Towards an understanding of Australian genre cinema and entertainment : beyond the limitations of ‘Ozploitation’ discourse

While Australian cinema has produced popular movie genres since the 1970s, including action/adventure, road movies, crime, and horror movies, genre cinema has occupied a precarious position within a subsidised national cinema and has been largely written out of film history. In recent years the documentary Not Quite Hollywood (2008) has brought Australia’s genre movie heritage from the 1970s and 1980s back to the attention of cinephiles, critics and cult audiences worldwide. Since its release, the term ‘Ozploitation’ has become synonymous with Australian genre movies. In the absence of discussion about genre cinema within film studies, Ozploitation (and ‘paracinema’ as a theoretical lens) has emerged as a critical framework to fill this void as a de facto approach to genre and a conceptual framework for understanding Australian genres movies. However, although the Ozploitation brand has been extremely successful in raising the awareness of local genre flicks, Ozploitation discourse poses problems for film studies, and its utility is limited for the study of Australian genre movies. This paper argues that Ozploitation limits analysis of genre movies to the narrow confines of exploitation or trash cinema and obscures more important discussion of how Australian cinema engages with popular movies genres, the idea of Australian filmmaking as entertainment, and the dynamics of commercial filmmaking practises more generally.

Generation next : post-cinema Australian moviemaking, innovation and implications for cultural policy

The Australian screen industries are a leading domestic creative industry sector at a crossroad. New production, distribution and exhibition technologies are challenging traditional models of ‘filmmaking’. For the screen industries to remain competitive they must renovate business models for an emerging marketplace. This paper is a preliminary examination of three key aspects of next generation filmmaking: post-cinema approaches to screen production, emerging production and business models, and issues for policy.

Film, cinema, screen

Screen industries around the globe are evolving. While technological change has been slower to take effect upon the Australian film industry than other creative sectors such as music and publishing, all indications suggest that local screen practices are in a process of fundamental change. Fragmenting audiences, the growth of digital video, distribution and exhibition, the potential for entirely new forms of cultural expression, the proliferation of multi-platforms, and the importance of social networking and viral marketing in promoting products, are challenging traditional approaches to ‘film making’. Moreover, there has been a marked transition in government policy rationales and funding models in recent years, resulting in the most significant overhaul of public finance structures for the film industry in almost 20 years. Film, Cinema, Screen evaluates the Australian film industry’s recent development – particularly in terms of Australian feature film and television series production; it also advocates new approaches to Australian film, and address critical issues around how screen production globally is changing, with implications for local screen industries.

Independent cinema in the Chinese film industry

Chinese independent cinema has developed for more than twenty years. Two sorts of independent cinema exist in China. One is underground cinema, which is produced without official approvals and cannot be circulated in China, and the other are the films which are legally produced by small private film companies and circulated in the domestic film market. This sort of ‘within-system’ independent cinema has played a significant role in the development of Chinese cinema in terms of culture, economics and ideology. In contrast to the amount of comment on underground filmmaking in China, the significance of ‘within-system’ independent cinema has been underestimated by most scholars. This thesis is a study of how political management has determined the development of Chinese independent cinema and how Chinese independent cinema has developed during its various historical trajectories. This study takes media economics as the research approach, and its major methods utilise archive analysis and interviews. The thesis begins with a general review of the definition and business of American independent cinema. Then, after a literature review of Chinese independent cinema, it identifies significant gaps in previous studies and reviews issues of traditional definition and suggests a new definition. After several case studies on the changes in the most famous Chinese directors’ careers, the thesis shows that state studios and private film companies are two essential domestic backers for filmmaking in China. After that, the body of the thesis provides an examination of the development of ‘within-system’ independent cinema. Specifically, three factors: government intervention, the majors’ performance (state studios and, later, the conglomerates) and the market conduct of independent cinema at various points in their trajectories are studied. The key findings of the study are as follows: First, most scholars have overlooked the existence and the significance of within-system Chinese independent cinema. Drawing on an American definition of the independent sector, this thesis proposes a definition of the sector in China: namely, any film that has not been financed, produced, and/or distributed by majors. The thesis also notes important contradictions in applying this definition: i.e. film-making is still dependent on policies that frame industry development. The thesis recognises that major tensions apply to filmmaking in China, which significantly differentiates the Chinese independents from those in the US. Second, the development of Chinese independent cinema is the result the rise of the private sector and the decline of the state studio system. As state studios encountered difficulties the private sector moved forward; consequently the environment improved for independent cinema. Third, before 2003, the film industry in China had little commercialisation. The government controlled independent cinema by means of license and censorship. State studios produced main melody films and Hollywood attracted most of the audiences. Many independent filmmakers focused on commercial films, thus contributing to film commercialisation. Fourth, after 2003, the film industry became increasingly fragmented. The government created distribution and exhibition opportunities for main melody films; conglomerates collaborated with Hong Kong players; Hong Kong co-productions and Hollywood occupied the film market; and small private film companies produced main melody films in order to earn meagre profits. The original contribution of the thesis is to advance the study of Chinese independent cinema. The study suggests a reasonable and practical definition of Chinese independent cinema. It shows how the Chinese government authorities have implemented economic measures to gain ideological control in the film industry. Finally, this the first study on Chinese independent cinema applying a synthesis of economic, political and historical perspectives.

