Class Notes (923,486)
CA (543,255)
UTSC (33,026)
Sociology (2,442)
SOCC44H3 (55)
Lecture 10

Thorough Notes on Lecture 10

6 Pages
125 Views

Department
Sociology
Course Code
SOCC44H3
Professor
Ivanka Knezevic

This preview shows pages 1-2. Sign up to view the full 6 pages of the document.
SOCC44H Media and SocietyApril 01/2011
Internet:
Film
Economics and aesthetics of film
Because of its elastic demand, producers conceive entertainment as subject to fashion/novelty
(change for the sake of change). Audience accepts this conceptualization: this accounts for
fashion: small and cyclical change. Change for the sake of change.
Not innovative
Novelty: change in unimportant aspects of communication
ex:change from traditional pop music in the 1940s and 1950s to the inclusion of race
music
there has to be a sufficient number of people out there who have to see the film (novelty)
only for the sake of it being new (accepting the conceptualization of the product as novel)
Aesthetic criteria applied to entertainment products change with changes in structural power of
producers
Other actors in the market (including audiences) accept the change through cultural mechanisms
it is not the audiences who create new fashions/novelty trends
their acceptance of newest novelties and fashions only last as long as audience still accepts it
as new but they don't control the newest trends that come in, only how long they last
what determines the length of a fashion?
Availability of alternative: how many other similar things do you have access to
Ability of industry to sense which trends are starting to bore audience
dry humour in films getting old
reading: Hirsch's steps for observing fads and fashions
it highlights the importance of institutional gatekeepers for success of a product
what's consider to be the in-thing is based on successful companies. Other companies then
follow.
Ex: whatever the most successful film companies were doing, others were following
around 1910, one of the big film producers from new york, Martin Lews, figured out that since
technology was advancing (so it was possible to produce longer films) he was going to hire a
bunch of theatre actors and film a bunch of plays.
This became huge because it was a trend away from actualities
in the 1950s, musicals were gone because musical studios had to sell their musical holding
rights
profit for musicals wasn't as high as it was supposed to be so they stopped doing them
so the most powerful producers determined whether musicals were to continue or
discontinue, they controlled this trend
The Studio System
In the 1920s technology was available to produce feature length (90 min) films
if we wanted to produce fictional films (for which you needed a ton of staff), we'd be
www.notesolution.com
employing huge numbers of people for production. This costs a lot of money in primary
investment. This means the film needs to work, so you need to produce the film on a rational
basis
Solution: the studio system – you'd have 2 groups of personnel
You'd have the business employees and the employees who worked directly on set
the most important business employee is the producer
producer had the final say about everything
In the 1940s, this system changed a little and now you had Segment Producers
a different producer responsible for each genre of music. They had their own specializations
(ex: one producer for comedies, one for drama, one for romance)
Towards the end of the 1950s, the 8 largest studios in Hollywood produced 75% of films and
collected 90% of cinema revenue
only 10% of revenue is left for anybody else to collect
Studio system was not only an example of horizontal concentration (only 5 of them producing
films and collected the bulk of revenue), but also vertical integration
each owned a large studio, worldwide network of distribution offices and cinema chains
(particularly metropolitan first-run houses)
metropolitan first run houses: cinemas located in the largest markets (ex Toronto) where the
film would play for example April 1st, then April 17th in smaller cities
Other large studios: Universal, Columbia, United Artists
United Artists was founded by a number of actors and directors who were fed up with the
studio system because in this system you had to do whatever you were told to do
ex: if actors found that their characters were to stale or that scripts were dull
one of the reasons why producers were able to collect these 90% of revenues was because of
block booking: studio will not sell owner of the cinema the right to sell only the film you want
to sell
ex: if the theatre wants to show only gone with the wind, they can't cause the studio forces
you to buy films in bulk and makes you buy a bunch of crappy films to show in order to
show the one good film
Effect of studio system on film content
1. Formulaic content
Ex: action films have a hero who always kills villain. Never other way around
Most of the films becoming similar to eac hother
this is contrary to what film should be doing
Art is expected to entertain through innovation
offering you something new, and not the same formula
However, oligopoly prevents market success of innovative products by independent producers
if you are an owner of a cinema in Toronto and MGM wants you to show 5 films, you don't
have anymore money or space to show smaller, lesser films
Innovation is supplanted by novelty (i.e. Fashion)
www.notesolution.com

Loved by over 2.2 million students

Over 90% improved by at least one letter grade.

Leah — University of Toronto

OneClass has been such a huge help in my studies at UofT especially since I am a transfer student. OneClass is the study buddy I never had before and definitely gives me the extra push to get from a B to an A!

Leah — University of Toronto
Saarim — University of Michigan

Balancing social life With academics can be difficult, that is why I'm so glad that OneClass is out there where I can find the top notes for all of my classes. Now I can be the all-star student I want to be.

Saarim — University of Michigan
Jenna — University of Wisconsin

As a college student living on a college budget, I love how easy it is to earn gift cards just by submitting my notes.

Jenna — University of Wisconsin
Anne — University of California

OneClass has allowed me to catch up with my most difficult course! #lifesaver

Anne — University of California
Description
SOCC44H Media and Society April 012011 Internet: Film Economics and aesthetics of film Because of its elastic demand, producers conceive entertainment as subject to fashionnovelty (change for the sake of change). Audience accepts this conceptualization: this accounts for fashion: small and cyclical change. Change for the sake of change. Not innovative Novelty: change in unimportant aspects of communication ex:change from traditional pop music in the 1940s and 1950s to the inclusion of race music there has to be a sufficient number of people out there who have to see the film (novelty) only for the sake of it being new (accepting the conceptualization of the product as novel) Aesthetic criteria applied to entertainment products change with changes in structural power of producers Other actors in the market (including audiences) accept the change through cultural mechanisms it is not the audiences who create new fashionsnovelty trends their acceptance of newest novelties and fashions only last as long as audience still accepts it as new but they dont control the newest trends that come in, only how long they last what determines the length of a fashion? Availability of alternative: how many other similar things do you have access to Ability of industry to sense which trends are starting to bore audience dry humour in films getting old reading: Hirschs steps for observing fads and fashions it highlights the importance of institutional gatekeepers for success of a product whats consider to be the in-thing is based on successful companies. Other companies then follow. Ex: whatever the most successful film companies were doing, others were following around 1910, one of the big film producers from new york, Martin Lews, figured out that since technology was advancing (so it was possible to produce longer films) he was going to hire a bunch of theatre actors and film a bunch of plays. This became huge because it was a trend away from actualities in the 1950s, musicals were gone because musical studios had to sell their musical holding rights profit for musicals wasnt as high as it was supposed to be so they stopped doing them so the most powerful producers determined whether musicals were to continue or discontinue, they controlled this trend The Studio System In the 1920s technology was available to produce feature length (90 min) films if we wanted to produce fictional films (for which you needed a ton of staff), wed be www.notesolution.com
More Less
Unlock Document


Only pages 1-2 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Unlock Document
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Unlock Document

Log In


OR

Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit