Arthouse is an alternative that lets art moviegoers set themselves apart from “regular” moviegoers, like the grand cinemas of the Renaissance. However, it offers a more intellectual film experience, tied to the idea of high culture and art. Along with giving arthouse operators a sense of prestige and status, these theaters also provide intellectual and artistic value.
Art films tend to come from outside the mainstream U.S. film industry. In the late 1940s, an “independent” industry emerged to fill this niche, creating space alongside the traditional film industry. Movies like …And God Created Woman, 8½, Bicycle Thieves, The Red Shoes, Wild Strawberries, and others show the potential of “alternative” films.
By the mid to late 1950s, Hollywood recognized a growing market and took it over, producing adult films like The Man with the Golden Arm, Paths of Glory, and The Defiant Ones for more discerning audiences. In the 1960s and 1970s, many themes and techniques from 1940s and 1950s art films influenced mainstream filmmaking.
Beyond shaping the film industry, arthouse cinema also influences how people think about the status of the film itself. It emerged as part of a changing view of film as an art form, the cultural role of movies, and the legitimacy of film censorship. A 1952 Supreme Court case about the exhibition of the Italian film L’Amore helped establish that films were a significant medium for communicating ideas.
This decision led to a series of court rulings in the 1950s and 1960s, extending constitutional protections to films and reversing a 1915 ruling that treated movies as “a business pure and simple, originated and conducted for profit.” Arthouse cinema shaped the public’s understanding of what cinema could be, associating it with prestige and culture.
Arthouse theaters, in particular, played a key role in elevating cinema to an art form and encouraged people to view films as more than just entertainment. Understanding how and why arthouses positioned themselves within the cultural hierarchy helps explain how films became studied in college courses.
Academics’ reconceptualization of cinema requires distinguishing between the terms “arthouse” as a theoretical idea and as an industrial product in a specific historical context. It is tempting to treat art films as fixed concepts, but they must be understood in both academic and industrial terms.
Certain films by certain directors with specific qualities are called art films. However, looking at the idea of film as art in the late 1940s shows the different ways films work in the film industry and how they hold meaning for both industry insiders and audiences. It becomes clear that the term “film art,” as a practical and commercial concept in the industry, is pretty flexible and ambiguous.
Like in classical Hollywood cinema, artistic films develop from specific industrial and social relations. In other words, art films don’t just define the function and meaning of cinema by themselves. On the other hand, arthouse cinema has a special status within the renaissance of cinema. It’s industrially complex, and its aesthetics and functions help create the arthouse environment.
One thing people generally agree on is that art films are not mainstream Hollywood films, even though there are contradictions in trying to set boundaries for what qualifies as art films. Art films aren’t always defined by their themes or style. However, they are different from Hollywood movies. Arthouse cinema explicitly sets itself apart from classical narrative structures, especially the cause-and-effect relationships that drive events in mainstream films.
Because of this, it’s important to examine arthouse films to understand how film serves as an alternative to mainstream Hollywood cinema. Not only in terms of style but also in terms of production and distribution. When you think of art cinema as “reprogramming,” it raises questions, like how and why art cinema functions in the U.S.
People started combining “arthouse” with “independent film” in the U.S. Beyond sharing many of the same stylistic traits, Miramax began distributing independent films that were also commercially viable. When the big studios realized the unique appeal of independent films, they created divisions dedicated to non-mainstream movies. Critics have debated whether films from Focus Features or Paramount Vantage can be considered independent.
On top of that, many of these films get financial backing from big studios too. Camille Paglia, in her 2007 article Art Movies: R.I.P., argued that apart from The Godfather series by Francis Ford Coppola, which uses clever flashbacks and sharp social realism, no movie made in the last 35 years has had the same philosophical depth or execution as Persona or The Seventh Seal by Ingmar Bergman.
The younger generation of the 2000s was not as patient as the deep-thinking European directors of the past. Today’s approach does not focus on slow, thoughtful scrutiny of tiny facial expressions or cold, sterile spaces or bleak landscapes.
In some cases, the arthouse is gone. What once seemed deep and meaningful now feels forced and pretentious. Why do sophisticated characters have to drive off bridges or run across highways in Truffaut’s Jules and Jim? All the great European directors hit a rough patch in the 70s. For example, people have little interest in the later works of Fellini or Tarkovsky, which seem to regress into pastiche and parody.
It is also possible that people are not as into Lars von Trier or Paul Thomas Anderson. But why should every artist be expected to have their prime? On the other hand, young filmmakers today are often pushed toward simply rejecting religion with liberal clichés. People no longer see religion as a source of metaphysics or cosmic vision. Take the New Wave movement, for instance, which is still held in high regard; people now find its excesses strange. Idealistic thoughts lead them to question whether they should criticize the evils of capitalism or dismiss modernism as a shallow ideology.
It was these very formulas that sparked an artistic renaissance, where prestige was much greater across the board.
References
- …And God Created Woman (1956). Directed by Roger Vadim. CEFAL.
- 8½ (1963). Directed by Federico Fellini. Cineriz.
- Bicycle Thieves (1948). Directed by Vittorio De Sica. Ente Nazionale Industrie Cinematografiche.
- Jules and Jim (1962). Directed by François Truffaut. Les Films du Carrosse.
- Paglia, C. (2007). Art Movies: R.I.P. The New York Times Magazine.
- Persona (1966). Directed by Ingmar Bergman. Svensk Filmindustri.
- The Godfather Series. (1972-1990). Directed by Francis Ford Coppola. Paramount Pictures.
- The Red Shoes (1948). Directed by Michael Powell & Emeric Pressburger. Archers Film Productions.
- The Seventh Seal (1957). Directed by Ingmar Bergman. Svensk Filmindustri.
- Wild Strawberries (1957). Directed by Ingmar Bergman. Svensk Filmindustri.
