Film importing monopoly 'should be scapped'
Film importing monopoly 'should be scapped'
By Marselli Sumarno
JAKARTA (JP): In the New Order era, Harmoko, who made quite an
achievement by assuming the position of information minister
three times, consistently denied the allegation that there were
monopolistic practices in the purchase and distribution of
imported films in Indonesia.
Today, Minister of Information Muhammad Yunus, having held his
position for only two months, made headlines with his statement:
"Scrap the monopoly in film imports!"
It is not our business to find out why Harmoko and Yunus are
at extreme opposites. What matters most is when the monopoly in
film imports will be scrapped and what measures should further be
taken after the abolition of this monopoly.
In the 1950s, Indonesian films could hardly breath in the
upper level of the market because of the dominance of Hollywood
films; while at the lower level they had to compete hard with
Indian, Malaysian and Philippine films.
Usmar Ismail and Djamaluddin Malik, two leading national film
producers in this period, were also film importers. Of course
each had their own preferences. Usmar, an idealist, imported
serious films while Djamaluddin usually imported more commercial
films.
As for Hollywood films, pursuant to an agreement between the
Indonesian government and the Motion Picture Export Association
of America (MPEAA), distribution in Indonesia of films produced
by members of MPEAA would be permitted.
To this end an agency, called the American Motion Picture
Association of Indonesia, was set up to take care of this
distribution.
Political turmoil in the mid-1960s had a significant impact on
national films and movie theaters. American films were boycotted
by a movement supported by the Indonesian Communist Party. The
American Motion Picture Association of Indonesia was finally
disbanded. This boycott was also applied to films from other
countries, particularly from Malaysia, which was then involved in
a confrontation with Indonesia. As a result, many movie theaters
went bankrupt owing to short supplies of films.
In the New Order era a number of unions of film importers were
set up. First was the Association of National Film Importers,
Producers and Distributors. This was replaced later by the Film
Importers Coordinating Agency. The agency was later changed into
the Film Importers Consortium, which in the early 1980s turned
into a film importers association.
One roof
These unions of film importers had to take different forms
because of among other things: (a) their members were increasing
in number; (b) imported film quota was big and (c) it was
difficult to have efficient management. Even the final form, the
association, has proven to bring about problems too.
In 1985 the Association of Mandarin Film Importers (led by
Sudwikatmono as the owner of PT Suptan) merged with the
Association of Importers of European/American Films.
Later on, the Association of Importers of Non-Mandarin Asian
Films joined this merger. Hence the formation of a monopoly or a
"one-roof management" for film imports.
Sudwikatmono is a tycoon who owns the Subentra Group. Suptan,
as a film importer, is but one of Subentra' subsidiaries. Suptan
became powerful as it got hold of a number of main distribution
channels. This was a smart move indeed. The Subentra Group
created a network of movie theaters, known as the 21 Group, in a
number of major cities. Many long-established movie theaters had
to join this group, including the legendary Megaria, which was
set up in 1949. Megaria, located in Central Jakarta, had its name
changed to Metropole.
As sole importer which also controlled the distribution chain
and the movie theaters, Suptan would prioritize the films it
imported for movie theaters under its control. In this way, movie
theaters outside the 21 Group became helpless. They had no other
choice but to screen any film offered by the distributor.
In fact the quota of imported films continued to be cut. In
the 1970s the annual quota of imported films stood at some 700
titles with a limit of only two copies each.
This level continued to be reduced to 160 titles, but each
title could have as many copies as needed.
The alleged monopoly in film imports, later also in the film
distribution sector, became a hot topic of public debate in
national film circles.
Eros Djarot and Slamet Rahardjo, two brothers who are both
noted film directors and producers, also joined the debate. They
claimed that the practices adopted by Suptan had caused a host of
serious difficulties to regional distributors, who were in
control of hundreds of movie theaters.
In fact, old movie theaters were the right market for national
films. Eventually, national films fell victim to the monopoly in
film distribution.
This distribution squeeze even made film director Slamet
Rahardjo take the case of the distribution of his film Langitku
Rumahku (My Sky My Home) to court.