Journalism in the cinema

This chapter explores the representation of journalism in one of the most important popular culture forms, cinema. It advocates the use of movies about journalism in journalism studies teaching and research, and reviews the existing literature on the subject.

Digital Disruption : Cinema Moves Online

Digital Disruption: Cinema Moves On-line helps to make sense of what has happened in the short but turbulent history of on-line moving image distribution. It provides a realistic assessment of both the genuine and the not-so-promising methods that have been experimented in response to the disruptions that moving from ‘analogue dollars’ to ‘digital cents’ have provoked in the film industry. Paying close attention to how the Majors have dealt – often unsuccessfully – with the challenges it poses, it also focuses closely on the innovations and practices that have taken place beyond the mainstream, showcasing important entrepreneurial innovations such as Mubi, Jaman, Withoutabox and IMDb. Written by leading academic commentators and experts close to the fluctuating fortunes of the industry, Digital Disruption: Cinema Moves On-line is an indispensable guide to the changes currently facing film and its audiences.

'The comfort lies in all the things you can do': the Australian drive-in: cinema of distraction

Contrary to the claims of some film historians, the drive-in was not a uniquely American invention. Australian drive-in cinemas were, at least in the 1950s and 1960s, distinguishable from their American counterparts by virtue of the profusion of additional amusements (or distractions) they offered alongside film-viewing. This article traces the history of Australian drive-ins as ‘entertainment centres’ and ‘high temples of modernity’. It argues that the drive-in can usefully be understood as a mid-point between the domestic and public spheres, and a powerful symbol of post-WWII Australia, signifying prosperity, gathering consumer confidence and, in metropolitan areas, marking the path of urban development through its concentration in new, outer suburban areas.

A bureaucratic cinema: the fraught relationship between government and film

The interventions by the government in the production and circulation of film in late 1960s transformed the Australian cinema industry into a bureaucratic cinema because of its established agencies and institutions for the benefit of filmmakers. Training options expanded by the commencement of the Australian Film and Television School and the Film, Radio and Television Board of the Australia Council, which ran compulsory orientation seminars and workshops on the use of new equipments, helped the aspiring filmmakers to access money from the council's Basic Production Fund.

Outward-looking Australian cinema

Over the last twenty years or so, Australian cinema's international relations in production and policy have expanded and become more complex, while those with Hollywood have been transformed. The boundaries of the national cinema stretch much further than the national territory. Australian production and postproduction companies work in Australia with international partners or on international projects. In this article I will trace some of the material and discursive entailments of this new international turn to explore how dynamic and shifting relations between the local/national and the international have transformed the ways in which we might think about what constitutes Australian cinema, and to illustrate how relations of commonality and continuity with the international called up in the new arrangements challenge the dominant articulation in policy of difference from 'other kinds of filmmaking' as the basis of Australian cinema. I draw on Deb Verhoeven's work on simultaneously national and international films and filmmakers, and adapt Doreen Massey's concept of 'outwardlookingness' to consider Australian cinema's international aspects.

Digital intermediary: Korean transnational cinema

Since censorship was lifted in Korea in 1996, collaboration between Korean and foreign filmmakers has grown in both extent and visibility. Korean films have been shot in Australia, New Zealand and mainland China, while the Korean digital post-production and visual effects firms behind blockbusters infused with local effects have gone on to work with filmmakers from greater China and Hollywood Korean cinema has become known for its universal storylines, genre experimentation and high production values. The number of exported Korean films has increased, as has the number of Korean actors starring in films made in other countries. Korea has hosted major international industry events. These milestones have facilitated an unprecedented international expansion of the Korean film industry. With the advent of the 'digital wave in Korea the film industry's transition to digital production practices this expansion has accelerated Korean film agencies the pillars of the national cinema have played important parts in this internationalisation, particularly in promoting Korean films and filmmakers outside Korea and in facilitating international events in Korea itself Yet, for the most part, projects involving Korean filmmakers working in partnership with filmmakers from other countries are the products of individuals and businesses working outside official channels. That is, they are often better understood as 'transnational rather than 'national' or 'international' projects. In this article, we focus on a range of collaborations involving Korean, Australian, New Zealand and Chinese filmmakers and firms. These collaborations highlight some of the forces that have shaped the digital wave in the Korean film industry, and illustrate the increasingly influential role that the 'digital expertise of Korean filmmakers is playing in film industries, both regionally and around the world.

