Hollywood is for many, myself
included, the first place that you think of when you think of where the most
dominant film industry in the world is located. The well known glamorous actors
and actresses that light up the screen and the well known film directors like
Steven Spielberg and Ron Howard make the imagery of Hollywood purely all
American. Any other film industry outside of the USA would seem to be miniscule
and unimportant next to the over publicized actors, directors and films coming
straight out of Hollywood. However, it has been noted by many scholars that
Hollywood has become very much influenced by Asian culture, or in other words
asianised. This can to be said for the Asian film industry with the emergence
of Bollywood which has completely taken oven India and has been very much
influenced by Hollywood. Christina Klein (2004) wrote an article on the affects
that globalization has had on the film industries in both the USA and Asia.
Klein writes that her article ‘argues that these industries are becoming more closely
integrated with one another both materially and aesthetically, and that this in
turn is leading to the denationalization of individual films and film
industries on both sides of the Pacific’ (2004, pg 1).
The remaking of films from both
Asian to American and American to Asian formats have been done for decades and
are a prime example of how both of the film industries are taking each other’s
ideas and reworking them to make blockbusters, and most of all profits. British
journalist Jonathon Romney (2013) writes that ‘asianisation of Hollywood cinema
is inevitable in a globalised world’ and his statement is seemingly correct.
The remaking of Asian films into Hollywood blockbusters has become an integral
part of the Hollywood film industry, horror films in particular being the main
target, however not the only genre. For
the most part Asian films which are remade into Hollywood blockbusters do not
get the credit they deserve as it is highly uncommon for the audience to even
know where the original idea came from. Remaking films from ‘Hong Kong, Japan
and South Korea has been a major trend in Hollywood since 2002’ which saw the
Hollywood release of the film ‘The Ring’ which was remade from the Japanese
film ‘Ringu’, turn into a massive ‘box office success’ (Hunt & Leung 2008,
pg 191). The ethnic identities of the original Asian films which are remade
into Hollywood films are essentially forgotten as the original version does not
gain credit for the success of the movie, and it is only the success of the
Hollywood version that is publicized. According to Hunt and Leung (2008, pg
192) ‘the remaking trend occurred... because of the systematic exploitation of
exotic cultures and fast action by Hollywood’. This quote explores the fact
that the Hollywood film industry has the ability to remake Asian movies
especially with the profits that are made each year from film tickets. In 2012
alone in America ‘movie
theatres sold an estimated $10.84 billion worth of tickets’ (Smith 2012). Add
into the already rich mix of Hollywood, money and power, a surplus of well
known and idolised actors and the reason behind remaking already made Asian
movies can be seen to be simple. Klein writes that ‘we can see one kind
of integration taking place in the globalization of Hollywood’s audience...
making movies primarily for people who live outside the USA...for people who
live in Asia’ (2004 pg 363).
Globalization is referred to by
Albrow (cited in Rantenen 2005) as “all those processes by which the
peoples of the world are incorporated into a single world society, global
society.” This particular quote from Albrow is very closely connected to
the Asianisation of Hollywood as globalisation has contributed significantly to
Hollywoods increasing profits and styles of movie. Martial arts are
perhaps one of the most overused ways of depicting fighting scenes in Hollywood
films in this day and age. Well known Asian actors such as Jackie Chan and Jet
Li have graced our big screens with their presence for a number of years. Yet
martial arts fighting scenes are not limited to Asian actors and relatable
Asian settings or story lines, in fact they are in most of the modern
blockbuster movies, and if they were to be taken out the movies (and the
audiences) would be left feeling quite lacklustre. Journalist Scott Bowles
writes that films which previously showcased ’Asian martial arts were once
relegated to grind house theatres and niche markets, but the genre is enjoying
a subtle resurgence in the mainstream’ (August 2013). This couldn’t be closer
to the truth with Hollywood blockbusters in every film genre opting to use
martial arts as a fighting sequence. From sci-fi movie ‘The Matrix’ to
superhero movie ‘Daredevil’ to action flick ‘Charlie’s Angels’ and even
animated movies such as ‘Shrek’ cashing in on the martial art action, it is
evident that the Asianisation of Hollywood will continue to grow as it is
clearly in the profit interesting of Hollywood (Klein 2004).
The Asianisation of Hollywood in
the 1990’s meant that for the first time ‘Asian markets began generating
revenues for the studios’ and today studios executives have ‘their eyes trained
on China and India’ as potential markets to crack into (Klein 2004 pg 364). Profits
for Hollywood continue to grow outside of the USA and ‘today the average studio production earns well over 50% of
its revenue abroad’ (Klein 2003). This heavily explains
why Asia continues to have an impact on the Hollywood film industry as Asia has
been realised as an ideal market to gain enormous profit from. Jones (2002)
wrote that ‘Hollywood films claim about 60 percent of the
ticket sales in China while being limited to only about 30 percent of the
screen time’ (cited in Klein 2004). This
statistic shows that while Hollywood films may be catering more to the Asian
market, the profits which are being turned around from Asia suggest that
Hollywood is making its mark on Asia.
