INTRODUCTION
People like the New Yorker’s Lewis Manand have little faith in the fate of film. He believes that it was doomed from its inception, as did the father of modern film, Louis Lumeire. “The movies were killed by sequels; they were killed by conglomerates; they were killed by special effects. “Heaven’s Gate” was the end; “Star Wars” was the end; “Jaws” did it. It was the ratings system, profit participation, television, the blacklist, the collapse of the studio system, the Production Code. The movies should never have gone to color; they should never have gone to sound. The movies have been declared dead so many times that it is almost surprising that they were born,” he says. It sounds just like Lumiere’s statement in 1895 that “cinema is an invention without any commercial future,” (The New Yorker).
The occupation of film has been extremely affected by the forces of rationalization as a result of advancements in technology, consolidation of production, geared content and marketing, corporatization and large budgets. Although these changes have allowed for films to gross more money, it has had social and cultural impacts on how Americans engage with the medium of film. Amidst the environment of streaming services, the blockbuster films which primarily use Ritzer's principles have begun to phase out. In their wake, independent film makes its return, and with it restores some of film’s classical practices.
VISUAL CONTEXT OF TODAYS FILM
THE BIRTH OF FILM
The Invention
In 1891, Thomas Edison and William Dickinson invented the kinetoscope. This device utilized a motor, which caused a strip of film to quickly pass between a lens and an electric light bulb. As the earliest motion-picture device, the kinetoscope allowed viewers to gaze into the box and witness the illusion of a continuous image, or video (Britannica). In correspondence with the new technology's capacity for entertainment, Edison utilized his film studio to stage and capture different scenes. As the new technology gained popularity the Edison company expanded their presence into hotel lobbies, amusement parks, and arcades. Soon, customers could pay somewhere around 25 cents to enter kinetoscope banks, where they could view a number of different motion pictures (Lule, 2016).
However, because Edison's invention was not internationally patented, duplicates of the kinetoscope began to pop up throughout Europe. As inventors and mechanics realized the success of the new medium of entertainment, many began ideation on how they could introduce the motion pictures to an audience, in a more accessible manner. The solution came with an invention by two brothers, Auguste and Louis Lumière. In 1895, the pair made a patent for the cinématographe, an easily portable film projector that could take and print pictures. The new device's light weight permitted outdoor filming and display, and allowed the brothers to produce over 1,000 short films. As they gained popularity, the pair began to travel across Europe showing their films. Back in America, Edison’s Film Company had caught on and patented their own film projecting device (Lule, 2016).
Public Perception
In this premature era, the public still perceived film as an extension of photography. This caused short films to lack plot and length, instead showing realistic occurrences of everyday life. Some halls even advertised the projectors used for screening and their creators rather than the film title (Edison and the Lumiere Brothers). The audience seemed to be more enthralled by the phenomenon of motion pictures than their contents. Edison's films featured events including; circus performances, dancing women, cockfights, boxing matches, and even a tooth extraction by a dentist (Robinson, 1997). In addition, most films in America were composed of about 10 one minute scenes and depicted characters performing day to day tasks (Encyclopedia of the Age of Industry and Empire).
FILM INNOVATIONS
New Camera Techniques
Soon after Méliès introduction of narrative films, in 1903, projectionist and engineer Edwin S. Porter made a 12-minute film, The Great Train Robbery. He further innovated Méliès’s narrative film by utilizing camera pans, rear projections, and diagonally composed shots. This granted The Great Train Robbery a more realistic narrative and established a new standard / creative facet of filmmaking. It was also the first major box-office hit, “pav[ing] the way for the growth of the film industry” (Lule, 2016).
Central Viewership
Investors began opening permanent film theaters around the country soon after, nicknamed “nickelodeons,” due to their cheap price. The working class started to flock to these cinema theaters, which granted access to entertainment that the leisure class generally derived from expensive live theater. From 1904 to 1908, around 9,000 nickelodeons popped up all around the United States, becoming a staple of culture for middle class Americans (Dictionary of American History).
