Sunday, 31 January 2010
05:17 | 
Posted by
srishell |
Preface
The field of Film Studies is already large but is still growing in popularity. An increasing number
of schools, colleges and universities are also adopting film as an area of study. Numerous
courses are devoted to the study of aspects of film and film history and many disciplines
are also actively integrating the use of film, among them Media Studies, English, Historical
Studies, American Studies and Cultural Studies, to name just a few.But do we need yet another book on Film Studies? While there are any number of academic texts covering many different areas of Film Studies, there are relatively few textbooks which explain basic concepts in a lucid manner suitable for students at the very beginning of their studies. For example, at the time of writing only a single textbook is available for British A level students. Studying Film provides an alternative core text for the new AS/A-Level specification in Film Studies. The text is also designed to provide a useful tool
for undergraduate students both in Film Studies and cognate degree courses. It will also
assist teachers of Film Studies and those with a general interest in film alike, providing
additional information outside the syllabus's scope for those wishing to learn more.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the many people who in various ways have helped in the development
and completion of this book. They include family and friends, colleagues and students,
readers, Tim O'Sullivan, Lesley Riddle, Emma Heyworth-Dunn and the team at Arnold. Their
contributions range from patience and understanding to help and advice. We would also like
to thank Kobal and the BFI for permission to reproduce photographs.
In this opening chapter we shall focus on the American film industry which goes by the
name of Hollywood. The precursors to and origins of Hollywood are examined elsewhere,
in Chapter 7 on Early Cinema and Film Form; here we shall be examining Hollywood from its
heyday, the 'mature' Studio System between the years 1930 and 1949, through to what has
variously been called post-1948 Hollywood, New Hollywood or contemporary Hollywood.
While tracing the development of Hollywood, we shall also look at the growth of the 'independents'
and their relationship to the major studios in terms of finance, distribution and
exhibition.
Histories of Hollywood have changed over time. Early histories were little more than firsthand
accounts of the industry, written by individuals who were often part of the very system
they claimed to analyse. This raises questions of the objectivity and usefulness of such
accounts. From the 1970s onwards, however, a new academic form of Film History
emerged from the university campuses which sought to revise the earlier, often uncritical,
histories. In turn, these histories were themselves challenged in the late 1970s and 1980s
and scrutinized by others who had adopted Marxist-materialist perspectives. Then by the
mid-1980s, another mode of Film History, which focused upon institutions, began to
emerge. Academic understanding of Hollywood, therefore, has developed as the writing of
film history itself has changed. Our intention is simply to focus upon certain key periods; we
acknowledge that the boundaries that mark different periods in Hollywood's history (and,
indeed, what to call them) are still in dispute, but we shall not enter into that debate here.
T H E S T U D I O S Y S T E M
The origins and early history of the motion picture industry in Hollywood will be discussed in
other chapters; our emphasis here will be on the years between 1930 and 1949, which have
been described as the 'Golden Age' or the 'Classical Era' of Hollywood film. To understand
why this is so, we need to examine the nature of Hollywood film production during this
period, which Thomas Schatz (1998) has referred to as 'the genius of the system'. It is
during this period that we see Hollywood trying to remove any element of surprise or unpredictability
from the film-making process at every level from a film's conception to its exhibition.
It must be pointed out here, however, that many of the techniques that were so
effective during the heyday of the Studio System were being developed from 1909 onwards
and were already firmly in place by 1930.
O l i g o p o l y
By 1930 eight studios dominated the Hollywood film industry in the form of an oligopoly: a
situation where the market is completely dominated by a small number of companies, resulting
in limited competition. These companies were divided into the 'Majors' or 'Big Five', which
were Warner Brothers, Loew's-MGM, Fox, Paramount and Radio-Keith-Orpheum (RKO) (see
Figure 1.1), and the 'Minors' or 'Little Three': Columbia, Universal and United Artists (UA). The
major studios were vertically integrated, which means they exercised control over production,
distribution and exhibition, whereas the minors generally concentrated on production.
Hollywood's position as the film capital of the world was made possible partly by the
advent of the First World War in 1914. The war temporarily destroyed European competition,
particularly in France and Italy. For the next four years Hollywood dominated the film
world, establishing an impressive global distribution network. It has been estimated that in
1914 Hollywood produced 50 per cent of the world's films; by 1918 it produced nearly all
of them. By 1925 foreign film rentals amounted to 50 per cent of total Hollywood revenues.
V e r t i c a l I n t e g r a t i o n
Vertical integration meant that the major studios dominated film production, distribution and
exhibition. They made, released and marketed their films, even owning the cinemas in which
they were shown: exhibition was the most profitable sector of the film industry. In the days
before television and VCRs, box-office sales were the source of income for recouping budgets
spent on making films. The heads of the major studios wanted to ensure that there was a
constant outlet for their product, and this led to a series of initiatives designed to dominate
the industry.
