Newsweek Blames Depressing Movies On… Bush
by Christian TotoThe Oscar-nominated movies in recent years have been enough to make a grown man cry… Or worse. Consider “There Will Be Blood,” “No Country for Old Men” and “The Reader” as a sampling of the morbid films jockeying for Oscar glory. This year, add Oscar wannabes “The Road” and “Precious” to the list.
Newsweek scribe Ramin Setoodeh writes about the trend in the liberal magazine’s latest edition. Setoodeh bemoans the fact that some of the best films lately take a too sober view of society. On that we can agree.
Then, Setoodeh whips out his trusty Bush bashing cudgel and starts a whacking:
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.
He then compares the recent Oscar nominees to ones during the end of President Bill Clinton’s tenure in the White House – noting such gut-busters as “Shakespeare in Love” and “The Full Monty” to burnish his case.
Suffice to say Oscar voters have a plethora of comedies to choose from every year, but they simply go toward films which have that Academy vibe.
Biopics and Bush bashing documentaries usually lead the way.
But big screen comedies enjoyed a renaissance during the Bush years, partly thanks to the Judd Apatow machine. Consider “Wedding Crashers,” “Superbad” and “Borat” as just a sampling of the side-splitting films from the last eight years.
And, in a just world, a smart, sweet and bawdy comedy like “The 40-Year-Old Virgin” would have earned a Best Picture nomination. Too bad Oscar voters look down their collective noses at such material.
Comedies, we’ve learned over the years, need not apply when Oscar season begins.
In fact, it’s hard to imagine a film like “Annie Hall” would be an Oscar favorite today, even though it walked away with the 1977 Best Picture statuette.
Blaming Bush for the glut of oh-so serious movies makes little sense – unless you’re writing for a magazine eager to keep slamming the former President while apologizing for the current Commander-in-Chief.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
92 Comments
(Sigh) Yet another pinhead heard from.
how long before even they stop blaming Bush for everything?
Of course I did hear someone blame the second term of Bush the elder for her taxes going up on her current pay check. Go figure
I hear that the death of the Dinosaurs was Bush's fault. He want back in time as destroyer of worlds.
Why not blame it on the writers of a lot of these poor films. Just for the fact that 80% of them SUCK. I think tables will turn, but it won't come from Hollywood. Independent films need to take the commercial route. There are bound to be other talent out there that are not attached to the Hollywood-Bush's-fault-Obama-is-our-savior's mind.
Actually, the Newsweek guy might have had a point. Directors are, by necessity, extremely emotional creatures, and it's not too far-fetched to think that they might have been so unhinged by the thought of having a smiling guy from Texas in the White House that they just couldn't help but share their angst with the viewing public.
What WILL the media do when, in a few more years, the average American thinks of the Bush Presidency as ancient history? They will, God forbid, actually have to start framing coherent arguements again, which they haven't had to do for almost a decade. They will be sorely out of practice.
I just wish we could see what this same writer would have written if the theaters were full of silly screwball comedies. No doubt it would be Bush's fault, too, caused by screenwriters needing to escape the horrible gulag that is America.
If they're not blaming Bush then they're blaming global warming. "As the US continues to do avoid taking responsibility for global warming, Hollywood directors have responded by creating dark and gloomy movies that reflect the emotional truth of the disaster scenario we will soon be living." That makes as much sense as Setoodeh's theory.
Toto isn't the only one on Big Hollywood who surprises the snot out of me. I certainly don't agree with Setoodah, but 40 YEAR OLD VIRGIN as an Oscar nominee? I thought this was a conservative site/blog.
That movie was hilarious, but it was also putrid: a romantic comedy swaddled in effluent, basted with sexual perversion.
I find it a strange inconsistency. Is it the libertine in the libertarian that drives it? Since when is promoting and celebrating immorality "conservative"? How is 40 YEAR OLD VIRGIN more acceptable than, say, BROKENBACK MOUNTAIN?
Toto and others should rethink their standards. Or maybe Breitbart should.
Didn't you hear? He also killed off all the mammoths while he was at it, sank Atlantis, and orchestrated the sack of Rome. Oh, and he also blew up Krypton.
