Question 1: What factors were
involved in the end of the Studio System as it existed from the early days up
through the 1950’s?
To
begin with, the Studio System was dominant from the 1920’s through the late
1950’s and early 1960’s. The Studio System was known for the vertical
integration techniques that many of the large companies practiced. Belton
describes vertical integration as
The structure of a marketplace that is integrated (rather than
segregated) at a variety of crucial levels; in the case of the motion picture
industry, the studio system established a market in which the studios are
owners of their production facilities, distribution outlets, and theaters. In
other words, the studios control every level of the marketplace from the top
down, from production to exhibition.[1]
Vertical integration is what made
it very easy for a certain amount of production companies to become the
strongest such as MGM, Paramount, Warner Bros., and 20th Century
Fox. However, as companies grew more powerful one might say that several people
and agencies became corrupt. For example, in an attempt to gain a higher
revenue through the movie sales, manipulative booking techniques were used.
These techniques included block booking, blind bidding, and runs, zones, and
clearances.[2]
However, these techniques became known quickly, and many people disagreed with
them.
The
demise of the Studio System began before World War II, “when the U. S.
Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division filed suit against the eight major
studios accusing them of monopolistic practices.”[3]
However, this case lasted throughout the war and was not settled until May
1948.[4]
Because the Supreme Court ruled against the Paramount Case and the studios, the
eight major studios (Paramount, Loew’s/ Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Fox/ 20th
Century-Fox, Warner Bros., and Radio-Keith-Orpheum)[5]
were forced to divorce their operations from each other, and to remove
themselves from the theater chains; therefore they would have no involvement in
both the production of the films and the distribution.[6]
However, because the major studio’s had become so powerful, they were able to
stall the courts ruling for a few more years, which gave them the power to
maintain their control until the late 1950’s and early 1960’s.[7]
However,
the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Paramount Case was not the only thing
influential in the decline of the Studio System and Era. Due to the war, there
were several protests and strikes by the studio labor unions that took place
after the Second World War.[8]
The studios were also experiencing competition with television, independent
producers and actors, and a change of leisure time for the American public
(because the War greatly disrupted the way people lived in America).[9]
Also, many of the actors began to ask for lump-sum payments because they were
taxed at a lower rate and gave the actor a higher status and star symbol in the
film industry. Lastly, the era of the blockbuster was right around the corner,
and because the Studio System was unable to compete with the mode of production
they slowly began to release their personnel and shut down their businesses.
However, there was still a remnant of the past left behind because many of the
studios were rented out to private producers and television shows.[10]
In
conclusion, the Studio System brought along a Golden Age to Hollywood, but it
was met with demise at the end. This was due to the corruption of the vertical
integration, actors and actresses asking for lump-sum payments, labor unions
going on strike, the changing culture and economy due to World War II, and the
Paramount Case. However, as one door might shut another one will open, and this
door would lead to the beginning of the Blockbuster Era.
Question 2: In the first several
decades of film production, various Studios were associated with particular
styles and genres. Discuss this subject and give examples from our viewing list
or other movies you might have watched on your own.
An
observer and critic of American cinema would notice that there are differences
in style and genres that each Studio might have. This is especially true in the
first several decades of film production when a Studio would be known for a
particular style and/or genre before the later years when a Studio would begin
to incorporate different styles and genres.
To answer this
question I will begin with the major and the minor studios. The major studios
include Paramount, Loew’s/ Metrow-Goldwyn-Mayer (M-G-M), Fox/ 20th
Century-Fox, Warner Bros., and Radio-Keith-Orpheum (RKO); while the minors were
Universal, Columbia, and United Artists.[11] Although
these are the most well known studios, the business actually began with Motion
Picture Patents Company, which was Thomas Edison’s trust that had, “control of
basic motion picture patents, governed production, distribution, and
exhibition.”[12]
However, out of this trust emerged Adolph Zukor’s Famous Players Company in
1912, which capitalized on the dramatic content within the films and the actors
and actresses.[13]
It was at this point in history that different companies began to emerge and
start their productions. Each of these studios had their own style and
specialty genre.
