A Voice in the Frame

A Voice in the Frame:

ACADEMIC ESSAY

SASHQIA DAS NEVES 231250

14 OCTOBER 2025

List of Figures

INTRODUCTION

The South African film industry in 2025 exists at a crossroads, caught between global pressures and the need to assert a distinctive voice. Hollywood’s continuing dominance - through international distribution structures and blockbuster monopolies - continues to limit the visibility and independence of local productions, with South African films accounting for only a small share of the domestic box office in 2023 (National Film and Video Foundation, 2025; Lobato, 2019, p. 135; Ebrahim, 2018, p. 200). This structural imbalance situates South African cinema within a Second Cinema framework - characterised by auteur-driven artistry within global systems - yet its postcolonial and resistant themes also align it with Third Cinema traditions, reflecting a hybrid position between independence and liberation (Ebrahim, 2018, p. 200-202; Solanas & Getino, 1976).

Representation and post-apartheid legacies present further hurdles (Ebrahim, 2018, p. 199).

South African cinema must challenge historical stereotypes while navigating international demands that idealise local narratives (Ebrahim, 2018, p. 200). District 9 (2009) exemplifies this tension: critically acclaimed yet reliant on Hollywood funding and distribution (Wired, 2009). As Viljoen (2022) observes, even films that empower marginalised groups remain bound to Hollywood structures, where decision-making is dominated by white executives. In contrast, Five Fingers for Marseilles (2017), celebrated for narrative innovation and its critique of oppression, illustrates the difficulty local films face in securing global visibility (Broodryk & Joynt, 2021, p. 6-10).

Linguistic and cultural diversity compounds these issues, as filmmakers must balance accessibility with authenticity (Ebrahim, 2018, p. 198). Moreover, cinema enables cultural engagement; Kinder (1997) reminds us that film is “a vehicle for constructing images of a unified identity out of regional and ethnic diversity.” In South Africa, filmmaking operates as both art and cultural practice, enabling communities to reclaim identity, preserve memory, and redefine representation in a post-apartheid, globalised context (Botha, 2011, p. 253).

Through District 9 (2009) and Five Fingers for Marseilles (2017), this essay illustrates how cinema can enact these possibilities, showing that film is not only a medium of storytelling but also a platform for cultural resistance and identity formation. Both films confront systemic oppression and identity formation, yet their reception reveals how complex local narratives are often simplified for international audiences and reframed primarily as entertainment rather than culturally authentic expression (Christopher, 2013; Broodryk, 2021).

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: UNDERSTANDING FILM AS ART

Understanding the challenges, opportunities, and responsibilities facing South African filmmakers requires recognising film as an art form. Cinema is more than entertainment or commerce; it is a complicated art form mixing visual, thought-based, and belief-based ideas (Thomson-Jones, 2008, p. 2-6). Thomson-Jones (2008, p. 14-15) argues that film qualifies as an art form in its own right, capable of interpretation and aesthetic engagement. Unlike other media closely bound to tradition, cinema negotiates the balance between artistic innovation and popular appeal - balance especially complex in postcolonial contexts like South Africa, where filmmakers operate within the hybrid terrain of Second and Third Cinema, characterised by auteur-driven artistry yet constrained by Western commercial systems (Thomson-Jones, 2008, p. 12–14; Solanas & Getino, 1976).

Dutton (2007, p. 3-4) clarifies film’s cultural and human importance, positioning art within the human drive to create symbolic objects and experiences conveying meaning across cultures and time. Art is not merely decorative; it is communicative, adaptive, and shaped by evolution and culture (Dutton, 2007, p. 6-8). In South Africa, filmmaking deals with cultural history in a divided political setting (Dutton, 2007, p. 9). By grounding their work in local languages,

Still from the 2009 film, “District 9”

Note: Neil Blomkamp (dir), 2009

FIGURE 02

Still from the 2017 film,“Five Fingers for Marseilles”

Note: Michael Matthews (dir), 2017

histories, and mythologies, filmmakers participate in this universal artistic function while resisting cultural loss caused by global media (Dutton, 2007, p. 10-11).