Although the court did not rule in his favor, it was clear
that the competition in terms of the distribution of national and
imported films was not fair.
In 1991 MPEAA began to distribute films directly to Indonesia.
MPEAA later became the Motion Pictures Association of America
(MPAA). The Indonesian government permitted MPAA, which has major
U.S. film producers as members, to directly distribute its films
to Indonesia with the provision that this should be conducted
through an importers association.
Crisis
It was no coincidence that the existing importers association
was also ready with its own network of movie theaters under the
banner of the 21 Group.
Time moved on. Indonesian films sunk deeper into a quagmire of
difficulties. Market competition with imported films intensified.
New competitors emerged: private television stations. Worst of
all, the onset of the economic crisis in July 1997.
The crisis has made virtually all imported products, including
films, very costly. Sources have said that beyond the films
directly distributed to Indonesia, films imported by Subentra are
in short supply because prices have skyrocketed. These non-MPAA
films are known as independent films. In the same way, Hong Kong
and Indian films have also soared in price.
Now that the development in film imports in Indonesia over
different periods has been observed, the following measures, in
light of the reform spirit, may be recommended:
First, the monopoly in film imports should be immediately
scrapped. Fresh opportunities should be offered to qualified
newcomers to act as film importers. In the 1950s, for example, a
dedicated film producer could import films. In this way, imported
films would be of greater variety.
Second, the monopoly in film imports should abolish
monopolistic practices in the distribution of imported films. In
this way, movie theaters outside the 21 Group would have the
freedom to screen films which in their estimate would be
profitable.
Third, the 21 Group should be allowed to continue their movie
theater business as long as this is not "collusively" related
with the businesses of purchasing and distributing imported
films.
This means that the agreement on the distribution of MPAA
films through an association of film importers should be replaced
with a system which would benefit the development of national
films.
In short, film imports, film distribution and movie theaters
should be separate businesses. Only in this manner can
monopolistic business practices in imported films be avoided.
The writer is a film/TV observer and lecturer at the Film and
Television Department of the Jakarta Arts Institute.
By Marselli Sumarno
JAKARTA (JP): In the New Order era, Harmoko, who made quite an
achievement by assuming the position of information minister
three times, consistently denied the allegation that there were
monopolistic practices in the purchase and distribution of
imported films in Indonesia.
Today, Minister of Information Muhammad Yunus, having held his
position for only two months, made headlines with his statement:
"Scrap the monopoly in film imports!"
It is not our business to find out why Harmoko and Yunus are
at extreme opposites. What matters most is when the monopoly in
film imports will be scrapped and what measures should further be
taken after the abolition of this monopoly.
In the 1950s, Indonesian films could hardly breath in the
upper level of the market because of the dominance of Hollywood
films; while at the lower level they had to compete hard with
Indian, Malaysian and Philippine films.
Usmar Ismail and Djamaluddin Malik, two leading national film
producers in this period, were also film importers. Of course
each had their own preferences. Usmar, an idealist, imported
serious films while Djamaluddin usually imported more commercial
films.
As for Hollywood films, pursuant to an agreement between the
Indonesian government and the Motion Picture Export Association
of America (MPEAA), distribution in Indonesia of films produced
by members of MPEAA would be permitted.
To this end an agency, called the American Motion Picture
Association of Indonesia, was set up to take care of this
distribution.
Political turmoil in the mid-1960s had a significant impact on
national films and movie theaters. American films were boycotted
by a movement supported by the Indonesian Communist Party. The
American Motion Picture Association of Indonesia was finally
disbanded. This boycott was also applied to films from other
countries, particularly from Malaysia, which was then involved in
a confrontation with Indonesia. As a result, many movie theaters
went bankrupt owing to short supplies of films.
In the New Order era a number of unions of film importers were
set up. First was the Association of National Film Importers,
Producers and Distributors. This was replaced later by the Film
Importers Coordinating Agency. The agency was later changed into
the Film Importers Consortium, which in the early 1980s turned
into a film importers association.
