One positive consequence of our current national crisis may be at least a temporary shadow in Hollywood’s culture of violence. Fearful of offending audiences in the wake of the terrorist attack, some moviemakers have postponed the release of film with terrorist themes. Television writers are delaying scripts with warlike and terrorist scenarios (劇本提綱).It is probably good thinking. My local video store tells me nobody is checking out “disaster” movies. Says the manager, “Currently, people want comedy. They want an escape from stories about violence and terrorism.” Similarly, in the music business, there’s a run on patriotic and inspirational tapes and CDs.

　　According to The New York Times, the self scrutiny among these czars (特權人物) of mass-entertainment taste is unprecedented in scale, sweeping aside hundreds of millions of dollars in projects that no longer seem appropriate. A reasonable concern is that this might be a short term phenomenon. Once life returns to something more normal, will Hollywood return to its bad old ways? The Times offers a glimmer of hope. The industry’s titans (巨頭),it suggests, are struggling with much more difficulties, long range questions of what the public will want once the initial shock from the terrorist attacks wears off. Many in the industry admit they do not know where the boundaries of taste and consumer tolerance now lie.

　　This is an opportunity for some of us to suggest to Hollywood where that boundary of consumer tolerance is, especially those of us who have not yet convinced Hollywood to cease its descent into ever lower of the dumbness of our young.

　　The nonprofit Parents Television Council, which monitors the quality of TV programming, says in its latest report that today’s TV shows are more laced than ever with vulgarities, sexual immorality, crudities, violence, and foul language. The traditional family hour between 8p.m.and 9p.m., when the networks used to offer programs for the entire family, has disappeared. The problem looks like it will get worse.

　　That certainly looked to be the case before the Sept.11th assault. One pre attack New York Times story reported that TV producers were crusading (討伐) for scripts that include every crude word imaginable. The struggles between net-work censors and producers, according to the report, were “growing more intense”. Producers like Aaron Sorkin of “The West Wing” planned to keep pushing hard. He was quoted as saying, “There’s absolutely no reason why we can’t use the language of adulthood in programs that are about adults”.

　　My guess is that a lot of adults don’t use the language Mr. Sorkin wants to use, and don’t enjoy having their children hear it. At this moment of crisis in our nation’s history, thought has become more thoughtful, prayerful, and spiritual. It may be the time to tell the entertainment industry that we want not a temporary pause in the flow of tastelessness, but a long term clean-up.

　　57. Some filmmakers hesitate to release new films with violent content because .

　　A) they want to show themselves to be patriots

　　B) they are afraid such films may anger audiences

　　C) films with violence in them are no longer popu1ar

　　D) films with terrorist themes are reflections on violence.

　　58. The “self-scrutiny” in the second paragraph refers to filmmakers attempt to .

　　A) produce appropriate films with no violent content for the audiences

　　B) prevent themselves from slipping into their old bad ways

　　C) understand to what extent their films have contributed to the national crisis

　　D) find out where the boundaries of taste and consumer tolerance lie

　　59. The author thinks that it is time for the general audience to .

　　A) tell filmmakers where the boundaries of their taste lie

　　B) point out to Hollywood how bad their films are

　　C) accuse the filmmakers of desensitizing their children

　　D) ask filmmakers to make films that reflect traditional family life

　　60. Which of the following statements is TRUE about Aaron Sorkin?

　　A) He is strongly against using crude language in films.

　　B) He starts the struggles between network censors and producer.

　　C) He insists no restraint be set to the language used in films.

　　D) He believes that it is time to clean up the entertainment industry.

　　61. The author’s purpose in writing this passage is .

　　A) to acknowledge the current practice of the entertainment industry

　　B) to show his admiration for the current practice of the entertainment industry

　　C) to accuse the entertainment industry of their current practice

　　D) to show tolerance of the current practice of the entertainment industry

　　【答案】

　　美國遭受恐怖襲擊后，好萊塢電影所推崇的暴力文化被投下了陰影�！都~約時報》報道電影巨頭們對大眾娛樂的品味進行了史無前例的自我分析。文章末尾作者指出在國家處于這樣危急的歷史時刻,人們比以前更虔誠地關注、思考精神與思想的問題。也許的確到了該徹底長期整頓電影的時候了,而不是像現(xiàn)在一樣只是暫時停止制作品味極低的電影。

　　57. B )�！径ㄎ弧� 由題干filmmakers hesitate to release new films定位到原文第一段第二句Fearful of offending audiences in the wake of the terrorist attack,some moviemakers have postponed the release of film with terrorist themes.【解析】細節(jié)題。從第一段可以看出,9.11恐怖襲擊給人們帶來了極大的震驚,為好萊塢電影暴力文化投下了陰影。由于害怕 “offending” 驚魂未定的大眾,很多電影制片商have postponed the release of film with terrorist themes。由此可見B)符合題意,選項中的“afraid”與原文中的“fearful”意思上相同,“anger”為動詞,與原文中的“offending”相對應,更可確定答案的正確性�！颈苠e指導】A)在文章中并未提及;C)認為“充滿暴力內(nèi)容的電影在他們中間已經(jīng)不再流行”與原文意思相反,如果誤認為“them”指的是廣大觀眾就很容易誤選;D)將暴力電影等同于暴力,混淆了兩個概念，同原文意思不相符,故錯誤。

