Matrixx_Entertainment
2004-04-28 23:58:37 UTC
DEDICATION
This book is dedicated to all of the African Americans, Hispanic/Latinos,
Native Americans, Asian Americans, German Americans, Italian Americans,
women, gays/lesbians, Christians, Muslims, Arabs and Arab-Americans, White
Southerners and others who have been victimized by Hollywood employment
discrimination and patterns of bias on the screen for some 100 years.
INTRODUCTION
In the summer of 1992, a rather remarkable but little noticed series of
coincidental events occurred: four separate film industry-related
professionals (a film critic, a litigating attorney, a journalist and a
securities/entertainment attorney), working independently of each other
(each approaching his task from his own unique perspective as two
individuals and one pair) published three separate books that were extremely
critical of the U.S. film industry. All three books agreed on at least two
important points, while still disagreeing on one or two other issues. These
authors agreed that (1) motion pictures play an important role in society
(they are more than mere entertainment) and (2) there are serious problems
with the U.S. film industry. All four authors were also very critical of the
way in which the film industry is operated today and critical of the results
in terms of the motion pictures produced and distributed. These authors
appeared to disagree about (or at least some were hesitant to honestly
discuss) the question of who is primarily responsible for these problems and
the question of how to remedy the situation.
A fourth book that was also somewhat critical of the U.S. film industry, was
published in 1993 but, again, was written without benefit of the three
previous works since it was already at the publisher's when the other books
came out. That was David Prindle's Risky Business--The Political Economy of
Hollywood (see brief description below),
In their book Fatal Subtraction--How Hollywood Really Does Business, Los
Angeles litigating attorney Pierce O'Donnell (along with co-author Dennis
McDougal of the Los Angeles Times) provided a detailed review of the
Buchwald v. Paramount lawsuit during which Pierce O'Donnell represented the
plaintiff writer and producer against the major studio/distributor
Paramount. In addition to points (1) and (2) above, the Fatal Subtraction
book and subsequent magazine articles about the same lawsuit, furnished a
fairly good look at the way in which at least one major studio/distributor
handles its financial relationship with the creative community. The book
also states that the other studios conduct their business in the same or
similar manner, and goes on to offer that an " . . . elite group of two
dozen white males . . . " are primarily responsible for the industry's
problems. Finally the O'Donnell/McDougal book makes some broad suggestions
to the effect that a number of institutions and people should become
involved in remedying the situation including Congress, the U.S. Justice
Department, the President, the Federal Trade Commission, the talent guilds
and the movie-going public. Unfortunately, little else is offered in the way
of specific remedies.
In Michael Medved's Hollywood vs America--Popular Culture and the War on
Traditional Values, film critic Medved basically made four points: (1)
motion pictures are important, (2) Hollywood has been turning out a lot of
trash of late, (3) the fault lies with a secularist Hollywood creative
community and possibly the foreign and domestic international corporate
conglomerates who own the major studio/distributors and (4) the way to get
Hollywood back on track is to (a) get the Hollywood establishment to
publicly acknowledge its obligation to accept reasonable standards for its
own activities, (b) let Hollywood know how the
public feels, (c) change the values of the people who shape our popular
culture, (i.e., persuade Hollywood to alter its underlying attitudes) and
(d) infiltrate Hollywood with more religious filmmakers who can produce new
movies that reflect more traditional values. Thus, this critic of specific
films has also evolved into a film industry critic.
My own 1992 book offering, Film Finance and Distribution--A Dictionary of
Terms (Silman-James Press), first provides the definitions of some 3,600
terms relating to film finance and distribution, provides some examples of
how those terms are used in the industry and then goes on to express some of
the same criticism of the film industry in commentary appended to many of
the definitions. At the time the dictionary was being prepared there were no
other books on the market that were as blatantly critical of the overall
film industry as the Medved and O'Donnell/McDougal books turned out to be
and the dictionary/commentary format was considered to be a convenient way
to both contribute to a higher level of understanding of film finance and
distribution topics among those working in the industry, while at the same
time, showing how financial control in the industry is inextricably
intertwined with creative control. Thus, my book explained why many of the
problems complained about in the Medved and O'Donnell/McDougal books
actually come about as a result of the financial controls of the film
industry exercised by the major studio/distributors. My dictionary also
discusses certain more controversial issues of concern to both myself and
others in the industry through commentary related to specifically defined
terms.