Special Effects and Narrative Plots
As film became a less fresh phenomenon by the start of the 20th century inventors and businessmen were seeking out new ways to appeal to consumers within the duration and content of the show. Parisian cinema owner and former magician Georges Méliès was one of the first people to experiment with special effects in order to bring unrealistic, magical … to fruition. After Méliès, filmmakers in England and America began to utilize “trick film,” aswell. In addition to his work with special effects, Méliès integrated narrative plots into his cohesive films. Instead of singular shots, he combined multiple different ones to create short films with fluidity. In 1902, he directed a 30-scene film called Trip to the Moon, which was based on a novel by Jules Verne and was one of the most widely seen productions in the emerging decade of cinema (Robinson).
Sound and Color
Years later in 1925, the Warner Bros. gained access to technology called a vitaphone which would allow them to implement orchestral music into small theaters that could not host live symphonies, as some luxurious one’s of the time did. After producing one highly successful film, Don Juan, with the integrated sound, they made another– this time allowing an actor to improvise a couple lines of dialogue and sing songs. The film, The Jazz Singer, was an immense success and by 1929, three-fourths of Hollywood films had some form of sound accompaniment (Gochenour). The next advancement would come in the form of color, but took a while to be fully implemented into mainstream film production because of the great depression.
CHANGES TO STRUCTURE OF FILMS
Corporate Takeover of Film
A bit before sound and color were implemented, as the demand for motion pictures grew due to the other innovations, production companies were created to meet it. At the peak of nickelodeon popularity in 1910, there were 20 or so major motion picture companies in the states (Britannica). Many of these companies united into the MPPC, which pooled the most significant motion picture patents into one monopoly. The company and one’s similar to it later dissipated because of their rigid insistence on maintaining single-reel films, which were shorter than multiple-reel films and their underestimation of the power which placing famous stage actors in advertisements and productions held. These multiple-reel, longer than 16 minute, films became known as features and were more often made by independent studios like; Fox, Goldwyn, Universal, and Paramount. Audiences gravitated towards longer-form narratives and were willing to pay more for them, as they seemed to provide a more holistic experience. For this reason, many of the companies above persisted (Motion Pictures).
Consolidation of Production
As moviegoing increased in America, filmmakers from large franchises began looking for ways to make the process more consistent. They wanted to be able to make films year round but were restricted by weather in the production capitals of Chicago and New York. Hollywood in Los Angeles, California proved to be the best location because of its year round good weather, cheap and plentiful land, and the diverse geography of the surrounding terrain. By 1915, more than 60 percent of U.S. film production was centered in Hollywood (Britannica).
Monopolization of Film
Although the depression slowed the integration of color into film, the industry overall had a surge in viewership directly after it ended up until the mid 1940s. Many experts attribute this to the innovation of sound, according to Understanding Media and Culture: An Introduction to Mass Communication. Another key part was the merging of several of the largest studios. These companies obtained vertical integration of everything from production to release to distribution to viewing (Lule, 2017). But after the war; inflation, estrangement from foreign markets, anti monopoly legislation, the rise of television, and more caused the movie industry to collapse. combined to bring that rapid growth to an end.
GROWING AUDIENCE AWARENESS
Marketing to Youth/ Target Audiences
In the 1960’s production companies started marketing movies to younger demographic by using more profane/ violent language and content as well as including revolutionary sentiments in films. Coming of age became a large subject of this time in films, and attracted teenagers under a notion that they could reject conventionality. After this wave of movies like Sam Peckinpah’s The Wild Bunch (1969), Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), Arthur Penn’s Bonnie and Clyde (1967), and Dennis Hopper’s Easy Rider (1969), there was a shift in attitudes surrounding sex and violence. In the 1970s Francis Ford Coppola’s The Godfather (1972), William Friedkin’s The Exorcist (1973), and Steven Spielberg’s Jaws (1975), all flourished at the box offices with raw images (Belton, 1994).
