Marc,

 

Perhaps the biggest problem in defining American independent cinema is that the criteria applied in any definition of the term are historically specific. In other words we should not talk about American independent cinema but about independent cinemas. This is an argument I am proposing in my own book on the history of American independent cinema for Edinburgh University Press.

 

Geoff correcly mentioned that the term independent goes as far back as the early 1910s when pioneers like William Fox and Carl Laemmle tried to resist the oppresiveness of the trade practices of the Motion Pictures Patents Company. Both the filmmakers themselves and early film historians like Hampton casually refer to an "independent movement" but independence here is conceived strictly on industrial/institutional terms. 

 

The situation becomes more complicated during the studio era. Two of the very few key studies deal with independet cinema from two very different perspectives. Merritt defines independent films as those who were not financed by a major company and completely ignores films by produceres such as Goldwyn, Selznick, Hughes, Wanger etc. On the other hand, Aberdeen deals with elite producers like Goldwyn, Selznick, Wanger etc but he does not deal look at the lower end of production. And both authors disregard films from Poverty Row studios (Republic, Monogram, Grand National, Producers Releasing Corporation etc). What is interesting about Poverty Row filmmaking is that one could argue that the speed and cheapness of production are responsible for the creation of a specific aesthetic in the same way that the carefully organised and rationalised production of the studio system gave birth to a very distinct aesthetic (often called classical). In this respect Poverty Row films have a much more substantial claim to "independence" both in industrio-economic and in aesthetic terms than elite independent producers such as Goldwyn and Wanger. 

 

But what makes matters more complicated is that after the Paramount decision in 1948 a large number of  production companies were formed. As most of those companies were formed by ex-studio employees (especially directos and stars) critics labelled them "independent." At that point it seemed right to label them independent as the companies did not have a corporate relation with the ex-studios. However, as the studios shifted from production and exhibition to distribution as a means of controlling the film industry, the independence of those companies became a moot point. The ex-studios still exercised control by financing the films of these companies in direct or indirect ways. Still the term independent persisted, perhaps for lack of a better word. 

 

So it became clear that critics needed a different set of criteria to define independent cinema. This is when emphasis was placed on independent distribution companies. It was argued that if a film is produced outside the studios and distributed by a non major then we should be able to talk about independent cinema in a more concrete manner. Thus companies such as The Distributors Corporation of America, Embassy, American International Pictures, New World Pictures, New Line Cinema, Miramax, Orion Pictures etc were seen to offer a sort of a guarantee of independence. Even nowadays when New Line and Miramax are subsidiaries of the majors and all the others do not exist, trade publications such as Screen International treat New Line and Miramax as independent comanies. (On this subject I should recommend my essay "Major Status - Independent Spirit: The History of Orion Pictures (1978-1992) in The New Review of Film and Television Studies, Vol 2, No 1). On the other hand, Dreamworks SKG, a privately owned company, is routinely placed along with the majors (though I think not by Screen International )

 

American independent cinema then is a slippery term only if we fail to see that it has meant very different things at different times.

 

Yannis

 

 

 

Dr Yannis Tzioumakis

Senior Lecturer in Screen Studies

School of Media Critical and Creative Arts

John Moores University

Dean Walters Building

St James Road

Liverpool

L1 7BR

 

tel: 0151 231-5030

fax: 0151 231-5049