I found it interesting that some countries created a domestic film industry that brought them profit, despite the limited opportunities, while others could not use their capabilities. The most impressive for me is the example of Brazil that has achieved the greatest success in international representation and the home market among other countries in the region. Even though the Brazilian market was limited due to linguistic isolation, films of Brazilian directors received recognition and profit.
Some Latin American countries have also successfully used co-production and expanded the market not only to Hispanic countries but also in Europe and North America. Although many of these projects were implemented with the help of subsidiary American companies, the fact that only some Latin American countries formed their film industry under incapable circumstances shows a high quality of their production.
Response to the classmate’s response
I agree that political instability was one of the main reasons for the fragility of the film industry in South America and Mexico. The constant cruelty of the rulers and the poverty of states for many years did not contribute to the development of cinema. However, I doubt that today there are mechanisms that would reduce the influence of Hollywood since its films have been global for decades. This fact is associated not only with the enormous financial capabilities of the studios that can produce hundreds of “light” and popular films a year but also with the quality of its production.
The only solution for other countries is to create high-quality movies that will gradually be able to win the love of the audience, which will allow them to compete. Consequently, although Hollywood has tremendous power in the industry, it will not be able to limit films from other countries completely, especially if they are willing to cooperate.