As Yomota noted in his introduction, film making today is a multinational enterprise. Not only do actors, directors, screenwriters, and other studio personnel often hail from many different countries, but the studios themselves increasingly produce with a global audience in mind. Films are often set in multiple countries, even when the topic of the film does not necessitate an international setting. Studios, perhaps more for economic than ethical reasons, are increasingly sensitive to the diversity of their audiences, and contemporary films are often quite explicit in seeking to avoid (or seeking to push back against) negative stereotypes concerning gender, race, and cultural practices. More controversially, studios sometimes choose to omit certain topics or images that a censorious foreign government might object to, essentially engaging in self-censorship and bowing to authoritarian pressure in order to penetrate that market.
For this relatively free discussion forum, think of a film you have seen that illustrates one or more aspects of the transnational quality of the modern film industry.
Describe these aspects. Do they affect the aesthetic dimension of the film, and if so, how? Is Yomota correct that the presence of such elements make it hard or impossible to maintain nationally defined categories?
lternatively, could the very quality of transnationality be what what makes (for example) a commercial Hollywood film, most “American”?
Think about these and any other points that relate to the issue of cinematic transnationality and strike you as interesting.