Franchise, Sequels, and Remake Films
The top 10 grossing films of 2019 were all based on precedent. As franchises recognized trends in viewership they began to gear new productions to narratives of the past which people were already familiar with. These films already have access to an audience and can be marketed through association (Brinker, 2016).
RATIONALIZATION
Efficiency
Efficiency can be witnessed in the film industry as a result of the division of labor and specialization that has developed overtime. “In the first decade and a half of cinema, studios made little distinction between the roles now filled by producers, screenwriters, directors, cinematographers,” according to the Wisconsin Center for Film and Theater Research. However, now there are countless different roles on a film set. In addition, the introduction of the scenario script permitted a “full numbered breakdown of action by narrative event, a scene plot that listed these events according to the locations in which they were to be filmed, and information for post-production personnel” (Wisconsin Center for Film and Theater Research). As films are divided more precisely amongst specialized workers with distinct tasks, they become more convenient. When one person doesn't have to do all of the work themselves there is more room to make a film in an easier, quicker, and better fashion. The collaboration of the crew allows for an overlap, which ultimately makes the final product more appealing to the general public. It is more representative of different voices and skills. Efficiency can also be witnessed in the different innovations that were made early on in the rationalization of film to better engage viewers. The addition of color, sound, special effects, and narrative plots were all innovations that allowed the product to better touch base with its viewer and methodically attract more. The corporate takeover and Hollywood centralization of film also served as tools to stimulate efficiency in ammassing consumers and producing films. With a business model in one place, film makers could compose more concrete divisions of labor and plans for producing on a system.
Control
Control was permitted by the introduction of new technology and production techniques. Historically, tactics like utilizing different angles, pans, and projections when recording granted filmmakers more control over their final product. Today, there are a number of different advances in technology from dslr cameras to handheld cameras to gimbels to sound/color technology to green screens to virtual animation/ effects to playback review of acting for improvement to much more, according to Courtney Verrill of the business insider. These new technologies allow for more precise, enthralling, and realistic images that audiences are more willing to spend money on. Not only does it make the films easier to make, but technology ensures that the vision for a film is closer to the final product/ real life result. Control has also historically been fostered in film by consolidation of film viewership into theaters. Giving consumers access to films in these spaces granted the studios control over when, where, and how their media is consumed. It also permits a more immersive experience, rather than a passive one which can be important to filmmakers. The installation of monopolies primarily served to ensure that the industry was profitable to a few businessmen and could be managed and molded as they saw fit.
Calculability
Calculability can be measured in films based on the amounts of money which studios spend when producing blockbusters. Based on how much they put in, they can quantify and expect a return on investment. The budgets for today's movies usually range from $100 million to $400 million (Verrill). According to Grant Harvey of Film Daft, the average blockbuster (over $100 million production) generally grosses around $400 million.
Predictability
Predictability is allowed by scientific advances which create new knowledge of what audiences are more likely to cater to. Psychologist, James Cutting, shares some of the conclusions of his studies on the average human’s perceptual and cognitive processing in an article he wrote, Shot Durations, Shot Classes, and the Increased Pace of Popular Movies. He examines how the brain’s processes relate to film components such as editing, frame rates, projection, and scene and narrative structure. He has been looking at shot duration over the past few years and has found that the average duration of a shot is consistently shorter now than it was a decade ago; from 12 seconds in 1930 to 2.5 seconds today. He also notes the use of less light and the increase of action shots in movies today. If movies can be scientifically more geared towards pleasing the human mind, then they are made more rational in the grand scheme of things. Filmmakers also know that remakes, series, movies with extreme conditions/ effects and movies with extremely famous actors are likely to produce a profit. For this reason large Hollywood studios are more purposeful with their target audiences and the contents/ basis of their films.
