SCREEN-L Archives

February 1994


Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
louis schwartz <[log in to unmask]>
Tue, 8 Feb 1994 13:12:41 -0600
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
text/plain (20 lines)
On Tue, 8 Feb 1994, DE NEF RENAAT wrote:
> Is it true that the American (film) culture is in danger after the buyout by
> Sony, Matsushita, Murdoch and Credit Lyonnais ?
Well, is it true that all national (film) cultures are in *danger* in an
economic era defined by the circulation of transnational capital? The means
of mechanical reproduction are an intensive form of capital that is
inevitably pulled within the dominant, transnational, flow of capital.
With in the transnational flow the means of mechanical reproduction become
increasingly expensive investments (witness the bidding war over
Paramount). This means that their *products*, eg movies, are each expected
to bring in a greater and greater return. In order to provide a profit
each film must first pay off 2 huge investments, the money spent
specifically on it and the money spent by a transnational conglomerate to
purchase the company that made the film. To make this kind of money films
must address audiences beyond the nation where it is first released. This
is all very well argued in Tim Corrigan in A CINEMA WITHOUT WALLS.