Bordwell and Thompson (2016, p. 55-61) provide a framework for analysing films’ multiple levels of meaning: referential, explicit, implicit, and symptomatic. Referential meaning involves the concrete, factual, or historical elements a film refers to, such as real people, places, or events (Bordwell & Thompson, 2016, p. 55). Explicit meaning refers to the clear, thematic content communicated through dialogue, plot, or character actions (Bordwell & Thompson, 2016, p. 57). Implicit meaning invites audiences to infer broader ideas and emotional or philosophical undercurrents (Bordwell & Thompson, 2016, p. 58). Symptomatic meaning reflects the ideological conditions of production, revealing deeper cultural or political attitudes (Bordwell & Thompson, 2016, p. 60-61). These categories help analyse how South African filmmakers embed local realities within global cinematic frameworks.

In District 9 (2009), as shown in Figure 1, Johannesburg’s decaying urban landscape and the segregation of the alien population evoke South Africa’s apartheid geography and contemporary xenophobia (Christopher, 2013, p. 4). Referentially, the film mirrors apartheid spatial hierarchies; explicitly, it dramatises the moral consequences of dehumanisation; and symptomatically, it reveals ongoing post-apartheid fears around otherness and exclusion within a modern global system focused on profit and markets (Bordwell & Thompson, 2016, p. 55-61). Blomkamp’s mixed visual style - combining documentary realism with sciencefiction tropes - exemplifies how cinematic form can operate as cultural critique, reinforcing

Thomson-Jones’s (2008, p. 13) view of film as an interpretive art that uses aesthetic form to question ideas or beliefs.

In Five Fingers for Marseilles (2017), as shown in Figure 2, the narrative clearly explores justice, revenge, and corruption within a post-apartheid moral landscape. Implicitly, the film reshapes the Western genre’s colonial imagery into a critique of apartheid’s lingering violence (Bordwell & Thompson, 2016, p. 58; Broodryk & Joynt, 2021, p. 6-10). This blending of genres, merging the Western’s frontier codes with South African settings, illustrates Dutton’s (2007, p. 6-8) notion of art as an adaptive cultural practice. The filmmakers use a global cinematic form to express local histories and identities, transforming a familiar genre into an act of reclaiming storytelling space in postcolonial South Africa.

By engaging with these levels of meaning, South African filmmakers create works that resonate locally while communicating universally. Their films carry specific cultural markers while also articulating subtle criticism of inequality and globalisation (Bordwell & Thompson, 2016, p. 59). The formal experimentation in District 9 (2009) and Five Fingers for Marseilles (2017) illustrates how South African filmmakers transform global cinematic languages into vehicles for cultural self-definition. Their work exemplifies how treating film as art enables both aesthetic innovation and ideological critique, affirming cinema’s role in shaping and contesting postcolonial identities (Thomson-Jones, 2008, p. 12-15; Dutton, 2007, p. 6-8; Bordwell & Thompson, 2016, p. 55-61).

These perspectives place South African cinema within a discourse both global and locally grounded. Thomson-Jones (2008, p. 13) states film’s legitimacy as an art form capable of serious interpretation; Dutton (2007, p. 7-8) frames artistic creation as central to identity and cultural adaptation; and Bordwell and Thompson (2016, p. 55-61) show how cinematic meaning operates on multiple, interrelated levels. For a South African filmmaker in 2025, this framework emphasises that filmmaking is not merely a technical craft but a form of cultural

power and influence. Every aesthetic choice - narrative, visual style, or language - plays a role in constructing, challenging, or supporting collective identity, reflecting how cinematic form shapes meaning and representation (Thomson-Jones, 2008, p. 13; Bordwell & Thompson, 2016, p. 59; Botha, 2011, p. 253).

This understanding clarifies why South African filmmakers cannot simply replicate Hollywood models. Global cinema often prioritises commercial success and universalised narratives that flatten cultural difference (Lobato, 2019, p. 135). South African film, by contrast, can focus on mixed, diverse, and post-apartheid themes (Botha, 2022, p. 225). Treating film as art allows creators to resist standardisation and contribute to global conversations without sacrificing local authenticity (Thomson-Jones, 2008, p. 14). In this way, South African cinema also serves as a form of artistic expression and cultural resistance, enabling filmmakers to critique, heal, and imagine futures beyond the limits of history (Bloch, 2012).

