The first film magazines in Taiwan were published during the 1940s, with at least five publications in circulation at the time. Due to the sombre political climate and strict publishing controls, these short-lived film magazines had only a limited sphere of influence.

In the 1950s, film companies started to publish their own publicity materials. These included publications such as International Film Education (国际电影教育), by the Motion Picture & General Investment studio (MP&GI), and the celebrity-oriented Social Studies and Motion Pictures Weekly (社教影剧周报). Among these magazines, there was also Movie Arts & Techniques (电影学报), a publication singled out by respected film critic Huang Ren for its scholarship. It was founded in 1958 but folded after just six issues in 1966.

However, the two most important publications that contributed to cinematic discourse in Taiwan were Theatre (剧场) and Influence (影响).

From its debut on 1 January 1965 to its last issue on 15 January 1968, Theatre published a total of nine issues. Priding itself as a magazine that introduced and analyzed avant-garde cinema and theatre, its sections on cinema were generally better received, and continued to inspire readers years later. In one of these sections, the magazine frequently translated the screenplays of what were then considered “avant-garde” films. These included Hiroshima Mon Amour (1959) and Last Year at Marienbad (1961) by Alain Resnais, La Dolce Vita (Federico Fellini, 1960) and La Notte (Michelangelo Antonioni, 1960). Although these films are now regarded as cinematic classics, they were seldom screened in Taipei at the time. Eager cinephiles who had no access to these films could only imagine them in their heads with the help of these translated screenplays. This created a strangely ironic phenomenon where Taiwanese cinephiles would be thoroughly familiar with films that they have never seen before.

The equally legendary film magazine, Influence, had a more complicated history. Its first incarnation debuted on 10 December 1971, and, after 15 issues, ceased publication in March 1977. It resumed in December 1977 for another nine issues, but eventually folded, once again, in September 1979. A decade later, a newly revamped version of the magazine was launched on 20 November 1989. Although the new team intended to continue in the tradition of the first two incarnations, the new version of Influence bore little similarities to its previous versions.

Like Theatre, the 70s versions of Influence were also niche publications, and continued in the tradition of introducing films by renowned foreign directors. However, Influence was far more influential on the film community. On top of its serious appraisal of Hong Kong and Taiwanese cinema, it was also known for its sharp criticism of current film culture. It had the foresight of recognizing the talent of Sung Tsun-shou (Song Cunshou), a filmmaker who was largely neglected at the time. In addition, it was also notorious for its list of Ten Worst Films, which was relentless in criticizing filmmakers who attempted to use their power to dominate the film industry. This created a huge controversy which put Influence under constant pressure from every field. On the other hand, it also gave Influence the reputation of being a cultural champion.

Neither Theatre nor Influence were widely circulated at the time. Largely ignored by the media, they did not enjoy a wide readership. They were only hailed by cinephiles much later because of their defiantly objective stance in the face of mass propaganda.

It was tough supporting these publications in those days, not because readers would get into trouble if they did (Taiwan wasn’t that repressive, and people didn’t treat these magazines seriously anyway), but because it was difficult to see the films that the writers were championing. Information on these movies were few and far between, and not many films even screened in theatres at the time. This is what sets apart the 90s version of Influence (or, as it is now called, Imagekeeper Monthly, 新影响).

In 2009, Imagekeeper Monthly published a commemorative issue to celebrate the 20th anniversary of Hou Hsiao-hsien’s City of Sadness. Image source: http://blog.sina.com.cn/imagekeeper.

By the late 80s, MTV lounges started to proliferate in Taiwan. In this uniquely Taiwanese version of the Japanese karaoke lounge, one could select and watch any amount of VHS tapes or Laser Discs for just NT$100. It even came with a free drink. This fad lasted all the way til the early 90s, right until American copyright law decimated the industry. Incredibly, one could find in an MTV lounge old classics, arthouse movies, and even little-known ethnic films that had yet to find their way into film textbooks. It had even more films than a proper film library.

From its inception, Imagekeeper Monthly had had a close working relationship with the then-famous “Sun MTV Lounge” chain, since they were both owned by the same person. Under the leadership of critic-turned-filmmaker Chen Kuo-fu, the magazine dedicated twenty to thirty pages of every issue to relatively unknown auteurs such as Pedro Almodovar, Peter Greenaway, and Andrei Tarkovsky. In conjunction with this, it also provided a VHS mail order service for the films of the different auteurs it profiled. Since none of these auteurs were ever screened in Taiwanese cinemas, this was the only film education available to ardent cinephiles. These cinephiles didn’t mind that the sale of these VHS tapes bordered on piracy; for collectors who were already willing to pay for these films, this service was seen more as a charity than as a business.

