Independent films are those in which filmmakers showcase their liberal views and/or innovative narrative styles, and often find ways to achieve this outside the mainstream system. As a result of being independent, these films generally lack access to financing, distribution channels, and professional crew and equipment. This situation pushes filmmakers to come up with innovative solutions not only for the film itself but also for securing these resources.

From its earliest days, when it began to be recognized as an art form, cinema has had a multidisciplinary structure. For this reason, throughout the history of cinema, the cost of producing professional works and bringing them to art lovers has been higher than in other artistic disciplines. Due to high production and distribution costs, the formation of industry cartels was inevitable from the very beginning. The primary motivation behind the emergence of independent cinema stemmed from filmmakers’ desire to produce films with the content and methods of their own choosing. The cartels and authorities dominating the industry used the capital, crew, equipment, set facilities, and prestige at their disposal to pave the way for the films they favored while blocking those they did not. This situation forced independent filmmakers to create a new form of cinema separate from the mainstream. One of the most prominent and notable examples of the emergence of independent cinema is the rise of American independent cinema.

American cinema was established under the monopoly of a single individual: Thomas Edison. Although Edison is often described as a scientist and inventor, he was just as much a businessman. He generated commercial revenue through his inventions and ventures in many fields, ranging from communication devices to chemicals, from mining to cinema. The Kinetograph was the first “motion picture” camera patented by Edison. Many other inventors worked alongside him at his company. Following the Kinetograph, Edison also patented other camera types, such as the Kinetoscope and the Vitascope. Edison was also a film producer. His studio produced approximately 1,200 films, including classics such as *Sneeze* (1894), *The Kiss* (1896), *The Great Train Robbery* (1903), *Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland* (1910), and *Frankenstein* (1910).

The Motion Picture Patents Company (MPPC), known as the “Edison Trust,” was an organization that held numerous cinema-related licenses and rights. This cartel included companies such as Edison, Biograph, Vitagraph, Essanay, Selig, Lubin, Kalem, American Star, American Pathé, George Kleine, and Eastman Kodak. These companies served as producers, distributors, and film manufacturers. Virtually everything—from cinema-related equipment and consumables to studios and licenses—was consolidated under the Motion Picture Patents Company cartel. The Edison Trust came to an end following two rulings by the United States Supreme Court. In 1912, the patent on raw film was invalidated. In 1915, all MPPC patents were invalidated. While these rulings succeeded in legalizing independent filmmaking, they were not very effective in addressing the de facto bans and restrictions on small-scale productions. Some small film producers who were not part of the Edison Trust and had fled to Southern California when the laws went into effect laid the foundations for the studio system of classic Hollywood cinema. These producers were the first group to be called independent filmmakers.

With the development of new production and distribution systems, the system previously controlled by the Motion Picture Patents Company began to shift to the initiative of newly established companies. By the 1930s, many companies had broken free from the Edison monopoly and declared their independence. The “Big Five”—20th Century Fox, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Paramount Pictures, RKO Pictures, and Warner Bros.—along with other companies such as Columbia Pictures, United Artists, Universal Studios, Grand National, Republic Pictures, Monogram Pictures, and the Producers Releasing Corporation, were among them. Hollywood, which had begun with independent studios, quickly transformed from a monopoly into an oligopolistic structure. There were now multiple players dominating the market rather than just one. Over time, many new independent filmmakers attempted to change this situation through both individual and collective actions.

As a result of these collective efforts, two major organizations emerged. In 1919, “United Artists” was founded with participants such as Mary Pickford, Charles Chaplin, Douglas Fairbanks, and D. W. Griffith. In 1941, the “Society of Independent Motion Picture Producers” initiative was established within United Artists, with participants including Mary Pickford, Charlie Chaplin, Walt Disney, Orson Welles, Samuel Goldwyn, David O. Selznick, Alexander Korda, and Walter Wanger. These groups of filmmakers not only produced independent films but also waged an important legal battle to ensure that independent cinema could continue to exist on a legal platform. In 1948, thanks to the efforts of the Society of Independent Motion Picture Producers, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling that put an end to the monopolies and theater chains created by the major studios. The closures resulting from these rulings indirectly brought an end to the period known as Hollywood’s Golden Age. Having achieved all its goals, the Society of Independent Motion Picture Producers dissolved itself.

In all countries where independent cinema has emerged, there is a trend away from the authority, power, and consequently the mainstream that dominates cinema—similar to the situation in the United States. In areas where there is no monopoly, oligopolistic structures—again, similar to those in the United States—prevent independent content and methods from being realized in cinema. The system is designed so that every film produced must contribute commercially to these structures.

The acceptance and spread of libertarian, democratic, and liberal movements following World War II led to a similar liberation of cinema.

With the emergence of auteur cinema, directors were able to gain loyal audiences by creating cult films, which in turn gave them much more say in the films they would make in the future. This significantly increased the number of independent films.

With the emergence of film festivals dedicated to independent films or topics that would not be accepted by the mainstream, the financing, production, distribution, and audience for films in these genres saw a rise. The visibility of the films, the perspectives they explored, and their directors and actors increased in proportion to the size of the festival. At the same time, festivals and awards began to play a critical role in the financing of independent films.

and many other independent film festivals emerged. Paradoxically, filmmakers and directors striving for success at these festivals—which are meant to support independent cinema—began to raise doubts about their independence as they gradually adapted their films to meet festival standards—essentially starting to make films designed to succeed at festivals.

As a result of technological advancements, the decline in costs for equipment and supplies used in film production, the increased use of special effects, and the reduction in distribution channel costs have expanded production opportunities for independent films. The fact that independent films often addressed topics that were not covered in mainstream films, along with the growing acceptance of B and Z movies by audiences, was also crucial to the spread of independent cinema. The sensation created by independent films that became cult classics or were banned contributed to the growing influence of independent cinema.

Independent films are generally low-budget. Many B and Z movies are produced as independent films. It is common to see actors, crew members, directors, screenwriters, and producers at the beginning of their careers working on independent films. They tend to focus more on regional or period-specific themes than mainstream films. Independent filmmakers often resort to shock value to get their films noticed. For this reason, their narrative styles can be very harsh or may include depictions of abuse that could be classified as exploitation cinema. In contrast, some independent film directors try their luck with highly minimalistic, slow-paced films in an effort to have their work recognized as art films and brought to the forefront. Independent films, like mainstream films, are subject to market, commercial, artistic, and reputational concerns. For this reason, even though they may have broken away from the mainstream, films are generally shot in a way that will be accepted by specific film festivals, audiences, and distribution channels, depending on the director’s concerns.