One roof
These unions of film importers had to take different forms
because of among other things: (a) their members were increasing
in number; (b) imported film quota was big and (c) it was
difficult to have efficient management. Even the final form, the
association, has proven to bring about problems too.
In 1985 the Association of Mandarin Film Importers (led by
Sudwikatmono as the owner of PT Suptan) merged with the
Association of Importers of European/American Films.
Later on, the Association of Importers of Non-Mandarin Asian
Films joined this merger. Hence the formation of a monopoly or a
"one-roof management" for film imports.
Sudwikatmono is a tycoon who owns the Subentra Group. Suptan,
as a film importer, is but one of Subentra' subsidiaries. Suptan
became powerful as it got hold of a number of main distribution
channels. This was a smart move indeed. The Subentra Group
created a network of movie theaters, known as the 21 Group, in a
number of major cities. Many long-established movie theaters had
to join this group, including the legendary Megaria, which was
set up in 1949. Megaria, located in Central Jakarta, had its name
changed to Metropole.
As sole importer which also controlled the distribution chain
and the movie theaters, Suptan would prioritize the films it
imported for movie theaters under its control. In this way, movie
theaters outside the 21 Group became helpless. They had no other
choice but to screen any film offered by the distributor.
In fact the quota of imported films continued to be cut. In
the 1970s the annual quota of imported films stood at some 700
titles with a limit of only two copies each.
This level continued to be reduced to 160 titles, but each
title could have as many copies as needed.
The alleged monopoly in film imports, later also in the film
distribution sector, became a hot topic of public debate in
national film circles.
Eros Djarot and Slamet Rahardjo, two brothers who are both
noted film directors and producers, also joined the debate. They
claimed that the practices adopted by Suptan had caused a host of
serious difficulties to regional distributors, who were in
control of hundreds of movie theaters.
In fact, old movie theaters were the right market for national
films. Eventually, national films fell victim to the monopoly in
film distribution.
This distribution squeeze even made film director Slamet
Rahardjo take the case of the distribution of his film Langitku
Rumahku (My Sky My Home) to court.
Although the court did not rule in his favor, it was clear
that the competition in terms of the distribution of national and
imported films was not fair.
In 1991 MPEAA began to distribute films directly to Indonesia.
MPEAA later became the Motion Pictures Association of America
(MPAA). The Indonesian government permitted MPAA, which has major
U.S. film producers as members, to directly distribute its films
to Indonesia with the provision that this should be conducted
through an importers association.
Crisis
It was no coincidence that the existing importers association
was also ready with its own network of movie theaters under the
banner of the 21 Group.
Time moved on. Indonesian films sunk deeper into a quagmire of
difficulties. Market competition with imported films intensified.
New competitors emerged: private television stations. Worst of
all, the onset of the economic crisis in July 1997.
The crisis has made virtually all imported products, including
films, very costly. Sources have said that beyond the films
directly distributed to Indonesia, films imported by Subentra are
in short supply because prices have skyrocketed. These non-MPAA
films are known as independent films. In the same way, Hong Kong
and Indian films have also soared in price.
Now that the development in film imports in Indonesia over
different periods has been observed, the following measures, in
light of the reform spirit, may be recommended:
First, the monopoly in film imports should be immediately
scrapped. Fresh opportunities should be offered to qualified
newcomers to act as film importers. In the 1950s, for example, a
dedicated film producer could import films. In this way, imported
films would be of greater variety.
Second, the monopoly in film imports should abolish
monopolistic practices in the distribution of imported films. In
this way, movie theaters outside the 21 Group would have the
freedom to screen films which in their estimate would be
profitable.
Third, the 21 Group should be allowed to continue their movie
theater business as long as this is not "collusively" related
with the businesses of purchasing and distributing imported
films.
This means that the agreement on the distribution of MPAA
films through an association of film importers should be replaced
with a system which would benefit the development of national
films.
In short, film imports, film distribution and movie theaters
should be separate businesses. Only in this manner can
monopolistic business practices in imported films be avoided.
The writer is a film/TV observer and lecturer at the Film and
Television Department of the Jakarta Arts Institute.