|
Film-Philosophy International Salon-Journal
(ISSN 1466-4615) Vol. 8 No. 39, November 2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Ruppert Hungarian Rhapsody: On Cunningham's _Hungarian
Cinema_ John Cunningham _Hungarian Cinema: From Coffee
House to Multiplex_ London and New York: Wallflower
Press, 2004 ISBN 1-903364-79-5 xiii + 258pp. The subtitle of John
Cunningham's comprehensive introduction to Hungarian cinema suggests a
straight trajectory from the art house to mainstream. But the actual story of
this national cinema, as Cunningham effectively tells it here, more closely
resembles a roller coaster ride with its peaks and troughs. Marked by disruption and
discontinuity, the story of Hungarian cinema parallels Hungarian history in
the 20th Century, a troubled narrative that includes the end of the
Austro-Hungarian Empire, two world wars, failed revolutions, and the rise and
fall of communism. No other national cinema, Cunningham suggests, has had to
endure the devastating impact of a fascist dictatorship, the complete
destruction of its facilities, state control, and censorship, and a 'systems
change' in 1989. And no other European film industry, with the possible
exception of Germany, has had to contend with the periodic emigration of its
most talented filmmakers (after 1919, in the late 30s, after World War II, in
1956 and after). And yet, as Cunningham also shows, Hungary has had moments
of exceptional filmmaking, producing exciting and innovative films that are
deeply engaged in social and moral issues and that attempt to come to terms
with this troubled past. Structured chronologically by
decades, Cunningham's book provides a concise and accessible overview of
Hungarian cinema from the first screenings in Budapest in 1896 to the impact
of the 'system change' after the fall of Communism in 1989 and beyond.
Rejecting past efforts to explain Hungarian culture in terms of Hungary's
linguistic isolation or its pivotal position between East and West,
Cunningham shows that Hungarian cinema cannot be reduced to the cliché of
angst-ridden allegories about suppression and repression. 'It is important',
he writes in the Introduction, 'to understand Hungarian film as films in
their own right and not just as we may wish to see them, as anti-totalitarian
allegories or metaphors of Stalinism . . .' (2). In the 13 chapters that follow,
Cunningham focuses on Hungarian film culture in its historical, political,
and social complexity. He writes informatively about the basic structures and
organization of the industry, provides insights into Hungarian film writing
and theory, stresses the important role of the Film Academy and film schools,
and includes important information on box office, stars, and audiences. There
is also an excellent chapter dealing with Hungarian documentary, animation,
and experimental films, as well as a fascinating chapter on the
representation of 'Jews, Gypsies and Others'. Equally fascinating is his
analysis of the of Hungarian football (*foci*) films, a genre deeply enmeshed
in politics and prejudice. And for those willing to make a special effort,
there's even a 'Guide to Hungarian Pronunciation' (xi). To situate the uneven
'start/stop' development of Hungarian cinema within its historical context,
Cunningham suggests a schematic division into four major periods, each one
determined by important historical events. 1. From the first film
screenings to about 1920, the development of Hungarian cinema followed the
pattern of other European countries. With the growth of the industry a film
culture developed rapidly and Hungarians were apparently among the first to
take film seriously and discuss it as an art form. The first Hungarian
narrative film was screened on 14 October 1912, possibly directed by Mihály
Kertész (later to become famous as Michael Curtiz, the director of
_Casablanca_). Here Cunningham also cites early film writings by Alexander
Korda and contributions to the philosophy of film by Marxist scholars György
Lukács and Béla Balázs. 2. The defeat of 1919 and the
Treaty of Trianon led to artistic decline and an exodus of major filmmaking
talent. With the establishment of the increasingly right-wing Horthy regime,
Hungarian cinema reached a low point that continued until the end of World
War II and the destruction of the major studios. Although there were
occasional highlights during this period (Cunningham cites the films of Fejös
and Szöts), interventionist governments and the rise of Nazism led to another
wave of emigration of filmmakers, an exodus that was repeated after the
failure of the Uprising in 1956. 3. The long postwar period (1948
to 1989) was dominated by the Soviet model. For a brief period after the war,