Alas, this couldn’t last long. With the “Special 301 Report” came the international enforcement of copyright under U.S. trade law. This marked the demise of the MTV lounges that had long operated on the fringes of legality. Imagekeeper Monthly had always depended on these lounges for its funding; it was more expensive to produce than most magazines due to its extensive and in-depth writing, and its sales were just not high enough to sustain its costs. There were many hiatuses in its 82-issue history (20 November 1989-February 1997). Its gradual shift in focus from auteur filmmakers to celebrities also reflected its struggle to adapt and survive.

In April 1997, an 83rd issue appeared under a new name. Under new ownership, the magazine no longer only focused on film; it also included topics such as multimedia, visual arts, music, and social issues. This incarnation of the magazine was even more short-lived this time. Within a year, failing to attract new readers and losing old fans, the magazine finally ceased publication for good.

Many considered Imagekeeper Monthly the ideal film magazine because of its wide-ranging and extensive coverage on European, Hollywood, and Asian films. Every issue focused on an important film personality and included in-depth reviews of recent theatrically-released films (usually 2-3000 words per review), facts and statistics on film production, feature reports, and film festival news. It even included a small section on television, music and commercial cinema. In other words, it was far more approachable than the previous incarnations of Influence. On the other hand, the sheer amount of writing in the magazine was often too much to digest. It was this very quality, however, and the magazine’s timeless film coverage that made old issues of Imagekeeper Monthly sought-after collector’s items.

Currently, the most widely-read film magazine in Taiwan is World Screen Magazine (世界电影), a monthly publication that focuses on recently released films and Hollywood celebrity news. First published in September 1966, it is one of Taiwan’s oldest existing publications. For many young cinephiles, the magazine functions as an introduction to cinema, thanks to its coverage of current movies. Only the columns in the magazine enjoy more freedom in scope. Incidentally, World Screen Magazine was also the first film magazine I subscribed to when I was in secondary school. My very first review, on John Woo’s A Better Tomorrow, was published here when I was 16, and I have been writing a column for the magazine since 1990. For a long time, I was writing for both World Screen Magazine and Imagekeeper Monthly, two magazines with completely different styles.

In the late 1990s, the team behind Imagekeeper Monthly started LOOK, a magazine that was similar in style to World Screen Magazine. Although it changed ownership a number of times and eventually changed its name to iLOOK, the magazine managed to survive on its own even after Imagekeeper Monthly‘s demise. This reflected the tough market for film magazines in Taiwan.

Issue 142 of the Film Appreciation Journal and the Film Appreciation Academic Journal (January-March 2010). Image courtesy of Chinese Taipei Film Archive.

The most academic film magazine in Taiwan is Film Appreciation Journal (电影欣赏). Being the key publication of the Chinese Taipei Film Archive, it has managed to stay afloat even after the downfall of several other important publications. It is mainly given out free to members of the film archive, scholars and other associated institutions. Film Appreciation Journal quickly became an important publication in its early days, because it featured articles on film history, genres, and theory. It also frequently translated pivotal film essays from all around the world. As a result, some of its archival issues remain well-referenced by film scholars today. In addition, it also featured interviews with international filmmakers when their work was screened in Taiwanese film festivals, providing year-end reviews of their oeuvres. Unfortunately, due to its infrequent publication, the magazine never quite reached out to the film community at large. As article submissions started to fall, the bi-monthly magazine started to publish only once every three months. Regardless of this, Film Appreciation Journal remains the only regular platform for academic film criticism.

At a time when monthly film magazines are about to be replaced by online publications, a new magazine, Cue, was launched by a team of young people in April 2010. Unlike other film magazines, it is neither dominated by Hollywood discourse, nor by serious film criticism. Instead, using cinema as its jumping board, it explores different facets of urban lifestyle including culture, food, fashion, travel and style. With so many movies being easily accessible today, Cue strives for a hip and light-hearted tone to remain mainstream and popular. Following the rise and fall of the Taiwanese New Wave, perhaps, this also best reflects the state of contemporary Taiwanese cinema.

Editor’s note:

1. Only Movie Arts & Techniques (电影学报), World Screen Magazine (世界电影), Imagekeeper Monthly (新影响) and Film Appreciation Journal (电影欣赏) come with romanised titles. For other publications, their romanised titles are directly translated from their Chinese titles: International Film Education (Guoji dianying jiaoyu 国际电影教育), Social Studies and Motion Pictures Weekly (Shejiao yingju zhoubao 社教影剧周报), Theatre (Juchang 剧场) and Influence (Yingxiang 影响).

2. The Editor thanks Mr Winston Lee, former director of the Chinese Taipei Film Archive.

Translated from Chinese by Tan Bee Thiam and Daniel Hui.

