Pub Date : 2020-06-16DOI: 10.1080/17508061.2020.1778831
C. Berry, Ming-yeh T. Rawnsley
Abstract In this introduction, the guest editors discuss briefly the context of organising this special issue, the approach of each paper takes, and how they are collectively related to the existing literature of Taiwanese-language films (taiyupian). The guest editors also explain the screening tour of selected taiyupian in the United Kingdom (UK) and Europe between 2017 and 2019, which became possible because of support and cooperation of many institutions in Taiwan, the UK and Europe.
{"title":"Introduction to a special issue on Taiwanese-language films (taiyupian)","authors":"C. Berry, Ming-yeh T. Rawnsley","doi":"10.1080/17508061.2020.1778831","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508061.2020.1778831","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this introduction, the guest editors discuss briefly the context of organising this special issue, the approach of each paper takes, and how they are collectively related to the existing literature of Taiwanese-language films (taiyupian). The guest editors also explain the screening tour of selected taiyupian in the United Kingdom (UK) and Europe between 2017 and 2019, which became possible because of support and cooperation of many institutions in Taiwan, the UK and Europe.","PeriodicalId":43535,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Cinemas","volume":"14 1","pages":"72 - 75"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17508061.2020.1778831","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42923698","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-06-12DOI: 10.1080/17508061.2020.1778219
C. Berry
Abstract The term taiyupian refers to over one thousand low-budget, Taiwanese-language films made between the mid-1950s and early 1970s. How should we understand this industry? It was neglected and forgotten for many years. By the time scholars became interested in the 1990s in revisiting taiyupian as part of the ‘sadness’ of the island’s martial law era, only 178 complete films survived. More recently, they have been revalorized and promoted as cult movies. In response to the limitations of those frameworks, this essay proposes approaching taiyupian as an alternative ‘cinema of poverty.’ Here, cinema of poverty is not a derogatory remark. Nor is it praise for high modernist purism, along the lines proposed by Jerzy Grotowski in his concept of a theatre of poverty. Rather, it is an analytical term, referring to the adoption of ingenious methods to realize a Hollywood-style cinema industry and culture on a low budget. In other words, this alternative cinema of poverty was also a cinema of aspiration. The essay asks if this practice can be considered as an exuberantly commercial practice of what Lu Xun in the 1930s called ‘grabbism’ (nalai zhuyi), appropriating anything that works from other cultural forms and overseas to create a locally distinctive cosmopolitanism of the poor. Furthermore, it argues that the idea of the taiyupian industry as an alternative cinema of poverty places it in a lineage of similarly neglected popular and commercial film industries that emulated Hollywood on a budget here.
{"title":"An alternative cinema of poverty: Understanding the Taiwanese-language film industry","authors":"C. Berry","doi":"10.1080/17508061.2020.1778219","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508061.2020.1778219","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The term taiyupian refers to over one thousand low-budget, Taiwanese-language films made between the mid-1950s and early 1970s. How should we understand this industry? It was neglected and forgotten for many years. By the time scholars became interested in the 1990s in revisiting taiyupian as part of the ‘sadness’ of the island’s martial law era, only 178 complete films survived. More recently, they have been revalorized and promoted as cult movies. In response to the limitations of those frameworks, this essay proposes approaching taiyupian as an alternative ‘cinema of poverty.’ Here, cinema of poverty is not a derogatory remark. Nor is it praise for high modernist purism, along the lines proposed by Jerzy Grotowski in his concept of a theatre of poverty. Rather, it is an analytical term, referring to the adoption of ingenious methods to realize a Hollywood-style cinema industry and culture on a low budget. In other words, this alternative cinema of poverty was also a cinema of aspiration. The essay asks if this practice can be considered as an exuberantly commercial practice of what Lu Xun in the 1930s called ‘grabbism’ (nalai zhuyi), appropriating anything that works from other cultural forms and overseas to create a locally distinctive cosmopolitanism of the poor. Furthermore, it argues that the idea of the taiyupian industry as an alternative cinema of poverty places it in a lineage of similarly neglected popular and commercial film industries that emulated Hollywood on a budget here.","PeriodicalId":43535,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Cinemas","volume":"14 1","pages":"140 - 149"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17508061.2020.1778219","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47218901","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-05-03DOI: 10.1080/17508061.2020.1778830
Pi Liang
Abstract As Taiwan’s film policy reform was taking place between 1956 and 1958, the definition of guochanpian (domestically produced films) and the qualification of taiyupian (Taiwanese-language films) as guochanpian were debated by the KMT party and the film administration. The press also engaged in the controversy by publishing special issues, opinion pieces, and meeting minutes in newspapers. In this essay, I investigate the formation of the meanings of taiyupian in the journalistic field between 1956 and 1958. The discussion focuses on the special issue published by Lianhe bao (United Daily News) in 1956 and the meeting minutes by Zhengxin xinwen (Credit News) in 1957 that displayed the conflicting tendencies to provincialize taiyupian and modernizing, localizing, internationalizing taiyupian. Through analyzing narratives and rhetoric employed to position taiyupian in news reports, this essay differentiates between imaginings and (re)presentations by two organizing concepts, Sinocentric Chinese nationalism and cosmopolitanism. This discussion concludes with an analysis of The First Taiyupian Festival in 1957, as it realized the imaginings of taiyupian that emerged in the meeting held by Zhengxin xinwen and generated a spectacular industrial, social, and discursive phenomenon that made taiyupian a vigorous discursive force in the discourse of modernity and national cinema.
