BDS is still going strong in our MSM. Take for example this article from Newsweek in which the author blames the recent depressing movies coming out of hollywood on you know who: (h/t Big Hollywood)
There are grim movies, and then there are movies that should list the Grim Reaper in the credits. No Country for Old Men, the 2007 Oscar-winning drama, falls into the latter category, but it’s as cuddly as a hamster compared with The Road, the latest adaptation of a Cormac McCarthy novel. The Road is set in a post-apocalyptic world where everything and almost everyone is dead. There are no trees, no grass, no sun, no food, and, worst of all, no booze to take the edge off. The few survivors are sometimes driven to devouring each other. Our two protagonists are tired, gaunt, and nameless: Man (Viggo Mortensen) and Boy (Kodi Smit-McPhee), who spend the movie navigating through these various hazards on their long journey to … where? I’m tempted to say it beats the hell out of me, but that may be the answer.
The Road seems to suggest that mankind is on a dreary march to endless pain, and after sitting through this season’s Oscar contenders, I can relate. This has always been the time when the studios drag out their heavy films for award “consideration.” But in the last few years they’ve been getting uncomfortably weighty. There’s even a movie called A Serious Man—I had to get up and leave in the middle, it’s so depressing—and it’s a comedy.
You can blame Hollywood’s doom and gloom on the Oscars, but I’m not going to. Instead, I think it’s George W. Bush’s fault. Most liberal directors felt restless under his presidency, and they pushed the envelope with over-the-top, operatic tragedies.
Maybe it’s the fault of man-made global warming. All that sweating these writers are doing from the warming is making their brains boil and the result is depressing movies.
See author page
Don’t much care for most of the fare offered by Hollywood these days, particularly these apocalyptic tomes. I would make an exception though if someone produced a doom and gloom disaster flick where we got to see the vast majority of Hollywood stars, playing themselves, reacting to the end of the world. Of course that would be set in 2012, the year in which the Mayan calendar comes to an end and Sarah Palin is elected. Since “2012” has already been taken they have to find another title. I would suggest “Palinoia: BDS II”.
Sorry. I think you are a bit off base on this one. Has nothing to do with Bush or why this was made, IMO.
The McCarthy book is relentlessly depressing.
Also, Blood meridian, or, The evening redness in the West is equally violent. Wonderful prose though in this one. The man can write, IMO.
I won’t see this movie. Too depressing for me.
Years ago I had a subscription to GQ magazine. I was reading an article about sleeve length on coats and jackets. While discussing this subject the author wrote that the Presidents sleeve length made him look like a monkey. I canceled my subscription and haven’t picked up an issue since.
As for Hollywood, they can keep their operatic tragedies. I’ll keep my money.
I would like to see a film about the excesses of Soviet socialism. “The Lives of Others” was great but it was not a Hollywood production. Perhaps a film that shows how Walter Duranty lied to cover up the Soviet starvation of the Ukrainian population. They could include Uncle Joe executing his officer Corps and installing Commissars to check on the armies loyalty. The film could show Stalin and Hitler signing their non-aggression pact. They could document all the Soviet spies that were in the US.
Instead we get Senator McCarthy shoehorned in to “Julie and Julia”. That makes “McCarthyism” and Republican bashing one of the most common story threads in Hollywood films. They can keep it.
And they wonder why more Democrats watch Fox News than the other channels. We want some part of our lives to be “Fair and Balanced”.