Cult cinema and 'fandom': A research proposal

This research project will consider the idea of 'cult' films, investigating what constitutes a cult film as such and conventions that may apply to this 'genre' of film, as well as exploring the notion that these films subvert popular ideologies and explore concepts not covered or disregarded by mainstream society. Focusing mainly on The Rocky Horror Picture Show, Pink Flamingos and A Clockwork Orange, I will consider the idea that cult films appeal to marginalised groups not catered for by popular and mainstream entertainment, and that these films could be argued to directly intend to make this so by making their protagonists and themes identifiable to these people who are alienated by society. My research will examine the social context of the 'cult movie' and the importance they have in revealing the ideologies dominant in our society. I will examine how films seen as cult have evolved, developed through history and how these films (and the reactions to them) have influenced each other, as well as influencing mainstream cinema. As well as considering the developments and change in cult cinema the research will strive to prove that attributes considered to belong to cult cinema are often exploited as selling points, and that mainstream film-makers trying to achieve the cult 'effect' now utilise this marketing strategy as often as the non-mainstream. I will analyse my chosen films closely, and as well as examining these specifically the research will also consider their audience reception, the reception of other relevant films, will include box office figures and statistics, and will contemplate critical discussion and theory of cult cinema. By doing this the research will enable an article to be produced that aims to provide a definitive understanding of what cult cinema is, how it can be defined, how it comes about, its place in cinema and film culture, and the influence cult cinema has on society and the viewers notions of themselves.

Research Questions

What characteristics are present throughout films labelled as 'cult cinema', how can these specifically be seen in The Rocky Horror Picture Show, Pink Flamingos and A Clockwork Orange, and could the cult film be argued to constitute a genre due to these conventions?
How are elements of cult cinema exploited as selling points and used as marketing strategies? For example, how does repackaging and labelling previously 'under the radar' films as cult lead to more widespread success, and how do some mainstream films now seek assimilate qualities of the 'cult' within themselves?
How does being a fan of cult films give a sense of belonging to an 'elite' to marginalised viewers alienated by the mainstream, and how do the fan bases of the films I am focusing on closely demonstrate this? How do these films, and cult films in general, aim to achieve this appeal to certain groups of people?