Although the Asianisation of
Hollywood is evident in the above paragraphs the Hollywoodisation of Asia is an
area which is also equally as interesting to look into as it continually occurs.
The Hollywood film industry is extremely powerful and as Klein states its ‘unparalleled
distribution system has long been the key to its domination of foreign
markets’ (2004 pg 371). Hollywood’s extreme wealth and countless resources are
perhaps the biggest reason why it continues to influence the Asian film
industry, as it is extremely hard to match the enormous power which is
Hollywood. Klein explains that to encounter local film industries which
potentially could cut Hollywood’s profits local divisions of massive studios such
as ‘Warner Brothers, Disney, Miramax and Universal’ have been created overseas
to counter these potential problems (2004, pg 372). With Hollywood companies
making these films in local areas within Asia they are effectively ensuring
that no other film industry can have a chance to overtake there power. It is no
doubt the plan of the major film executives is to further stake a claim on the
Asian film industry as it has the potential to overtake Hollywood locally, thus
taking away a huge chunk of profits. The corporate strategy of ‘global
localization’ includes producing films locally but tailoring them to the needs
of the local audiences (Robertson cited in Klein 2004, pg 373). This means that
films are being made that will be accepted and watched by local audiences.
Asian film makers are however, not
just standing by and letting Hollywood take the major profits and run over the
Asian film industry. Borrowing elements of ‘Hollywood’s visual and narrative
style’ (Klein 2004, pg 377) to both bring competition to Hollywood films and
bring back Asian audiences which have been enticed by Hollywood film style.
This is perhaps the biggest example of Hollywoodisation are elements which were
ever present in Hollywood films being used in Asian format. Kan (2003) and
Young (1996) have alluded to the fact that one of the primary concerns of Asian
film makers has been to ‘improve the quality of screenplays’ (cited in Klein
2004, pg 377). Academy award winning movie ‘Slumdog Millionaire’ is just one
example of a hybrid mix movie with traditional Indian aspects and a blend of
Hollywood production. Bollywood is India’s answer to Hollywood and is a prime
example of the Hollywoodisation of Asia. In terms of producing films Bollywood
is the number
one film industry in the world, but the profit returns have nothing on that of
the American film industry. In 2012 ‘a
total of 3.6 billion tickets’ were sold in Bollywood and earned total revenues
of ‘$1.3 billion’ whilst Hollywood films sold ‘2.6 billion tickets, but
generated revenues of $51 billion’ (Lakshmi 2013). American Filmmaker James
Kicklighter was asked of his thoughts on Bollywood becoming more powerful than
Hollywood. He answered with a simple quote. “In the
entertainment business, power pertains to money,” so until Bollywood
begins exporting more films that are successful in markets outside of Asia, “it
will not have the seat of power” (Lakshmi 2013).
It is clear that both the Asian and the Hollywood film
industries have had a significant influence on each other. Hollywood has for
decades been the front runner in the film industry and to keep that title they
have borrowed certain elements from Asian films to make sure that they are not
excluding that huge potential market. Profits will always be the drivers behind
change and it is demonstrated through Hollywood’s use of Asian actors and Asian
culture that they believe that is a huge market to take control of. The same can be said for the Hollywoodisation
of the Asian film industry. It has been realised by the Asian industry that
Hollywood has taken a huge chunk of their local profits and in turn they have
conformed to similar movie types and plots to gain back some profit. Both these
industries are extremely large and profitable and it is only natural that there
is both competition and influence between them.
References
Hunt, L., Wing-Fei, L. 2008, East Asian Cinemas: Exploring
transnational connections on film, date retrieved: October 2 2013, pg 191, 192,
< http://ezproxy.deakin.edu.au/login?url=http://site.ebrary.com/lib/deakin/Doc?id=10267549>
Klein, C 2004, Martial Arts and Globalisation of US and Asian
film industries, comparative American studies, vol 2, no 3, pp 360-384
Klein, C 2003, The Asia Factor in Hollywood, Yale Global
Online <http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/asia-factor-global-hollywood>
Rantanen, T. 2005, The Media and Globalization, Sage,
London.
Romney, J. 2013, The Independent, ‘Jonathon Romney on Pacific
Rim: America Vs The World? Big Mistake, Date retrieved: October 2 2013, <http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/reviews/jonathan-romney-on-pacific-rim-america-vs-the-world-big-mistake-8707465.html
>
Smith, G. 2012, Entertainment
Weekly, Box Office Report 2012: Film industry climbs to record breaking $10.8
billion, date retrieved: October 5 2013 <http://insidemovies.ew.com/2012/12/31/box-office-report-2012/>
Bowles, S. 2013, USA Today, Martial
Arts Elbowing into Hollywood’s biggest films, date retrieved: October 2 2013,
<http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/movies/2013/07/31/martial-arts-hollywood/2595055/>
Lakshmi, S. 2013, Policymic,
Hollywood vs. Bollywood: An interview with film director James Kicklighter, date
retrieved 8 October 2013, <http://www.policymic.com/articles/27103/hollywood-vs-bollywood-an-interview-with-filmmaker-james-kicklighter>
Image References
