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 (剧本提纲).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 (特权人物) 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 (巨头),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 (讨伐) 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】

　　美国遭受恐怖袭击后，好莱坞电影所推崇的暴力文化被投下了阴影。《纽约时报》报道电影巨头们对大众娱乐的品味进行了史无前例的自我分析。文章末尾作者指出在国家处于这样危急的历史时刻,人们比以前更虔诚地关注、思考精神与思想的问题。也许的确到了该彻底长期整顿电影的时候了,而不是像现在一样只是暂时停止制作品味极低的电影。

　　57. B )。【定位】 由题干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】细节题。从第一段可以看出,9.11恐怖袭击给人们带来了极大的震惊,为好莱坞电影暴力文化投下了阴影。由于害怕 “offending” 惊魂未定的大众,很多电影制片商have postponed the release of film with terrorist themes。由此可见B)符合题意,选项中的“afraid”与原文中的“fearful”意思上相同,“anger”为动词,与原文中的“offending”相对应,更可确定答案的正确性。【避错指导】A)在文章中并未提及;C)认为“充满暴力内容的电影在他们中间已经不再流行”与原文意思相反,如果误认为“them”指的是广大观众就很容易误选;D)将暴力电影等同于暴力,混淆了两个概念，同原文意思不相符,故错误。

　　58. D)。【定位】由题干The“self?scrutiny”in the second paragraph定位到第二段倒数第二句...1ong range questions of what the public will want once the initial shock from the terrorist attacks wears off.【解析】细节题。文章第二段指出,电影制片商们对大众娱乐的品味进行自我反省,很可能是一个暂时现象,因为正如业界许多人士承认的那样,目前他们不知道where boundaries of taste and consumer tolerance now lie。与前文的Fearful of offending audiences in the wake of the terrorist attack这个原因相照应。正是因为不知道观众们目前希望看什么样的电影,害怕暴力电影在这个特殊时刻激怒观众,才不敢贸然制作,因此制片商们才对此进行自我分析。故D)符合题意。【避错指导】 A)认为制片商这么做是因为“想为观众们制作出不含有暴力内容的影片”不确切,因为第一段中指出,制片商们只是“postponed the release of films with terrorist themes”,而不是停止制作此类电影,故A)错误;B)制片商们的目的是“阻止自己回到制作暴力电影的老路上去”同文章中的讲述相反,故错误;C)选项原文中并未提及,故不合题意。

　　59. A)。【定位】由题干it is time for the general audience to定义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】细节题。由于作者在第二段中指出制片商们不敢轻易制作电影,因为他们不知道观众的口味和对暴力电影的容忍度有多少,因此在第三段中指出,这正是一个好时机让观众告诉“口味如何及对暴力电影的容忍度有多大”。故 A)正确。【避错指导】B)犯了以偏概全的错误,人们反对的是好莱坞充斥暴力内容的电影,而不是所有好莱坞制作的电影，故不正确;作者只是指出人们可以借机向好莱坞提出电影未来方向的建议,建议他们cease its descent into ever lower of the dumbness of our young,而不是建议观众对此进行指责,故选项C)不确切;作者在文章第四段指出,传统的家庭电影时间“disappeared”,这一事实说明暴力电影的泛滥程度需要得到控制,但选项 D)“要求制片商们制作反映传统家庭生活的电影”在文中并未提及,故错误。

　　60. C)。【定位】由题干about Aaron Sorkin定义到原文中第五段最后两句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】细节题。文章在第五段中举了Aaron Sorkin这个导演为例,来说明前面的观点The struggles between network censors and produce...were growing more intense。从文中可以看出,Aaron Sorkjn认为,在关于成人的电影中不用成人的语言绝对没有任何道理。而后面作者指出,很多成人根本不用Aaron Sorkin在电影中使用的语言,也不希望他们的孩子们听到这样的语言,由此可以看出Aaron Sorkin所强烈推崇在电影中使用的“the language of adulthood”正是前文中所说的 “crude word”(粗俗的言语)。故C)“他坚持认为不应该对电影中的语言进行限制”解释正确。【避错指导】A)同原文内容正好相反,故错误;B)不正确,因为原文只说他在这场较量中想“keep pushing hard”，并未表明是他首先引起了这场较量;D)“他认为应该彻底整顿电影业”同文章中对Aaron Sorkin的描述相反,因为作者所说的 “clean up the entertainment industry”正是指让电影内容更加积极,减少粗俗的语言和暴力的内容。

　　61. C)。【定位】由题干the author’s purpose定位到全文内容，尤其是首尾两段。【解析】推断题。从文章第一段的第一句话来看,作者认为恐怖主义活动带来了一个“positive consequence”。那就是冲击了好莱坞的暴力电影文化。既然作者认为这是一个积极影响,说明作者对好莱坞暴力电影持否定态度。同时在文章的最后一句中,作者亦指出,现在是时候该告诉娱乐界人们所需要的不仅仅是a temporary pause in the flow of tastelessness,而是长期的彻底整顿。由此可见，作者对现在娱乐界的做法持否定态度。因此C)正确。【避错指导】A)“了解”、B)“赞同”和D)“容忍”,均不符合文中所表达的作者的目的。