Research Context

In particular, my research will focus on the characteristics of the films that make them cult, the audience and critical reaction to said films, and providing a context for these films, as well as attempting to handle theories of cult cinema on a more general level.
To understand my films and why they are considered 'cult classics', I will need to research into and learn about the historical and social contexts they were released into. To do this I will need to investigate and understand the social climes at the time, and therefore books such as Gods in Polyester or, a Survivor's Account of '70s Cinema Obscura will be useful, as it gives an understanding of the film industry at this time, and gives a historical and social backdrop to hold these films against, revealing just how controversial or unusual they were for this time.
I will also need to research the directors of each of my chosen films, studying their legacies and not only themselves as people, but critical discussions of them and their filmographies, reviews and reactions to their work, and direct quotes and discourse from them, especially quotes about the specific films. This will help me to gain an insight into the creative forces behind the films I am studying, as well as their intentions regarding them, which will illuminate the reasons why these particular films are now seen as cult classics, and if this was intended. Books such as Reading Rocky Horror: The Rocky Horror Picture Show and Popular Culture and Filthy: The Weird World of John Waters and The Complete Kubrick and Rocky Horror: From Concept to Cult will be particularly useful here, as will articles such as The Stanley Kubrick Archives by Gabriel Paletz and A Dirty Shame by Mark Pfeiffer. In Crackpot: The Obsessions of John Waters, Waters comments that, '..when I tried to make the sequel to Pink Flamingos nobody would give me the money. “Can you give us something we can admit we like?” said one studio executive.' This provides an interesting insight into Waters experience, and also reveals the controversial nature of the film, and how opposed to the mainstream it was.
It will also be useful to do research into other films released at the same time as the ones I am studying. By doing this I will be able to contrast numerous elements of the films against each other, such as plot, genre, production details such as budget, audience and critic reception, and box office figures. This will be extremely useful in separating my films from the 'norm', and isolating and highlighting exactly what it is that makes them cult. For example, this contextual research into films at the time revealed that while The Rocky Horror Picture Show took only $21,245 in its opening weekend, Jaws took a sharply contrasting $7,790,627 in its own opening weekend the same year. This was arguably down to the fact that Jaws was released in 409 cinemas on its opening weekend, compared with Rocky Horror's grand total of 2 cinemas. Interestingly however, despite this weak start, Rocky Horror has become the longest running release in film history, and has never been pulled from release by 20th Century Fox since its release in 1975 and has now grossed a total of $139,876,417, illustrating the slow-burning power of the cult film.
As well as investigating films released at the same time as my chosen films, it will be essential to research the history of films seen as cult and focus briefly on a selection of these and the reception they garnered. This is necessary because as well as providing another backdrop with which to contrast my films, it will also offer a sense of how the cult movie has changed and developed, or alternatively, remained constant in themes and intentions. This will enable my understanding of 'what a cult film is' to be extended, and will help me to define this more clearly, extending or changing the meaning of 'cult', and making it more all-encompassing. For example, when you study the tradition of cult films, it becomes clear that despite any other differences, dismissal of mainstream conventions is constant throughout cult cinema. As Mendik and Harper say in Unruly Pleasures: The Cult Film and its Critics, 'Crane argues that the cult film is defined by a systematic departure from the rules and regulations of mainstream movie making'.
Before I can begin to expand on what cult cinema is, it will be important to look at how different people define something as 'cult', in order to compile an understanding of what the term means and how far it stretches, or perhaps, how closely it is limited. It will also be absolutely essential therefore, to study film theorist's work on cult cinema, including both critical discussion of my chosen films, and existing research into cult cinema on a more general level.
It will also be necessary to study theories around genre, as I will be able to consider whether the cult film constitutes a genre by doing this. It might seem a strange claim to make, and people may tend to disagree, arguing that 'cult' is a term applied to cinema that only directly relates to a film's success or reception. However, by studying genre theory, I may be able to highlight qualities belonging to films seen as cult that may qualify this term. Steve Neale says in Genre & Hollywood that 'Genres may be defined as patterns/forms/styles/structures which transcend individual films, and which supervise both their construction by the film maker and their reading by an audience', and arguably these qualities are all evident in cult film.
I will also examine marketing strategies of cult films, as I believe this plays a large part in constructing the idea of the film as 'cult'. It will be interesting to investigate the way that films become popular gradually through DVD sales after little cinematic success, and earn themselves cult status by doing so, this often arguably the sole reason a film is considered cult. For example, Harold & Maude and The Big Lebowski were not financially successful at the time of their original release, but have since developed a cult following and become successful due to their video and DVD releases, and Showgirls flopped critically and commercially on release but has since been successful, earning $100 million from video rentals. It may even be possible to argue that this is one, if not the, defining characteristic of cult cinema, and while this may not qualify cult as a genre as it is something that happens outside and after the production of a film, it can certainly be seen as a convention. This argument could be countered with the idea that although certainly a characteristic of cult cinema, it is not the defining one, as the dismissal of mainstream conventions could be seen as far more constant and essential within cult cinema. While covering this section of the research I will also touch upon mainstream assimilation of 'cult qualities', examining newer films in terms of their marketing as well as their content.
Finally, it will also be useful to conduct research into viewer behaviour, and critical theories around fandom and viewer identification with films, as well as directly researching film fan sites and viewer created content. This will be interesting as it will allow understanding of cult cinema from a perspective outside the films, and will act as a response to my analysis of them. Fans and cult cinema are unalterably linked, for you cannot have cult cinema without its fans, arguably, a films fanbase may be as defining a quality of the cult film as those just mentioned. The study of my films fanbases, will illuminate my article and provide an understanding of exactly what the definition 'cult' entails; you cannot have a cult without cult members, and it is these fans that earn their films this title. In a society where the things we are fans of define who we are and make us belong, the significance and importance of the phenomenon that is cult cinema is evident. Therefore, in my research into fandom and viewer behaviour, I will specifically focus on the idea that cult cinema offers marginalised viewers not catered for by the mainstream a feeling of belonging. I will argue that while some cult films may have done this unintentionally, many directly intend to do so by the choice of themes, ideas and characters within them. Phenomenons such as Rocky Horror Picture Show screenings where fans wear costumes, use props and participate by dancing, shouting lines and even acting along with the characters are clear demonstrations of fans becoming involved with the films, and the habit of dressing as characters from cult films also displays the clear desire to be a part of the movie.


Research Method

My method of research could be called a 'hierarchy of information', but so I don't lose focus of my objectives and so I can see where my research should be 'branching' off to, I am going to use the metaphor of a tree to guide my research. (Please see the next page for a diagram of this, which shows the directions my research shall take.)
At its roots is the study of cult cinema. As the research begins, it is divided into three sections that I am going to use to understand cult cinema, and these sections will be linked to one another by the time the research is finished and I begin writing the article. These three sections are historical and social context, my chosen films, and relevant critical theories.
For the 'historical and social context' section my research will be further guided by another three subsections: the history of cult films, research into the film industry and society at the time, and the study of other films released at the same time as my chosen films.
My 'critical theories' section will also have three offshoots designed to focus the research; theories and critical writings on cult cinema, genre theories, and spectatorship theories.
Finally, under the section of 'my chosen films', the three subsections used to make sense of the films are close analysis of said films, directors, and critical writings on these films.
From the subsections leading off from these sections areas of research develop, such as box office figures, fanbases, the marketing and labelling of films as cult, and fan generated content such as fan sites. These further areas of research link with one another to tie up my research together. (Please see diagram)

I believe that using this diagram to navigate research is a highly effective research model, as it guides my understanding, and gives me an order in which to conduct my research, preventing a random approach. It also focuses my research, making it specific not vast, and stops me from losing focus and going off on tangents. Despite being specific, it also ensures my research is thorough and covers all relevant areas, and ultimately gives me a research checklist.
It also gives me an idea of the importance of the information and research gleaned and therefore gives me a guideline for writing my article, and the order information should be included in.
So in my opinion, this is a very practical and useful way of conducting research.

