can maybe argue that "Scent of Green Papaya" was lighter fare, but "Vertical Ray of the Sun" and certainly "Cyclo" were explored heavier themes. The fact that Vietnamese movies are playing in multiplexes to me is a positive sign. Sure it would be nice if there was indie movie houses everywhere, but that simply isn't the case. For someone like myself who doesn't live in a huge city, there's not enough folks around that care about seeing movies like "Vertical Ray of the Sun" "No Man's Land" or "Kandahar" for them to turn a profit. However, cramming two theatres with garbage like "Titanic" actually helps my case because those theatres can carry a smaller, lesser known movie. Perhaps I'm lucky that one of the local multiplexes actually has a conscience and plays lesser known foreign movies to virtually empty houses (comparably empty compared to blockbuster type movies) night after night. Regarding some of the filmmakers you've mentioned...to each his own, I don't particulary care for what I've seen of Kiarostami ("Taste of Cherry") or Hou Hsiao-hsien ("Flowers of Shanghai") I will agree that Mirimax's quality has massively dipped in the last few year's..."Chocolat" specifically springs to mind.
Although your points are well-taken, that's a pretty unsubstantiated statement. "Acclaimed" by who? And for total output or one movie? And by "international", do you mean only directors who make movies in a foreign language? For what it's worth, I think Leos Carax is terribly overrated and "Pola X" is an embarassment although "Lovers of Bridge 9" is fantastic.
back last November, when people were discussing "Who's next on the US's list" for terrorist states, I wrote to a friend that Miramax ought to be the next terrorist state on the list. I think that was at a point in time when that friend wastrying his darndest to get me to see Amelie. I've managed to avoid it. Miramax --- Brainless Films for Brainy People. I remember how pissed I got when Shakespeare in Love and The Thin Red Line came out. I was in Dallas, and that bastard critic for the Dallas Morning News Philip Wuntch was dissing on Line and calling that mental pop tart Shakespeare "luminous." Wong is a frickin' genius and should be more widely distributed. If it weren't for Film Comment, I wouldn't know the others.
Let me preface this by saying that I am fortunate to live in a metropolitan area where film lovers can see virtually anything. GT, the indie distribution market is a totally free and open market. What I assume that you're talking about is the link between distributors and multiplexes, which are harder to find (Miramax, Sony Classic, Fox Searchlight, Lion's Gate, etc.). But that's a problem that is prevalent throughout the entire industry, not just the Weinsteins. There is nothing that's stopping me from going to Cannes or Berlin or Slamdance or wherever with a wad of cash and buying the U.S. distribution rights to an independent film. It's not like somebody is buying them and shelving them, keeping film art away from the masses deliberately. Where I get my new film shown, on the other hand, is another issue. The best-case scenario is I get good buzz in the major cities with a few prints and then sell it to another big-name distributor who can get it on the screens nationwide. People may say that "Life is Beautiful" and "Amelie" are schmaltzy crap (I thoroughly enjoyed Amelie, by the way) but they were foreign-language films that broke through the toughest foreign-language market on the planet. If the movie has the appeal, it will play in the suburbs.
Yeah living in the US you never hear about foreign films in mainstream media unless they are released by Miramax. Nonetheless I take great pleasure in "discovering" a movie that I've never heard of from a foreign country be it on cable or wherever I found it. It makes it more special you appreicate it more because you feel special watcing a great film that most people haven't seen.
Re: Re: The death of foreign films in the U.S. Film festival juries, film society programmers, critics at Cashier du Cinema, Cineaction, Positif, Film Comment, Sight & Sound, etc etc. Total output in the last 10 years or so. That, and the fact that their films play on the international festival circuit. Most people, even Carax fans, hated "Pola X." But it was his only logical step after "Lovers." He's so committed to raising the stakes with every film, that he left his audience behind. I think he realizes this and I wouldn't be surprised if he never made a film again.
You do have a point. I used to program a film society in Texas. I would often go straight to the source, sometimes paying the filmmaker himself for the rights to screen his or her film for a week. For a Kiarostami retrospective, I had to go directly to the government film agency of Iran. But other times, the source would refuse to rent to me, still holding out hope for a U.S. distribution deal or because the rights had already been purchased, but with no hope of distribution. But they are. According to Rosenbaum, Miramax never releases about half of the foreign films they buy the rights for. For the Kiarostami retrospective, I had to beg and fight and claw for permission to screen "Through the Olive Trees," which they owned but never distributed outside of NY and LA. I offered them double the market price for a single screening, and still they refused. Finally, I had to enlist the help of some influential movie people to convince them to release it to us.
Well that's interesting and changes things quite a bit. If true, then yes, Bob & Harvey are jackasses.
While there is certainly a large distribution of foreign films by Mirimax, I know tons of foreign films distributed by Sony Pictures Classics too. At the multiplex nearest me, they probably play as many Sony pictures as they do Mirimax pictures.