The most unregulated industry in America losing hundreds of millions of dollars because of bad products has to blame somebody.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Fernando Colon, Big Tweeting. Big Tweeting said: BigHollywood: Newsweek Blames Depressing Movies On… Bush: The Oscar-nominated movi.. http://bit.ly/61ZL5Z #BigTweet [...]
Never. They're still hammering on Hoover.
he was the snake in the garden of eden too, although most of them will deny that it literally happened that way. You know it is more of an allegory or a figurative happening, but he still did it. (even though he couldn't have since it didn't happen. but it did)
and yet they make fun of conservties as being retrograde and always the crazy old man blaming it on kids and their rock 'n roll
i would sooner prep for a colonoscopy than go see any of these stupid movies……
Ok, I just got dizzy for a moment there.
The dog ran away and married the cat – blame bush… the salt shaker became unhinged and destroyed the pepperoni pizza – blame bush. I'm on my eighth root canal – you got it – blame cheyney. Oh brother, what a crock!
The left will never stop blaming Bush. Ever. Get used to it. I can't count the number of times I've been lectured too over the last couple of years how the economic problems are Reagan's fault for forcing cruel capitalism on Americans, and how we have to go back to the way it was when Carter was president.
It's nothing more than a distraction tactic. The modern liberal elite have to keep their foot soldiers agitated and emotionally riled up. Since democrats are running everything, trot out Reagan, Bush, and any one they can think of.
Don't expect it to end any time soon.
Since when does a Comedy picture ever win an Academy Award?
It would be easier to come up with a list of things that wasn't Bush's fault. The only thing I can think of was Ireland losing to France in World Cup Qualifying this year due to a missed handball by Henry. I'm thinking Bush isn't a soccer fan and I've seen no conclusive proof that he was the referee. I could be wrong though and I can't think of anything else.
But Bush caused Global Warming, remember?
Is not global warming Bush's fault, as well?
Just tring to think like they do
How long before we can blame bush for philandering politicians and sports stars and musicians and actors and…
maybe the fact that Esperanto never caught on?
Annie Hall is a mildly funny movie. To this day, I cannot believe that Star Wars did not win 1977's best picture Oscar.
Don't forget, Bush is responsible for all natural disasters past, present and future.
First of all, it was Brokeback Mountain. Second, I wasn't a huge fan of 40 Year Old Virgin. It was overly long, even though it had its moments, but I really don't see how it was promoting and celebrating immorality. In the end the main character rejects the one night stands and finds someone he can spend the rest of his life with. He also waits until he marries her.
Further, you admit it was hilarious. I'm a conservative but I would never want the Academy to decide Best Picture noms based on a films content. I just want good movies, even movies I have fundamental disagreements with. Brokeback Mountain was an excellent film, and it should have won Best Picture. That doesn't mean I advocate the homosexual lifestyle, that just means I know quality film when I see it. And I'm sure Breitbart is hanging on every word of your post.
That's true buck… Tiger's incredible unraveling lay clearly at the feet of GW.
No, sorry. That was clearly due to Bush's arrogance, America First mentality, and English Only initiatives. I read once where he believed the Esperantese were stealing American jobs!
Well, we all know he was responsible for Katrina. If it wasn't for him then it wouldn't have happened. Wait, he didn't support Global Warming (sorry Global Climate Change) initiatives. That proves he was responsible for Katrina. He also went back in time to the 60s and 70s and caused Global Cooling (sorry, Global Climate Change) that caused Global Warming (sorry, Global Climate Change) that caused Katrina.
There goes that dizzy feeling again.
Since a lot of these critics love these depressing movies, shouldn't they be thanking George Bush?
I thought we could blame that on Geoge Soros. CURSES foiled again.
yeah and he was his own grandpa!
and i once saw him bite the head off a puppy
and he likes foie gras!
the elder Bush DIDN'T have a second term!
Besides craving importance and relevancy beyond the entertainment factor, these doom&gloom flicks could be a sign of laziness. How much harder is it to create balanced-struggle over a "sky-is-falling' one-note mentality presented in these 'meaningful' movies?
