Asian Tigers May Slay Hollywood Dragon

LOS ANGELES - Consider the concern around the world that globalisation is Americanisation (if not United States cultural imperialism) in disguise, and that its most powerful exemplar is the Hollywood export.

But when the curtain drops on this century, suggests a major new West Coast study, Hollywood may no longer be the biggest star of the silver screen.

As of the moment, of course, its global standing is epic. More than half of the audiences for its many blockbusters hail from outside the US.

However, authoritarians of all stripes, religious fundamentalists and cultural conservatives - whether in China, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh or France - look warily at American film imports as conveyors of value-disease.

COSMOPOLITAN ENTERTAINMENT

BUT in the long run - suggests a provocative study by the Burkle Centre for International Relations at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) - the world need not fret too much. Should dynamic globalisation indeed prove a two-way export-import street, other stars will shine just as brightly.

Most likely to challenge Hollywood is Asia. India and China together boast not only one third of the world's population (the US has 4 per cent), but also breed thriving film industries.

Whereas Hollywood releases about 250 commercial films a year, India alone cranks out 800 to 900, though not many of the big-ticket variety, which is the US forte.

Cinematic output and creativity are also rising in the Philippines, Iran, Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Singapore and, of course, Hongkong.

The Chinese film Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon has grossed more than US$100 million (S$175 million) in the US alone - the first foreign-language film to make that kind of money.

In Iran, where almost all of Hollywood's products are banned, the unintended consequence of the mullahs' megalomania - or narrow-mindedness - has been an indigenous film industry that has people everywhere buzzing.

Suddenly, Iranian films are hot. The White Balloon, The Apple and Children Of Heaven stir audiences everywhere.

The UCLA study argues that increasing Asianisation of the film business could represent globalisation at its most desirable.

Exposing a larger US audience to divergent cultural and political perspectives could be of enormous value.

Rather than a fearsome and reductive 'clash of civilisations', we would get cosmopolitan world entertainment.

Mass entertainment, concludes the study, 'will not in itself be adequate to overcome inclinations towards hatred and violence. But it can help'.

Grieving Americans, shocked to discover that not everyone reacted to the World Trade Center massacre the same way, might want to see 11'09'01 September 11. It's an anthology, of sorts, from directors in 11 countries.

The Egyptian contribution, by director Youssef Chahine, contains dialogue making the case for terrorist attacks against the US and Israel.

India's Mira Nair tells the story of a Pakistani-American who died helping firefighters at the World Trade Center and who, posthumously, became the target of an anti-terrorist probe simply because, as his mother puts it, 'his name wasn't Jesus'- or David or Cary.

Curtains go up on the controversial film in France on Sept 11. Americans who want to see it, at this point, will have to go there.

It has yet to find a US distributor. Might this be a foretaste of US cultural protectionism? What an unwanted surprise ending that would prove.