Prindle's 1993 book, Risky Business--The Political Economy of Hollywood also
provides some useful analysis relating to Hollywood politics, economics and
sociology. This current study of Hollywood (What's Really Going on in
Hollywood) will comment on the Prindle, Medved, O'Donnell/McDougal books, at
length, agreeing with those authors on some issues while disagreeing on
others. In addition, some 145 other books (plus articles) relating to the
film industry have been reviewed in preparation for the writing of this book
and observations from those writings have been incorporated herein. Thus,
this writing has evolved into a review of the literature of the industry,
and utilizes the observations of other writers to either confirm the
underlying research of this book and my ten years of experience as a
practicing securities/entertainment attorney in Los Angeles, or to serve as
a point of departure on matters of disagreement.
Although there appears to be a tendency for the so-called Hollywood insiders
and others who have special knowledge and information about what is really
going on in Hollywood to keep quiet, occasionally, someone does step forward
to offer limited, but valuable criticism of the business side of the film
industry and how that relates to the films that are available to be seen by
mass audiences. An honor roll of some of those who have not been intimidated
by the Hollywood power structure and who have come forward in recent years
to write about their own perspective on the corruption in Hollywood should
include Dan Moldea, Kenneth Anger, Pierce O'Donnell, Dennis McDougal, Steven
Bach, William Cash, Steven Sills, David McClintick, Michael Medved and Terry
Pristin. These are the few who have not kept quiet. Aside from the many
quotes included in this book and attributed to such authors and others, the
balance of the statements made are my own and represent my opinion only.
Literature of the Industry and Original Research--As already stated, this
book and its companion volumes on Hollywood take a critical look at the film
industry, thus attempting to review and critically analyze much of the
literature regarding the business and legal aspects of this important field.
This series of books are not intended to focus on original research,
although a limited amount of such research is reported. Expressed in its
simplest terms, what this book seeks to accomplish is to combine a review of
the literature of the film industry with the experience of a working
professional in that industry while comparing the views expressed in those
books and articles with personal impressions and the impressions of others.
This book then attempts to draw certain conclusions regarding important
issues based on that variety of perspectives, recognizing that such
conclusions are not unassailable, simply the honest expression of personal
opinions, offered at a minimum to stimulate further research, writing and
discussion. In addition, however, this book attempts to go beyond where most
of the other writers on the film industry have gone with respect to the
question of who is responsible for the current circumstances of the
industry. The companion volume (Motion Picture Industry Reform), also seeks
to go beyond these other offerings with respect to what remedies ought to be
applied.
Thomas Schatz " . . . and others have called attention to the questionable
value of only using oral histories in constructing a chronicle of Hollywood
that will explain its films. Anecdotal histories--gripping in the telling
and listening--often suffer from what Schatz calls 'selective
recollection.'" Similarly, Gabler notes that the memoirs of writers--often
the least powerful creative figures during the studio era--are 'history by
retribution.' Hollywood writers in their writings that recall the production
heads of studios finally get a chance to create a history that favors them
by writing it themselves." Custen also warns that "[m]emoirs and interviews
must be balanced with other forms of data, where possible, to avoid becoming
part of the public relations machinery that Hollywood puts out." This book
and its companion volumes are not oral histories or memoirs, thus to that
extent, may serve to help balance the huge number of such books that have
been published in the past.
