270 - Movie Maps of the World
You’d think that in the world of global cinema, the US is the dominant force. You’d be wrong. Think New Zealand, India and Iceland. Of course these cartograms (i.e. maps distorted to demonstrate some kind of information) fall into the third category of untruths enumerated by “lies, damned lies and statistics”. Having these these cartograms demonstrate other aspects of the film industry would undoubtedly result in radically different maps.
These particular cartograms distort the sizes of the world’s countries in relation to the average budget per feature film, the number of films produced per capita and the total number of films produced per country.
On the first map, showing average budget per feature film, the surprising giant is New Zealand – for once looming large over its neighbour to the west, in fact, Australia could fit in between the North and South Islands. I can’t think of any other explanation for New Zealand’s size than the very expensive Lord of the Rings trilogy, shot on location in that country between October 1999 and December 2000.
Even if we revert to things as usual and ignore New Zealand, America’s size is less than impressive. You would think that all those blockbuster movies would have a greater effect on the average American feature film budget. But maybe the ‘big’ movies obscure the fact that the US produces many more ‘small’, low- or no-budget movies.
On the second map, showing number of films produced per capita, another thinly populated island nation is unexpectedly dominant – Iceland. Admittedly, it doesn’t take many movies in this country of barely 300,000 to get a good films per capita ratio. The other Nordic countries are also doing pretty well on this map, especially Denmark, outsizing all other European countries (except Iceland, of course). Slovenia is also doing noticeably well.
Regional dominance in Asia is achieved by Hong Kong, its unfamiliar shape for once outsizing the other Asian countries – even India, which is struggling to keep up with Israel.
The US manages its biggest relative size on the third map, showing the total number of feature films produced, dominating the American continent (much less so in the previous two maps), but with strong competition in Europe (notably France), Africa (a huge Nigeria) and of course Asia (a giant India shows the clout of its ‘Bollywood’, churning out more movies annually than the US).
This is also the only map that shows up a Japan larger than life. Australia and New Zealand have dwindled back into obscurity. Bizarrely, Portugal is almost invisible, whereas in the previous map it broke out of its Iberian partner Spain’s stranglehold.
Notably absent (or very atrophied) on all three maps are Latin America (Cuba punches above its weight on the second map, but that’s about it), Africa (Nigeria being the most striking exception), Russia, the Middle East and much of Asia.
These cartograms, an advert for Volkswagen showcasing the car manufacturer’s support for independent cinema, appeared on the back cover of this week’s film magazine from The Observer, the British newspaper. Thanks to Jon Morris for scanning them and sending them in.


Anyone familiar with Nigeria’s film scene? I’ve heard of Bollywood, and am unsurprised to learn that places such as France, Spain, Japan, and China are big on movies; Nigeria was not on my mental “movie radar,” though.
Comment by Randall — May 6, 2008 @
My cable provider includes the “Nigerian Television Authority,” and when I flip by they are often showing rather low-budget looking films. I’ve never stopped to watch more than a minute or two, though.
Comment by Evan — May 6, 2008 @
For Portugal, one of the most famous portuguese film director, Manoel de Oliveira, has directed “french movies” because of the way these movies has been produced (and financed).
There are lots of non-american movies that are in the same case, especially in Europe.
Perhaps I don’t catch it, but why does it deal with “independent movies” ? I think that there is a confusion between “independent” and “non-american”…
Comment by Jacques — May 6, 2008 @
This is from an advertisement - is there any reason to believe it’s statistically accurate? It strikes me that the artist thought, “Oh, Lord of the Rings - big budget” and then made up the map.
Comment by John Dekker — May 6, 2008 @
First of Iceland has a population of about 330.000. And the film industry is subsidized by the government to help the tourist industry and that is why we are able to make “big” budget movies here. And maybe most importantly there are surprisingly a lot of good actors and filmmakers here that make movies that do well internationally.
Comment by Arnór — May 6, 2008 @
Today’s Featured Blog: Strange Maps…
This is the first installment of what I hope will become a regular feature here at The Old Eighteen, in which I encourage you to check out blogs that I’ve found while perusing the many internets (because, as President Bush…
Trackback by The Old Eighteen — May 6, 2008 @
On the first map, is that a North Korea flanked by a smaller South Korea and comically tiny China?
If so, I wonder if its part of the “I have millions of videos and kidnap directors to remake Godzilla” thing that Kim apparently is afflicted with.
Comment by Richard Green — May 6, 2008 @
Germany in his borders of the German Reich, nicely done ve dub!
Comment by Chad Kroski — May 6, 2008 @
@Randall - Nigeria has a big enough film industry that the term “Nollywood” is being applied to it. Apparently it has the third largest film industry in the world, after the USA and India. The Wikipedia entry has some more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinema_of_Nigeria
Comment by Manny — May 6, 2008 @
I think the deal with New Zealand is that the local film industry is geared towards ridiculously low budget indie films, and so a number of high budget Hollywood fantasy films shooting tend to skew the average. I imagine the Chronicles of Narnia and King Kong would played a large part in the size distortion.
