Paul suggests:
>
> Therefore, there are [at least] 3 Indias in cinema: the India of
> American fantasy (e.g. Indiana Jones), the India of Indian fantasy (the
> song-and-dance films), and Ray's view of the "real" India.
>
>[...] The popularity of the song-and-dance movies, however,
> certainly does reveal something about the Real India, since it's Real
> Indians who support these extravaganzas.  My intuition is that this
> version of India holds the same place in the Indian psyche as the 6-day
> Edo Dynasty flicks hold in Japanese culture and the 3-day Westerns hold
> in the U.S.A.
 
"Quirky" Australian films (such as _Strictly Ballroom_) might occupy a
similar position for Australian audiences, and I suspect that their
nostalgia for particular versions of Australian life (especially family
life) is a big draw-- it also seems to be a feature of popular TV drama
and documentary, and extends into other fields (non-fiction publishing,
particularly autobiography and cook books!) _Romper Stomper_, while it
drew crowds at the time, doesn't seem to represent a similarly pervasive
"genre".
 
Nostalgia would presumably also be important in the films that Paul
mentions. Might that be one of the problems with the specific expectations
that we as audiences have of our respective national cinemas? A US film
watched in Australia is not neccessarily seen as being "about the US"
in the same way that an Australian film is "about Australia"? This could
limit the types of film that we would accept from our own filmmakers.
 
Helen Kay.
 
----
Online resources for film/TV studies may be found at ScreenSite
http://www.tcf.ua.edu/screensite