On some points, Custen admitted that he was " . . . forced to use secondary
material and, interestingly, material often not deemed officially
appropriate for serious academic study, like Kenneth Anger's hugely
entertaining Hollywood Babylon (1975)." On the other hand, Custen, points
out that "[o]ften only in such non-mainstream media sources can banished or
taboo behavior be chronicled at all." Thus, Custen concludes that
"[a]cademic standards of proof can be as repressive as the culture they seek
to illuminate." Even worse, so-called academic standards and other factors
severely limit the scope of the inquiry, particularly with regard to the
film industry. In addition, as Myrdal Gunnar suggests, "[f]ull objectivity .
. . is an ideal toward which we are constantly striving, but which we can
never reach. The social scientist, too, is part of the culture in which he
lives, and he never succeeds in freeing himself entirely from dependence on
the dominant preconceptions and biases of his environment."
In addition to the more contemporary books about Hollywood noted above that
came out in the summer of 1992, the earlier work by anthropologist Hortense
Powdermaker (Hollywood The Dream Factory), adds a contrasting perspective
from a different era. Dr. Powdermaker studied and wrote about Hollywood in
the late '40s. She suggested that the " . . . choice of the social scientist
is between being aware of his values and making them explicit, or being
unaware and letting the reader get them by inference. It seems more
scientific to openly present the values, which can then be rejected by a
reader if he chooses, than to have them hidden and implicit." Powdermaker "
. . . spent a year in Hollywood, from July 1946 to August 1947 . . . " Her "
. . . hypothesis was that the social system in which (movies) . . . are made
significantly influences their content and meaning." Powdermaker readily
admits that her " . . . hypothesis is hardly original . . . (in that) [a]ll
art, whether popular, folk or fine, is conditioned by its particular history
and system of production."
Powdermaker herself reported that she had " . . . no desire . . . to find a
job in the movie industry or to become a part of it . . . " In other words,
she " . . . had no ax to grind . . . " She interviewed a sampling of " . . .
approximately three hundred people . . . representative of the various
functional groups such as producers, writers, directors, actors and so on
(including) . . . the very successful, the medium successful and the
unsuccessful." Powdermaker also states that since " . . . political opinions
may influence attitudes, the sample also cut across left, right and center
groups." Powdermaker made appointments with people she was to interview by
getting others in the industry to vouch for her and provide an introduction.
She did not identify the persons interviewed by name. Her interviews were
conducted in a casual manner and she took no notes during the interview.
Powdermaker's book tried " . . . to explain in nontechnical language how the
social system underlying the production of movies influences them." Her " .
. . questions were concerned with what aspects of the system of production
and which individuals most influenced movies. The answers were found in a
study of the locus of power and its exercise, in the taboos which
circumscribe all production, in the values as represented in goals, in
historical and economic factors and in the introduction of new technology
and new ideas with resulting conflicts between old and new." Powdermaker
felt the relationships between various parties involved in filmmaking were
extremely important and that " . . . the key ones were those of
producer-writer, director-actor, and of all with the front office." "Related
problems of distribution and exhibition are discussed only incidentally,
since the study was focused on production in Hollywood." Powdermaker's
observations relating to the movie industry of the 1940s, are contrasted in
this work with more current observations. Enjoy!
FOREWORD
This work grew out of the observed frustration of film industry critics who
have chosen to criticize specific Hollywood movies over the years only to be
rebuffed by the false logic and overly simplistic studio arguments that such
films reflect the real world and that moviegoers vote with their pocket
books. After all, if it can be shown that there are consistent patterns to
the choices Hollywood studio executives make with respect to the movies
produced and released and the specific content of those movies, it becomes
obvious that Hollywood is selectively portraying reality and that moviegoers
only have limited options among all of the possibilities that could be
portrayed on the silver screen (i.e., their votes do not really count, or
only count in a limited way).