{"title":"From provincial to international: Competing imaginings and representations of taiyupian in news reports between 1956 and 1958","authors":"Pi Liang","doi":"10.1080/17508061.2020.1778830","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508061.2020.1778830","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract As Taiwan’s film policy reform was taking place between 1956 and 1958, the definition of guochanpian (domestically produced films) and the qualification of taiyupian (Taiwanese-language films) as guochanpian were debated by the KMT party and the film administration. The press also engaged in the controversy by publishing special issues, opinion pieces, and meeting minutes in newspapers. In this essay, I investigate the formation of the meanings of taiyupian in the journalistic field between 1956 and 1958. The discussion focuses on the special issue published by Lianhe bao (United Daily News) in 1956 and the meeting minutes by Zhengxin xinwen (Credit News) in 1957 that displayed the conflicting tendencies to provincialize taiyupian and modernizing, localizing, internationalizing taiyupian. Through analyzing narratives and rhetoric employed to position taiyupian in news reports, this essay differentiates between imaginings and (re)presentations by two organizing concepts, Sinocentric Chinese nationalism and cosmopolitanism. This discussion concludes with an analysis of The First Taiyupian Festival in 1957, as it realized the imaginings of taiyupian that emerged in the meeting held by Zhengxin xinwen and generated a spectacular industrial, social, and discursive phenomenon that made taiyupian a vigorous discursive force in the discourse of modernity and national cinema.","PeriodicalId":43535,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Cinemas","volume":"14 1","pages":"88 - 100"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17508061.2020.1778830","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41827439","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17508061.2020.1712776
M. Chan
Abstract There is no official censorship in Hong Kong, but the need to consider the structure of co-production with China and the PRC audience’s buying power has forced filmmakers to be cautious about the content of mainstream cinema. Ultimately such considerations and its ties to censorship have dramatic effects on film production in Hong Kong. As an alternative space for cultural industries, videos on online social networking platforms, such as YouTube, have become more popular as creative outlets for those living in Hong Kong to critique the increasing presence of the PRC. By examining the work of GVA Creative, a group of Hong Kong-based video producers, this article sheds light on how cultural icons, such as Guan Yu and Lei Feng among others, are mobilized as a rhetoric of Chineseness. In other words, Chineseness in the digital age must be considered a form of rhetoric that can be deployed for various purposes, such as a form of resistance to mainstream censorship among others. Furthermore, the visual citation of familiar figures in Sinophone communities is one that is remixed in the YouTube videos rather than images that simply reinforce state ideology. This process of remixing Chineseness is a participatory practice that contributes to the formation of a visual language that gives voice to marginalized groups in the face of state hegemony and other forms of censorship in the Sinophone world.
