Abstract
This chapter compares the differentiated contemporary cinema infrastructure across six regions in Bulgaria with reference to wider film exhibition changes across post-socialist Eastern Europe. Despite a recent overall rise in the number of cinema screens in the country, the concentration of the market in large high-priced urban venues, screening predominantly Hollywood content, has made cinema both less accessible and less attractive to certain groups of spectators. Cinema-going transformed from an inclusive, low-cost, popular everyday activity during socialism to an exclusive special occasion that fewer people can now afford. The current emphasis on optimising profitability often proves at odds with local views on accessibility, measured by perceptions of ticket price, ease of going to the cinema and film-related information flows. Comparing accounts of respondents from different Bulgarian localities and across the six regions within the country serves to illustrate preoccupations with social value, programming strategies, and disparities in local provisions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
The initiative is part of CinED—an international film education programme, funded by the Creative Europe / MEDIA programme of the European Union, “Support for film education.” Its objective is to help European youths aged six to nineteen discover European cinema. In the Bulgarian case, the programme is run by the arts and cultural events organisers, Arte Urbana Collectif, with the aim to help children from underprivileged backgrounds, who might struggle with the official curriculum, learn about filmmaking as well as re-engage at school.
- 2.
An interactive popularity ranking—“Lachenite obuvki na balgarskoto kino” (“Bulgarian Cinema’s Patent Leather Shoes”)—was organised by the Bulgarian National Television (BNT) in 2015 to commemorate the centenary of the production of the first Bulgarian film, Balgaran e galant (The Bulgarian Is Gallant, Vassil Gendov, 1915), and allow viewers to vote for their favourite local feature. Similar initiatives for Bulgarian animated and documentary films followed shortly.
- 3.
Irandoust (2017) demonstrates the importance of gender, age, educational attainment, income, marital status, critical reviews, word of mouth and willingness to pay in shaping demand for cinema-going. Cuadrado-García et al. (2018) uncover the influence of education, film popularity, film quality, social interaction and mood for motivating cinema-going, and the effects of programming, venue features, place, competing activities, financial restrictions and free time on barriers to access. This chapter focuses predominantly on the role of age and place in shaping perceptions of accessibility to cinema venues. I discuss the place of sociality, critical reviews, film quality, programming strategies, the appeal of genre and national cinema in more detail throughout other parts of my larger project.
- 4.
The project “Turning (your) back to audiences? Glimpses into shifting cinema-going and film consumption patterns in Bulgaria” was funded by the British Academy between 2017 and 2021. It aimed to investigate the experiences, habits and preferences of contemporary Bulgarian film viewers, their expectations of new Bulgarian cinema and their ability to access audiovisual products. More information can be found on the official website: https://bulgarianfilmaudiences.org/.
- 5.
So, while realist and empiricist enquiries can be similar in implementation, the findings are interpreted with different ontological underpinnings in mind.
- 6.
According to an amendment to the Bulgarian Spatial Development Act in 2009, settlements are classified as very small when they have under 10,000 dwellers, small—between 10,000 and 30,000 inhabitants, medium—between 30,000 and 100,000 residents, large—between 100,000 and 200,000 citizens and very large, when they have a population of over 200,000.
- 7.
As classified by the Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS) introduced by the European Union in 2003.
- 8.
When asked to evaluate on the Likert rating scale the statement “I am generally interested in films and cinema,” 70% of the questionnaire respondents marked “Strongly agree” and a further 20% responded with “Agree.” The majority of these respondents also used the free-text box at the end of the questionnaire for their reflections on the state of Bulgarian cinema. Similarly, focus group discussions often overran in time, due to the desire of the participants to share their views.
- 9.
The questions were adapted from the projects “Opening Our Eyes: How Film Contributes to the Culture of the UK” (2011), “Mediating Cultural Encounters through European Screens—MeCETES” (2013−2016) and “European Cinema Audiences: Entangled Histories and Shared Memories” (2018−2021).
- 10.
One-way ANOVA and Tukey post hoc tests were applied to analyse differences of questionnaire respondents’ opinions, as shaped by the size of the settlement in which they lived.
- 11.
Even though there is evidence for the building of new cinema theatres in (unofficially) racially segregated neighbourhoods throughout the country during state socialism, I am making no claims with regard to the experiences of minority groups, as this is beyond the scope of the study sample. Recruiting more participants from underrepresented groups would form an important query for future research, increasing the theoretical value and practical usefulness of the findings.
- 12.
The rise in popularity of new Bulgarian productions in the 2010s also contributed to renewed interest in cinema-going.
- 13.
An initiative by Creative Europe / MEDIA Programme and French National Centre for Cinema and the Moving Image supporting non-national European cinema.
- 14.
Mean = 3.47, Standard Deviation = 1.288.
- 15.
The result of one-way ANOVA testing (F(4.575) = 3.2, p = 0.013).
- 16.
As determined by a Tukey post hoc test, p = 0.007.
- 17.
A local venture, re-branded to CineLand in 2020.
- 18.
Mean = 4.07, Standard Deviation = 1.235.
- 19.
As determined by one-way ANOVA testing (F(4.575) = 6.8, p < 0.001) and a Tukey post hoc test across: very small and small settlements (p = 0.020); very small and large settlements (p = 0.003); very small and very large settlements (p < 0.001); medium and very large settlements (p = 0.006).
- 20.
Mean = 4.11, Standard Deviation = 1.132.
- 21.
Only 65% thought that they could easily access information on local film programming.
References
Adamczak, M. (2020). Hard power and film distribution: Transformation of distribution practices in Poland in the era of digital revolution. Studies in Eastern European Cinema, 11(3), 243–261.
