is there a divide between independent and mainstream cinema?

7/23/2019 Is There a Divide Between Independent and Mainstream Cinema?

1/10

Ryan Madden 22358188

MED2247 Research and Analysis for Film and TV

CW4- 2500 Word Film and Television Research Project

For this project, Ive decided to ask the question,is there a divide between independent

and mainstream cinema? Both are two different kinds of cinema, and at the times they do

cross over between each other. There is an already pre-perceived notion surrounding

these two types of cinema, implying that they are two separate entities. The notion

implies that mainstream films are the dominant species in the film industry, aimed at the

mass market, as opposed to independent films, which are in general focussed on a

niche market (Gemser: 2006, 45). My aim for the study isto find out if there is a divide,

and if its a positive one? Do mainstream audiences have a certain belief about

independent films, maybe a negative opinion on it? Are independent films less successful

because they dont spoon-feed audiences? Are mainstream films all spectacle and no

substance? Larry Qualls identifies a notion that surrounds audiences perceptions about

critical thinking of more high-brow cinema, suggesting we could receive that admixture

of academic theory and snob appeal (Qualls, 1998). His suggestion being, do some

audiences think independent cinema have a snob appeal? But then, are mainstream

films seen as often resulting in style over substance (Golden, 2013), as Aaron Golden of

the independent film festival Raindanceseems to think?

Before findings can be studied on a potential divide in audiences, its important to

categorically separate these two entities of cinema via definition. When asked for the


2/10

difference between independent and mainstream cinema, film critic Roger Ebert said an

independent film will have been made because it expresses the directors personal vision

rather than someones notion of box-office success (Levy: 2001, 3). This suggests that

independent cinema is a medium outside of the traditional Hollywood System, a

medium thats very personal, and maybe more challenging in that respect.

In Gemsers studies into the difference of the two categories, he uses Zuckerman and

Kims approach, who make the distinction between mainstream and independent films

from studying the market identity or market role of U.S. film distributors (Gemser:

2006, 45). The idea behind this strategy of distinction centres around audiences, and their

already pre-perceived notions about these distributors, the fact they have established

identities in the eyes of the audience and distribute either mainstream or art house

films (Gemser: 2006, 45). Gemser went further to categorise the two in his studies,

basing his sample of films on the market identity of the film theatres in which the film is

released (Gemser: 2006, 45), which was something I took into account and adopted

when categorising the two types of cinema for my survey.

To some audiences, its thought that independent cinema should be challenging, and

radical. However, there is a belief that newer independent films have a lack of radically

political and avant-garde visions, suggesting independent films are becoming more

and more conventional, more mainstream (Levy: 2001, 5). This could imply that Levy

believes that the divide between independent and mainstream is closing, but for negative

reasons, suggesting its lost what earlier independent cinema characterised. This quote


3/10

could also imply that Levy believes mainstream cinema is a predictable, conventional

medium, suggesting it does not challenge its audience. His suggestion that independent

cinema lacks less conventions in its content implies that he thinks less of mainstream films

for doing such, thus putting a negative divide between those two categories.

As touched on earlier, there are notions that independent cinema may have more of a

critical analysis applied to it than mainstream cinema does. Qualls discussed how

independent cinema can have an admixture of academic theory (Qualls, 1998) attached

to it, and Gemser further developed his point. Gemser found that with regards to

independent cinema, film critics act as influencers to the audience (Gemser: 2006, 57).

Gemser explains that due to independent cinemas sometimes lack of star power, and

relatively low marketing budget, the number and size of the film reviews seem to be

important variables that influence the early box office revenue (Gemser: 2006, 57). When

compared to a film critics influence on mainstream cinema, film reviews only have a

prediction effect on demand (Gemser: 2006, 57). Notably, in line with Gemsers thinking,

this would be due to mainstream cinemas high demand of star power and budgets, it can

afford this marketing to sell the film. Its interesting that independent and mainstream

audiences are separated in how they are sold a different film also.

In terms of differing the two types of cinema, Williams has suggested that there are

technical and also creative elements that can differ the categories. For example, Williams

suggests that independent films will often have different kinds of stories, being less

conventionally dramatic (Williams: 2006, 248) than mainstream films. She also suggests


4/10

that independent cinema is less driven by stars, genres or action and special effects

and that it also works with more daring or controversial subject matter (Williams: 2006,

248). She finally concludes her list with the suggestion that independent cinema will often

be marked by distinctive styles of camerawork or editing or narrative

organisation (Williams: 2006, 248). Williams suggestion is this is her definitive list of

what separates an independent film from a mainstream one. Through this suggestion, she

further reiterates previous scholars points that mainstream cinema will be conventional,

not controversial.