Following this guide, I will begin by conducting research into the historical and social contexts of cult cinema. To begin researching the history of cult films I will need to do a general search in the libraries' catalogue for cult cinema, this will find some highly relevant texts that will be useful throughout the project, and next I will search for articles in journals about cult cinema. Once I have these texts and articles I will be able to pinpoint several films seen as cult throughout film history and will be able to take a closer look at these films to understand the history and traditions of cult cinema. Articles from film magazines such as Entertainment Weekly's 'Top 50 Cult Movies' will be also highly useful. To gain an understanding of the historical and social contexts for my specific films I will have to briefly research the film industry in the 1970's, and its relation to society at that time, as coincidentally the release dates for my chosen films are 1971 (A Clockwork Orange), 1972 (Pink Flamingos) and 1975 (The Rocky Horror Picture Show). I will also examine the marketing and labelling of films as 'cult'.
The second part of my research will be that concerning film theory. This study of theories on cult cinema, genre and spectatorship will prepare me for my analysis of the films. I will begin my researching theories around cult cinema and it will be likely that the books and articles found earlier in my research into the history of cult cinema will be relevant and useful here. A brief look at genre theory will be necessary next, and then I will need to find writings discussing theories of spectatorship, specifically those around of viewer identification with films.
The third and final section of my research will be an investigation into the three films, and I will begin this by viewing them and carrying out a close analysis of aspects such as plot, narrative structure, the characters we are presented with, and the ideologies communicated. This will be followed by research into elements outside the films such as their marketing, box office figures, DVD/VCR sales, and media surrounding them. Next I will search for critical writings and reviews relating to the film's directors, entailing material such as filmographies, critical writings and articles about them, and quotes and discourse from the directors themselves regarding their works, their intentions, and these specific films. The next step will be research into critical writings about the films, and although this is similar to the previous section and there is a possibility of overlapping material, this research will aim to find articles by critics on the specific films rather than articles covering their directors in a more general sense. Finally, I will examine and research the fanbases of my films, relating the material I find back to the spectatorship theory covered earlier. I will search for fan generated content such as movie fan sites to take a first hand look at the way cult films give their fans something to belong to.
Through this extensive research into all areas of my films, I hope to gain a comprehensive understanding of these films. Through doing these things I can assert why they have been labelled 'cult' and develop a further understanding of what the term means itself.

After gathering this research I will be able to begin to construct my article from it.

Posters to be used in article that demonstrate marketing playing up their 'cult value':










Screenshots from fan sites researched for project, that demonstrate fan participation and identification:






Timetable of tasks

Research into historical and social contexts: 2 days

Researching theories on cult cinema: 1 day

Researching genre theories: 1 day

Research into viewer behaviour and spectatorship theories: 2 days

View and carry out close analysis of case study films: 2 days

Research directors of chosen films: 2 days

Search for and review critical writings on films: 2 days

Analysis of notes made while watching films, collaborating this information with information gleaned about cult cinema: 2 days

Conduct further research into aspects of my films such as marketing, audience and critic response, box office figures: 2 days

Analyse fan sites and the fanbase surrounding films: 1 day

Look at box office figures for cult films, collect statistics about success afterwards due to DVD sales etc. (and this leading to further screenings) and draw up graphs: 1 day

Find images such as film posters which support theories: 1 day

Compile 'hierarchy of information', sorting research into an order that seems linear and makes sense by following the guidelines of my 'tree' of research : 2 days

Use this to construct detailed 'essay plan' for article 2 days

Write article: 1 week

Length: 4 - 5 weeks


Bibliography (annotated)

Films:

The Rocky Horror Picture Show, 1975, Jim Sharman (dir.), UK, 20th Century Fox

Pink Flamingos, 1972, John Waters (dir.), USA, New Line Cinema

Clockwork Orange, 1971, Stanley Kubrick (dir.), USA & UK, Warner Bros.