{"title":"Remixing Chineseness: Censorship, disembodiment and the voice in Hong Kong digital media","authors":"M. Chan","doi":"10.1080/17508061.2020.1712776","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508061.2020.1712776","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract There is no official censorship in Hong Kong, but the need to consider the structure of co-production with China and the PRC audience’s buying power has forced filmmakers to be cautious about the content of mainstream cinema. Ultimately such considerations and its ties to censorship have dramatic effects on film production in Hong Kong. As an alternative space for cultural industries, videos on online social networking platforms, such as YouTube, have become more popular as creative outlets for those living in Hong Kong to critique the increasing presence of the PRC. By examining the work of GVA Creative, a group of Hong Kong-based video producers, this article sheds light on how cultural icons, such as Guan Yu and Lei Feng among others, are mobilized as a rhetoric of Chineseness. In other words, Chineseness in the digital age must be considered a form of rhetoric that can be deployed for various purposes, such as a form of resistance to mainstream censorship among others. Furthermore, the visual citation of familiar figures in Sinophone communities is one that is remixed in the YouTube videos rather than images that simply reinforce state ideology. This process of remixing Chineseness is a participatory practice that contributes to the formation of a visual language that gives voice to marginalized groups in the face of state hegemony and other forms of censorship in the Sinophone world.","PeriodicalId":43535,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Cinemas","volume":"14 1","pages":"1 - 15"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17508061.2020.1712776","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44810134","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17508061.2020.1733211
Helena Wu
Abstract Decolonization in the context of Hong Kong involves a ‘complex series of cultural-political struggles to re-imagine the future for the next 30 years and beyond,’ according to Chan’s “Delay No More: Struggles to Re-Imagine Hong Kong” (2015). In this regard, the bottom-up decolonization to be achieved by the local subjects and the projection of the future extended from cultural imaginaries are reciprocally connected. Building on this, the current study illustrates how locally produced images about the future constellate the local, the national and the global in the transforming post-handover setting of Hong Kong. With an eye to Golden Chicken II (Samson Chiu, 2003), Ten Years (omnibus, 2015) and She Remembers, He Forgets (Adam Wong, 2015), this study examines how Hong Kong’s future is respectively envisioned after the 2003 SARS outbreak and the 2014 Umbrella Movement, as these films by traversing the mainstream and the non-mainstream circuits coincide on the ambivalent feeling towards the future, wherever it is located, and the general concern towards those disappeared/disappearing values, identities and lifestyle that have long been taken for granted as ‘Hong Kong’. From the alternating utopian and dystopian projections of Hong Kong’s future, this study discerns the experimental attempts to self-decolonization by trial and error and unfolds the preferred local-national-global relations especially in the post-Umbrella Movement era before the eruption of the 2019 Anti-Extradition Bill Protests.
{"title":"Imagining the future in post-millennial Hong Kong cinema: Visualizing the local, the national and the global in cultural imaginaries","authors":"Helena Wu","doi":"10.1080/17508061.2020.1733211","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508061.2020.1733211","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Decolonization in the context of Hong Kong involves a ‘complex series of cultural-political struggles to re-imagine the future for the next 30 years and beyond,’ according to Chan’s “Delay No More: Struggles to Re-Imagine Hong Kong” (2015). In this regard, the bottom-up decolonization to be achieved by the local subjects and the projection of the future extended from cultural imaginaries are reciprocally connected. Building on this, the current study illustrates how locally produced images about the future constellate the local, the national and the global in the transforming post-handover setting of Hong Kong. With an eye to Golden Chicken II (Samson Chiu, 2003), Ten Years (omnibus, 2015) and She Remembers, He Forgets (Adam Wong, 2015), this study examines how Hong Kong’s future is respectively envisioned after the 2003 SARS outbreak and the 2014 Umbrella Movement, as these films by traversing the mainstream and the non-mainstream circuits coincide on the ambivalent feeling towards the future, wherever it is located, and the general concern towards those disappeared/disappearing values, identities and lifestyle that have long been taken for granted as ‘Hong Kong’. From the alternating utopian and dystopian projections of Hong Kong’s future, this study discerns the experimental attempts to self-decolonization by trial and error and unfolds the preferred local-national-global relations especially in the post-Umbrella Movement era before the eruption of the 2019 Anti-Extradition Bill Protests.","PeriodicalId":43535,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Cinemas","volume":"14 1","pages":"32 - 49"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17508061.2020.1733211","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48770340","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17508061.2020.1713436
Gary Bettinson
Abstract Since Ackbar Abbas theorized Hong Kong as a space of cultural ‘disappearance’ in the mid-1990s, critics have debated the extent to which local cultural forms have continued to recede, particularly as a corollary of Hong Kong’s increasing subjection to mainlandization. For several critics, the region’s cinema has already vanished from view, only to re-emerge in a brand new, distinctly Sinicized guise – that of ‘post-Hong Kong cinema,’ a mode of predominantly coproduced filmmaking that effaces traditional Hong Kong aesthetics and routines of film practice. So thoroughly has Hong Kong cinema been subsumed to China that its once ‘unique’ and ‘singular’ identity is no longer discernible. The shackles of PRC censorship now stifle free expression; Hong Kong’s classic genres have become obsolete; and the PRC’s vogue for ‘main melody’ films and the dapian (‘big film’) has straitened Hong Kong cinema’s range of storytelling options. Today, critics contend, Hong Kong filmmakers are severely constrained by Mainland bureaucracy and the exigencies of the China market. This article seeks to challenge these assumptions, contesting a set of apparent truisms concerning Mainland censorship, Hong Kong-China coproductions, and the dissipation or disappearance of Hong Kong’s local cinema and identity. The theory of mainlandization, I submit, denies the durability of Hong Kong’s standardized craft practices; its aesthetic traditions; and the facile ingenuity of its filmmakers.
