cc	first vid >> Normand Gilliland: Welcome	 to University Place.	 I'm Norman Gilliland.	 Americans have always	 loved the movies,	 but their love affair	 with foreign films has been	 an on and off phenomenon.	 There was quite a market for	 foreign films in this country	 in the 1920s.	 Then, it went into an eclipse	 until after World War II.	 Foreign films had a renaissance	 here, until about 1973.	 What created that renaissance,	 and what made it end?	 Our guest	 will provide the answers.	 He's Tino Balio,	 professor emeritus of film	 in the Department	 of Communication Art	 at the University	 of Wisconsin-Madison,	 the former director	 of the Wisconsin Center	 for Film and Theatre Research,	 and the author of	 "The Foreign Film Renaissance	 on American Screens, 1946-1973."	 Pleasure to have you here.	 >> Tino Balio: Thank you,	 Norman.	 >> Gilliland: There is so much	 to talk about and so much to see	 that we'll get right to it.	 But let me ask first a question	 about the critics and the whole	 role of foreign films in this	 country and what got you	 interested in the whole	 phenomenon in the first place.	 >> Balio: Yes, well the period	 that I'm covering, it was a very	 influential period in American	 film history.	 This was a period when film	 became acknowledged as an	 international art form, this was	 a period when film was accepted	 into the academy.	 It was being taught at the same	 level as literature.	 The foreign films were being	 promoted by museums	 and film festivals.	 And foreign films generated a	 great deal of discussion about	 the nature of motion picture	 censorship, the relationship of	 Hollywood to the international	 film market and so forth.	 So foreign films had a great	 deal of influence during this	 period, but there had been no	 comprehensive history written	 about it, long and short.	 But I received a grant from the	 Academy of Motion Picture Arts	 and Sciences to do that based	 upon a proposal that I submitted	 to them.	 Now, the role of the critics was	 very important during this	 period, in particular the role	 of Bosley Crowther	 at the New York Times.	 Bosley Crowther was vilified by	 many of his colleagues for	 having a very klutzy writing	 style, but he was very	 influential because he was the	 chief film critic	 of the New York Times.	 And basically he can make or	 break a film, a foreign film in	 particular.	 But, fortunately, he loved	 foreign films, especially	 foreign films that had some sort	 of social theme connected to	 them.	 So he was one of the big	 champions of the art film market	 after World War II.	 And what I did in my book was to	 analyze the various waves of	 imports from different countries	 around the world, and I	 consulted all of the principal	 film reviewers to see what they	 had to say about these films.	 So I obviously wanted to find	 out what Bosley Crowther had to	 say, representing the New York	 Times as a national newspaper.	 Then I checked the reviews and	 as markets circulation	 magazines, Time, and Newsweek.	 High brow periodicals like The	 New Yorker, The New Republic.	 >> Gilliland: Esquire.	 >> Balio: Esquire,	 yes, absolutely.	 And then, of course,	 the Trade Press.	 So I got a cross-section of the	 critical reception of these	 films during this period.	 And this critical reception, you	 might say, helped to drive the	 market.	 Now, foreign film fans, the	 audience that went to see	 foreign films were rather	 influenced by reviews, much more	 so than the regular American	 filmgoer who was less affected	 by movie reviews.	 >> Gilliland: Word of mouth	 was not an option so much	 with foreign films?	 >> Balio: Well, no, word	 of mouth was very significant	 for foreign films.	 The ideal for any type of launch	 of the foreign film in the	 United States was to get a good	 New York City launch with a	 favorable review from Bosley	 Crowther and the New York film	 critics.	 And that called attention to the	 film.	 But the actual process of	 publicizing the film was	 actually basically done through	 word of mouth, because the	 audience for foreign films	 talke