|
''Hollywood vs. America: Popular Culture and the War on Traditional Values'' is a 1992 book by conservative film critic Michael Medved. Its purpose is an examination and condemnation of violence and sexuality in cinema, as well as other media, such as TV and rock music.〔Charles Oliver, "It's Not a Wonderful Book" (Review of ''Hollywood vs. America''), ''Reason Magazine'', February 1993, (pp. 46-48).〕 Medved argued in the book that since the 1960s, American popular culture-especially Hollywood cinema-had been producing art that was excessively violent, sexual and disrespectful to authority, and that such art was having a harmful effect on American society.〔 The book's evidence relies heavily on the Lichter & Rothman book ''Watching America'' and the 1990 conference "The Impact of the Media on Children and the Family" to conclude that violence in cinema has a negative impact on American culture, especially by motivating viewers to mimic the violence they see on the screen. The book was praised by George Gilder in its American edition.〔 ==Reception== In his book ''Movies About the Movies'', film historian Christopher Ames attacks ''Hollywood vs. America'' as overly simplistic, exhibiting "virtually no awareness of the function of fantasy and vicarious experience…That audiences might have complex reasons for viewing behavior they do not wish to emulate or experience firsthand eludes Medved." 〔Ames, C: ''Movies About the Movies'', page 121. The University Press of Kentucky, 1993.〕 In ''The New Republic'', David Denby called ''Hollywood vs. America'' "the stupidest book about popular culture that I have read to the end." 〔http://www.csmonitor.com/1992/1117/17111.html〕 Charles Oliver, reviewing the book for ''Reason'' magazine, took issue with several of Medved's arguments. Oliver stated the commercial failure of ''Star Trek V: The Final Frontier'' was due to the fact "it was simply the worst of the series", not because of Medved's statement that audiences objected to the film's anti-religious tone.〔 Oliver pointed out themes like anti-heroes, crime and adultery had been staples of the American film industry since the 1940s, citing films like ''Double Indemnity'' and ''White Heat''. Oliver also stated "Medved never stops to consider the idea that maybe adultery is a powerful dramatic theme-powerful because we value marriage so much". 〔 On the other hand, Martin Amis agreed with some of Medved's points about violence affecting young audiences, while ultimately rejecting Medved's argument, saying violence was an inevitable part of any artistic medium.〔 Martin Amis: ''The War Against Cliche: Essays and Reviews, 1971-2000'' .Knopf Canada, 2001〕 John Podhoretz in ''Commentary'' praised the book, stating: "The central point of ''Hollywood vs. America'' is, however, unassailable: not only is their a gaping chasm between Hollywood's America and the real America, but Hollywood seems willing to pay in the coin of reduced profits for its continual refusal to bridge the chasm". 〔 ''Hollywood vs America'' was criticized in two articles by Brian Siano in the January 1993 issue of ''The Humanist'' magazine as being a case of Medved trying to exaggerate in order to make his point.〔(The Screening Room of Dr. Caligari ) Reprint of Siano's article〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Hollywood vs. America」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|