{"title":"Yesterday once more: Hong Kong-China coproductions and the myth of mainlandization","authors":"Gary Bettinson","doi":"10.1080/17508061.2020.1713436","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508061.2020.1713436","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Since Ackbar Abbas theorized Hong Kong as a space of cultural ‘disappearance’ in the mid-1990s, critics have debated the extent to which local cultural forms have continued to recede, particularly as a corollary of Hong Kong’s increasing subjection to mainlandization. For several critics, the region’s cinema has already vanished from view, only to re-emerge in a brand new, distinctly Sinicized guise – that of ‘post-Hong Kong cinema,’ a mode of predominantly coproduced filmmaking that effaces traditional Hong Kong aesthetics and routines of film practice. So thoroughly has Hong Kong cinema been subsumed to China that its once ‘unique’ and ‘singular’ identity is no longer discernible. The shackles of PRC censorship now stifle free expression; Hong Kong’s classic genres have become obsolete; and the PRC’s vogue for ‘main melody’ films and the dapian (‘big film’) has straitened Hong Kong cinema’s range of storytelling options. Today, critics contend, Hong Kong filmmakers are severely constrained by Mainland bureaucracy and the exigencies of the China market. This article seeks to challenge these assumptions, contesting a set of apparent truisms concerning Mainland censorship, Hong Kong-China coproductions, and the dissipation or disappearance of Hong Kong’s local cinema and identity. The theory of mainlandization, I submit, denies the durability of Hong Kong’s standardized craft practices; its aesthetic traditions; and the facile ingenuity of its filmmakers.","PeriodicalId":43535,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Cinemas","volume":"14 1","pages":"16 - 31"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17508061.2020.1713436","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41478329","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17508061.2020.1717066
S. Tong
Abstract The role of the transregional documentary organization CNEX in Chinese documentary production is explored from an ethnographic perspective by examining its training events. I first provide a brief overview of CNEX and its aims. Using the framework of cultural mediation, I explore how CNEX, as a cultural broker, uses training events to develop transnational connections and mediates between Chinese documentaries and the international market. I then analyze two annual training events: the CNEX Chinese Documentary Forum (CCDF) and the CNEX–Sundance Editing Lab. Drawing on ethnographic data, I describe how these events are organized and how Chinese projects are transformed through the training processes. I argue that these training events function as transformative mechanisms that mediate and align local individual productions with international industry demand. These CNEX events help maintain and remake the boundary between the ‘local’ and the ‘international’ by defining specific documentary subjects, forms, and practices as ‘Chinese’ or ‘Taiwanese’, and others as ‘universal’.
{"title":"Cultural mediation and transformative mechanism: An ethnographic study of the documentary organization CNEX and its training events","authors":"S. Tong","doi":"10.1080/17508061.2020.1717066","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508061.2020.1717066","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The role of the transregional documentary organization CNEX in Chinese documentary production is explored from an ethnographic perspective by examining its training events. I first provide a brief overview of CNEX and its aims. Using the framework of cultural mediation, I explore how CNEX, as a cultural broker, uses training events to develop transnational connections and mediates between Chinese documentaries and the international market. I then analyze two annual training events: the CNEX Chinese Documentary Forum (CCDF) and the CNEX–Sundance Editing Lab. Drawing on ethnographic data, I describe how these events are organized and how Chinese projects are transformed through the training processes. I argue that these training events function as transformative mechanisms that mediate and align local individual productions with international industry demand. These CNEX events help maintain and remake the boundary between the ‘local’ and the ‘international’ by defining specific documentary subjects, forms, and practices as ‘Chinese’ or ‘Taiwanese’, and others as ‘universal’.","PeriodicalId":43535,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Cinemas","volume":"14 1","pages":"50 - 67"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17508061.2020.1717066","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46750551","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-09-02DOI: 10.1080/17508061.2019.1678480
M. Keane
Abstract The influence of China on the world stage is beyond question; however, this influence is most evident in the realm of economics. Since the early 2000s China’s media and cultural industries have made a concerted effort to enter international markets. In recent years China’s leading online and digital platforms have become linked to the so-called ‘culture going out’ campaign; they contribute to ‘the call of government’ by revitalizing Chinese cultural products/services and promoting them through online consumption experiences on their affiliated platforms. This paper examines the extent of these Chinese digital companies’ capabilities in the great rejuvenation of China’s culture. The paper also considers the problem of reporting on the reception of China’s film and television outside China. It argues that while online platforms are getting the message out, Chinese products are primarily targeted at the domestic audience and the already converted, those in the Chinese diaspora. This online model of dissemination in turn has implications for how academics use the term ‘media industry.’
