Film scholars agree that Hollywood portrayals of America at war follow a cyclical pattern. During and immediately after a conflict, important films trumpet glory and sacrifice. Ten to fifteen years later, questioning and sometimes pacifistic movies about the conflict dominate. In the late 1960’s, “the raging bulls” of Hollywood--the young trendsetters rising to prominence--proclaimed this pattern obsolete. However, the passage of time has demonstrated this cultural pattern to be more resilient than it seemed in those days of social change.
Throughout the majority of the last century, evidence of the cyclical portrayal of war in film abounds. After America declared war against Germany during World War I, the still infant film industry glorified the fight against “the Hun.” By the early 1930's, major releases had changed their tone; for example, All Quiet on the Western Front put forth an anti-war message by displaying the horrors of combat. After World War II began, the industry shifted gears. Suddenly, important pictures again portrayed glories and courage without the questioning or despair. For example, Guadalcanal Diary, produced during the war, showed “the ultimate sacrifice” as a noble and undoubted good. Once again, though, by 1957, films such as The Bridge on the River Kwai won awards for depicting the moral confusion of war.
Those who later declared this pattern dead based their conviction on their hearts rather than their minds. During the Vietnam War, the only major film about that conflict was The Green Berets, starring John Wayne and far closer in tone to Guadalcanal Diary than to The Bridge on the River Kwai. Similarly, years went by before more complex visions of war, such as Apocalypse Now, and then Platoon, emerged.
While today’s film industry is more diverse and its audience more culturally fragmented, this cycle largely continues. Jarhead, a layered depiction of the first gulf war, premiered more than ten years after that conflict. Further evidence of this pattern can be seen in the release of Apocalypse Now Redux, which contained additional footage that the producers originally thought would repel audiences. Thus, the famous aphorism “The more things change, the more they stay the same” certainly applies to this aspect of the film industry.
1) According to the passage, Apocalypse Now Redux differed from Apocalypse Now in which of the following ways?
A. The added footage made it less appealing to a more culturally diverse audience.
B. The added footage made its portrayal of war less glorified and more ambiguous.
C. The added footage made its portrayal of war less harsh and more glorified.
D. The added footage made it more similar in tone to other war movies.
E. The removed footage made its portrayal of war less glorified and less appealing.
2)What is the main point made by the author?
A: Hollywood has never fully supported America’s armed conflicts.
B: In the last century, the film industry has become more culturally diverse.
C: An established cultural pattern is more durable than was thought during a time of social upheaval.
D: The film industry has only supported American military efforts during the actual conflict.
E: Cyclical patterns determine the type of big budget films produced by Hollywood more than individuals do.
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2021-4-17 19:56:07
收藏
收藏