Hungarian cinema reflected the Moscow party line and the official style of
Socialist Realism. But after the death of Stalin and the de-Stalinization of
the arts, the situation for filmmakers improved dramatically. By 1960,
Cunningham claims, Hungarian films had moved beyond the boy-meets-tractor
stories and the theme of heroic resistance of the people against the Nazi
hordes. Influenced by the French New Wave, Hungarian films became
individualized, dealt with ambivalent social and moral issues, and
experimented with a variety of film styles. Although the industry remained
under state control, the control was more relaxed -- paternalistic rather
than totalitarian, according to Cunningham. This unique mix of state control
and artistic freedom, along with diminished censorship, a revamping of the
studio system and a more open policy of the Film Academy, led to a flowering
of Hungarian cinema -- a 'new wave' in which movies were overtly critical of
the political power structure. The 60s became a decade of triumph. Leading
filmmakers such as Miklós Jancsó experimented with long takes, superb
compositions, and graceful tracking shots to make complex movies that
interrogated Hungarian history and its implications for contemporary
audiences. Surprisingly outspoken, focusing on ambivalent moral issues, and
open-ended in their conclusions, many of these films remain underrated in the
West, where only a handful of Hungarian films were exhibited. Although some
filmmakers -- Jancsó, Károly Makk, Márta Meszáros, István Szabo -- managed to
attract audiences at home as well as international audiences, many films have
not been distributed in the West, and Hungarian audiences, like other
European audiences, have always preferred Hollywood products. 4. After the fall of communism
(1989) there was a significant decrease in the role of the state, especially
in terms of state subsidies, and a concomitantly greater stress on
entrepreneurial skills in a capitalist market. Nevertheless, as Cunningham
notes, Hungarian filmmakers do not operate in a pure free market. Subsidies
still exist today, although the amounts are smaller than they used to be. But
when you take into account that in 1991 the average Hungarian feature film
cost about Ft25 million (3,000 US Dollars), subsidies remain a significant
factor. Cunningham also argues that 'there is no dividing wall between post-
and pre- 1989' (196). Still, changes can be seen in the greater diversity of
subject matter in recent films, along with a preference for comedies and films
dealing with gangsters and crime, indicating a greater concern for box
office. Cunningham ends his study on a
mixed note of gloom and promise for the future. Hungarian cinema, he
observes, seems to have weathered the transition to a free market, but in the
process it has bifurcated into 'parallel industries' (159) -- the big
international co-productions on the one hand, and on the other a domestic
industry existing in a cultural ghetto and catering mainly to local
audiences. What the future holds is unclear. Now that Hungary has joined the
European Union one thing is certain: production costs will rise. Avoiding a
Manichean judgment on the future of Hungarian film, Cunningham concludes by
citing Gramsci's prescription for a dose of 'pessimism of the intelligence
and optimism of the will' (196). Cunningham's unambiguous purpose
here is to familiarize Western audiences with a rich, if uneven tradition of
filmmaking. His goal, first and foremost, is to write 'an accessible account'
that appeals to a wide range of readers. 'I consider much contemporary film
theory to be inadequate and confusing,' he writes, 'particularly when
gobbledly-gook of the Althusserian variety or Lacanian psychobabble
predominates' (3). He describes his approach as 'unashamedly empirical,
roughly chronological and written in manner that . . . is comprehensible to
all' (3). Thus Cunningham avoids theoretical analysis and pares down his
discussion of individual films and directors' biographies in order to focus
on broad historical developments. And so as not to deflect our attention from
developments within Hungary, he limits consideration of those filmmakers who
emigrated and worked in other film industries, e.g. Michael Curtiz in
Hollywood, Emeric Pressburger in Britain, Béla Balázs in the USSR. (There is,
however, an impressive list of émigrés and exiles in the Appendix (197-199),
entitled 'The Hungarian Film Diaspora: From the Beginning to 1989'. Although
incomplete, the list includes Hungarian actors, scriptwriters, directors, cameramen,
and composers like Béla Lugossi, Ferenc Molnár, Charles Vidor, Lászlo Kovács,
and Miklós Rózsa, among many others.) _Hungarian Cinema: From Coffee
House to Multiplex_ is informative, informed, and a pleasure to read.