Books:

Brooker, Will and Jermyn, Deborah, The Audience Studies Reader, London: Routledge, 2003
Discusses subjects useful to my project such as theories around the spectator and audiences, fans, the internet in relation to audiences, and audience interactivity

Donahue, Suzanne and Donahue, Mikael Sovijarvi, Gods in Polyester or, a Survivor's Account of 70s Cinema Obscura, Succubus Press
Covers cult film in the 1970's, the time period I particularly need to investigate, and interestingly is a compilation of writings by actors, directors and producers, so gives a first hand account of the film industry at this time

Duff, David (ed.), Modern Genre Theory, Harlow, Longman, 2000
Includes work from several theorists on genre and is useful for my 'theories' section of research

Evans, David and Michaels, Scott, Rocky Horror: From Concept to Cult, Sanctuary Publishing, Ltd
Discusses the making of the film and contains film memorabilia. Highly relevant in analysing and understanding the film

Gray, Jonathan, Sandvoss, Cornel, and Harrington, C. Lee (eds.), Fandom: Identities and Communities in a Mediated World, New York: New York University Press, 2007
Offers a comprehensive understanding of fandom, and is particularly useful in terms of the 'fans belonging to a community' idea that I will discuss

Harris, Cheryl and Alexander, Alison (eds.), Theorizing Fandom: Fans, Subculture, and Identity, Hampton Press
Similarly useful to previous text, touches upon issues of identity being defined by the things you are a fan of

Hellekson, Karen and Busse, Kristina, Fan Fiction and Fan Communities in the Age of the Internet: New Essays, Jefferson, N.C. : McFarland & Co., 2006
Not entirely relevant as mostly focused on fan fiction, but does provide interesting discussion around fan communities on the internet, the opportunities the internet offers fans, and the concept of fans claiming and interacting with the content they are fans of, all of which are relevant to my project

Hughes, David, The Complete Kubrick, London: Virgin, 2000
Comprehensive work on Stanley Kubrick, the director of A Clockwork Orange, extremely useful in understanding both Kubrick as an auteur and A Clockwork Orange

Jancovich, Mark (ed.), Defining Cult Movies: the Cultural Politics of Oppositional Taste, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2003
Concentrates on analysis of cult films, and how they can be defined, and discusses the cult film as one oppositional to mainstream and commercial film, as I will argue

Mathijs, Ernest and Mendik, Xavier, The Cult Film Reader, Maidenhead: Open University Press, 2008

Mayne, Judith, Cinema and Spectatorship, London: Routledge, 1993
Focuses on the role of the viewer in film

Mendik, Xavier and Harper, Graham (eds.), Unruly Pleasures: The Cult Film and Its Critics, Fabs Press

Neale, Steve, Genre and Hollywood, London: Routledge, 2000

Paszylk, Bartlomiej, The Pleasure and Pain of Cult Horror Films: A Historical Survey, McFarland

Pela, Robert L., Filthy: The Weird World of John Waters, Alyson Books
Discusses Waters' career, his films, his fans, and the impact he has had on Western culture

Staiger, Janet, Perverse Spectators: The Practices of Film Reception, New York: New York University Press, 2000

Stam, Robert and Miller, Toby (eds.) Film And Theory: An Anthology, Malden: Blackwell Publishers, 2000

Stokes, Melvyn and Maltby, Richard (eds.) Hollywood Spectatorship: Changing Perceptions of Cinema Audiences, London: British Film Institute, 2001

Telotte, J. P, The Cult Film Experience: Beyond All Reason, Austin: University of Texas Press, 1991.

Waters, John, Crackpot: The Obsessions of John Waters, Vintage
Written by Waters himself so gives insight into director of Pink Flamingos

Weinstock, Jeffery (ed.), Reading Rocky Horror: The Rocky Horror Picture Show and Popular Culture, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008
Argues that Rocky Horror is the worlds most famous cult movie, and approaches the film from a number of different theoretical perspectives such as genre, a cultural angle, sexuality, among others. Extremely useful in understanding and analysing the film

Weinstock, Jeffery, The Rocky Horror Picture Show (Cultographies), Wallflower Press

Magazine and Journal articles:

'Top 50 Cult Movies', Entertainment Weekly, May 23, 2003

'The Rocky Horror Picture Show', Matthew Tinkcom, Science Fiction Film and Television, Volume 2, Issue 2, Spring 2009, pp. 311-314
Contemplates cult cinema and discusses the difficulties in defining the term, focusing specifically on The Rocky Horror Picture Show'. Also touches upon the topic of marketing strategies employed by the film industry to promote these films, which is highly relevant for my project

'Cult Films: Taboo and Transgression', Dusty Lavoie, Film & History: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Film and Television Studies, Volume 40.1, Spring 2010, pp. 109-11
Discusses cult cinema and its 'special relationship' with its audience

'From Spectator to "Differentiated" Consumer: Film Audience Research in the Era of Developed Socialism (1965–80)', Joshua First, Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History, Volume 9, Number 2, Spring 2008, pp. 317-344