Original article:

理想主义与生存之道，漫谈台湾的电影杂志

闻天祥

台湾的电影杂志发行，最早可以推到1940年代，当时至少有五本不同的电影杂志在市面流通，但由于政治气候的严肃与出版管理的严格，多半寿命不长，影响也有限。

到了1950年代，则开始有专属于电影公司的宣传刊物，例如电懋公司发行的「国际电影教育」，或是以明星私生活与动态为主的「社教影剧周报」，还有被台湾资深影评人黄仁赞美难得具有学术性的「电影学报」（1958-1966，只出版过6期）。

但是真正对台湾电影论述产生重要影响的，应该是「剧场」（1965年创刊）和「影响」（1971年创刊）这两份刊物。

「剧场」杂志1965年1月1日在台北创刊，1968年1月15日停刊，共出版9期。它是一本分析、介绍前卫电影与前卫戏剧的刊物，但后人所津津乐道的，显然在电影部分多过戏剧。当年「剧场」杂志翻译了好几部当时被视为前卫电影、日后被公认为影史经典的电影剧本，像是雷奈（Alain Resnais）的《广岛之恋》（Hiroshima, mon amour,1959）、《去年在马伦巴》（L’Année dernière à Marienbad,1961），费里尼（Federico Fellini）的《生活的甜蜜》（La Dolce vita,1960），安东尼奥尼（Michelangelo Antonioni）的《夜》（La Notte,1960）。讽刺的是这些影片只有少部分在台北上映过，热情的影痴「望梅止渴」地藉由阅读、研究「剧场」刊出的中译剧本，伴随着想象去亲炙这些作品。因此，没看过电影却对影片内容结构了如指掌的怪异现象，也成为那个时代台湾影痴的某种特殊印记。

与「剧场」杂志一样堪称为台湾传奇电影杂志的「影响」，则是更曲折的一段故事。所谓的「老影响」，指的是1971年12月10日创刊，出了15期以后，在1977年3月停刊；后来又在同年12月1日复刊，但撑了9期之后，终在1979年9月出完第24期后「寿终正寝」。「新影响」则是阔别10年后，于1989年11月20日问世的新杂志，虽然在精神上有向「老影响」继承、看齐的心意，但两者实际上并没有直系的血缘关系。

1970年代的「影响」杂志，虽然也属于「小众」刊物，亦乐于译介国外著名导演的作品，颇有传承「剧场」杂志的味道，但是和台湾电影生态之间的互动，以及引发的效应，则比「剧场」来得剧烈些。「影响」对港台特定电影作者的严肃看待与评析，或是针贬电影生态文化的锐笔，现在看来皆意义非凡。譬如他们既能眼光独到地正视当年被严重忽略的导演宋存寿；也以不留情的犀利态度，用「十大烂片」戳破那些想要利用势力一手遮天的影人与作品，甚至因此引发了轩然大波，受到各方压力。不过也因此，让「影响」杂志蒙上了一抹悲剧英雄与文化图腾的色彩。

其实无论「剧场」或是「影响」，这两本电影杂志的发行量都不大，读者不多，也不见媒体青睐，之所以在日后成为影痴心中的「经典」，最主要的原因还是在于它们在当时的保守社会中所代表的自由、叛逆精神，以及在一片附和政策与宣传的电影气象中，坚持了自主的观点。

当年支持或阅读这类电影杂志的读者，显然也十分「辛苦」。倒不是读这些刊物会遭到麻烦（台湾还不至于这幺闭塞，况且没多少人会严肃看待一本电影杂志），而是由于信息落后、从电影院能看到的影片有限，对于编辑、作者们乐此不疲介绍的导演与作品，难免会有隔靴搔痒之憾。这1990年代重新发行的「影响」（简称「新影响」）在1990年代最不同的特点之一。

花个台币一百元左右、就可从成千上百的录像带或LD中挑一部在包厢看个过瘾，还付赠一杯饮料的「MTV视听中心」，是台湾1980年代后期到1990年代初的奇异风景；也是把日本卡拉OK转换成时下流行的KTV的重要创意来源。在美国的著作权法保护旋风还未吹垮台湾MTV工业前，令人难以相信但事实确凿的，几乎所有古今中外的著名电影、艺术经典、甚至连教科书都还来不及列进去的民族电影，大概都能在台北的「MTV视听中心」找得到，一间小包厢比电影系的图书馆还管用。而「新影响」即与当时名噪一时的「太阳系MTV」关系深厚（老板为同一人），找来从影评跨足导演的陈国富担任总编辑，几乎每期的重点都是导演评介，甚至配合专题推出录像带邮购，于是阿莫多瓦（Pedro Almodovar）、格林纳威（Peter Greenaway）、塔科夫斯基（Andrei Tarkovsky）这些当时还没有电影正式在台湾上映的导演，却因为「新影响」以动辄二、三十页的篇幅介绍加上录像带拷贝贩卖，自然而然成为当时影痴之间的「显学」。对求知若渴的影痴而言，并不太在意这种杂志包装录像带贩售的行为是否违法，何况「新影响」并不强迫读者购买录像带，更让愿意掏钱买片收藏的人，觉得杂志其实「做善事」多过「做生意」。