The first three chapters of this book summarize and provide an overview of
the contents of three companion volumes all relating to Hollywood movie
patterns of bias (Patterns of Bias in Motion Picture Content, A Study in
Motion Picture Propaganda, Motion Picture Biographies-The Hollywood Spin on
Historical Figures). This book and its companion volumes differ from other
studies touching on the same topic. Whereas most books considering the
subject of bias in motion pictures focus on the treatment of a single
ethnic, religious, cultural, racial or other readily identifiable interest
group in our diverse society, this study attempts to provide an overview of
such bias. The underlying assumption is that once the patterns of bias in
motion picture content are demonstrated, it then becomes easier to identify
the source of the bias and to explain why such bias exists. This more
comprehensive patterns of bias approach is also more useful when remedies
are considered, since no single interest group offended by Hollywood with
its movie portrayals has yet been able to effectively persuade Hollywood to
substantially alter such portrayals over a long period of time. To the
extent that some slight change has been brought about, due to the temporary
pressure of a particular group or the gradual evolution of cultural
sensibilities, Hollywood has merely substituted another equally offensive
pattern of bias for the previous portrayals.
The studies reported here also attempt to avoid redundancy by providing only
summary coverage in the areas that have been fairly adequately studied,
(e.g., treatment of African-Americans, Hispanics, women, etc.), while
placing a greater emphasis on subjects that have not been adequately covered
(e.g., bias directed toward Whites from the South). In addition, in order to
avoid the creation of a book that is too lengthy to digest, the entire text
of the section on anti-Nazi movies has been omitted, since there appears to
be no question that Hollywood's all-time favorite villain is the Nazi.
This study of Hollywood patterns of bias in motion picture content
(including negative portrayals, bias in biopics and favored themes) is
directly related to the material presented in the subsequent chapter "Who
Really Controls Hollywood", since movies, to a large extent, tend to mirror
the values, interests, cultural perspectives and prejudices of their makers.
These chapters considered together demonstrate quite clearly that the
Hollywood-based U.S. motion picture industry is controlled by a single, very
narrowly-defined interest group. It further concludes that it is
inappropriate for any such group to control a significant medium for the
communication of ideas in a society that is as diverse as that in the U.S.,
particularly a supposed democratic society, based on a free marketplace of
ideas.
Another book in this series on Hollywood, How the Movie Wars Were Won
catalogs discusses a variety of business practices and other techniques used
by the Hollywood control group to gain and maintain its dominance over the
U.S. film industry for the past 90 years. The book concludes that many of
such business practices are unfair, unethical, unconscionable,
anti-competitive, predatory, and in some case, illegal. A closely related
volume entitled The Feature Film Distribution Deal (published by Southern
Illinois University Press) critically analyzes the single most important
film industry agreement and shows how the Hollywood major
studio/distributors have abused their excessive power in the film industry
marketplace to contractually exploit producers, directors, writers, actors,
actresses, investors and others through documents that can only be
characterized as contracts of adhesion, filled with unconscionable
provisions.
Another of the books in this series, Motion Picture Industry Reform takes a
serious look at various approaches to instigating significant and long-term
reform in the way the motion picture industry operates. It specifically
promotes a policy designed to insure equal and fair opportunities for
persons of all races, religions, ethnicity, cultures, nations or regions of
origin, sexual preferences and so forth to tell their cultural stories
through this important communications medium, the feature-length motion
picture.
The research underlying this work ultimately occupied 2,222 pages of text.
The material was originally divided into nine books (Patterns of Bias in
Motion Picture Content, Motion Picture Biographies, A Study in Motion
Picture Propaganda, How the Movie Wars Were Won, Who Really Controls
Hollywood, Politics, Movies and the Role of Government, Hollywood
Corruption, Legacy of the Hollywood Empire and Motion Picture Industry
Reform). However, this current title (What's Really Going On In Hollywood)
provides an overview of five of those books by excerpting the summaries and
conclusions of those works, while omitting the detailed notes relating to
specific films. Anyone interested in reviewing any of the original nine
titles with the more complete presentation of the basic research may obtain
copies through the author/publisher.
John W. Cones, Esq.