IRRATIONALITIES; THE DOWNFALL OF FILM
BlockBuster Films
Blockbusters embody many of the irrationalities that are displayed in the history of film on a large scale, while independent movies return to the simpler roots of filmmaking for affordability purposes. Blockbuster films are primarily defined by their large budgets which are used as vessels for calculability of return on investment and control over the extravagance of a final product (Filmdaft). These large budgets are used to access extreme visual and special effects as well as the most advanced camera technologies. While they do allow for greater control over the studio’s final product, they often drive up prices and eradicate a need for more skilled workers. This allows them to gross large sums of money, but also drives up ticket prices. Theater visits are now a luxury, they are no longer geared towards the common man. As is shown in Fig. 2, movie ticket prices have been steadily increasing for decades at a steeper rate than inflation. Today tickets are nearly twice the price that they were 20 years ago. In addition, as shown in Fig. 3, major Hollywood studios which make blockbusters also increasingly utilize non unique stories which include sequels, prequels, spin-offs, remakes or reboots of preexisting narratives. This method is a way to increase calculability, based on past performance of films and predictability, based on audiences' predisposition to a film’s basis. In doing so, blockbuster films disallow innovation and expanded creativity in order to appeal to consumers.
Television/ Streaming Services
Today the effect that TV had on film production can be mirrored in the way that streaming services have fostered downward trends in theater viewership of blockbuster films. Blockbusters are largely budgeted Hollywood movies that are produced to draw in a massive crowd. In most cases these movies are displayed primarily in theaters, as a method of control over the audience, so that they fully engage with the film. In an article by state news, a filmmaker Carleen Hsu stated that theaters mean no distractions, which is beneficial to film makers, while streaming grants more “democratized media consumption.” Subsequently, these films are beginning to lose relevance when compared to art house, or independent films which are often displayed on streaming services like Amazon Prime and Hulu. Amazon incentivizes independent film makers with its easy access to performance based rates (Film Stories). The streaming service and the wealth of independent films which it hosts demonstrated their cultural relevance at the 2017 Oscars where 3 films which Amazon backed won Oscars and the 2017 Sundance festival, where 15 films available on prime were nominated for awards. In addition, a survey by Statista, shown in Fig. 4, also supported this, indicating that 56% of people either strongly or somewhat prefer streaming movies to watching them in theaters.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the rationalization of film has made the process of producing movies easier for many large production companies. However, there is something to be said about whether or not the process has been made more effective. Evidence for the downfall of film lies in ticket sales. Many people across America are getting used to the scene of an empty theater. As they walk in, excitement may ring in the air because of the privacy, and access to the best seats. However, these empty theaters reveal something about the fate of film that is nothing to jeer at.
Classical cinema is dying. Although films are grossing more in the domestic box office and receiving more sponsorships, the number of tickets sold has shown a downward trend since 2002, according to Statista.com. Moreover, since 1964 there has been a steady percentage below 10% of the U.S. population that averaged going to the movies weekly, as compared to more than 65% of the population in 1930, according to Catarina Cowden of the Business Insider. This trend in viewership reflects a culture shift, regardless of profits.
Experts believe that Hollywood's unwillingness to stray from their formula is a part of the reason for this decline, as indie filmmakers take an approach that creates “low-budget, unique, and insightful movies,” according to Universe Narratives. The indie filmmaking process is more or less, anti-rationalization and is beginning to rise in popularity– stumping out studio made blockbusters movies, as can be seen in Fig. 1 (Stephen Follows). “Although big budget, CGI franchises remain popular, a decline in ticket sales and a rise in popularity of more thought-provoking, non-corporate films show a definite shift in the entertainment industry. Since people no longer need to pay movie theater prices or leave the house to find quality entertainment, the time is ripe for a serious emergence of independent film” (Hales, 2015).
In addition, with new technologies, budgets, and systems of production, work now requires less specialization from the crew as they become more and more expendable. Their job can be done better by mechanized technology and aided by unskilled workers across different groups. Crew in today's film environment perform intensive, laborious tasks for increasingly long hours while only directors are able to express creative visions. Many have begun to protest their treatment or decided to utilize their talents as a part of smaller film projects where their voices are heard (Wisconsin Center for Film and Theater Research).