CHALLENGES CONFRONTING SOUTH AFRICAN FILMMAKERS

A key challenge in 2025 remains Hollywood’s global dominance (Mfolo & Van Vuuren, 2022, p. 5). International distribution systems and blockbuster monopolies make it difficult for independent films to secure screen space (Gengan, 2023, p. 8). This structural imbalance allows commercially driven international standards to overshadow culturally specific storytelling (Ebrahim, 2018, p. 201). District 9 (2009) exemplifies this: despite critical success, it depended heavily on Hollywood funding and distribution (Maingard, 2007, p. 143). Without such backing, its reach would have been limited, highlighting dependence on foreign infrastructure (Ebrahim, 2018, p. 200). Similarly, Five Fingers for Marseilles (2017) faced budget and marketing limitations limiting international visibility, despite creative storytelling

(Broodryk & Joynt, 2021, p. 13, 15). These examples reveal how globalised structures restrict creative freedom (Lobato, 2019, p. 182).

Representation and post-apartheid legacies add complexity. South African cinema must address historical stereotyping while navigating global expectations that idealise local stories (Maingard, 2020, p. 10). Both films explore oppression and identity (Broodryk & Joynt, 2021, p. 1), yet their reception demonstrates how nuanced narratives are simplified for international audiences (Christopher, 2013, p. 2). Different languages and cultures make it harder to stay real and reach audiences, presenting filmmakers with a constant challenge to balance inclusivity and creative integrity (Ebrahim, 2018, p. 198). While these challenges persist, evolving technologies and creative strategies open new pathways for South African filmmakers to express cultural independence. Despite these barriers, the South African film industry continues to benefit from significant opportunities.

OPPORTUNITIES FOR SOUTH AFRICAN STORYTELLERS

IN A GLOBAL INDUSTRY

The growth of digital platforms enables filmmakers to avoid traditional distribution, expanding global reach (Lobato, 2019, p. 182). These platforms allow South African stories to circulate internationally without full dependence on Hollywood (Lobato, 2019, p. 182). District 9 (2009) demonstrates how globally supported productions can still retain local identity. Its Johannesburg setting, local cast, and symbolic use of xenophobia root it in South African realities while maintaining global appeal (Christopher, 2013, p. 1). Similarly, Five Fingers for Marseilles (2017) shows how filmmakers can localise global genres by transforming the

Western into a distinctly South African narrative of justice and revenge (Broodryk & Joynt, 2021, p. 4).

South Africa’s multilingual and multicultural context offers immense creative potential. As Hall (1997 p.15) notes, representation lies at the heart of cultural meaning-making. By focussing on local languages and histories, filmmakers differentiate their work from standardised global content while contributing unique perspectives to international cinema (Botha, 2011, p. 253). Cinema thus remains both an artistic and socio-political platform through which filmmakers can encourage dialogue, challenge inequalities, and assert cultural agency (Ebrahim, 2019 p. 201).

ETHICS AND IMPACT: THE SOUTH AFRICAN FILMMAKER’S RESPONSIBILITY

In a society still marked by inequality and historical trauma, South African filmmakers carry ethical as well as artistic responsibilities. As Botha (2011, p. 253) notes, cinema acts as a way to remember shared history, demanding engagement with history, identity, and representation. Ethical filmmaking therefore requires attention to whose stories are told, how they are framed, and who benefits from their circulation. Within a global market where African narratives are often simplified or appropriated, authenticity and accountability become important ways of keeping culture alive (Ebrahim, 2018, p. 199-201). Maingard (2007, p. 143) argues that postapartheid cinema must balance creative freedom with social responsibility, ensuring that film contributes to collective healing rather than exploitation. Ethical practice extends beyond onscreen content to include production choices, modes of collaboration, and community involvement. Joining ethics and creativity supports film’s two main purposes as both aesthetic creation and social conscience; an essential foundation for building empathy, sustaining collective memory, and imagining a more just national identity (Thomson-Jones, 2008, p.

13). Ethical filmmaking therefore is integral to sustaining cinema’s role as a cultural practice that both reflects and shapes national identity.

CONCLUSION

In 2025, South African cinema stands between limitation and possibility. Hollywood dominance continues to shape distribution and audience expectations (Mfolo & Van Vuuren, 2022, p. 5), yet the growth of digital platforms creates new opportunities for local storytelling and wider cultural reach (Lobato, 2019, p. 182). Such developments position filmmaking as both a form of cultural resistance and a site for creative agency within post-apartheid cinema (Botha, 2011, p. 225).

