COLUMN ONE : Hollywood Goes Boffo Overseas : The increasingly multinational movie industry is raking in profits around the globe. New theaters and TV channels will fuel demand for American films.

Oliver Stone’s “JFK” explores one of the defining events in American history, the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. But as it heads into the best picture race at tonight’s Academy Awards, the controversial film is drawing its biggest crowds outside the United States.

Its success--”JFK” has raked in more than half of its $150 million in ticket sales overseas--has something to do with affection for Kennedy abroad. But it says even more about the growing importance of the international movie market, which Hollywood has come to regard as its own new frontier.

In the decade ahead, the major studios, which are suffering from a stagnant domestic market, expect foreign audiences to provide up to 70% of their business. “Increasingly we are producing an export commodity,” says entertainment attorney Bruce Lilliston. “The product that is most successful around the world is the Hollywood film.”

That helps explain why an international superstar such as Arnold Schwarzenegger commands $15 million a picture. His “Terminator II” took in $490 million worldwide, only $205 million of it in the United States. Other busy Hollywood actors--among them martial arts expert Jean-Claude Van Damme and anti-hero Mickey Rourke--owe most of their bankability to foreign audiences.

Overseas investment in movie production also colors Hollywood’s increasingly global perspective.

Half the major movie studios--Sony Pictures, 20th Century-Fox and Universal Pictures--are foreign-owned. Three films nominated for best picture--”JFK,” “Bugsy” and “The Prince of Tides”--were fully or partly made with overseas money. Indeed, one unending dilemma for Hollywood producers is how much ownership to share with foreign investors.

Jack Valenti, president of the Motion Picture Assn. of America, calls the foreign market the “locomotive” that will carry the movie industry into the next decade. Nearly half of all film revenue already comes from abroad, compared with about 30% in 1980. Movies earn the United States a $3.5 billion export surplus--up from $3 billion in just two years.

“It’s a golden opportunity,” said Morgan Creek Productions Chairman James G. Robinson, whose company produced last summer’s domestic and international blockbuster, “Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves.” “All of the real growth in the coming years will be overseas.”

How that’s affecting the content of movies is a point of hot debate in Hollywood. Some say American films are successful abroad because they remain uniquely American. Others see foreign influence in the increasing violence in action pictures, the blatant eroticism in dramas and the broad physicality of comedies.

An executive at one foreign-owned studio, who asked that his name not be used, said his company will no longer commit to a major movie unless it has strong international potential.

Surprisingly, cultural resistance hasn’t significantly slowed the American movie invasion so far, even though quotas on film imports exist in most foreign nations. Countries such as Britain, Italy and France have proud film traditions of their own, but they may be resigned to playing a supporting cinema role.

Benoit Caron, liaison officer for the Los Angeles French Film Office, said many French distributors actually prefer handling Hollywood movies.

“The American films are very popular,” Caron said. “We still try to preserve a certain level of production of French films. But it’s not easy to compete against the big American movies. The same actors who are popular in America are also very popular in France.”

With their big budgets and potent combination of glamour, action and sex, American films have always enjoyed the greatest international popularity. In recent years, especially, they have come to dominate theaters the way Japanese products dominate consumer electronics. One analyst recently wrote that American movies alone speak a “transatlantic language.” Markets across the Pacific are increasingly receptive, too.

Now, with the construction of multiplex theaters abroad, the commercialization of European television (which opens up another market for movies) and multinational filmmaking alliances, Hollywood’s opportunities are multiplying.

In Britain, theater admissions doubled to 100 million last year, after 400 state-of-the-art screens were built from 1985 to 1991.

Such mainstream American movies as “Cape Fear,” “JFK” and “The Prince of Tides” held seven of the top 10 spots in British theaters recently. In Tokyo, audiences lined up for “My Girl.” In Australia, it was “Medicine Man,” according to the entertainment industry bible, Variety, which now recognizes that “boffo box office” can be tallied in Barcelona as well as Boston.

