Film contingent

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A film quota is the amount of films that can be imported into a specific country in a specific period of time. The amount of a film quota was usually determined by an import quota , which determined the proportion of domestic to foreign films. Film quotas were introduced by many European countries in the 1920s to protect national film production from excessive film imports from the United States .

history

After the First World War , film production in most European countries had declined and was in financial crisis. Few donors were willing to invest in the European film industry. The consequences can be seen most dramatically in the example of France and Great Britain . These two countries were among the leading film producers in the world before the First World War - after which they had lost almost all importance for a long time. The film industry in Germany and Austria , however, was hardly affected by the First World War - on the contrary: the high inflation and the resulting weak currency created extremely favorable exchange rates , so that German and Austrian films were cheap abroad, which is why film production in both countries, at least for the time being so long as inflation was high, rose sharply.

In contrast to Europe, the United States profited greatly from the First World War - mainly through large arms exports and capital flight . American donors were ready to invest in the Hollywood film industry because it was run economically and promised high returns . So there was a large and sustained growth in film production in Hollywood , as the increasing film production in Hollywood was offset by an increasing number of cinemas and cinema visits in the USA. The quality of the Hollywood films was very high, as the most modern technology and the highest level of professionalism were used, and the films were always tailored to the tastes of a broad audience. This was the basis for Hollywood's success.

In order to "take over" the European market, the second largest cinema market after the USA, which promised even more profits, the American film producers and distributors chose the strategy of offering their films cheaper in Europe than in the USA. The background for this business tactic was that the Hollywood movies in their costs already played in American cinemas and therefore not in Europe cost recovery contributions had to earn more. The films were therefore offered to European cinema owners at a cheaper rate than any European film - which had yet to earn its production costs - could be in order to gain larger market shares in this way . Because the cinema owner found not only the cheaper films in the Hollywood productions, but also often those films that promised more success with the audience, as they had directors and actors who enjoyed the highest recognition in Europe. The professional staging and the mass appeal of Hollywood films was of course not a disadvantage in Europe either. The fact that artistic demands, which European film producers often harbored, fell by the wayside did not play a role in the pursuit of higher profits.

After the First World War, for example, film imports from the United States rose steadily and from around 1923 onwards gradually assumed threatening proportions for European film producers, as they increasingly pushed European film productions out of the cinemas. Numerous European film producers went bankrupt. Since inflation in Germany and Austria was brought under control with currency reforms from 1922 and 1923 and the exchange rate turned in favor of film importers, the heavily export-oriented film production in these countries was hit. They too were now threatened by the “flood of films” from Hollywood. Across Europe, filmmakers and filmmakers began to protest for state protective measures against the existence-threatening “film flood” from the United States. Almost everywhere the solution was seen in the introduction of import quotas linked to domestic film production and the associated allocation of American films.

Allotment

Often not only American films were affected by import quotas, but foreign films in general. There were quotas set certain how many foreign films allowed to be imported per domestic film. An import quota of 1:10 provided that ten foreign films could be imported for one domestic film. The quotas were decided by the European governments with representatives of the American film industry and were based on the size of the respective country and its film industry. For example, a quota of 1: 1 was enforced for Germany, while in France, whose film industry weakened sharply after the war, only a quota of 1: 7 could be agreed after proposing a quota of 1: 4. It is also noteworthy that Great Britain was only able to enforce a quota of 1:20 in 1927 - the same quota that was also granted to Austria. That shows how much the British film industry was weakened after the First World War. As with France, lack of capital was the problem here.

Pressure from the American distributors was, among other things, the threat of not showing any films in the respective country if the odds were too unfavorable. This leverage could be used successfully in Hungary , for example , which is why Hungary finally decided not to set any quotas.

Import quotas by country, year of introduction, ratio of national to foreign films:

  • Germany: 1: 1 (from approx. 1921)
  • Austria: 1:20 (May 19, 1926), later between 1:10 and 1:18
  • Great Britain: 1:20 (from summer 1927), increasing to 1: 4 by 1940
  • France: 1: 7 (1928)
  • Italy: 1:10

literature

  • L'Estrange Fawcett: The World of Film. Translated by C. Zell, supplemented by S. Walter Fischer. Amalthea, Zurich, Leipzig, Vienna 1928.

Individual evidence

  1. L'Estrange Fawcett: The World of Film. Amalthea-Verlag, Zurich, Leipzig, Vienna 1928, p. 44 (translated by C. Zell, supplemented by S. Walter Fischer)
  2. ^ Fawcett, p. 121
  3. ^ Fawcett, p. 144
  4. ^ Walter Fritz : In the cinema I experience the world - 100 years of cinema and film in Austria. Brandstätter, Vienna 1996
  5. ^ Fawcett, p. 137
  6. ^ Fawcett, p. 149
  7. ^ Fawcett, p. 150