District 9 (2009) relied on Hollywood infrastructure yet remained grounded in Johannesburg’s realities (Christopher, 2013), while Five Fingers for Marseilles (2017) reimagined the Western genre as a distinctly South African narrative of justice and memory (Broodryk, 2021). Together, these films illustrate how cinema can reclaim identity, preserve memory, and redefine representation in a globalised world.

South African cinema is not merely a commercial endeavour but a dynamic site of cultural resistance and innovation, capable of shaping collective memory and imagining new possibilities for identity. Filmmakers who focus on local culture push back against global uniformity and share important ideas about identity, justice, and belonging. As South African cinema evolves, it stands ready to reshape both local and global cultural landscapesoffering not just stories, but frameworks for reimagining identity, memory, and resistance in the twenty-first century.

REFERENCES

Bloch, N. (2012, September 18). Cultural resistance: The arts of protest. New Tactics in Human Rights. https://www.newtactics.org/conversations/cultural-resistance-arts-protest/

Blomkamp, N. (Director). (2009). District 9 [Film]. TriStar Pictures.

Bordwell, D., & Thompson, K. (2016). Film art: An introduction (11th ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Botha, M. P. (2011). Post-apartheid cinema: A thematic and aesthetic exploration of selected short and feature films. South African Journal of Film Studies, 3(2), 225-276. http://dx.doi. org/10.5007/2175-8026.2011n61p225

Broodryk, C. W. (2021). Violence, colonialism and oppression in Five Fingers for Marseilles. University of Pretoria. https://repository.up.ac.za/bitstream/handle/2263/91133/Broodryk_ Redemption_2021.pdf

Christopher, D. (2013). The allegory of apartheid and the concealment of race relations in District 9. Online International Journal of Arts and Humanities, 10(X), xx–xx.

Dutton, D. (2007). The art instinct: Beauty, pleasure, and human evolution. Bloomsbury Press.

Ebrahim, H. (2018). Close-up: South African cinema - Traversing the cinematographic landscape of contemporary South Africa: A peripatetic journey. Journal of African Cinemas, 11(2), 197-215. https://doi.org/10.2979/blackcamera.9.2.14

Gengan, R. (2023). Innovative entrepreneurship through creative outputs for emerging filmmakers in South Africa. African Interdisciplinary Studies Journal, 4(1), 19-32. https:// journals.co.za/doi/full/10.51415/ajims.v5i1.1160?utm_source=

Hall, S. (1997). Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices. Sage in association with the Open University.

Lobato, R. (2019). Netflix nations: The geography of digital distribution. NYU Press. https://doi. org/10.18574/nyu/9781479882281.001.0001

Maingard, J. (2007). South African national cinema. Routledge. https://doi. org/10.4324/9780203354513

Matthews, M. (Director). (2017). Five fingers for Marseilles [Film]. Indigenous Film Distribution.

Mfolo, B., & Van Vuuren, A.-M. J. (2022). The viability of online distribution for South African feature films. Proceedings of the Asian Conference on Media, Communication & Film 2022, 59-69. https://doi.org/10.22492/issn.2186-5906.2022.6

National Film and Video Foundation. (2025). South African box office report 2023. NFVF. https://www.nfvf.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/2023-Box-Office-Report.pdf

Thomson-Jones, K. (2008). Film as an art. Aesthetics and film (pp. 1-15). Continuum. International Publishing Group.

Solanas, F., & Getino, O. (1976). Towards a third cinema: Notes and experiences for the development of a cinema of liberation in the Third World. In B. Nichols (Ed.), Movies and methods: An anthology (Vol. 1, pp. 44-64). University of California Press.

Viljoen, J.-M. (2022). Re-forming Hollywood’s imagination: Beyond the box office and into the boardroom. Image & Text, (36), Article a2. https://doi.org/10.17159/2617-3255/2022/n36a2

Wired. (2009, July 20). How Peter Jackson discovered District 9 director Neill Blomkamp. https://www.wired.com/2009/07/pl-screen-9/

© 2024 The Open Window