--------------------
Balance of book at http://www.mecfilms.com/FIRM/whats.htm
This book is dedicated to all of the African Americans, Hispanic/Latinos,
Native Americans, Asian Americans, German Americans, Italian Americans,
women, gays/lesbians, Christians, Muslims, Arabs and Arab-Americans, White
Southerners and others who have been victimized by Hollywood employment
discrimination and patterns of bias on the screen for some 100 years.
INTRODUCTION
In the summer of 1992, a rather remarkable but little noticed series of
coincidental events occurred: four separate film industry-related
professionals (a film critic, a litigating attorney, a journalist and a
securities/entertainment attorney), working independently of each other
(each approaching his task from his own unique perspective as two
individuals and one pair) published three separate books that were extremely
critical of the U.S. film industry. All three books agreed on at least two
important points, while still disagreeing on one or two other issues. These
authors agreed that (1) motion pictures play an important role in society
(they are more than mere entertainment) and (2) there are serious problems
with the U.S. film industry. All four authors were also very critical of the
way in which the film industry is operated today and critical of the results
in terms of the motion pictures produced and distributed. These authors
appeared to disagree about (or at least some were hesitant to honestly
discuss) the question of who is primarily responsible for these problems and
the question of how to remedy the situation.
A fourth book that was also somewhat critical of the U.S. film industry, was
published in 1993 but, again, was written without benefit of the three
previous works since it was already at the publisher's when the other books
came out. That was David Prindle's Risky Business--The Political Economy of
Hollywood (see brief description below),
In their book Fatal Subtraction--How Hollywood Really Does Business, Los
Angeles litigating attorney Pierce O'Donnell (along with co-author Dennis
McDougal of the Los Angeles Times) provided a detailed review of the
Buchwald v. Paramount lawsuit during which Pierce O'Donnell represented the
plaintiff writer and producer against the major studio/distributor
Paramount. In addition to points (1) and (2) above, the Fatal Subtraction
book and subsequent magazine articles about the same lawsuit, furnished a
fairly good look at the way in which at least one major studio/distributor
handles its financial relationship with the creative community. The book
also states that the other studios conduct their business in the same or
similar manner, and goes on to offer that an " . . . elite group of two
dozen white males . . . " are primarily responsible for the industry's
problems. Finally the O'Donnell/McDougal book makes some broad suggestions
to the effect that a number of institutions and people should become
involved in remedying the situation including Congress, the U.S. Justice
Department, the President, the Federal Trade Commission, the talent guilds
and the movie-going public. Unfortunately, little else is offered in the way
of specific remedies.
In Michael Medved's Hollywood vs America--Popular Culture and the War on
Traditional Values, film critic Medved basically made four points: (1)
motion pictures are important, (2) Hollywood has been turning out a lot of
trash of late, (3) the fault lies with a secularist Hollywood creative
community and possibly the foreign and domestic international corporate
conglomerates who own the major studio/distributors and (4) the way to get
Hollywood back on track is to (a) get the Hollywood establishment to
publicly acknowledge its obligation to accept reasonable standards for its
own activities, (b) let Hollywood know how the
public feels, (c) change the values of the people who shape our popular
culture, (i.e., persuade Hollywood to alter its underlying attitudes) and
(d) infiltrate Hollywood with more religious filmmakers who can produce new
movies that reflect more traditional values. Thus, this critic of specific
films has also evolved into a film industry critic.
My own 1992 book offering, Film Finance and Distribution--A Dictionary of
Terms (Silman-James Press), first provides the definitions of some 3,600
terms relating to film finance and distribution, provides some examples of
how those terms are used in the industry and then goes on to express some of
the same criticism of the film industry in commentary appended to many of
the definitions. At the time the dictionary was being prepared there were no
other books on the market that were as blatantly critical of the overall
film industry as the Medved and O'Donnell/McDougal books turned out to be
and the dictionary/commentary format was considered to be a convenient way
to both contribute to a higher level of understanding of film finance and
distribution topics among those working in the industry, while at the same
time, showing how financial control in the industry is inextricably
intertwined with creative control. Thus, my book explained why many of the
problems complained about in the Medved and O'Donnell/McDougal books
actually come about as a result of the financial controls of the film
industry exercised by the major studio/distributors. My dictionary also
discusses certain more controversial issues of concern to both myself and
others in the industry through commentary related to specifically defined
terms.