I did buy both “There Will Be Blood,” and “No Country for Old Men”. I consider these to be works of art. But they tell me nothing about life or America. They hold no relevance to the life I experience. They are fantasy escapes. The 1 flick that Was about Bush, "W", was a huge letdown as I expected much more from Olly Stone, even if it was to be the hit piece he made. It was as if Stone wanted to get in on the current comic book action movie boom, but couldn't quite pull it together.
I hope George W Bush gets a chuckle out of the hubris. He deserves the laugh after the demonization attempted by Hollywood's uber-rich.
I like the suggestion that it seemed to have started with Hoover. The Dumb-oh-craps with FDR found out it was easier to scapegoat rather than argue with the American public to get their way. If they really understood the arguments of the left then Libertards would be considered a joke or dangerous to freedom.
"You kids with your damn rock'n'roll and your Reeboks and your MTVs and your God damn iPods and your GET THE HELL OFF MY LAWN!"
"You old farts with your Pinko this and your Communist that and your Frank Sinatras and your John Fords and your back-in-my-day-everything-was-better crap, for Cryssakes why don't you people DIE already?!"
Correct. And that's exactly why the left doesn't want to have those conversations and debates.
Hence all the childish and immature diversion tactics to prevent it.
One can only come to the natural conclusion that this Ramin Setoodeh (c'mon, that isn't a real name….) is mildly retarded…..
I think he was named after the infamous camptown races. "oh setoo ta deh"
Yes and those famous noodles too….
The Oscars typically reflect trends in the attitudes of the general public. Think of the several Oscar nominees and winners throughout the 1970s. Films like Dog Day Afternoon and The French Connection depicted a grim world where authority figures couldn't be trusted, and by and large, the people agreed with that. If anything, 2009 has followed suit, with Obama's promises of hope and change ringing false. Up In The Air is a film about people losing their jobs. Precious is a film about desperation and longing. Last year, however, Slumdog Millionaire reigned supreme because of the sense of optimism. The Big Hollywood readers may not have felt that way but it still follows.
Thank-you for this post. While I haven't seen No Country (though a film school friend of mine despised it), we both thought There Will Be Blood was excellent. Is it relevant to my life? No. Are all movies relevant to my life? No, nor do I expect them to be.
As for W, I remember when Nolte posted the trailer back on his old website and even though I'm not the biggest Bush fan, my first thought was, "This is a joke, right?" The movie itself was just okay but you could tell it was made in a rush.
People, we should be encouraging this behavior. By blaming the Boogeyman Bush for everything, they take no action to correct their own failings, and they die off all the faster. A new crop of filmmakers will replace them, hopefully with a better sense of filmmaking.
Indeed, and that explains alot about them.
It helped him to steal Cobra's weather dominator.
[...] Apocalypse Now Now this is Bush Derangement Syndrome to a whole new level! – “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.” There’s got to be a tongue-in-cheek element to this comment, right? Right? (Hat Tip: Big Hollywood) [...]
Only mildly? You're being to nice to the idiot.
I lost half of mine in the last 10 months.
I'll paraphrase one of my English professors who said that a work of literature cannot be considered "art" unless it's morbidly depressing. I think Oscar voters are attracted to depressing films by default, since great works of art are "supposed" to be depressing in this postmodern era.
I watch over a hundred DVDs a year, and read hundreds of reviews, and yet I've never heard of this Setoodeh person.
This is a reply to blackhawk and Jake…
I know the title of the gay cowboy film, blackhawk, or I wouldn't have mentioned it. And my point had nothing to do with the Academy and everything to do with Toto's suggestion that something like VIRGIN should be held up as admirable and worthy of best picture ostensibly. And clearly my post wasn't sent to Breitbart, but to people who have clearly missed my point. Ring a bell?
And Jake, as I said, it's a sweet story set in a filthy, immoral setting. If you can't see how putting out a film like that with endlessly prurient content promotes, in a general sense, the moral decay in our culture, then you are in with Toto as the target of my critique. Apatow is infamous for this kind of thing; it doesn't redeem the whole. Would you say the same about a pile of dog crap that had a rich nougat center…? "But the payoff was the nougat! The chef was trying to contrast the goodness at the center — the point of the dessert — with the nasty stuff surrounding it." Ah, I see.