Hollywood executives expect to reap even larger benefits once more theaters are up and running. The United States, with a population of 248 million, has some 24,000 movie screens. That compares with fewer than 2,000 screens in Japan, where there are 123 million people.

European cities are similarly outmoded and “underscreened,” to use the industry lingo. In Italy, people don’t go to movies during the summer because the theaters aren’t air-conditioned--at least not yet.

American companies hope to change those habits.

Last spring, Time Warner Inc. announced plans to construct 25 to 30 luxury multiplexes in Japan, in partnership with the Japanese mall developer Nichii Co. The tightly controlled Japanese market is especially alluring, since patrons pay as much as $20 a ticket.

Throughout Europe, a similar expansion is under way. And Hollywood also is looking to such isolated but promising markets as Indonesia, Korea, the Commonwealth of Independent States and China.

Morgan Creek’s Robinson likens Eastern Europe, in particular, to America during the Great Depression, when people flooded into movie houses to escape their problems. Richard J. Fox, who heads international distribution for Warner Bros., calls theater construction the pathway to profit. “Once that infrastructure is built,” he said, “you’re going to see something enormous.”

Adds the MPAA’s Valenti: “As they say in movies, ‘When you build it, they will come.’ ”

In the case of “JFK,” starring Kevin Costner, Warner opened the film in foreign markets one month after its American premiere. The film has benefited from positive reviews in America and the fiery media debate over its historical accuracy. Director Oliver Stone and Costner also promoted it aggressively overseas.

Warner’s Fox called the distribution of “JFK” a “military exercise in coordination.” There are more than 1,800 prints in circulation overseas. By custom, the copies in France, Germany, Italy and Spain are dubbed. The rest are subtitled.

In the past, films often opened overseas long after their American runs. But the schedule is being condensed to capitalize on the buzz that begins when a movie opens in America.

Sony’s past two box office years abroad demonstrate the wisdom of the new policy.

The international division had its biggest year to date in 1990, when theatrical grosses hit $447 million. Last year the figure grew to $540 million, not counting the films Sony distributes overseas for Orion Pictures.

“The foreign market used to be an afterthought,” said Ted Shugrue, the international distribution chief for Sony Pictures Entertainment. “In short order, it’s become a forethought.”

In a further nod to the significance of foreign box office, Sony and Warner Bros. both announced recently that they had bolstered their international operations. Walt Disney Studios is expected to take over its own foreign distribution when its contract with Warner expires this year.

As markets grow, however, so do the headaches.

Foreign governments do not always welcome American exports. Profits are tied to a fluctuating exchange rate. Piracy remains rampant in many countries. And stars and directors are often resistant to overseas promotion.

Cultural differences also can make for some mind-boggling marketing challenges. Companies have been known to shuffle marquee credits if a secondary actor is more popular than the lead in a particular nation. A film’s erotic content can also be a big selling point in some countries.

Sony Pictures Entertainment Chairman Peter Guber said tastes vary from one country to the next. “Each territory is a totally separate experience. There’s no consistent cultural base. As a result, all of the problems are magnified, as well as the opportunities.”

Some studios use sophisticated computer programs--which take into account a film’s domestic performance and a country’s film-going habits--to project foreign earnings.

But there’s only so much a computer can do in an industry as fickle as the film business. American audiences are still seen as the best barometers for gauging how a film will perform abroad, which is one reason so much significance is placed on domestic box office grosses.

“The rule used to be that comedy didn’t travel,” said 20th Century-Fox Chairman Joe Roth, who has enjoyed considerable success overseas with comedies such as “Home Alone” and “Hot Shots.” “Now, what’s a hit here is a hit there. And what’s a flop here is a flop there.”

Indeed, most of the hot films in Europe and other markets were hits in America last fall and winter. But there are exceptions. “Hudson Hawk,” considered last year’s biggest U.S. movie debacle, took in a respectable $40 million overseas, according to Sony Pictures. Films such as “Frankie and Johnny” and “Not Without My Daughter” have also played well abroad after meeting a tepid response at home.