'Star Wars Fans, DVD, and Cultural Ownership', Will Brooker, The Velvet Light Trap, Number 56, Fall 2005, pp. 36-44

' "You Are Invited to Participate": Interactive Fandom in the Age of the Movie Magazine', Marsha Orgeron, Journal of Film and Video, Volume 61, Number 3, Fall 2009, pp. 3-23

'The Stanley Kubrick Archives', Gabriel M. Paletz, The Moving Image, Volume 7, Number 1, Spring 2007, pp. 103-107

'A Dirty Shame', Mark Pfeiffer, found at www.thefilmjournal.com/issue10/dirtyshame.html
Discusses Waters' films, including Pink Flamingos

'Clockwork Orange Review', Richard Schickel in Life Magazine, Feb 4, 1972, Vol. 72, No. 4

Websites:

http://www.rockyhorror.com/history/howapbegan.php
Rocky Horror fansite, written in first person, detailing memories around the film such as the first time the author went to see it (first of 1,300 times!)

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/records/
Useful website for box office figures and a films gross earnings

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=rockyhorrorpictureshow.htm
Page on Rocky Horror that details statistics such as box office profit

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=clockworkorange.htm
Page on A Clockwork Orange that details statistics such as box office profit

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066921/
Internet Movie Database page for A Clockwork Orange, gives large amount of useful information around aspects of the film, such as production

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0069089/
Internet Movie Database page for Pink Flamingos, gives large amount of useful information around aspects of the film, such as production

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073629/
Internet Movie Database page for Rocky Horror, gives large amount of useful information around aspects of the film, such as production

http://www.dreamlandnews.com/fans/index.shtml
Community of John Waters fans

http://www.facebook.com/#!/group.php?gid=2204729054&ref=ts
'John Waters is a genius!' Facebook fan group

http://www.fanpop.com/spots/a-clockwork-orange
A Clockwork Orange fansite

http://moviescreens.tripod.com/clockwork/
A Clockwork Orange fansite

http://www.freewebs.com/riffrafffynn/
Rocky Horror Fansite

http://rockyhorror.nu/
Rocky Horror Fansite

http://www.rhpsfans.com/
Rocky Horror Fansite

Ideology, Race and Difference, and Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom

Within this essay I am going to discuss theories of Ideology and Race and Difference, and focusing on them produce a reading of Indiana Jones and The Temple of Doom. I expect this reading to demonstrate that Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom clearly positions its audience in an ideological sense. I also intend to demonstrate that the messages and values within Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom are highly questionable and that the representations of race we are offered within the film - through power struggles, the depictions of good and bad, of us and the other, clearly illustrate an ideological notion of race prevalent at the time in Western society.

Ideology can be defined as a set of beliefs, values, or ideas that have been shaped by the society they are a product of, and which themselves in turn shape that society, as members of said society conform to dominant ideologies.
Comolli and Narboni comment that ‘‘what the public wants’ means ‘what the dominant ideology wants’. The notion of a public and its tastes was created by the ideology to justify and perpetuate itself.’1
Ideology is what society uses to make sense of itself and the elements within it, and is directly linked to positions of power within society, the ideologies that are dominant and found most commonly are that which serve the powerful and not necessarily the greatest number of people. Despite this, and despite dominant ideologies both needing and creating a homogenised mass of people subscribing to them and embodying ‘society as a whole’, ideology works at the level of the individual through offering the individual representations of themselves and others.
These representations define us as an individual and as a collective – telling us who we are, who we should be, and influencing who we want to be. It is the largely the media that presents us with these representations and which plays an important part in shaping ideologies, as ideology is bound up within social institutions and this clearly reveals the need to study and analyse the representations offered to us by film.

Film theorists interested in ideology argue the idea that rather than portraying the ‘real’, cinema exposes to us the dominant and counter ideologies present in society2, whether it conforms to them or not. Through the analytical study of films, the conventions within them, and the tensions often present between dominant ideologies and the text or narrative, ideological readings can be formed and a films messages and meanings can be interpreted effectively.
Comolli and Narboni believe every film is political3, and it is the significance of ideology within film theory that politicises film; through the lense of ideology the representations films offer are no longer neutral, becoming predisposed and subjective. The realism offered by films utilises ideologies to tell us what is ‘real’, and can tell us something about the culture and society it is a product of.

Ideology is also a useful theory for understanding film because power hierarchies which we see within ideologies are also present within film and Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom is particularly an appropriate example to illustrate this.