Perhaps one of the
largest styles that are present within film is the narrative style. Belton
describes the Narrative process as,
…an orderly patter in which an initial state of affairs is
introduced, after which something occurs to disturb this equilibrium.
Subsequent events attempt to restore the original status quo, but this is
repeatedly frustrated, and order is recovered only at the end of the film.[14]
The narrative style also has
subdivisions of style within it such as the classical narratives and the
adventure story, which could include horror.[15]
These types of movies often present the viewer with a character-centered
cinema. Therefore the characters must overcome their obstacles within the film
by problem solving.[16]
Therefore, the character’s struggle to achieve their goals or solve their problems
gives way for the action, adventure, comedy, horror, or other drama that is
depicted towards the viewer. However, there is also the point that these
struggles are also constricted to a certain time and space within the movie,
which also provides more of a dramatic effect.[17]
An
example of a narrative film would be Some
Like It Hot!, which was directed by Billy Wilder and distributed by United
Artists. It starred Marilyn Monroe, Jack Lemmon, Tony Curtis and others. This
movie is an example of the flight and pursuit aspect of a narrative. It shows
how the main characters, Josephine and Daphne travel down to Florida because
they were trying to escape the gangsters since they only surviving witnesses to
the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre. Throughout their journey they were met with
comical obstacles as cross dresser’s and members of an all-female band.
Another
type of style would be the melodrama, which first came to the United States
from France as a silent film.[18]
Therefore, Belton states that this type of film,
…perfected the craft of visual expression, translating thought
and emotion into gesture, costume, décor, and other elements of mise-en-scène.
It discovered how to say all without literally saying anything.[19]
As stated above, this type of film
was ideal for the silent cinema. Therefore actors such as Buster Keaton or
Charles Chaplin were very prominent. A melodramist by the name of Griffith was
well known in the United States on speaking on behalf of nineteenth-century
agrarianism.[20]
He had films such as A Corner in Wheat
and The birth of a Nation.[21]
Another
genre of music would be the musical. This type of film contains song and often
dance numbers that tells a story, and they usually have a narrative or musical
reality, which assist in telling the story line. An example of an early musical
would be Broadway Melody, which was
produced in 1929.[22]
Although musicals, particularly the operetta flourished at Paramount and M-G-M,
the musical began to shift into a present-day (ie High School Musical) style musical when RKO began producing the
Astaire-Rogers musicals. These are also known as the “screwball musicals”
because of the slapstick comedy throughout.[23]
Within
the genres of American cinema, there was also a large demand for comedy films.
The genre of comedy contains other genres within it. For example, many of the
silent films that Chaplin partook in were also comedies.[24]
It is Belton that states that, “American film comedy, like comedy in general,
is the genre of the people.”[25]
This is very true with the fact that comedies often made fun of anyone and
everyone. There were different types of comedies such as the Silent, Slapstick,
Romantic, Screwball, War, Animal, Ironic, and Greek Comedies.[26]
Although many studios produce comedic films, the two that might be the most
well known for the production of early comedic films are Hal Roach and Columbia
(which alone produced 190 releases of The
Three Stooges).
Another
genre would be war. This type of film presents the viewer with a narrative that
has, “explosive action sequences, superhuman feats of bravery, and spectacular
displays of mass destruction.”[27]
While watching war films, one might be able to see how unlike other films,
there is usually a distinct difference in sexual roles between males and
females. War films can also be used as a type of propaganda such as J. Stuart
Balckton’s Battle Cry of Peace
produced in 1915.[28]
One example of a well-known war film would be Casablanca produced in 1942. It shows how there are sexual role
differences between men and women, a struggle and goal objectives by the main
characters, and how war scenes are depicted.
There
are three other types of film genres that are present within American cinema
such as Film Noir, which is also known as black film, Western films, and
Science Fiction films. The Film Noir is found early within cinema productions.