Comment by Sana — May 6, 2008 @
Amazing how americans can be surprised when faced with the truth that US is not the center of the universe. There is a whole big planet out there, folks.
This is a great blog, but sometimes the “US focus” is a little too much. As seen in the comments, there is people from all around the world reading and commenting.
Comment by Dan — May 6, 2008 @
Dan, Look at the comments again and please point out the American shock that I fail to see.
One of the reasons I love this blog is because the comments are level headed. Don’t change that.
Comment by anonymouse — May 6, 2008 @
I’d say Argentina’s size on the second map is pretty noteworthy, considering it’s got the greatest per capita ratio of the americas, bigger than Cuba (if I’m reading the map correctly).
Comment by Domingo — May 6, 2008 @
“I can’t think of any other explanation for New Zealand’s size than the very expensive Lord of the Rings trilogy, shot on location in that country between October 1999 and December 2000.”
Are television shows included? Hercules, Xena, Halifax F.P. …
Oh, wait, not high budget.
Comment by teqjack — May 6, 2008 @
I couldn’t believe it, but checked to make sure - that it is indeed Nigeria that dominates in Feature Film Production. Where is South Africa? Barely there, a smidgen of green. (With Egypt that brown square on top.) Quite surprising.
Comment by Quiddity — May 7, 2008 @
#14 — I was thinking Hercules & Xena, too. There might exist out there a bunch of fantasy epics that were filmed in New Zealand but never released to the States.
BTW, I thought Canada would be bigger, what with all those movies where Vancouver substitutes for Seattle and Toronto substitutes for Detroit/Chicago/New York.
Comment by El Santo — May 7, 2008 @
Why, I wonder, is Sulawesi made to stand in for Indonesia? It’s not the biggest island or I would imagine the main centre for film production.
Comment by bingley — May 7, 2008 @
I’m surprised to see Denmark so big. Particular after the whole Dogma 95/Lars Trier brouhahah.
I’d have thought Bollywood was well enough known to most people to let them realise that India is biiiiig on film. Nigeria, though, was completely off the radar for me too.
Comment by Sili — May 7, 2008 @
I think the reason that Hong Kong’s shape is unfamiliar is because it’s rotated, cock your head to the left (like you were “reading” a smilie) and it’ll look more familiar. (I don’t think there’s a real bay at the north of Hong Kong like on HK as depicted)
#7: No, I think that’s “Korea”, ie the Korean peninsula, either representing just S. Korea, or combining N. and S. Korea as a single entity (which probably works out to roughly the same numbers. :) )
#8: Nope, that is present-day Germany, the fact that Poland is also orange (a lighter shade) sort of skews it, especially in map 2.
#16: I live in Winnipeg, another film centre (movies filmed recnetly here off the top of my head include “Shall We Dance?” and “The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford”. Unfortunately, the media still isn’t used to the increasing number of films being shot here and still get all giggly-school-girl-ish when news breaks that a movie will shoot here.
Comment by David — May 7, 2008 @
[...] under: Film & TV, Uncategorized — flann4 @ 11:57 pm Tags: film budgets, film production Very cool StrangeMap regarding global film [...]
Pingback by World of film « Revenge of the Castanets — May 7, 2008 @
I imagine Iceland being a case of quality over quantity.
The advertisement speaks of independent film, but I wonder if this map includes independent releases.
The map fails to say anything about distribution or revenue, likely because those maps would be less interesting or ’surprising’.
Comment by metamorphallic — May 7, 2008 @
Yeah, the German Reich have made this really great movie. The sequel was awesome too.
Comment by Ignorance is a blessing — May 7, 2008 @
Rough map of Germany: Has anyone noticed that the first map has the 1871 German borders, the second map the borders in 1920, and the third map has 2008 borders…….
Comment by Ron — May 7, 2008 @
LOL at the huge new zealand - very very few films were made in new zealand in the middle part of the 20th century and only a handful a year through the 1970’s ‘revival’ period. this overall low film number combined with half a dozen recent effects laden (read:weta workshop) MEGA BUDGET blockbusters could easily probably put the average in the $20 million + area.
Comment by Shades — May 9, 2008 @
Where d’ya find ‘em!
Another incredible map!
Raf
http://uzar.wordpress.com/
Comment by Raf Uzar — May 10, 2008 @
Both Australia and New Zealand produce a number of ‘local’ productions each year (perhaps 10 films a year), costing maybe $1-5M per film; but in New Zealand in the last decade you have Lord of the Rings (3*$500M), King Kong ($500M), two Chronicles of Narnia, The Last Samurai and several other “epics” … and if all of these are included the avarage must be uop around $100-200M.
Comment by Albert — May 16, 2008 @