My point had nothing to do with what's funny or what constitutes excellent filmmaking, but rather what we, as conservatives, would advocate, especially on a site that purports to be a conservative voice on entertainment.
So, my point stands: You guys, including Toto, are conservative in what way exactly? Taxes? Bill of Rights? But damn the torpedoes morally and culturally?
Gee…who are they going to blame for the pathetic movie 'Precious' ???
There are actually quite a lot of good films coming out, but yes, they're mostly independent. However, I don't think independent film will ever become any more "commercial" than it is now. The majority of filmgoing audiences pay for mindless entertainment.
I consider myself a conservative, but I'm also an adult who can laugh at crude humor. I don't think conservatives should all fall in line and only accept entertainment that leaves out sexual material. Some conservatives do, and that's their choice. I don't. "Virgin" does offer plenty of traditionally conservative values, but it does so using some pretty adult material.
As a film critic I will not dismiss a movie simply because it embraces a liberal philosophy. If I did, I wouldn't have many movies to review. I also don't mind an R-rated comedy as long as it is funny, smart and entertaining.
I think we can agree to disagree here, and I appreciate you taking the time to read my post – and this follow up.
I love "Annie Hall," but it still hurts my soul that "Star Wars" didn't get Best Picture. I remember watching the Awards that year … I was only about 9 but even then I felt a sense of outrage.
Maybe if the stormtroopers had succumbed to PTSD after extended stints on Tatooine, and Darth Vader lowered taxes on all the systems in the Empire….
If Jabba was a intergalactic narcotics dealer and Chewbacca was a Wookies-rights militant, then THEN we might've see a Best Pic for Star Wars from Hollywood.
No, it's gone the way of the Nobel Prize. Utterly political and culturally meaningless.
Oh please.
Like all the directors in Hollywood were moping around for eight years because big bad GWB was in the White House. What crap.
Lots of movies made money during those years, what happened was the division between what the people enjoy seeing and the artsy fare the Academy thinks are Oscar films has become greater and greater. Don't blame Bush! For some reason the snooty Hollywood folks the only flicks worth praising are silly costume dramas and not exciting yet brilliantly made action flicks like The Dark Knight.
He likes foie gras?! That's it, I'm joining the Democrats!
You may laugh at all this, but I think he needs to be brought to justice for conspiring with them to destroy the Eiffel Tower.
Looked at one way, it's not really blaming Bush but blaming the movie producers for being stupid in reaction to their dislike of Bush. They were thinking about Bush instead of thinking about making good movies. They were distracted.
The words "blame Bush" might be in there, but I almost have to think the actual criticism is of the movie makers. Which would be the case with blaming the Oscars too, wouldn't it? The Oscars force no one to make a gloomy doomy movie. Blaming the Oscars is silly… as is blaming Bush. Either way it's just an excuse when clearly those to blame, if blame is to be had, are the producers.
And anyway… what I'd heard most for "blame" over the last decade was that art has to follow the mood of real life and all the gloomy doomy crap was being blamed on how bad everything was. The problem with that is that it's opposite of the truth. Complete opposite. When people are comfortable, secure, and generally well off they *slum*. They go looking for things to struggle against in order to find some way to feel. They chose art that takes them out of their comfortable place. When things are *bad*, OTOH, people look for escape. Their lives are uncomfortable and insecure, so they look for a way to be taken away from that for a while; to laugh or spend time with entertainment that inspires and portrays themself as powerful or able to overcome.
Things were pretty good during the Bush years, war or not, the beginnings of the economic problems or not…. and art reflected that by giving us a whole bunch of "Don't you dare be too happy! Look at this bad stuff! Look at it!"
Now, the economy is crappy and more and more people are out of work. People are not comfortable. Something uplifting like Blind Side or fantasy escapism like New Moon is going to do really well. Comedies will do really well. (Particularly if they are actually funny.)