I prefer to see something that really makes me think, ideally with layers of meaning so

the film can either be enjoyed as a piece of entertainment or you can glean further

meaning from re-watching or rethinking the film (Golden, 2013). This is Aaron Goldens

thoughts on why he currently prefers independent cinema, the implication of course

being that mainstream cinema cannot live up to these standards. His suggestion is that,

the majority of at least, mainstream films doesnt make you think, dont have multiple

layers. This notion held by Golden, and likely a fair amount of the film going audience

negatively enhances the divide between the two entities of cinema. To further evidence

the growing divide, its clear mainstream cinema is a very popular medium. According to

respected online critical website Rotten Tomatoes, in the same year Golden made that

statement, the best film of the whole year was Gravity (2013), scoring 97% [see

bibliography for reference],which, at a budget of a reported $100 million, according to

Gemser this is no independent film, its mainstream. The suggestion is here, a lot of


5/10

people, top critics included, believed this mainstream film was better than some

independent films that year. Completely juxtaposing Goldens opinion, the divide grows.

When choosing what method to use for my research, I wanted to choose a research

method that gave me ample opportunity to get fast, quantifiable answers without too

much detail. The answers I wanted werent going to hinge on peoples details, just the

core of their answer. This strategy would be better time management also, saving time on

analysing and quantifying toomuch data. I chose a questionnaire as my research method,

a form of survey. By definition, Used in survey research, this is a set of questions given to

respondents and designed to provide information relevant to the research

area (Abercrombie: 2006, 315). This was a perfect choice for my research, as I wanted

the relevant information, no more, no extra detail.

As well as time management, efficiency was very important to this research, as there was

no room for anomalies in the data. Questionnaires are very efficient form of research

method, and they allowed data collection in the most accurate way possible (Brace,

2008: 7). By collecting accurate data, I could gain more accurate responses, providing a

much more efficient form of data collecting. Accuracy of data collecting was very

important, as I didnt want confusing questions to throw respondents off, giving me the

wrong answer. I felt questionnaires gave me ample opportunity to get straight to the

point with questions, as opposed to a research method such as a focus group, whose

discussion could go on a tangent, and ultimately not answer the question in as much

accuracy as preferred. An example of this in my questionnaire was when I asked


6/10

participants for their Top 3 Favourite Films. I wanted to quantify this information using

scholars approaches, and identify if the participant preferred independent or mainstream

cinema. I didnt need reasons as to why these films are their favourites, as I wanted to

manage my time better, and put more time into analysing the lesser data in more detail.

I was very particular about how I worded my questionnaire, as I was aware the question is

central to the accuracy and efficiency of the data. If a questionnaire is written poorly, it

will not provide the data that are required or, worse, will provide data that are

incorrect (Brace, 2008: 7). Inaccurate and data can jeopardise findings of a research

project, in turn providing inaccurate and invalid research findings. So it was inherent that

the questions were worded in a way that should help the respondents to provide

accurate and valid responses (Brace, 2008: 7). An example of how a question could have

been misinterpreted if it were poorly written was when I asked for the participants rank of

most frequently visited cinema chain.If the question had been as In your opinion, whats

the best cinema chain?, participants could have ranked their favourite cinema chains

instead of most frequent, and that wouldnt answer my objective of the question which is

do audiences visit mainstream or independent cinema chains more.

When I got my questionnaires back to analyse the data, a negative of the research

method immediately arose. Of a possible 40 participants who I sent links to the

questionnaire, I got a return of 7 completed questionnaires. This massively impacted my

findings, as my sample had been reduced, and thus my findings were not as accurate as

they could have been with a broader choice of participant of different ages and


7/10

background. However, from the return I had, the results still showed some interesting

findings that responded to the scholars suggestions in my literature review.

One thing I was interested in, is how the perception of independent cinema has changed.

In my findings, under the favourite filmquestion, 2015s Whiplashfeatured more than

once. When attempting to categorise these films, Ive used the scholars approaches from

my literature review. Gemser suggested that independent films have a lack of star

power (Gemser, 2006: 57). However, Whiplash has two big star names in Miles Teller and

J.K. Simmons, both previously starring in mainstream films such as Divergent (2014) and

Spider-Man (2002) respectively. But, then again, Gemser identified some independent

films by the market identity of the film theatres in which the film is released (Gemser:

2006, 45). Whiplash was released in limited Odeons and Cineworldsacross the UK, but

was most frequently shown in Picture Houses. It is interesting to find that, over time, the

two types of cinema are now overlapping. The distinct line between independent and

mainstream specifications is gradually getting blurry. This could be a suggestion that the

divide between independent and mainstream cinema is closing. Or, Whiplashcould

simply be an anomaly in that respect.

