Talk:Transnational cinema

Bad
Removed the following section because it's awful, biased, badly-sourced, etc., probably written by some pseudo-intellectual teen who's done a semester of critical theory-leaning Eastern studies and read a couple of pages of Edward Said.

Or it was written by an academic with a PhD in Eastern/film studies.

I spend a lot of time around both and it can be hard to tell the difference.

Importance[edit]

The concept of transnational cinema is important because it will be able to change how films from different cultures are approached. Mostly the approach is Eurocentric and the field of studying cinema is full of biases. It is mainly about how western culture views eastern culture.

Defining transnational cinema must be done carefully. It should challenge and criticize Orientalism that is rooted in film studies. It should be also differentiated from world cinema, which marks cinemas from countries that are not Anglo-phone as "others" and bind them in one category without realizing that they each have unique culture and identity.

"In the study of films, a critical transnationalism does not ghettoize transnational film-making in interstitial and marginal spaces but rather interrogates how these film-making activities negotiate with the national on all levels – from cultural policy to financial sources, from the multiculturalism of difference to how it reconfigures the nation’s image of itself."[4] — Preceding unsigned comment added by OldSchoolRyanAtwood (talk • contribs) 20:16, 7 March 2019 (UTC)