重寫臺語電影史：黑白底片、彩色技術轉型和黨國文化治理

Abstract

這本論文的研究問題是：面臨國民黨政府壟斷資源並推行國語的限制，臺語影人為什麼能在1956年拍攝出第一部臺語片《薛平貴與王寶釧》，甚至在1950到60年代間讓臺語片興起茁壯？臺語片的盛世，最終又為何在1968至1970年之間迅速衰亡，並在1970年代遲遲未能翻身，始終揹負粗製濫造的低俗污名？藉由檔案研究的方式，我從文化生產學派的角度切入，強調底片作為生產原料、彩色技術轉型的門檻以及黨國文化治理，替這兩道謎題提出另一套替代解釋。 本文的主要論點是：臺語片的興衰，直接地受到國民黨政府對底片這項生產原料及相關攝影器材等技術的關稅操作所影響。臺語片是在國民黨政府因應廈語片而鬆綁對於福佬話電影的限制，加上中影為了解決財務困境而代客製片才得以誕生。它興起的主因則在於搭上國民黨政府為了籠絡香港影人，頒訂底片和器材得以押稅進口的《進出口器材統籌處理辦法》所致。國民黨中四組對此結果並不滿意，便透過更改主事機關、收回租稅優惠、厲行電影檢查等手段，限制臺語片發展大型影業，縮限臺語影業的轉型機會。 臺語片之所以由盛轉衰，關鍵在臺灣電影由黑白轉向彩色的技術轉型，以及美都臺語片《三伯英台》大敗於邵氏國語片《梁山伯與祝英台》的景氣轉向。我提出臺語片的兩階段衰亡論：一是1963至1967年，在《梁祝》因國民黨加持而爆紅之後，隨著中影《蚵女》等享有「黨國特權」的彩色國語鉅片出現，創下了新的「國片」典範，臺語片開始在票房和聲譽上出現衰頹；二是1968年之後，隨著電視製作空間的出現，加上國語片已完成全面的彩色化轉型，廉價黑白底片也愈來愈難取得，導致臺語片年產量的急遽下降。最終，臺語片在黨國文化治理和全球彩色技術轉型下，因黑白底片停止進口的斷源而徹底消逝，徒留粗製濫造的技術汙名。 這一段臺語片的興衰史，不只奠定臺灣電影產業日後發展的基礎，也能在理論上突顯出生產原料、技術轉型和國家角色在文化社會學應有的重要，更能讓我們看見國民黨政府在語言政治和娛樂產業上更幽微的文化治理策略。

This thesis investigates the rise and fall of Taiwanese-dialect cinema, which was identified as a a counter-hegemonic project against the monolingual ideology in Taiwan. How did Taiwanese-dialect film manage to rise in the 1950s while the émigré regime Kuomintang(KMT) officially banned the use of Taiwanese-dialect? Even more curiously, why did the Taiwanese-dialect film suddenly die out around 1969; a year when almost a hundred films were produced, while next to none appeared five years later? By using archival research and secondary records, I challenge the common myths that Taiwanese-dialect film was born naturally because of the land reform which enhanced the farmers' income, and its abruptly demise was due to the entrepreneurial myopia. In this thesis, I will argue the rise of Taiwanese-dialect film is because that Taiwanese filmmakers skillfully acquired overseas capital to take advantage of the favorable policy on importing film stock, which was strictly regulated and heavily taxed back then. In the climate of Cold War, the KMT had to fought against the Communist Party of China to win over overseas Chinese. In order to co-opt filmmakers overseas, the KMT initiated the treatments for reducing the tax credit of film stocks. So the shrewd Taiwanese filmmakers pretended to co-produce with Hong Kong companies in order to obtain cheaper film stock. Next, I argue that the demise of the Taiwanese-dialect film is due to the conversion to color film and the lack of black-and-white film stocks. After the huge successes at the box office of Mandarin films, including The Love Eterne and Oyster Girl, the KMT systematically promoted the production of Mandarin color films and initiated a national language campaign to stigmatize the usage of Taiwanese-dialect. All of this caused barriers for Taiwanese filmmakers to cross the threshold to color films. While despised for its low quality, Taiwanese filmmakers produced lots of films and even made Taiwan the third largest film producing country in 1966. However, the Taiwanese-dialect cinema was forced to die out in the 1970s due to the lack of cheaper film stocks. The case of Taiwan brings out three often neglected components by production-of-culture literatures when analyzing cultural industries: the condition of raw material supply, the introduction of new technology, and the governance of the nation state.