Cunningham writes in a lively way about his subject, seamlessly combining his
knowledge of cinema with his considerable knowledge of Hungarian history. The
reader can't help but learn a great deal about each. Although the book can be
used as an introduction -- a sort of guide for the uninitiated -- I think it
will also benefit those more familiar with the subject. Of particular
interest is the chapter that deals with the darker side of Hungarian history:
the historical persecution of Jews and Gypsies and the general failure of
cinema to provide adequate representations. Cunningham notes that before
World War II only a few Hungarian films made reference to Jews and even fewer
could be labeled as anti-Semitic. After the war, as was the case in Germany,
there was a pervasive silence about the Holocaust. With the exception of two
films by Zoltán Fábri in the 1950s, it wasn't until the 1980s that the
historical persecution of Jews in Hungary received serious treatment. The
most ambitious treatment to date, according to Cunningham, is István Szabó's
_Sunshine_ (1999), which charts the history of a Jewish family through three
generations and three historical regimes -- the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the
Nazi occupation, and the long period of Communism. The representation of
Gypsies, 'Europe's most loathed people' (180), has not fared as well. In
feature films, if Gypsies are represented at all, they are usually there to
provide humor or music of folksy manners. This situation is reminiscent of
the obsequious black 'Step'n'Fetch it' character familiar from Hollywood
films. More recently, Cunningham points out, there has been a welcome
increase in the number of documentaries and ethnographic films about Gypsies.
Cunningham's emphasis on being
comprehensive and accessible does entail some limitations. There is, for
example, the usual cataloging of obscure and run-of-the-mill films followed
by cursory discussion and plot summaries. While this may avoid the canonical
approach, most readers have not seen the films under discussion and may find
the commentary perfunctory and tedious. Moreover, with a few exceptions
(Zoltán Fábri's _Merry-Go-Round_ (1956) and Szabó's _Sunshine_), there is
little of what I would call critical analysis of individual films. Also,
since Cunningham has intentionally pared down his discussion of genres,
directors' biographies, émigrés, and auteurs (Szabó, Jancsó, Makk, and
Mészáros) on the premise that their work has already been covered by other
writers, some readers may be disappointed by the limited attention they
receive here. Readers who are interested in history of Hungarian film,
however, and the role that cinema has played in Hungarian society and
culture, will find this an intelligent and compelling book A recurring historical problem
for Hungarian cinema, as Cunningham observes, is the effort to walk the
tenuous path between box office appeal on the one hand, and on the other
films that feed off the personal visions of the director who relies on state
subsidies. This art/popular dichotomy, certainly not unique to Hungarian
film, is evidenced in the contrast between the awards and accolades showered
on Hungarian cinema at international film festivals and their meager appeal
at home. The individualistic and uncompromisingly grim films of Béla Tarr
(often compared to Tarkovsky) have attracted a devoted band of admirers but
have had limited circulation. And past attempts to make Hollywood-style films
have apparently been disappointing. A better direction, as Cunningham
suggests, may be indicated by a greater diversity in subject matter evident
in the post-1989 era, the increase in comedies (proving that Hungarians are
not manic-depressives), and gangster films (possibly reflecting the increase
of organized crime). At this pivotal point in time it's impossible to predict
the future of small national cinemas like Hungary's. It may be that in our
postmodern era of corporate globalization the cinemas of small nation-states
will be gobbled up by the big player nations. On the other hand, having
survived the cataclysmic events of the 20th Century history, the odds are
that the Hungarian film industry will endure and continue to make films that
are engaged and relevant. Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida, USA Copyright © Film-Philosophy 2004 Peter Ruppert, 'Hungarian Rhapsody:
On Cunningham's _Hungarian Cinema_', _Film-Philosophy_, vol. 8 no. 39,
November 2004 <http://www.film-philosophy.com/vol8-2004/n39ruppert>. |
|
|
|
|
|
Save as Plain Text Document...Print...Read...Recycle Join the _Film-Philosophy_ salon, and receive the journal articles
via email as they are published. here Film-Philosophy (ISSN 1466-4615) PO Box 26161, London SW8 4WD, England Contact the Editor (remove Caps before
sending) Back to the Film-Philosophy homepage |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|