There are many discussions about globalization of various types of cinema, however Western commercial represented by Hollywood and Third-World non-commercial represented by Bollywood became in the centre of active debate. This essay is an attempt to explain the scholars’ views on Bollywood based on Tyrell’s article (2012) on situating Bollywood within and against Third-World cinema theories as an international film industry, and Cowen’s ideas on possible future (2007).
Bollywood and Hollywood are named similarly, but is it just an imitation of the second one, or was it created to challenge it (Tyrell, 2012)? Do the globalization process and Hollywood’s influence affect Bollywood, or is it merely spreading its own culture to become globalized? Cowen (2007) supports the second idea demonstrating the example of McDonald’s bending to local Indian taste, which upon other circumstances would be just unusual.
In his article, Tyrell (2012) concludes that Bollywood is a “wild-card in the globalization process of the media.” He claims that such shift occurs due to the following reasons: diaspora influence and Western moves into India, emergence of cultural dialogues between East and West, and development of new technologies and their implications (Tyrell, 2012). The author is convinced that such existence of Bollywood is not beneficial because it is opposed to Hollywood.
Tyrell (2012) is positive that the reappraisal of “current dichotomies of thought” between oppositional East and commercial West shall be taken into consideration due to the existence of various problematic issues concerning Hindu nationalism, their elitism, corruption and censorship. Although the author agrees, it might challenge current views on what is actually Third-World oppositional and what is commercial art cinema (Tyrell, 2012).