SCREEN-L Archives

March 1995, Week 2


Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Thu, 9 Mar 1995 15:35:42 CST
text/plain (31 lines)
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
<[log in to unmask]>  $B$N!" (J
 "Re: ***international*** discussion list"  $B$K$*$$$F!" (J
 [log in to unmask]  $B$5$s$O=q$-$^$7$?!# (J
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>3. Given the immense commercial impact of American cinema on the rest of
>the world (where Hollywood can often recoup losses from a domestic
>"disaster"), how does that affect the film culture of any given nation?
I know, I am being repetitive in my constant references to Indian cinema,
and I mentioned that before - allegedly, Hollywood's impact on the Indian
film market is still negligeable. (Its impact on the character of
popular Indian films is there, but that's a different question)
This is largely due, I think, to the practice of non-dubbing. As I mentioned
before, Jurrasic Park was the first Hollywood film to be dubbed into Hindi.
Non-dubbing, of course, restricts viewing potential. I personally think that
the Indian film market would be one of the most interesting areas to watch for
 the next
few years.
Speaking of Europe, and especially of German-speaking countries: Everything
is dubbed in Austria, and therefore, Hollywood films are, linguistically,
"on a par" with Austrian films, and it is not only, but also owing to this
factor that Hollywood films do affect the local film industry (if any...).
Birgit Kellner
Institute for Indian Philosophy
University of Hiroshima