I appreciate your taking the time to reply as well, Christian. But I fear you've missed my point.
I didn't suggest you should dismiss a movie because it isn't conservative nor that conservatives have to avoid this or that movie; I questioned why you would suggest VIRGIN is worthy of Best Picture given its overwhelmingly prurient content, despite the nugget of supposed virtue in the protagonist. (I would argue that it wasn't right or wrong that drove the character's reservations at all, but rather his fears reinforced when things went awry things when he tried the immoral route. How is that a "traditionally conservative value"?)
But you needn't approve a movie simply because you need movies to review. That's a completely specious argument. Many well-made, smart, uplifting films were made during the Bush years, but you chose VIRGIN. And a negative review is still a review, is it not? And even if you enjoy a film it doesn't necessarily merit the Academy's Best Picture award, does it?
And if all it takes is that a movie be "funny, smart and entertaining," then you fall right back into proving my point. While not comedy by a long shot, you'd be hard-pressed to find better filmmakers than Leni Riefenstahl and Sergei Eisenstein. Want more filmmakers cast from their molds to be recognized by the Academy despite their liberal philosophies? Care to see Hollywood give more Oscars to Alan Ball, Sam Mendes, Sean Penn and Michael Moore all of whom are capable of smart, funny, and entertaining? Then go ahead, Christian, join the chorus.
To my mind, it's a case of moral relativism in evidence, and a blind-spotted willingness to go along with the Hollywood often decried on this site and on other conservative outlets.
"Houston, we have a problem," seems to be the larger point of Breitbart's media efforts. So, why propagate an aspect of what's wrong today with America's pop culture on a conservative entertainment site? To what end? Does it make it any better if the affirmation is coming from a self-proclaimed conservative? Certainly you have a right to whatever position suits you, but isn't this site supposed to be an alternative to the liberal mainstream media message?
Bush's Fault.
Lets try this again. Best Picture nominations should not be decided based on a film's content…period. There are plenty of morally uplifting films with excellent messages, even conservative messages, that have content that is disturbing, violent, sexual, and crude. If you do not like those films that is fine, but a Best Picture nomination is about the overall product.
This is not moral relativism. I am not promoting premarital sex by watching 40 Year Old Virgin any more then I am promoting Elf on Orc violence by watching The Lord of the Rings. Eisenstein and Riefenstahl's films were morally corrupt because of their MESSAGE, not CONTENT. Immoral behavior doesn't come from entertainment, it comes from US. Waging some kind of moral crusade against raunchy movies is a waste of time. I would rather use the opportunity to have a discussion about why I disagreed with certain aspects of a film than throw around words like 'prurient' and 'filthy' and declare myself above such things. I thought The Hangover was one of the funniest movies I have seen in years, it was full of bad language, sexual humor, and just about every kind of crudeness I can think of, but I didn't care. I just don't think it is our responsibility as conservatives to be moral crusaders, and it certainly isn't the Academy's job either.
Listening to a liberal wax philosophically is kind of like swimming in a pool of ignorance.
It's a good thing I don't have any hair, because I'd be pulling it out right now.
It's amazing what people can say without being embarrassed.
following orders like a true obama-ite. such small minded people. at what point do we start to feel sorry for them? (i suspect that point is quite far from here)
If Bush is to blame for the depressing movies, can I blame Jimmy Carter for Disco in the 70's?
I really don't see how it was promoting and celebrating immorality. In the end the main character rejects the one night stands and finds someone he can spend the rest of his life with. He also waits until he marries her.
Note, too, that at least two of his coworkers (neither of them virgins themselves) have severe relationship issues. The virgin in question turns out to be the least maladjusted character in the film.
"Annie Hall" may have seemed brilliant at the time, but its too dated in the 70s. A Best Picture winner should ideally be one that will rise above the narrow time frame in which it was made, so that future generations will also want to watch it.
I tried to watch "Annie Hall" a few years ago and could only make it halfway through.
Isn't the whole Oscar process so political (within Hollywood, not Dem. vs. Rep) and insular to be meaningless? It often doesn't truly measure a film by box office or even by quality.