　　58. D)。【定位】由題干The“self?scrutiny”in the second paragraph定位到第二段倒數(shù)第二句...1ong range questions of what the public will want once the initial shock from the terrorist attacks wears off.【解析】細節(jié)題。文章第二段指出,電影制片商們對大眾娛樂的品味進行自我反省,很可能是一個暫時現(xiàn)象,因為正如業(yè)界許多人士承認的那樣,目前他們不知道where boundaries of taste and consumer tolerance now lie。與前文的Fearful of offending audiences in the wake of the terrorist attack這個原因相照應。正是因為不知道觀眾們目前希望看什么樣的電影,害怕暴力電影在這個特殊時刻激怒觀眾,才不敢貿(mào)然制作,因此制片商們才對此進行自我分析。故D)符合題意�！颈苠e指導】 A)認為制片商這么做是因為“想為觀眾們制作出不含有暴力內(nèi)容的影片”不確切,因為第一段中指出,制片商們只是“postponed the release of films with terrorist themes”,而不是停止制作此類電影,故A)錯誤;B)制片商們的目的是“阻止自己回到制作暴力電影的老路上去”同文章中的講述相反,故錯誤;C)選項原文中并未提及,故不合題意。

　　59. A)。【定位】由題干it is time for the general audience to定義到原文第三段第一句This is an opportunity for some of us to suggest to Hollywood where that boundary of consumer tolerance is.【解析】細節(jié)題。由于作者在第二段中指出制片商們不敢輕易制作電影,因為他們不知道觀眾的口味和對暴力電影的容忍度有多少,因此在第三段中指出,這正是一個好時機讓觀眾告訴“口味如何及對暴力電影的容忍度有多大”。故 A)正確�！颈苠e指導】B)犯了以偏概全的錯誤,人們反對的是好萊塢充斥暴力內(nèi)容的電影,而不是所有好萊塢制作的電影，故不正確;作者只是指出人們可以借機向好萊塢提出電影未來方向的建議,建議他們cease its descent into ever lower of the dumbness of our young,而不是建議觀眾對此進行指責,故選項C)不確切;作者在文章第四段指出,傳統(tǒng)的家庭電影時間“disappeared”,這一事實說明暴力電影的泛濫程度需要得到控制,但選項 D)“要求制片商們制作反映傳統(tǒng)家庭生活的電影”在文中并未提及,故錯誤。

　　60. C)�！径ㄎ弧坑深}干about Aaron Sorkin定義到原文中第五段最后兩句Producers like Aaron Sorkin of “The West Wing”planned to keep pushing hard. He was quoted as saying,“There’s absolutely no reason why we can’t use the language of adulthood in programs that are about adults”.【解析】細節(jié)題。文章在第五段中舉了Aaron Sorkin這個導演為例,來說明前面的觀點The struggles between network censors and produce...were growing more intense。從文中可以看出,Aaron Sorkjn認為,在關于成人的電影中不用成人的語言絕對沒有任何道理。而后面作者指出,很多成人根本不用Aaron Sorkin在電影中使用的語言,也不希望他們的孩子們聽到這樣的語言,由此可以看出Aaron Sorkin所強烈推崇在電影中使用的“the language of adulthood”正是前文中所說的 “crude word”(粗俗的言語)。故C)“他堅持認為不應該對電影中的語言進行限制”解釋正確�！颈苠e指導】A)同原文內(nèi)容正好相反,故錯誤;B)不正確,因為原文只說他在這場較量中想“keep pushing hard”，并未表明是他首先引起了這場較量;D)“他認為應該徹底整頓電影業(yè)”同文章中對Aaron Sorkin的描述相反,因為作者所說的 “clean up the entertainment industry”正是指讓電影內(nèi)容更加積極,減少粗俗的語言和暴力的內(nèi)容。

　　61. C)�！径ㄎ弧坑深}干the author’s purpose定位到全文內(nèi)容，尤其是首尾兩段�！窘馕觥客茢囝}。從文章第一段的第一句話來看,作者認為恐怖主義活動帶來了一個“positive consequence”。那就是沖擊了好萊塢的暴力電影文化。既然作者認為這是一個積極影響,說明作者對好萊塢暴力電影持否定態(tài)度。同時在文章的最后一句中,作者亦指出,現(xiàn)在是時候該告訴娛樂界人們所需要的不僅僅是a temporary pause in the flow of tastelessness,而是長期的徹底整頓。由此可見，作者對現(xiàn)在娛樂界的做法持否定態(tài)度。因此C)正確。【避錯指導】A)“了解”、B)“贊同”和D)“容忍”,均不符合文中所表達的作者的目的。