In 1916 Adolph Zukor developed a system of 'block booking' for film distribution. He
forced theatre owners to rent Paramount's star vehicles along with groups or 'blocks' of
other less desirable and less commercially viable films. Zukor thus ensured a steady outlet
for his films regardless of their quality, meaning that money was made on everything
Paramount produced.
Within a year every major production company had adopted this practice. The studios
already controlled production and block booking represented an attempt to control distribution
and exhibition as well. This desire to dominate exhibition was extended by the studios'
attempts to acquire as many cinemas as possible during the 1920s. By the 1930s the majors
were pouring most of their investments into exhibition, and as a result between 1930 and
1949 they owned almost three-quarters of first-run US cinemas. The majors had divided the
country into 30 markets and these were again subdivided into zones, in which the cinemas
were classified as first-run, second run, and so on. First-run cinemas showed films as soon as
they were released. They tended to have large numbers of seats, were situated in key locations
in urban areas, and charged higher admission prices. Each film had to be shown for 14
to 42 days before it could move to the next zone, and this meant a maximum profit for the
majors from each release. The majors' ownership of theatre chains, in particular first-run
cinemas, together with block booking practices, ensured maximum exhibition of their films.
As mentioned above, the studios had already established an impressive global distribution
system by the 1920s, and a major factor in their success was an international market
for their films. The major studios dominated this distribution network as a direct result of
their control of exhibition. The minors had some involvement in distribution, most notably
United Artists, which was set up in response to Zukor's block booking initiatives by Mary
Pickford, Douglas Fairbanks, Charlie Chaplin and D.W. Griffith in 1919 for the exclusive distribution
of their films. However, they had to co-operate with the majors' system of distribution,
and in practice this meant that the majors ensured that their own films received priority
over those of the minors. It was these initiatives that increased cost-effectiveness and
guaranteed profits and helped to account for the commercial success of the Hollywood
Studio System after 1930.
A s s e m b l y Line P r o d u c t i o n
During the 'Golden Age' of Hollywood, the studios produced one film each per week per year.
At its height, the studio system released 350 films in a single year. The studios were able
to achieve such remarkable production figures through rationalization of working practices.
The field of Film Studies is already large but is still growing in popularity. An increasing number
of schools, colleges and universities are also adopting film as an area of study. Numerous
courses are devoted to the study of aspects of film and film history and many disciplines
are also actively integrating the use of film, among them Media Studies, English, Historical
Studies, American Studies and Cultural Studies, to name just a few.But do we need yet another book on Film Studies? While there are any number of academic texts covering many different areas of Film Studies, there are relatively few textbooks which explain basic concepts in a lucid manner suitable for students at the very beginning of their studies. For example, at the time of writing only a single textbook is available for British A level students. Studying Film provides an alternative core text for the new AS/A-Level specification in Film Studies. The text is also designed to provide a useful tool
for undergraduate students both in Film Studies and cognate degree courses. It will also
assist teachers of Film Studies and those with a general interest in film alike, providing
additional information outside the syllabus's scope for those wishing to learn more.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the many people who in various ways have helped in the development
and completion of this book. They include family and friends, colleagues and students,
readers, Tim O'Sullivan, Lesley Riddle, Emma Heyworth-Dunn and the team at Arnold. Their
contributions range from patience and understanding to help and advice. We would also like
to thank Kobal and the BFI for permission to reproduce photographs.
In this opening chapter we shall focus on the American film industry which goes by the
name of Hollywood. The precursors to and origins of Hollywood are examined elsewhere,
in Chapter 7 on Early Cinema and Film Form; here we shall be examining Hollywood from its
heyday, the 'mature' Studio System between the years 1930 and 1949, through to what has
variously been called post-1948 Hollywood, New Hollywood or contemporary Hollywood.
While tracing the development of Hollywood, we shall also look at the growth of the 'independents'
and their relationship to the major studios in terms of finance, distribution and
exhibition.
Histories of Hollywood have changed over time. Early histories were little more than firsthand
accounts of the industry, written by individuals who were often part of the very system
they claimed to analyse. This raises questions of the objectivity and usefulness of such
accounts. From the 1970s onwards, however, a new academic form of Film History
emerged from the university campuses which sought to revise the earlier, often uncritical,
histories. In turn, these histories were themselves challenged in the late 1970s and 1980s
and scrutinized by others who had adopted Marxist-materialist perspectives. Then by the
mid-1980s, another mode of Film History, which focused upon institutions, began to
emerge. Academic understanding of Hollywood, therefore, has developed as the writing of
film history itself has changed. Our intention is simply to focus upon certain key periods; we
acknowledge that the boundaries that mark different periods in Hollywood's history (and,
indeed, what to call them) are still in dispute, but we shall not enter into that debate here.