Comolli and Narboni discuss the idea that film reproduces the world as it is experienced when ideologies and not really as it appears. They describe a number of categories they believe films fit into, ranging from the ‘first and largest category’ (a) which they describe as one who’s films ‘are imbued through and through with the dominant ideology in pure and unadulterated form’ through to (e) ‘films which at first sight seem to belong within the ideology and completely under its sway, but which turn out to be so only in an ambiguous manner’ to categories for highly political and revolutionary film. In my opinion the category Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom undoubtedly fits into is category (a), the authors explain that the films in this category are not just limited to ‘so-called ‘commercial’ films’, but that the ‘majority of films in all categories are the unconscious instruments of the ideology that produces them’. I do not believe that it is even this subtle with The Temple of Doom and that the film quite obviously fits into category (a).4

Klinger discusses the idea that a film needs to ‘escape... the conventional procedure of closure’5 to be ideologically complex and this conventional narrative structure is certainly unrealistic and supports the idea that films do not offer the real but a subjective view of reality. The Temple of Doom’s narrative is a conventional one following a typical ‘equilibrium, disruption, disequilibrium, resolution, return to equilibrium/new equilibrium formed’ pattern.

Theories of ideology are useful in understanding Indiana Jones and the Temple Of Doom because the film upholds dominant Western ideologies such as patriarchy, white dominance and capitalist ideals. Through close analysis of the film I found no clear examples of dominant ideologies that had been subverted. However, an interesting scene where this partly happens is the one in Willie and Indiana’s separate bedrooms in the palace, where for the first time they are portrayed as equals, both carrying out the same actions and saying the same things as they stubbornly wait for the other to come to their bedroom. This scene shows sex reducing men and women to an identical state; however it could be argued that as this is the only time Jones is at Willie’s level, the scene shows sex reducing men to the lower level of women.

It could be argued that the ideologies are specific to the time period and that the representations of sexism, racism and the positioning of the white man are no longer culturally relevant, but I would argue that these ideologies have been so deeply entrenched in Western culture since the time they were established that the criticism and analysis of them is still necessary and pertinent.
I would also argue that the positioning of the representations presented within the film, particularly the one of the colonising, white, Western male support the idea that dominant ideologies will be the ones that serve the most powerful.

I discussed earlier the idea that ideology could be said to be a ‘system of representations’, and the society within which we live is one with largely patriarchal ideologies. Klinger highlights the relation ideology theory and feminism have to each other and comments that ideology theory has been advanced through a ‘feminist perspective that employs … textual theories drawn from formalism, structuralism, semiotics, and psychoanalysis’.6
Women are a vehicle of male fantasy, in film as much as or more so than anywhere else, and Kate Capshaw as Willie in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom hardly subverts this role. A shallow character who proves useless in most situations, she is certainly not a positive representation of women, and Capshaw herself said that the character was little more than ‘a screaming dumb blonde’7.

In the film Willie is unintelligent, remarking in the first scene that “he’s mighty small” when presented with the ashes of a Ming dynasty emperor, and seems to be prized merely for being nice to look at, clearly supporting the patriarchal ideology of women as objects. She also appears pathetic and weak when she cannot handle being wet, sharing a plane with livestock, riding elephants, and bugs, among other things. This portrayal supports the idea that men are the stronger gender. She is also depicted as uncultured, impolite and fussy when refusing food from the starving villagers. Despite her annoyance throughout the film at Indiana she is submissive to him sexually whenever he demands her affection; in the closing scene Indiana merely lassoing Willie with his whip makes her fall into his arms!
Indiana talks to Willie in a condescending tone throughout the film, calling her ‘doll’ in a patronising manner that Short Round imitates. Short Round also addresses Willie rudely with a “Hey lady, you call him Dr Jones!” clearly placing men above women in the film’s hierarchy of power. As well as conforming to these ideologies that are dominant in the American/Western white culture the film is a product of, Willie also subscribes to stereotypical female ideologies around appearance, caring more that she ‘broke a nail’ than the loss of Jones’ gun, and putting perfume on an elephant. In another negative stereotype of women, she is portrayed as extremely materialistic, commenting on the ‘limousines and parties’ she used to frequent, as well as having a preoccupation with money and wealth. At one point in the cave she forgets her fear for her life upon hearing the word ‘diamonds’, at another she scrabbles on the floor of the nightclub for a diamond amidst shooting, at another she fits the materialistic ‘gold-digger’ stereotype when she remarks that the ‘maharaja is swimming in loot’ and then enquires whether he has a wife.

However, the ideologies the film arguably presents to us most strongly are arguably the ones that centre on race and the hierarchies of power between races within the film. The film clearly intends to position us with the white hero, and in the first scene we see Indiana as ‘above’ the villainous Chinese gangsters, who are vicious, calculating and untrustworthy, contrasting sharply with our hero who is portrayed as noble and a man of his word. A power hierarchy with Jones at the head is also clear when we see the Mayapore villagers dependant and submissive to him as he enters their village, and I will discuss this further when focusing on race and difference.