Prindle's 1993 book, Risky Business--The Political Economy of Hollywood also
provides some useful analysis relating to Hollywood politics, economics and
sociology. This current study of Hollywood (What's Really Going on in
Hollywood) will comment on the Prindle, Medved, O'Donnell/McDougal books, at
length, agreeing with those authors on some issues while disagreeing on
others. In addition, some 145 other books (plus articles) relating to the
film industry have been reviewed in preparation for the writing of this book
and observations from those writings have been incorporated herein. Thus,
this writing has evolved into a review of the literature of the industry,
and utilizes the observations of other writers to either confirm the
underlying research of this book and my ten years of experience as a
practicing securities/entertainment attorney in Los Angeles, or to serve as
a point of departure on matters of disagreement.
Although there appears to be a tendency for the so-called Hollywood insiders
and others who have special knowledge and information about what is really
going on in Hollywood to keep quiet, occasionally, someone does step forward
to offer limited, but valuable criticism of the business side of the film
industry and how that relates to the films that are available to be seen by
mass audiences. An honor roll of some of those who have not been intimidated
by the Hollywood power structure and who have come forward in recent years
to write about their own perspective on the corruption in Hollywood should
include Dan Moldea, Kenneth Anger, Pierce O'Donnell, Dennis McDougal, Steven
Bach, William Cash, Steven Sills, David McClintick, Michael Medved and Terry
Pristin. These are the few who have not kept quiet. Aside from the many
quotes included in this book and attributed to such authors and others, the
balance of the statements made are my own and represent my opinion only.
Literature of the Industry and Original Research--As already stated, this
book and its companion volumes on Hollywood take a critical look at the film
industry, thus attempting to review and critically analyze much of the
literature regarding the business and legal aspects of this important field.
This series of books are not intended to focus on original research,
although a limited amount of such research is reported. Expressed in its
simplest terms, what this book seeks to accomplish is to combine a review of
the literature of the film industry with the experience of a working
professional in that industry while comparing the views expressed in those
books and articles with personal impressions and the impressions of others.
This book then attempts to draw certain conclusions regarding important
issues based on that variety of perspectives, recognizing that such
conclusions are not unassailable, simply the honest expression of personal
opinions, offered at a minimum to stimulate further research, writing and
discussion. In addition, however, this book attempts to go beyond where most
of the other writers on the film industry have gone with respect to the
question of who is responsible for the current circumstances of the
industry. The companion volume (Motion Picture Industry Reform), also seeks
to go beyond these other offerings with respect to what remedies ought to be
applied.
Thomas Schatz " . . . and others have called attention to the questionable
value of only using oral histories in constructing a chronicle of Hollywood
that will explain its films. Anecdotal histories--gripping in the telling
and listening--often suffer from what Schatz calls 'selective
recollection.'" Similarly, Gabler notes that the memoirs of writers--often
the least powerful creative figures during the studio era--are 'history by
retribution.' Hollywood writers in their writings that recall the production
heads of studios finally get a chance to create a history that favors them
by writing it themselves." Custen also warns that "[m]emoirs and interviews
must be balanced with other forms of data, where possible, to avoid becoming
part of the public relations machinery that Hollywood puts out." This book
and its companion volumes are not oral histories or memoirs, thus to that
extent, may serve to help balance the huge number of such books that have
been published in the past.