Anisimovich, A. (2019). Coming to terms with the past: New Bulgarian cinema and the post-communist transition [Doctoral dissertation, Edge Hill University].
Biltereyst, D., & Meers, P. (2016). New cinema history and the comparative mode: Reflections on comparing historical cinema cultures. Alphaville: Journal of Film and Screen. Media, 11, 13–32.
Biltereyst, D., & Van de Vijver, L. (2016). Cinema in the ‘fog city’: Film exhibition and socio-geography in Flanders. In J. Thissen & Z. Clemens (Eds.), Cinema beyond the city: Small-town & rural film culture in Europe (pp. 223–236). Palgrave–BFI.
Bulgarian National Film Center. (2018). Bulgarian cinema 2018: Facts, figures, trends. Retrieved January 21, 2023, from https://www.BulgarianNationalFilmCentre.bg/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Bulgarian_Cinema_2018-online-2.pdf
Çam, A., & Şanlier Yüksel, İ. (2021). Old places, renewed experiences: Looking at the legacy of Çukurova cinemas in the pandemic era. Participations: Journal of Audience & Reception Studies, 18(2), 419–435.
Christie, I. (2012). Audiences. Amsterdam University Press.
Cuadrado-García, M., Filimon, N., & Montoro-Pons, J. D. (2018). Picturing Spanish filmgoers: Motives, barriers and film theatres. Regional Science Enquiry, 10(2), 45–60.
Donev, A. (2018). Pomosht ot publikata. Fŭn tezi.
Hames, P. (2000). Czech cinema: From state industry to competition. Canadian Slavonic Papers, 42(1–2), 63–85.
Hanzlík, J. (2017). Eventization and targeting in Czech theatrical distribution after 1989. Iluminace, 29(3), 49–64.
Irandoust, M. (2017). The demand for cinema in Sweden: An application of proportional odds model. The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society, 48(5), 351–361.
Kauber, S. (2022). The imagined affordances of cinema-going and national cinema. Participations: Journal of Audience & Reception Studies, 19(1), 199–223.
Kayhan Müldür, S. (2021). Open-air cinemas of Istanbul from the 1950s to today. Space and Culture, 24(1), 128–143.
Konecny, B. (2017, March 24). A forgotten country’s forgotten cinema: Searching for hope in post-Soviet Moldovan cinema. FilmInt.nu. Retrieved January 21, 2023, from http://filmint.nu/forgotten-countrys-searching/
Kostov, K. (1999). Na kino v Plovdiv. Vera Slovena Publishing House.
Maltby, R. (2011). New cinema histories. In R. Maltby, D. Biltereyst, & P. Meers (Eds.), Explorations in new cinema history: Approaches and case studies (pp. 1–40). Wiley-Blackwell.
Media Salles. (2020). Average ticket prices (Euro) (2013–2019). Retrieved January 21, 2023, from http://www.mediasalles.it/ybk2020/tabelle/img_tabelle/prezzimedi_e.htm
Merrington, P., Hanchard, M., & Wessels, B. (2021). Inequalities in regional film exhibition: Policy, place and audiences. Journal of British Cinema and Television, 18(2), 198–222.
NSI. (1990). Statistical Yearbook 1989.
NSI. (1994). Statistical Yearbook 1993.
NSI. (2004). Statistical Yearbook 2003.
NSI. (2022a, May 23). Cinemas. National Statistical Institute. Retrieved January 21, 2023, from https://nsi.bg/en/content/3621/cinemas
NSI. (2022b). Average gross monthly wages and salaries of the employees under labour contract by statistical regions and districts in 2018. National Statistical Institute. Retrieved January 21, 2023, from https://www.nsi.bg/en/content/3930/statistical-regions-district
NSI. (n.d.-a). Cinemas: Seats, screens, screenings and attendances by regions. Infostat. National Statistical Institute. Retrieved January 21, 2023, from https://infostat.nsi.bg/infostat/pages/reports/query.jsf?x_2=428
NSI. (n.d.-b). Screening movies according to their nationality by districts. Infostat. National Statistical Institute. Retrieved January 21, 2023, from https://infostat.nsi.bg/infostat/pages/reports/query.jsf?x_2=556
Panicherski, I. (1982). Sotsiologicheski Pogled Varhu Kinoto i Zritelite Prez 80-te Godini. Kinorabotnik, 4, 35–38.
Papadimitriou, L., & Grgić, A. (2020). Introduction. In L. Papadimitriou & A. Grgić (Eds.), Contemporary Balkan cinema: Transnational exchanges and global circuits (pp. 1–17). Edinburgh University Press.
Schrøder, K., Drotner, K., Kline, S., & Murray, C. (2003). Researching audiences: A practical guide to methods in media audience analysis. Arnold.
Spatial Development Act. (2001). Bulgaria.
Statulov, D. (2021). Alternativni filmovi prostranstva. Kultura.bg. Retrieved January 21, 2023, from https://kultura.bg/article/950-alternativni-filmovi-prostranstva
Talavera, J. (2018, January). Measuring access to theatrically screened films in Eastern Europe. European Audiovisual Observatory. Retrieved January 21, 2023, from https://rm.coe.int/measuring-access-to-film-east-euro-pdf/168078731e
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Sage.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Nedyalkova, M. (2024). Comparing Aspects of Regional and Local Cinema Differentiation through Perceptions of Cinema-going in Post-socialist Bulgaria. In: Treveri Gennari, D., Van de Vijver, L., Ercole, P. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Comparative New Cinema Histories. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38789-0_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38789-0_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-38788-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-38789-0
eBook Packages: Literature, Cultural and Media StudiesLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)