It is the classical black and white films, but depends heavily on the different
types of lighting, actors and actresses, and mise-en-scène. The Western films were known
for their image of conquering the west, and although it was Edison who first
filmed Buffalo Bill,[29]
it was Warner Bros. who seemed to lead the way with John Wayne movies. Lastly,
the horror and science fiction genre opened a new world to viewers by presenting
the viewer with a heart-racing thrill. Star
Trek would be an example of science fiction, and Dracula would be an example of horror. For example, Universal
Studios would be well known for producing the monster horror movies, and Fox
and United Artists would be known for the production of science fiction movies
such as The Lost World or Things to Come.
Although
different production companies were known for different styles and genres of
movies, such as Universal Studios specializing in monster movies, many
production companies often had a few films that were out of their element.
However, by beginning with a narrative, a movie could follow simple steps to
keep the audience engaged in the movie rather it be a comedy, science fiction,
or western movie.
Question 3: There is something
called the “Hollywood Style.” What is it and how did it develop?
The
Hollywood style has previously been described in the first two questions, but
it will be described again in this question. There is a typical style that all
artists follow known as the American National Style. Each artist, while showing
his or her individualistic styles through their motion pictures are existing
within a larger context which is a general style therefore known as the
Classical Hollywood Style.[30]
Although
it is hard for an every day, untrained eye to see, the Classical Hollywood
Style shows that there are specific processes and a certain style within a
movie. This process is the narrative process. As stated previously,
…it follows an orderly pattern in which an initial state of
affairs is introduced, after which something occurs to disturb this
equilibrium. Subsequent events attempt to restore the original status quo, but
this is repeatedly frustrated, and order is recovered only at the end of the
film.[31]
The Classical Hollywood Style
follows this in almost every American movie produced. For example, they all
have a beginning, middle, and end. They also have different events that occur
in the movie to the characters where the characters must solve their problems
in order to achieve their goals.[32]
There is also the fact that these goals are organized through time and space.
Belton states,
Often the goals that organize a classical Hollywood narrative
are given a precise temporal dimension—a specific deadline has to be met or a
certain task has to be completed by a definite time.[33]
An example of this would be a more
recent movie such as Inception. In
this film, the characters must accomplish a goal in a certain amount of time,
and within each level of the unconscious they have a certain time to get to the
other level; the characters are also met with emotional and physical problems
as well that the must solve in order to complete their mission of implanting a
thought into a man’s head.
Also,
there are several hidden details within the Classical Hollywood Style. For
example, while a viewer might not immediately see underlying meanings, they
might, “unconsciously sense the classic principles of economy, regularity,
symmetry, order, and pleasure.”[34]
In
trying to analyze and review a film that is produced using the Classical
Hollywood Style, one might use segmentation, which is “an analytical technique
designed to expose an underlying discontinuity by breaking the film down into
basic narrative unity.”[35]
An example of this is the segmentation of Chaplin’s The Gold Rush:
I. Prologue
II. The Cabin
III. The dance hall
IV. The cabin in town
V. The dance hall
Each of these segmentations is
followed by a brief summary of the section. This helps to see the symmetry, imagination,
the flight and pursuit of characters, the narrative structure and sexuality
within the film, the resolution or irresolution of the characters problems, and
other details that lead to a larger picture.
In
conclusion, most films follow this narrative Classical Hollywood Style.
However, there are some that do not. By having an organized film, it is easier
for a viewer to follow along with the movie, and by having a producer’s
individual artistic ideas incorporated, it keeps the viewer engaged. The
Hollywood Style is one that is not only seen in films from the past, but also
in the films of today.
Question 4: What were the
origins of the Production Code and how did it influence American filmmaking?
Also
known as the Hayes Code after Will H. Hays effort to clean up Hollywood’s
image, The Production Code was instituted in 1934 by the Motion Picture
Producers and Distributors of America,[37]
and this was instituted because of protests by certain prominent leaders within
the community and members of the clergy.[38]
The Production Code enforced guidelines on the producers of motion pictures so
that they would not portray anything that would be offensive to the public.