T H E S T U D I O S Y S T E M
The origins and early history of the motion picture industry in Hollywood will be discussed in
other chapters; our emphasis here will be on the years between 1930 and 1949, which have
been described as the 'Golden Age' or the 'Classical Era' of Hollywood film. To understand
why this is so, we need to examine the nature of Hollywood film production during this
period, which Thomas Schatz (1998) has referred to as 'the genius of the system'. It is
during this period that we see Hollywood trying to remove any element of surprise or unpredictability
from the film-making process at every level from a film's conception to its exhibition.
It must be pointed out here, however, that many of the techniques that were so
effective during the heyday of the Studio System were being developed from 1909 onwards
and were already firmly in place by 1930.
O l i g o p o l y
By 1930 eight studios dominated the Hollywood film industry in the form of an oligopoly: a
situation where the market is completely dominated by a small number of companies, resulting
in limited competition. These companies were divided into the 'Majors' or 'Big Five', which
were Warner Brothers, Loew's-MGM, Fox, Paramount and Radio-Keith-Orpheum (RKO) (see
Figure 1.1), and the 'Minors' or 'Little Three': Columbia, Universal and United Artists (UA). The
major studios were vertically integrated, which means they exercised control over production,
distribution and exhibition, whereas the minors generally concentrated on production.
Hollywood's position as the film capital of the world was made possible partly by the
advent of the First World War in 1914. The war temporarily destroyed European competition,
particularly in France and Italy. For the next four years Hollywood dominated the film
world, establishing an impressive global distribution network. It has been estimated that in
1914 Hollywood produced 50 per cent of the world's films; by 1918 it produced nearly all
of them. By 1925 foreign film rentals amounted to 50 per cent of total Hollywood revenues.
V e r t i c a l I n t e g r a t i o n
Vertical integration meant that the major studios dominated film production, distribution and
exhibition. They made, released and marketed their films, even owning the cinemas in which
they were shown: exhibition was the most profitable sector of the film industry. In the days
before television and VCRs, box-office sales were the source of income for recouping budgets
spent on making films. The heads of the major studios wanted to ensure that there was a
constant outlet for their product, and this led to a series of initiatives designed to dominate
the industry.
In 1916 Adolph Zukor developed a system of 'block booking' for film distribution. He
forced theatre owners to rent Paramount's star vehicles along with groups or 'blocks' of
other less desirable and less commercially viable films. Zukor thus ensured a steady outlet
for his films regardless of their quality, meaning that money was made on everything
Paramount produced.
Within a year every major production company had adopted this practice. The studios
already controlled production and block booking represented an attempt to control distribution
and exhibition as well. This desire to dominate exhibition was extended by the studios'
attempts to acquire as many cinemas as possible during the 1920s. By the 1930s the majors
were pouring most of their investments into exhibition, and as a result between 1930 and
1949 they owned almost three-quarters of first-run US cinemas. The majors had divided the
country into 30 markets and these were again subdivided into zones, in which the cinemas
were classified as first-run, second run, and so on. First-run cinemas showed films as soon as
they were released. They tended to have large numbers of seats, were situated in key locations
in urban areas, and charged higher admission prices. Each film had to be shown for 14
to 42 days before it could move to the next zone, and this meant a maximum profit for the
majors from each release. The majors' ownership of theatre chains, in particular first-run
cinemas, together with block booking practices, ensured maximum exhibition of their films.
As mentioned above, the studios had already established an impressive global distribution
system by the 1920s, and a major factor in their success was an international market
for their films. The major studios dominated this distribution network as a direct result of
their control of exhibition. The minors had some involvement in distribution, most notably
United Artists, which was set up in response to Zukor's block booking initiatives by Mary
Pickford, Douglas Fairbanks, Charlie Chaplin and D.W. Griffith in 1919 for the exclusive distribution
of their films. However, they had to co-operate with the majors' system of distribution,
and in practice this meant that the majors ensured that their own films received priority
over those of the minors. It was these initiatives that increased cost-effectiveness and
guaranteed profits and helped to account for the commercial success of the Hollywood
Studio System after 1930.
A s s e m b l y Line P r o d u c t i o n
During the 'Golden Age' of Hollywood, the studios produced one film each per week per year.
At its height, the studio system released 350 films in a single year. The studios were able
to achieve such remarkable production figures through rationalization of working practices.
Labels: