Abstract
In this thesis, we propose a question that why would the cinema market in Taiwan be in its current deserted state as there does exist some government intervention and support? To answer this question, we first need to know the logic of cinema and the logic of intervention. After reviewing the movie industries and the cinema market of its current state, we found that the world cinema market operates on a basic economic logic called “home market effect”, which makes companies reside within a larger home market will be advantageous to their counterparts in a smaller home market. And we examined different government intervention schemes in different situations. We found that whether or not an intervention will take place depends on whether the concerning matter is in the conscious scope of the government or not. If one thing is not in the conscious scope of the government, it will not intervene even if that thing is in immediate jeopardy. In addition, the true essence of intervention is actually domination and anti-domination, which in turn is a mode of political power exertion. We also identified that there are two types of interventions, judging by the number and identity of the subjects, (1) limited and specific, (2) unlimited and non-specific. Identification of these two types is based on the scope of intervention. By observing the example countries, we now know that the economic theory of home market effect could be used to provide explanations on cinema market status of a country which employs little or no film policy, while policy explanations of intervention could be used to interpret countries which engage intervening measures to antagonize home market effect. And the political economy theories depicted what a hegemony will do as it encounters anti-domination interventions stated above. In the end we sorted out a list of possibly beneficial cinema market interventions based on French and Korean models for Taiwanese government to consider for application. Finally we identified that the reason for Taiwanese government did not deploy these intervention measures because of (1) pressure from the U.S. (2) not having film “industry” in its conscious scope and (3) some movie businesses objected themselves.