Capitalist ideals are clear in the film when we see the exchanging of goods and the seeking of riches, and are present in Indiana’s desire to seek ‘fortune and glory’. Another dominant ideology clearly present is the one which dictates women need a heterosexual relationship to achieve a ‘happy ending’, and the closing scene of the film communicates this message unmistakably.

Theories of Race and Difference are obviously highly significant in understanding Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom because of the prevalence of representations of the ‘other’ within the film. These representations play a big part in revealing the dominant ideologies, as previously discussed.
Saussure said that ‘difference is essential to meaning’, and that you cannot understand something and know the qualities that make it what it is until you know what is different from it. However, this does not suggest that different necessarily has to mean negative, as Indiana Jones arguably does. However, Saussure did believe that binary oppositions will not be neutral and that one pole will be dominant, and it could be argued that an idealist society would be one with neutral oppositions.
The marking of difference is what constructs ideologies and hierarchies within our culture, as the marking of difference is what lies at the base of representations. Our understanding and construction of ourselves are reliant on the other, in Saussure’s terms we cannot understand ourselves until we know what we are not, what is different from us.

Stuart Hall comments on pro-Western ideas’ portrayal of the West as being civilised, industrialised, capitalist, modern, and governed by reason, whereas the Non Western world is portrayed as primitive, underdeveloped, pre-capitalist or communist, rural, backward, and governed by emotion.8 The representations in the Temple of Doom support this completely, with the civilised, American hero Indiana Jones coming to the rescue of/defeating two groups of equally primitive and uncivilised Indians. The Western characters in the film also have far more defined personalities than the two-dimensional homogenous groups of Mayapore villagers and Thuggee cult members, and this supports Hall’s theory that pro-Western ideologies depict Western people as individuals, and the ‘rest’ as a mass, a type.9
It is ironic that so much is made of the individual in Western ideologies, and represented as important when a closer look will reveal that these ideas and this culture requires the individual to subscribe to dominant ideologies and become part of a collective mass.
The representations Hall has attributed to the West and the ‘rest’ also reveal which qualities are prized most highly within our society, with our ideologies telling us that rationality and modernity are more valuable than emotion and tradition, but is reason really more desirable than emotion? Some of the qualities attributed to the Non-West, being governed by emotion for example, suggest that the Non-West will be more in touch with the creative side of themselves.
This imposition of Western values and normalities and generalising of the ‘other’ as ‘all the same’ speaks of our desire to colonise and the failure to distinguish, understand and value difference within the ‘other’. This can clearly be seen as Indiana Jones rides into rescue and reform the villagers, justifying colonisation and the westernisation of the other. Westernisation of the other can also be seen in Short Round, who wears a New York Yankees baseball cap and adopts Jones’ mannerisms and catchphrases.
Bhabha also discusses the idea that our ideas of the ‘other’ come from us projecting our desires and fantasies onto, as well as idealising inhabitants of the Non-West10, and examples of this in The Temple of Doom are seen when the Indian characters are either idealised as dependant and week to justify our dominance over them, or are otherwise exhibiting primal urges.

Race and Difference theories are extremely significant within film theory as through understanding the stereotypes we are presented with and why they are there, we can understand the ideologies the film is trying to distribute, the message imparted and the position we are offered within this as an audience.
In Bhabha’s ‘The Other Question: Stereotype, discrimination and the discourse of colonialism’ he makes several points extremely pertinent to my discussion. He comments on the idea that the ‘male ‘American’ spirit [is] always under threat from races and cultures beyond the border or frontier’11 and this is translated quite literally onto the screen as we see Jones chained to a rock, force-fed blood, and induced into the Thuggee cult.
Bhabha also makes a point I would like to quote in its entirety as I feel it is extremely relevant to my discussion and encapsulates my reading of the film quite succinctly:

‘The objective of colonial discourse is to construe the colonized as a population of degenerate types on the basis of racial origin, in order to justify conquest and to establish systems of administration and instruction.’12

These theories are useful in understanding Indiana Jones because the film offers a representation of ‘the other’ that is undoubtedly derogatory; the indigenous peoples in the film are clearly backward, heathen, unrealistic representations.
The audience of the film is clearly positioned to favour the heroic, white, male Jones and associate themselves with him, while seeing the ‘other’ – the Indians as ‘bad’. As I mentioned earlier a Western desire to colonise is evident within the Americanising of other races within the film, Indiana’s Chinese sidekick Short Round uses American slang and the ‘good’ Indians – the Mayapore villagers, are dependent on Indiana and submissive and so are acceptable. When Willie asks how Jones found Short Round he replies that he “didn’t find him, I caught him… trying to pick my pocket”, then redeeming him and providing yet another example of a character of another race requiring Jones’ heroism and help to set him on the right path. Through this ‘salvation’ and subsequent westernisation of Short Round he becomes an acceptable character, though still fetishized for his difference, as his English is not perfect and his Chinese accent in pronouncing words – “Mo more parachutes!” seems to be intended to be humorous.

