Core Response #1 – Pau Brunet – Richard Dyer readings (January 22).

Cinema, stars, and box office go all together. 

Originally, film stars only existed as a financial asset created and used by the Studios, but ultimately became something more. This "something more" will occupy most of our conversation in class, but we cannot deny the economic implications related to the existence of "stars." From this industrial frame, we can observe the institution that rules and justifies the existence of movie stars as a "phenomenon of production" (Dyer p.10). In the book Stars, Richard Dyer indicates that stars have enormous economic importance because "the elaborate machinery of image-building and film's importance in establishing character-types all suggest the potential power of the forces of cinematic production for creating the star phenomenon" (p.17). However, without the economic context, we cannot fully understand the impact of the population's response to that relationship, and, at the same time, the economic impact does not directly affect the audience. In other words, stars navigate a complex socio-economic duality. This duality can also be seen in politics, which Dyer uses to create an exciting simile.  

The scholar uses the example of politics to illustrate stars' existential power and dependence within society. "'The start system...never creates a star, but it proposes the candidate for 'election,' and helps to retain the favor of the 'electors'" ("The Power Elite" p. 93)(p.19). Dayer points out using this simile that the industry that proposes a star for election or reelection, for example, in every film release, and the audience "are shaped by the particular ideological formation of their situation in society" (p.19). Because of this, the socio-economic space that stars occupy is fascinating because of what they represent to others and what they represent to the economy of an industry such as entertainment. With that said, something we can implement from Dyer's book is today's political power that lies in the stars.    

Today's star system has changed significantly from the one seen in the book and the Annenberg documentary, and the most radical change relates to the economic values. Because of the saturation of new content and the extreme volatility of audiovisual content, film stars are harder to create and unnecessary for the industry. To contextualize, there is a rise in film production as never seen before and a consumption window that often lasts less than a month – short if we compare it with the larger formats of exhibition in theaters, videocassettes/DVD, and television from before 2010. Because of that, stars, as we understand them from a historical perspective, with a large economic apparatus and power, have been replaced by a focus on production values, easier to manage, and more new talent. Often, this talent can be socially diverse and niche, and able to develop a political voice or energy rarely seen in the past. For instance, the radical persona of Jane Fonda multiplied in contemporary times. We have dozens of examples that go from Lady Gaga to Melissa Barrera. Their star power does not fit in one direction but in many. 

As said, film, stars, and consumption go all together, and this relationship has changed dramatically in the last decade because of social media and content streaming platforms.