Belton states the following about the Production Code:
Directed against depictions of not only crime and violence but
also sexual themes such as adultery; scenes of passion, seduction, or rape;
sexual perversion, and miscegenation, the Code handcuffed the rampant sexuality
of early 1930’s stars such as the sexy platinum blonde Jean Harlow and the
sexually suggestive Mae West.[39]
The Code also put limitations on
violence within the films. Many of the earlier gangster films often had a
warning or even a Bible verse at the beginning of the films. The Code was meant
to portray a good moral example to those who watched films in their leisure
time. Throughout the years that the Production Code was instated, there were
movies that were being produced where a viewer could see how The Code affected
the scenes, sexuality, and violence, and how there were changes throughout the
years (especially after the Second World War when sexuality began to reemerge).
Perhaps one of the
biggest influences that the Production Code had on filmmakers is within the
realm of sexuality. Films such as Frank Capra’s It Happened One Night portrays a man and woman sleeping in separate
beds, with a curtain drawn between the two.[40]
This is one example of why many of the sex comedies were without the actual
sex. These changes were brought on by the Catholic Legion of Decency, which
campaigned to depict Christian morality within the films and prohibit sexual
perversion, vulgarity, and scenes of passion.[41]
It was sexuality that The Code seemed to have more focus on, rather than the
issue of violence within movies.
The Code also
regulated war movies and worked closely with the Office of War Information
(OWI).[42]
It often would show the graphic battle scenes and blood, but would leave out
the actual killing of the humans. This is also seen in many of the early
gangster films The Public Enemy.
However, violence, while important, did not seem like the main focus of the
Production Code…sexuality was.
However, as the
years continued on, many of the producers began to challenge the limits of the
Production Code. As many of them continued to do this, The Code began to relax
the rules a little bit. For example, Otto Preminger completely disregarded The
Code in his 1953 film, The Moon is Blue
by openly discussing premarital sex and using words such as pregnant,
seduction, and mistress.[43]
This pattern continued to grow stronger, and by the late 1950’s and early
1960’s the Production Code became almost impossible to control. There were too
many producers disobeying the rules for The Code to work. Therefore, out of The
Code, an effort was made to create a rating system. This rating system is still
present now, and used on almost every film (except the Not Yet Rated films).
However, it is clear that many producers are beginning to defy this rating code
like the producers of the past. How is someone to judge if something is rated
G, M, R, and X, or in today’s world G, PG, PG-13, R, X? It is a question that
is to remain, but the legacy of the Production Code is still present today.
Works Cited
Belton, John. American Cinema/American Culture. 3rd ed. Boston: McGraw
Hill. 2009.
[1]
John Belton, American Cinema/ American
Culture, 3rd ed., (Boston: McGraw Hill, 2009), 68.
[2]
Ibid., 82.
[3]
Ibid.
[4]
Ibid.
[5]
Ibid., 67.
[6]
Ibid., 82.
[7]
Ibid.
[8]
Ibid.
[9]
Ibid.
[10]
Ibid., 83.
[11]
Ibid., 67.
[12]
Ibid.
[13]
Ibid., 68.
[14]
Ibid., 23.
[15]
Ibid., 24.
[16]
Ibid.
[17]
Ibid., 25.
[18]
Ibid., 127.
[19]
Ibid.
[20]
Ibid., 135.
[21]
Ibid.
[22]
Ibid., 155.
[23]
Ibid., 157.
[24]
Ibid., 166.
[25]
Ibid., 173.
[26]
Ibid., 174-194.
[27]
Ibid., 196.
[28]
Ibid., 205.
[29]
Ibid., 244.
[30]
Ibid., 22.
[31]
Ibid., 23.
[32]
Ibid., 25.
[33]
Ibid.
[34]
Ibid., 28.
[35]
Ibid.
[36]
Ibid., 29-30.
[37]
Ibid., 110.
[38]
Ibid.
[39]
Ibid.
[40]
Ibid., 181.
[41]
Ibid.
[42]
Ibid., 208.
[43]
Ibid., 187.
No comments:
Post a Comment