We can take Jones as a representation that stands for the male, white, western world, and the subsequent representations of Indians and Hinduism are close-minded and bigoted portrayals. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom was filmed in Sri Lanka rather than India as the Indian Government found the script racist and did not approve filming, asking for changes to be made.13 That the Indian Government were unhappy with the portrayals within the film and perceived them as racist is highly relevant to the representations within the film. Despite this Spielberg and Lucas, hugely important figures in Western cinema, subsequently won an Oscar for the film and were nominated for one more, while in India the country’s censors banned the film and the depiction of Hinduism within the film caused controversy.14 It could be argued that this says something about Western or Hollywood cinema as a whole, and that this is typical of filmmakers who view the ideologies their films impress as more important than realistic representations.

The meals eaten at the palace, which are assumedly meant to be a humorous take on Indian cuisine - Snake Surprise (which is full of live worms), dishes of beetles and eyeball soup, are all indicative of the uncivilised and primitive representations of the Indians, as are the man who burps loudly and the description of chilled monkey brains as a ‘dessert’. These characters are also child-stealing, a characteristic that is seen as the epitome of evil, and is often used in propaganda to slight groups.
The depiction of the Thuggee’s eating monkey brains is highly inaccurate as monkeys are revered within Hinduism, although it could be argued that this then suggests that the cult are not true Hindus and are villainous heretics. However, if this was what was intended this needed to be made clearer, and because of this the representation of the Thuggee’s is a dangerous and inaccurate representation of Hinduism.

The other Indian characters we see are pitiful and weak before their salvation at the hands of Indiana, and we see them stroking his clothes in begging gestures, looking adoringly at him, waiting on him and bringing him food, all of which support ideologies of Western rule.
All of these representations contrast strongly with the portrayal of Jones who appears more educated, noble, brave and knowledgeable than all the other characters without exception.

Ideology theory arguably has limitations because we are in danger of politicising a film’s content too thoroughly. When we produce a reading of a film through focusing on ideology there are no neutral representations and these representations and politics take precedence over narrative. The importance of the individual is ignored in favour of looking for the dominant ideologies present, and the auteur’s intentions and narrative meaning can be obscured. It could also be argued that it is impossible to ever produce an unbiased commentary on a film in terms of ideology because we are ourselves part of an ideology; the one dominant in our own society.
Limitations of understanding a film through Race and Difference are similar; arguably a character may no longer be seen as an individual and more as a representation of his and her race. This is damaging, as viewing characters as standing for their entire race and not as single individuals capable of good and evil as all human beings are can lead to unfounded accusations of racist representations.
In terms of Indiana Jones and the Temple Of Doom, these arguments could suggest that the film has been too politicised, and was intended to simply be a fantasy-adventure film with a narrative focusing on one individual heroic protagonist defeating a single evil tribe that have through an ideological reading unwittingly come to stand for the colonising Western world Vs. India/Hinduism/the ‘other’. However, for Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom I find these limitations of the theories irrelevant, as I believe the reading that the representations within the film are racist and Western extolling extremely accurate. It is my opinion that the representations within the film cannot just be those of individuals, and come to stand for white Westerners and ‘uncivilised’ Indians as a whole, and that the Indian government’s decision to ban the film proves that this was felt by the nation it depicted.

In conclusion, it is my opinion that Ideology and Race and Difference prove valuable theories for understanding the text and provide an apt reading of the film. I would summarise my findings by saying that Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom is a film that perpetrates dominant Western ideologies, expresses a desire to colonise and contains largely negative representations of the ‘other’, and that while it may be an effective piece of cinema within the Fantasy-Adventure genre, it is irresponsible in terms of the ideologies and representations it presents.


Bibliography


Bhabha, Homi K., “The Other Question: Stereotype, discrimination and the discourse of colonialism’, from Bhabha, The Location of Culture (London: Routledge 1994)

Comolli, Jean-Luc and Narboni, Jean, “Cinema/Ideology/Criticism” (Braudy, 812-819)

Fanon, Franz, “The Fact Of Blackness” from Black Skin, White Masks (Chippenham: Pluto, 1986)

Gilman, Sander L., “What are Stereotypes?, from Difference and Pathology (Ithaca and London: Cornell Univ. Press, 1985)

Gogoi, Pallavi, “Banned Films Around the World: Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom”. (BusinessWeek, 05-11-2006)

Hall, Stuart, “The Spectacle of the ‘Other’ ” in Hall (ed.) Representation (London: Sage 1997)

Klinger, Barbara, “‘Cinema/Ideology/Criticism’ Revisited: The Progressive Text” (Screen, 25.1 pp. 30-44)

McBride, Joseph, “Ecstasy and Grief” in Steven Spielberg: A Biography (New York: Faber and Faber, 1997)