‘The Irishman’ on Netflix, Symbol Of a World Cinema In Danger
Published in Le Monde
(France) on 30 November 2019
by Editorial (link to original)
(France) on 30 November 2019
by Editorial (link to original)
Translated from
by Anindita Jaggi.
Edited by Margaret McIntyre.
As Scorsese's latest film will not be played in cinemas across France, the Broadcasting Act must adapt our system to the inevitable phenomenon of the surging popularity of streaming platforms.
On Wednesday, Nov. 27, the best film of the year was not released in French theaters. It is a huge production – with an estimated budget of USD $150 million - featuring world-renowned stars like Robert De Niro and Al Pacino and directed by one of the greatest living American filmmakers, Martin Scorsese. But The Irishman will not be played in French cinemas and will only screen in American theaters. To see it, you have to subscribe to Netflix and watch it on your own screen.
This aberration is a symptom of the crisis in international cinema, the worst it has been since the arrival of televisions in people’s homes half a century ago. It is tempting to attribute the role of villain, previously assigned to television, to streaming platforms.
In a column published in The New York Times on Nov. 4, Martin Scorsese named another culprit: major Hollywood studios caught up in the race for market concentration, whose goal is "the gradual but steady elimination of risk" in the production of big budget films. The result, explains the creator of Taxi Driver, is that "we now have two separate fields: there’s worldwide audiovisual entertainment, and there’s cinema." The huge studio productions based on commercial brands (Marvel, DC, Hasbro or Harry Potter) and the films selected for major festivals like Cannes, Venice or Toronto.
This gap began to widen well before the arrival of Netflix and its competitors. Those platforms then rushed in to fill the gap left by studios, offering their resources to producers of independent films and, in return, demanding producers give up showing their films in theaters.
Social Dimension
In the United States, as in many European countries, the cause seems to be obvious: major commercial channels are devoted entirely to the distribution of movies like The Avengers or Toy Story, while the big cities still have some cinemas dedicated to arthouse films. If these cities are too far away, you must settle for streaming services.
The social, collective dimension of cinema, which has made it a major art form for more than a century, is fading away. Paradoxically, we have never seen so many films in cinemas around the world. But in emerging markets there is also a deep divide between industrial and artistic products.
We should be able to counter this serious challenge with the French method. Organizing the distribution of film resources with the support of the national community, mechanisms that allow for the emergence of new talents or the maintenance of an unparalleled network of theaters, has enabled France to not only maintain attendance at these theaters, but also possess a community not entirely focused on major Hollywood films. However, this system invented in the post-war era, and powerfully reinforced in the 1980s, fails to take into account changes around the world, starting with the surging popularity of streaming platforms.
This issue must be remedied by government initiatives like the film provisions included in the Broadcasting Act. To ensure the remedy is not worse than the disease, we will need to prioritize one of the two elements that constitute the essence of cinema according to André Malraux’s formula: art. Unless you choose industry, making Scorsese's nightmare a reality.
On Wednesday, Nov. 27, the best film of the year was not released in French theaters. It is a huge production – with an estimated budget of USD $150 million - featuring world-renowned stars like Robert De Niro and Al Pacino and directed by one of the greatest living American filmmakers, Martin Scorsese. But The Irishman will not be played in French cinemas and will only screen in American theaters. To see it, you have to subscribe to Netflix and watch it on your own screen.
This aberration is a symptom of the crisis in international cinema, the worst it has been since the arrival of televisions in people’s homes half a century ago. It is tempting to attribute the role of villain, previously assigned to television, to streaming platforms.
In a column published in The New York Times on Nov. 4, Martin Scorsese named another culprit: major Hollywood studios caught up in the race for market concentration, whose goal is "the gradual but steady elimination of risk" in the production of big budget films. The result, explains the creator of Taxi Driver, is that "we now have two separate fields: there’s worldwide audiovisual entertainment, and there’s cinema." The huge studio productions based on commercial brands (Marvel, DC, Hasbro or Harry Potter) and the films selected for major festivals like Cannes, Venice or Toronto.
This gap began to widen well before the arrival of Netflix and its competitors. Those platforms then rushed in to fill the gap left by studios, offering their resources to producers of independent films and, in return, demanding producers give up showing their films in theaters.
Social Dimension
In the United States, as in many European countries, the cause seems to be obvious: major commercial channels are devoted entirely to the distribution of movies like The Avengers or Toy Story, while the big cities still have some cinemas dedicated to arthouse films. If these cities are too far away, you must settle for streaming services.
The social, collective dimension of cinema, which has made it a major art form for more than a century, is fading away. Paradoxically, we have never seen so many films in cinemas around the world. But in emerging markets there is also a deep divide between industrial and artistic products.
We should be able to counter this serious challenge with the French method. Organizing the distribution of film resources with the support of the national community, mechanisms that allow for the emergence of new talents or the maintenance of an unparalleled network of theaters, has enabled France to not only maintain attendance at these theaters, but also possess a community not entirely focused on major Hollywood films. However, this system invented in the post-war era, and powerfully reinforced in the 1980s, fails to take into account changes around the world, starting with the surging popularity of streaming platforms.
This issue must be remedied by government initiatives like the film provisions included in the Broadcasting Act. To ensure the remedy is not worse than the disease, we will need to prioritize one of the two elements that constitute the essence of cinema according to André Malraux’s formula: art. Unless you choose industry, making Scorsese's nightmare a reality.
Previous article![]( "Trump Will Not Let Macron Flog Erdogan")
Next article![]( "Why Impeachment Matters")