I believe that the future of cinema rests on independent filmmakers. If people who appreciate the art are able to compose it with skill, originality and selflessness, then it shall persist long beyond the rise and fall of theaters.
WORKS CITED
Belton, John. American Cinema/American Culture. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994), 284–290.
Brinker, Scott. “Marketing Technology Landscape Supergraphic (2016).” Chief Marketing Technologist, 23 Apr. 2020, https://chiefmartec.com/2016/03/marketing-technology-landscape-supergraphic-2016/.
“The Continuity Script and the Rationalization of Film Production.” Wisconsin Center for Film and Theater Research, University of Wisconsin- Madison, https://wcftr.commarts.wisc.edu/exhibits/harry-roy-aitken-papers/continuity-script-and-rationalization-film-production.
Cowden, Caterina. “Movie Attendance Has Been on a Dismal Decline since the 1940s.” Business Insider, Business Insider, 6 Jan. 2015, https://www.businessinsider.com/movie-attendance-over-the-years-2015-1.
Cutting, James. Shot Durations, Shot Classes, and the ... - Cornell University. Cornell University, 2015, doi: 10:3167/proj.2015.090204.
Dictionary of American History, 3rd ed., s.v. “Nickelodeon,” by Ryan F. Holznagel, Gale Virtual Reference Library.
Encyclopedia of the Age of Industry and Empire, s.v. “Cinema.”
Harvey, Grant. “What Makes a Movie a Blockbuster? and What Does It Cost? 2022.” FilmDaft, 8 Sept. 2021, https://filmdaft.com/what-makes-a-movie-a-blockbuster/.
Hales, Emily, Johansson, Courtney, Urquhart, Jack, “Hollywood Is Falling, and Independent Film Hopes to Take Its Place " Universe Narratives.” Universe Narratives, 23 Mar. 2015, https://universe.byu.edu/narratives/hollywood-independent-film/.
“Is Amazon Prime the Big Bad Wolf, or an Indie Filmmaker's Saviour?” Film Stories, 13 Jan. 2021, https://www.filmstories.co.uk/features/is-amazon-prime-the-big-bad-wolf-or-an-indie-filmmakers-saviour/.
“Kinetoscope.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., https://www.britannica.com/technology/Kinetoscope.
Lule, Jack. “Understanding Media and Culture, an Introduction to Mass Communication.” The History of Movies, University of Minnesota, 2016, https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_understanding-media-and-culture-an-introduction-to-mass-communication/s11-01-the-history-of-movies.html.
Menand, Louis. “Gross Points.” The New Yorker, 31 Jan. 2005, https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/02/07/gross-points.
“Méliès and Porter.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., https://www.britannica.com/art/history-of-the-motion-picture/Melies-and-Porter.
Motion Picture Association of America, “History of the MPAA,” 2016
Navarro, José Gabriel. “Theaters vs. Streaming: First Time Movie Viewing Preferences in the U.S. 2020.” Statista, 12 Aug. 2021, https://www.statista.com/statistics/947757/theaters-streaming-watching-movies/.
Richter, Felix. “Infographic: Are Americans Falling out of Love with the Cinema?” Statista Infographics, 2 July 2021, https://www.statista.com/chart/25234/movie-tickets-sold-in-north-america/.
Robinson, From Peep Show to Palace: The Birth of American Film, 1997
Stephen Follows. “48 Trends Reshaping the Film Industry: Part 3 - Distribution and Exhibition.” Stephen Follows, 6 July 2021, https://stephenfollows.com/trends-reshaping-film-industry-distribution-exhibition/.
Thrift, Stephanie K., Ionut, Balcanasu A, Smagin, Sergey V. “Edison and the Lumiere Brothers,” Cartoons and Cinema of the 20th Century.
Verrill, Courtney. “18 Photos That Show How Drastically Making Movies Has Changed over the Last Century.” Business Insider, Business Insider, 4 May 2016, https://www.businessinsider.com/film-sets-1900s-vs-now-2016-4.