{"title":"China’s digital media industries and the challenge of overseas markets","authors":"M. Keane","doi":"10.1080/17508061.2019.1678480","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508061.2019.1678480","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The influence of China on the world stage is beyond question; however, this influence is most evident in the realm of economics. Since the early 2000s China’s media and cultural industries have made a concerted effort to enter international markets. In recent years China’s leading online and digital platforms have become linked to the so-called ‘culture going out’ campaign; they contribute to ‘the call of government’ by revitalizing Chinese cultural products/services and promoting them through online consumption experiences on their affiliated platforms. This paper examines the extent of these Chinese digital companies’ capabilities in the great rejuvenation of China’s culture. The paper also considers the problem of reporting on the reception of China’s film and television outside China. It argues that while online platforms are getting the message out, Chinese products are primarily targeted at the domestic audience and the already converted, those in the Chinese diaspora. This online model of dissemination in turn has implications for how academics use the term ‘media industry.’","PeriodicalId":43535,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Cinemas","volume":"13 1","pages":"244 - 256"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2019-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17508061.2019.1678480","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48441891","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-09-02DOI: 10.1080/17508061.2019.1678235
W. Leung, Sangjoon Lee
China’s film industry is a significant global, regional and national concern today. In 2018, China’s box office increased by 9% to USD 8.9 billion in receipts—second only to North America’s USD 11....
{"title":"The Chinese film industry: Emerging debates","authors":"W. Leung, Sangjoon Lee","doi":"10.1080/17508061.2019.1678235","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508061.2019.1678235","url":null,"abstract":"China’s film industry is a significant global, regional and national concern today. In 2018, China’s box office increased by 9% to USD 8.9 billion in receipts—second only to North America’s USD 11....","PeriodicalId":43535,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Cinemas","volume":"13 1","pages":"199 - 201"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2019-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17508061.2019.1678235","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49062089","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-09-02DOI: 10.1080/17508061.2019.1678475
Wesley Jacks
Abstract Following the severe restrictions of the Cultural Revolution, China restarted widespread imported film distribution in 1978. Between 1978 and the start of the revenue-sharing quota in 1994, more than 600 imported films from over 50 nations screened across China. For much of this era, Japan was the most favored importer—exciting industry personnel and audiences alike. The Sino-Japanese connection, which combined political-cultural reciprocity with popular film content, was an ideal match for an industry in the midst of a transition between a Planned Economy past to a market-based future. Since moviegoing in China reached all-time heights during this period, the legacy of several of the most popular Japanese imports has endured for decades.
{"title":"The personal, the political and the popular: Sino-Japanese film collaboration in the early reform era","authors":"Wesley Jacks","doi":"10.1080/17508061.2019.1678475","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17508061.2019.1678475","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Following the severe restrictions of the Cultural Revolution, China restarted widespread imported film distribution in 1978. Between 1978 and the start of the revenue-sharing quota in 1994, more than 600 imported films from over 50 nations screened across China. For much of this era, Japan was the most favored importer—exciting industry personnel and audiences alike. The Sino-Japanese connection, which combined political-cultural reciprocity with popular film content, was an ideal match for an industry in the midst of a transition between a Planned Economy past to a market-based future. Since moviegoing in China reached all-time heights during this period, the legacy of several of the most popular Japanese imports has endured for decades.","PeriodicalId":43535,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chinese Cinemas","volume":"13 1","pages":"202 - 214"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2019-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17508061.2019.1678475","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46815630","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：