Let's face it… it couldn't have been ME that left those skid marks in my shorts. It had to be Bush.
There is only one person responsible for the world running out of things to blame Bush for. Booooosh. Evil Evil Boooooooosh.
Hate to dissent here, but Setoodeh is simply stating the obvious – Hollywood liberals hated Bush and were moved to make "over-the-top, operatic tragedies". Sounds less like a Bush-bash and more like a gentle knock on the overwrought filmmakers. BDS is still rampant, but this isn't it.
Correction,… it's Buttcrack Mounting.
I cannot understand why Esperanto is described as "failed" when this is not true
Esperanto is in the top 100 languages, out of 6,800 worldwide, according to the CIA factbook. It is the 17th most used language in Wikipedia, and in use by Skype, Firefox and Facebook.
Native Esperanto speakers, include George Soros,World Chess Champion Susan Polger, Ulrich Brandenberg the new German Ambassador to NATO and Nobel Laureate Daniel Bovet.
An interesting video can be seen at http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=_YHALnLV9XU Professor Piron was a former translator at the United Nations. A glimpse of the language can be seen at http://www.lernu.net
Oscars? Does anyone even bother watching them? I view those as a sad attempt by Hollywood to pretend they're still in their golden era.
I hope that someone in Bush's company is reporting all of this to him! I'm sure he's getting a great laugh at the fact that his name is still being bantered around Hollywood, and the fact that he is being blamed for everything that the liberals don't like! Hysterical!!! Can't wait to hear all the 'stuff' they are going to praise Obama for. The only thing he has done for America is to destroy everything moral!!!
Actually, I think he deserves praise for that operation. We needed to make room for a brand new WalMart.
Actually I have no problem at all with mindless entertainment. I know it's not for everyone, but it's fun, provides a small escape and isn't preachy or pretentious – for the most part of course, at times a few lefty jabs can find their way into these too, but not as much as the more "respectable" shams.. er films.
Everything is Bush's fault anyway – it gets old.
This is why I watch my movies on Turner Classic Movies even though they did call Frank Capra's Why We Fight series propaganda. Modern day Hollywood just plain sucks. I wont pay to watch on PPV much less what it costs to get into a theatre.
Most liberal directors felt restless under his presidency,
Must have happened during one of their rehab visits when they were off of the drugs.
This book may also explain the Bush bashing.
'How the Left Swiftboated America'
John Gibson
Even your response — to a note written to the author's response, not yours — is rife with moral relativism, and illogic to boot.
That's the problem with post-modern "conservatives." They are not only content to contradict themselves in s single paragraph, but too blind to see how their mixed positions help propagate the very thinking that has us, as Borke referred to it, "slouching toward Gomorrah."
"Immoral behavior doesn't come from entertainment, it comes from US." And so that idiot spew from you is different from the idiot spew from the left HOW exactly? (Thanks for illustrating my point.) But if clear thinkers like you are among the Big Hollywood readership, well, by all means, Christian, blog on without a second thought. It clearly makes readers like blackhawk, whose thinking is virtually indistinguishable from the left, feel right at home.
I'd actually have to agree with you. There are plenty of purely fun movies I enjoy. However, the majority of people complain about how 'mindless' movies are these days, then turn around and go see the likes of Transformers, New Moon, etc, etc, etc. Obviously none of those movies are going to be thought-provoking, let alone worth watching in many cases. It reeks of hypocrisy when people complain about how bad movies are while consistently going to see what are, by most indications, utterly terrible films.
A vaild point as well.
My main objection is being preached at and insulted when all I want to do is to enjoy life for a few hours (and some bad movies are so bad that one can't help but have fun).
[...] critic Christian Toto responds: “Big screen comedies enjoyed a renaissance during the Bush years, partly thanks to the Judd [...]
[...] Film critic Christian Toto responds: [...]
Recent Blogroll Additions……
[...]usually posts some very interesting stuff like this. If you’re new to this site[...]……
Great website…
[...]we like to honor many other internet sites on the web, even if they aren’t linked to us, by linking to them. Under are some webpages worth checking out[...]……
You must be logged in to post a comment.