On some points, Custen admitted that he was " . . . forced to use secondary
material and, interestingly, material often not deemed officially
appropriate for serious academic study, like Kenneth Anger's hugely
entertaining Hollywood Babylon (1975)." On the other hand, Custen, points
out that "[o]ften only in such non-mainstream media sources can banished or
taboo behavior be chronicled at all." Thus, Custen concludes that
"[a]cademic standards of proof can be as repressive as the culture they seek
to illuminate." Even worse, so-called academic standards and other factors
severely limit the scope of the inquiry, particularly with regard to the
film industry. In addition, as Myrdal Gunnar suggests, "[f]ull objectivity .
. . is an ideal toward which we are constantly striving, but which we can
never reach. The social scientist, too, is part of the culture in which he
lives, and he never succeeds in freeing himself entirely from dependence on
the dominant preconceptions and biases of his environment."
In addition to the more contemporary books about Hollywood noted above that
came out in the summer of 1992, the earlier work by anthropologist Hortense
Powdermaker (Hollywood The Dream Factory), adds a contrasting perspective
from a different era. Dr. Powdermaker studied and wrote about Hollywood in
the late '40s. She suggested that the " . . . choice of the social scientist
is between being aware of his values and making them explicit, or being
unaware and letting the reader get them by inference. It seems more
scientific to openly present the values, which can then be rejected by a
reader if he chooses, than to have them hidden and implicit." Powdermaker "
. . . spent a year in Hollywood, from July 1946 to August 1947 . . . " Her "
. . . hypothesis was that the social system in which (movies) . . . are made
significantly influences their content and meaning." Powdermaker readily
admits that her " . . . hypothesis is hardly original . . . (in that) [a]ll
art, whether popular, folk or fine, is conditioned by its particular history
and system of production."
Powdermaker herself reported that she had " . . . no desire . . . to find a
job in the movie industry or to become a part of it . . . " In other words,
she " . . . had no ax to grind . . . " She interviewed a sampling of " . . .
approximately three hundred people . . . representative of the various
functional groups such as producers, writers, directors, actors and so on
(including) . . . the very successful, the medium successful and the
unsuccessful." Powdermaker also states that since " . . . political opinions
may influence attitudes, the sample also cut across left, right and center
groups." Powdermaker made appointments with people she was to interview by
getting others in the industry to vouch for her and provide an introduction.
She did not identify the persons interviewed by name. Her interviews were
conducted in a casual manner and she took no notes during the interview.
Powdermaker's book tried " . . . to explain in nontechnical language how the
social system underlying the production of movies influences them." Her " .
. . questions were concerned with what aspects of the system of production
and which individuals most influenced movies. The answers were found in a
study of the locus of power and its exercise, in the taboos which
circumscribe all production, in the values as represented in goals, in
historical and economic factors and in the introduction of new technology
and new ideas with resulting conflicts between old and new." Powdermaker
felt the relationships between various parties involved in filmmaking were
extremely important and that " . . . the key ones were those of
producer-writer, director-actor, and of all with the front office." "Related
problems of distribution and exhibition are discussed only incidentally,
since the study was focused on production in Hollywood." Powdermaker's
observations relating to the movie industry of the 1940s, are contrasted in
this work with more current observations. Enjoy!
FOREWORD
This work grew out of the observed frustration of film industry critics who
have chosen to criticize specific Hollywood movies over the years only to be
rebuffed by the false logic and overly simplistic studio arguments that such
films reflect the real world and that moviegoers vote with their pocket
books. After all, if it can be shown that there are consistent patterns to
the choices Hollywood studio executives make with respect to the movies
produced and released and the specific content of those movies, it becomes
obvious that Hollywood is selectively portraying reality and that moviegoers
only have limited options among all of the possibilities that could be
portrayed on the silver screen (i.e., their votes do not really count, or
only count in a limited way).