The national specificity of horror sources in Asian horror cinema

This dissertation explores the relationship between horror films and the national contexts in which they are produced by analyzing several Asian horror movies – Ringu (Japan), The Eye (Hong Kong) and Shutter (Thailand). Utilizing these films as case studies, the dissertation examines the degree to which genre cinemas are nationally-specific, and the degree to which it is possible to make genre films that can enter international markets and be comprehensible in various national markets as well. The dissertation also makes the following claims on the national specificity of genre cinema: i) The sources of frightening elements in horror films are nationally-specific. ii) There is a regional "Asian" horror because of the intertwining national histories and shared cultural elements across several Asian countries.

A silver bullet for Australian cinema? Genre movies and the audience debate

There has been a renaissance in Australian genre cinema in recent years. Indeed, not since the 1980s have Australian genre movies across action, adventure, horror, and science-fiction among others, experienced such prominence within production, policy discourse, and industry debate. Genre movies, typically associated with commercial filmmaking and entertainment, have been identified as a strategy to improve the box-office performance of Australian feature films and to attract larger audiences. Much of this conversation has revolved around the question of whether or not genre can deliver on these high expectations and transform the unpredictable local film industry into a popular and profitable commercial production sector. However, this debate for the most part has been disconnected from analysis of Australia’s genre movie heritage in terms of their position within Australian cinema and their reception with domestic audiences, and how this correlates to contemporary trends. As this chapter argues, genre production is not a silver bullet which will single handedly improve the Australian feature film industry’s commercial performance. Genre movies have occupied, and continue to occupy, a difficult position within Australian cinema and face numerous challenges in terms of reception with national audiences, limited production scale and enterprise structures, and ongoing tensions between culture and commerce.

Towards an understanding of Australian genre cinema and entertainment : beyond the limitations of ‘Ozploitation’ discourse

While Australian cinema has produced popular movie genres since the 1970s, including action/adventure, road movies, crime, and horror movies, genre cinema has occupied a precarious position within a subsidised national cinema and has been largely written out of film history. In recent years the documentary Not Quite Hollywood (2008) has brought Australia’s genre movie heritage from the 1970s and 1980s back to the attention of cinephiles, critics and cult audiences worldwide. Since its release, the term ‘Ozploitation’ has become synonymous with Australian genre movies. In the absence of discussion about genre cinema within film studies, Ozploitation (and ‘paracinema’ as a theoretical lens) has emerged as a critical framework to fill this void as a de facto approach to genre and a conceptual framework for understanding Australian genres movies. However, although the Ozploitation brand has been extremely successful in raising the awareness of local genre flicks, Ozploitation discourse poses problems for film studies, and its utility is limited for the study of Australian genre movies. This paper argues that Ozploitation limits analysis of genre movies to the narrow confines of exploitation or trash cinema and obscures more important discussion of how Australian cinema engages with popular movies genres, the idea of Australian filmmaking as entertainment, and the dynamics of commercial filmmaking practises more generally.

Brisbane : creative city, cinema city?

Brisbane stands at the cross roads of many major economic, social and cultural opportunities as it positions itself as a cosmopolitan, globally networked metropolis of the twenty-first century. In order to link and leverage the existing screen industries infrastructure into Brisbane’s creative city’s plans, the paper argues for a re-think of the existing policy frameworks that support Australian screen culture and the national screen industries. Instead of remaining premised on a separation of these two activities the paper argues for a greater recognition of the overlaps occurring in both production and consumption of screen content. By acknowledging the impact new media technologies and social behaviours and the way they are re-shaping media consumption and media production practices, film and media policy could be better positioned to complement the emerging creative city policy frameworks that are being fostered in a city like Brisbane. The paper argues that reconsideration of the culture/industry separation that characterizes contemporary policy settings underpinning Australian media and screen production assistance would not only assist in identifying crucial synergies within a creative city policy it would also invigorate policy settings for the screen industries and enable them to connect more efficiently to a shifting film and media production and consumption landscape.