可惜好景不常，美国「三０一法案」在整肃台湾盗版歪风的同时，也宣告了游走在法律边缘的「MTV视听中心」势必要走入历史。以大篇文章、深入报导为主的「新影响」，成本本来就比一般杂志来得高，虽然颇受好评，但销售量还是很有限，当背后奥援的财力发生问题时，也不可避免牵动杂志的命运。「新影响」从1989年11月20日创刊，到1997年2月第82期为止，七年多之间历经了创刊、停刊、复刊、又再停刊，专题人物也从导演逐步变成明星，多少可以看到其中的调适和挣扎。

「新影响」的全名是「影响电影杂志」，1997年2月终于停摆，但同年4月却又在市面上出现第83期，表示幕后老板再度易手，但「电影」两个字被摘掉，因为杂志内容已非「纯电影」，而是跨足所有多媒体视觉艺术，讨论影像、媒体、音乐与现代社会的互动。这个也被称为「影响跨界」的杂志寿命更短，不到一年就夭折了，因为在无法开发新读者的情形下，它连忠贞的电影迷也失去了。

许多人都认为「新影响」的内容是最理想的电影杂志，因为它广及欧陆、好莱坞、亚洲电影，每期大篇幅介绍一位重要影人，并有近期上映影片的深度评论（通常都是两三千字的影评）、片厂纪实、专题报导、世界各地影展相关讯息，还有小部分电视、音乐专区、院线片情报等，不像「老影响」那幺难亲近，却堪称扎实。但换个角度看，「新影响」的份量常让读者一时消化不完也是事实。不过由于「新影响」超出一般月刊的文字质量以及不太受时间影响淘汰的深度内容，反而让它在停刊后，成为抢手的收藏品。

其实在台湾阅读率最高的电影杂志，应该是以介绍每月新片与好莱坞明星动态为主的「世界电影」。「世界电影」自1966年9月创刊以来，一直屹立不摇，也是台湾现存最长寿的期刊之一。许多年轻观众的第一本入门杂志都是它，主要是因为内容最切近刚接触电影的一般观众的需要，除了专栏作家的文字得以稍微天马行空外，所有内容都与即将上映的新片有关。我自己在中学时期订的第一本杂志就是「世界电影」，16岁时写的第一篇影评习作（1986年吴宇森导演的《英雄本色》）发表的地方也是这里，甚至在1990年代成为它的专栏作家，维持至今。有很长一段时间，我同时为「影响」和「世界电影」这两个风格完全不同的杂志撰稿。

1990年代后期，「影响」杂志另外办了本类似「世界电影」以报导新片与明星为主的「LOOK」，当「影响」结束后，「LOOK」虽然几番易主，并改名为「iLook」，却反而还能支撑下去，多少也反映了台湾消费市场的基本性格，以及电影杂志生存空间的狭小。

即使电影杂志生态严重失调，但台湾堪称最学术性的电影杂志「电影欣赏」却不太受影响，主要是因为这本刊物是「台北国家电影资料馆」的固定出版品，实际的订户非常少，主要还是赠阅给电资馆的会员以及相关学者、单位。早期的「电影欣赏」，扮演了介绍电影史、类型、理论的重要角色，也不吝翻译一些国外重要的电影学术文章，因此一些陈年卷号，到现在仍是许多学子寻找资料作报告时，主要的参考对象。虽然「电影欣赏」总会针对每年在各影展期间访台的影人作专访，同时也不忘在年度回顾与影人口述历史上，持续耕耘，但缓慢的出版速度，较少能与社会、电影生态产生互动，也不太能影响台湾电影研究风气，殊为可惜。在稿量减少的情况下，原本的「双月刊」甚至在近年变成了三个月才出一本的「季刊」。尽管如此，它仍然是目前唯一固定出版而且能提供论文式电影文字发表的刊物。

当电影月刊几乎被讯息传递更快速的网络给取代的新世纪，2010年4月台湾突然出现一本由年轻人主编的新杂志「cue.」，既不全然以好莱坞为导向，也不走严肃影评的路线，而是以电影为核心，延伸出达人文化、城市旅居、食衣住行风格等都会色彩浓厚的生活志。在电影多如过江之鲫而且垂首可得的情况下，企图塑造一种较为轻盈、时尚的质感。似乎也说明了台湾在经历过「台湾新电影」的光荣与黯淡之后，企图保有在地特色的同时，还能通俗与主流的趋势吧！