The first three chapters of this book summarize and provide an overview of
the contents of three companion volumes all relating to Hollywood movie
patterns of bias (Patterns of Bias in Motion Picture Content, A Study in
Motion Picture Propaganda, Motion Picture Biographies-The Hollywood Spin on
Historical Figures). This book and its companion volumes differ from other
studies touching on the same topic. Whereas most books considering the
subject of bias in motion pictures focus on the treatment of a single
ethnic, religious, cultural, racial or other readily identifiable interest
group in our diverse society, this study attempts to provide an overview of
such bias. The underlying assumption is that once the patterns of bias in
motion picture content are demonstrated, it then becomes easier to identify
the source of the bias and to explain why such bias exists. This more
comprehensive patterns of bias approach is also more useful when remedies
are considered, since no single interest group offended by Hollywood with
its movie portrayals has yet been able to effectively persuade Hollywood to
substantially alter such portrayals over a long period of time. To the
extent that some slight change has been brought about, due to the temporary
pressure of a particular group or the gradual evolution of cultural
sensibilities, Hollywood has merely substituted another equally offensive
pattern of bias for the previous portrayals.
The studies reported here also attempt to avoid redundancy by providing only
summary coverage in the areas that have been fairly adequately studied,
(e.g., treatment of African-Americans, Hispanics, women, etc.), while
placing a greater emphasis on subjects that have not been adequately covered
(e.g., bias directed toward Whites from the South). In addition, in order to
avoid the creation of a book that is too lengthy to digest, the entire text
of the section on anti-Nazi movies has been omitted, since there appears to
be no question that Hollywood's all-time favorite villain is the Nazi.
This study of Hollywood patterns of bias in motion picture content
(including negative portrayals, bias in biopics and favored themes) is
directly related to the material presented in the subsequent chapter "Who
Really Controls Hollywood", since movies, to a large extent, tend to mirror
the values, interests, cultural perspectives and prejudices of their makers.
These chapters considered together demonstrate quite clearly that the
Hollywood-based U.S. motion picture industry is controlled by a single, very
narrowly-defined interest group. It further concludes that it is
inappropriate for any such group to control a significant medium for the
communication of ideas in a society that is as diverse as that in the U.S.,
particularly a supposed democratic society, based on a free marketplace of
ideas.
Another book in this series on Hollywood, How the Movie Wars Were Won
catalogs discusses a variety of business practices and other techniques used
by the Hollywood control group to gain and maintain its dominance over the
U.S. film industry for the past 90 years. The book concludes that many of
such business practices are unfair, unethical, unconscionable,
anti-competitive, predatory, and in some case, illegal. A closely related
volume entitled The Feature Film Distribution Deal (published by Southern
Illinois University Press) critically analyzes the single most important
film industry agreement and shows how the Hollywood major
studio/distributors have abused their excessive power in the film industry
marketplace to contractually exploit producers, directors, writers, actors,
actresses, investors and others through documents that can only be
characterized as contracts of adhesion, filled with unconscionable
provisions.
Another of the books in this series, Motion Picture Industry Reform takes a
serious look at various approaches to instigating significant and long-term
reform in the way the motion picture industry operates. It specifically
promotes a policy designed to insure equal and fair opportunities for
persons of all races, religions, ethnicity, cultures, nations or regions of
origin, sexual preferences and so forth to tell their cultural stories
through this important communications medium, the feature-length motion
picture.
The research underlying this work ultimately occupied 2,222 pages of text.
The material was originally divided into nine books (Patterns of Bias in
Motion Picture Content, Motion Picture Biographies, A Study in Motion
Picture Propaganda, How the Movie Wars Were Won, Who Really Controls
Hollywood, Politics, Movies and the Role of Government, Hollywood
Corruption, Legacy of the Hollywood Empire and Motion Picture Industry
Reform). However, this current title (What's Really Going On In Hollywood)
provides an overview of five of those books by excerpting the summaries and
conclusions of those works, while omitting the detailed notes relating to
specific films. Anyone interested in reviewing any of the original nine
titles with the more complete presentation of the basic research may obtain
copies through the author/publisher.
John W. Cones, Esq.
--------------------
Balance of book at http://www.mecfilms.com/FIRM/whats.htm