With regards to what might be more popular to audiences, I asked my participants what

cinema they visit most frequently, in ranked order. In regards again to Gemsers

suggestion of market identity of the film theatres in which the film is released (Gemser:

2006, 45), this approach would be best when finding the objective of this question. Of a

choice of 7 different cinema chains, all different in their own regard, Odeon was the most


8/10

popular cinema chain with an overall score of 6.00. The market identity of Odeonis that

of a typically mainstream one. With regards to what types of films it shows, it is largely

mainstream. As a reference, Odeons current showtime list for the current week (Week

commencing 27/04/2015 [see bibliography for reference]) contains 10 films. And of those

10 films, 8 are mainstream films. Based on Gemser and Williams previous approaches

from the literature review, only 2 of those films can be considered independent. This

suggests that Odeon isnt a stranger to independent cinema, however it does largely

showcase mainstream pictures. Picture House cinema chain was second to bottom,

scoring a score of 3.17. The suggestion here is that fewer audience members visit

cinemas that host more independent films rather than mainstream ones.

In regard to Qualls suggestion that independent cinema has a certain snob

appeal (Qualls, 1998), I asked a question on the questionnaire with the objective of

finding out what mainstream audiences might think about independent cinemas, where

they perceived as snobby? Of the 7 respondents, only 5 had said that they had visited an

independent cinema. And of those 5, none reported anything negative about their visit.

The only comment that could be perceived negatively is one participant stated that their

visit was awesomeness from the offset, yet full of hippys. Now this could be construed as

a participant not taking the questionnaire seriously, but I believe the point being made

does relate to the snob appeal. Hippies are traditional left-wing centred people, and

independent cinema is thought to be radically political and [with] avant-garde

visions (Levy: 2001, 5). Their suggestion is that people in the cinema were solely left-

wing, solely independent cinema-goers, potentially implying their ignorance towards


9/10

right-wing, mainstream cinema. That could in turn suggest that this participant had

encountered the snob appeal Qualls suggested.

In conclusion, theres a fair bit I learnt about the difference and the divide between

independent and mainstream cinema. One thing was that the pre-perceived notions on

what makes an independent or mainstream film are now becoming less accurate, as the

specifications are commonly crossing over between both cinemas now. Additionally, it

seems that independent cinemas are not as popular as mainstream ones. That I

predicted, however, I didnt predict how few people choose independent cinemas over

mainstream ones. That in itself suggests that mainstream cinema has a bigger grasp on

todays audience, whereas, as stated in the introduction, independent films are are in

general focussed on a niche market (Gemser: 2006, 45). In regards to my choice of

research method, I was happy with the efficiency and accuracy my questionnaire

achieved. I managed my time well and my answers were notably accurate and valid.

However, the lack of replies did hurt my findings considerably, given me a narrower

audience to analyse. Overall, I was happy with how my research ended, and I have

concluded that there is still in fact a divide between mainstream and independent

cinema. However, the gap seems to be closing each year.

Bibliography

Gemser, Gerda. (2006). The impact of film reviews on the box office performance of art

house versus mainstream motion pictures. Art house versus mainstream motion pictures.

1 (1), 45-57.


10/10

Qualls, Larry. (1998). To Market, To Market. A Journal of Performance and Art. 1 (1), 38-43.

Golden, Aaron. (2013). WHAT MAINSTREAM CINEMA CAN LEARN FROM

INDEPENDENT FILM. Raindance.org. 1 (1)

Levy, Emanuel (2001). Cinema of Outsiders: The Rise of American Independent Film. New

York: NYU Press. 1.

Williams, Linda Ruth (2006). Contemporary American Cinema. London: McGraw-Hill

Education. 1.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/gravity_2013/

Abercrombie, N; Hill, S; Turner, B (2006). Dictionary of Sociology. 5th ed. London:

Penguin Publishers.

Brace, I (2008). Questionnaire Design: How to Plan, Structure and Write Survey Material

for Effective Market Research (Market Research in Practice). 2nd ed. London: Kogan Page.

2-36.

http://www.odeon.co.uk/cinemas/liverpool_one/171/

Link to my Questionnaire- https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/HG7J8LC
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/HG7J8LChttp://www.odeon.co.uk/cinemas/liverpool_one/171/http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/gravity_2013/

is there a divide between independent and mainstream cinema?

Documents