Some credit the globalization of American cinema--particularly the influence of foreign investors--for the rising acceptance of such foreign-born directors as Renny Harlin (“Die Hard 2”) and Paul Verhoeven (“Basic Instinct”). International stars such as Gerard Depardieu also have popped up in American films recently. Anne Parillaud, the French star of “La Femme Nikita,” is set to star in “Innocent Blood” for Warner Bros. And Antonio Banderas, the Spanish star of “The Mambo Kings,” will be a presenter on tonight’s Oscar telecast.

“The pool of talent has broadened both in front of and behind the cameras,” said Robert Friedman, Warner Bros.’ advertising and publicity chief. “You see more directors, writers and actors crossing over to American movies. But the basic elements of an American movie haven’t changed.”

With revenues growing, Hollywood executives will have their sights set overseas for the near future. Entertainment analyst Jeffrey Logsdon of Seidler Amdec Securities in Los Angeles predicts that foreign sales, which grew 9% last year, will catch up to domestic revenues by 1994.

Some executives see foreign markets as the bridge that will carry Hollywood studios from the video boom of the 1980s to the widely anticipated pay-per-view boom of the late 1990s.

The major studios look to the commercialization of European television, which up to now has been under tight government control, to provide even more avenues of distribution for American films in the years ahead. The reason: More channels will be opening up, so more movies will be purchased for broadcast on TV. And, for the first time, European TV can be used as an advertising tool.

Executives at specialized Hollywood production companies--such as former California Lt. Gov. Mike Curb of Curb/Esquire Films and Mark Damon of Vision International--already have done remarkable business overseas by tapping into the insatiable international appetite for erotica and cheaply made action-adventure pictures.

Vision’s “Wild Orchid” took in $60 million internationally--and only $11 million domestically. Another of its films, “Double Impact,” premiered in France, not America.

Attorney Lilliston says the definition of a Hollywood movie has changed radically as the globe has shrank.

“These films look like Hollywood movies and talk and act like Hollywood movies, but in many cases they aren’t,” he said. “ ‘Total Recall’ was considered a classic American film,” Lilliston said of the Arnold Schwarzenegger vehicle. “But it has an Austrian star, a Dutch director and was financed by a French bank.”

Box Office Bonanza

The proliferation of movie theaters, international investment and the creation of privately owned TV channels with an appetite for Hollywood movies are fueling record revenues abroad for U.S. studios.

Foreign countries are Hollywood’s fastest growing market . . .

Share of motion picture company revenues

U.S. Foreign 1986: 60% 40% 1991: 54% 46% 1994* 49% 51% 2000* 30% 70%

* Projected

. . . with ample demand for more theaters . . .

In America, where 1 billion movie tickets are sold each year, there are about 24,000 movie screens. Others countries have far fewer theaters, and multiplexes are rare, but construction booms in many nations are likely in the 1990s.

Number of screens, 1991

Australia: 841

Brazil: 1,052

Commonwealth of Independent States: 5,500

France: 4,610

Germany: 4,000

Italy: 3,350

Japan: 1,912

Spain: 1,553

. . . and American films are already dominating the world’s screens

Hollywood movies topped the lists of the most popular movies in major European cities and Tokyo, as of March 19. EUROPEAN CITIES

Top-Grossing Films Revenue Weeks released 1. JFK $55.9 million Eight weeks 2. The Prince of Tides $15.2 million Four weeks 3. Cape Fear $14.7 million Three weeks 4. The Last Boy Scout $12.2 million 11 weeks 5. Dead Again $9.9 million Eight weeks

TOKYO

Top-Grossing Films Revenue Weeks released 1. Dead Again $1.4 million Five weeks 2. Bugsy $1.2 million Three weeks 3. Star Trek VI $542,000 Two weeks 4. My Girl $455,000 One week 5. The Doctor $378,000 Four weeks

Sources: Weekly Variety, Seidler Amdec Securities and Paul Kagan Associates Inc., Motion Picture Almanac