The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Brenton Sanderson Archive
Jewish Themes in The Graduate (1967)
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The 1967 film The Graduate was a landmark in Jewish cultural subversion (see also Edmund Connelly’s treatment). By the time of the film’s release, Jewish film-makers in Hollywood were becoming more explicit in their antipathy for White Americans and their culture, and this was increasingly reflected in their output. In 1963, the Jewish producer Larry Turman came across the 24-year-old Californian Charles Webb’s novel The Graduate which, he claimed, “had an emotional coloration for me like [the Jewish playwright] Harold Pinter. The book was funny, but it made you nervous at the same time.”[1]Alec Scott, “When ‘The Graduate’ Opened Fifty Years Ago, It Changed Hollywood (and America) Forever,” Smithsonian Magazine, December 2017. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/graduate...67222/

In his novel, Webb looks back in anger at his gilded California lifestyle as the son of a Pasadena cardiologist. His semi-autobiographical protagonist, Benjamin Braddock, a 20-year-old recent graduate from an East Coast college, returns to his Californian home for a long, hot summer over the course of which he stumbles into a passionless affair with the much older Mrs. Robinson, the wife of his father’s business partner. Braddock becomes infatuated with Mrs. Robinson’s daughter Elaine who reciprocates his feelings but rebuffs him after learning of his relationship with her mother. Mrs. Robinson sends Elaine off to college at UC Berkeley, where she becomes engaged to her classmate Carl Smith. A desperate Benjamin crashes their wedding and elopes with Elaine to the great distress of her family.

ORDER IT NOW

Turman bought the rights to the book for $1,000 and sent it unsolicited to Jewish director Mike Nichols (born Mikhail Peschkowsky) who signed on to the project. Turman’s search for financing led him to Jewish film mogul Joseph E. Levine—“the schlockmeister of the world”—who put up $3 million. Turman’s impulse purchase of the rights led to one of the most consequential films ever. Released in December 1967, The Graduate grossed almost $105 million (equivalent to almost $1 billion today), the third-highest ever at the time, and was nominated for seven Academy Awards including best picture and acting nods for stars Anne Bancroft, Dustin Hoffman and Katharine Ross, plus an Oscar victory for director Nichols. The Graduate has since become one of the most referenced films in the popular culture lexicon of the Western world.

Nichols assigned Jewish screenwriter Buck Henry (born Henry Zuckerman), then writing for the TV spy spoof Get Smart, as screenwriter. Henry ended up sharing writing credits with the non-Jewish Calder Willingham who had written a rejected first script. Songs by the Jewish duo Simon and Garfunkel were used for the soundtrack. Given the many Jews involved in the film’s production, it’s hardly surprising that Jewish sensibilities and ideological fixations pervade the final product.

The Graduate was not meant to read Jewish in the novel: the non-Jewish Charles Webb wrote the 1963 novel when he was just out of Williams College, which at the time is alleged to have been “notoriously anti-Semitic, even at the administrative level.”[2]Laurie Gwen Shapiro, “50 Years Later, Just How Jewish Was ‘The Graduate?’” Forward, November 15, 2017. https://forward.com/culture/387524/50-years-later-ju...duate/ In the hands of director Mike Nichols, however, the story became a scathing critique of bourgeois WASP American culture and the oppressive burden it purportedly imposed on young Americans. Nichols employs two recurrent visual metaphors to symbolize this oppressive culture: black-and-white stripes and water. The former representing prison bars confining Benjamin, while the latter (the numerous scenes referencing pools, aquariums, Scuba diving and rain) are said to symbolize the oppressive weight of societal expectation. The “troubled water” theme recurs throughout the film, with Benjamin floundering in a toxic social order where “he is submerged, underwater, trapped,” his world appearing “claustrophobically enclosed like a fish in a small water tank.”[3]Gus Cileone, “What does the water imagery in ‘The Graduate’ express about the 1960s youth mindset and destiny,” The Take, October 7, 2015. https://screenprism.com/insights/article/what-does-t...outh-m

Nichols’ prison bar metaphor
Nichols’ prison bar metaphor

The film resonated with a generation of young people concerned, as recent college graduate Benjamin Braddock is, about their place in the adult world they were reluctantly entering. Beverly Gray, author of the 2017 book Seduced by Mrs. Robinson: How “The Graduate” Became the Touchstone of a Generation, claims the film “strikes me as having a Jewish soul.” Laurie Shapiro, writing for the Forward, agrees, observing that “Despite the All-American storyline of the novel, The Graduate, the film version has always signaled a very Jewish sensibility to me, starting with Dustin Hoffman oddly cast in the lead as super-Waspy Connecticut kid Benjamin Braddock.” Referring to its Jewish director Mike Nichols, Gray notes how:

The film seems to me Jewish in a social sense, in terms of the Jewish outsider, which is certainly the way Mike Nichols viewed himself. Nichols was feeling a bit askew among the comforts of bourgeois America. It’s important to remember Nichols as a very young refugee from Nazi Germany. He never really got over the experience of fleeing Berlin at age 7. I’d go on to add that Nichols has made the following comment: “Dustin has always said that Benjamin is a walking surfboard. And that’s what he was in the book, in the original conception. But I kept looking and looking for an actor until I found Dustin, who is the opposite, who’s a short, dark, Jewish, anomalous presence, which is how I experience myself.” It’s a provocative statement, because Nichols was neither short nor dark, though clearly he felt a strong inner discomfort about the way he presented himself to the world. He certainly identified with the angst felt by Benjamin Braddock.[4]Shapiro, “50 Years Later,” op cit.

The perennial theme of Jewish alienation from a WASP-dominated mainstream American society played an important role in how the character of Benjamin Braddock—and the entire film—were conceived by Nichols—though this only became fully apparent to him after the film had been made. “My unconscious was making this movie,” Nichols later recalled. “It took me years before I got what I had been doing all along—that I was turning Benjamin into a Jew. I didn’t get it until I saw this hilarious issue of MAD magazine after the movie came out, in which the character of Dustin says to the character of Elizabeth Wilson, ‘Mom, how come I’m Jewish and you and Dad aren’t?’ And I asked myself the same question, and the answer was fairly embarrassing and fairly obvious: Who was the Jew among the goyim? And who was forever a visitor in a strange land?”[5]J.W. Whitehead, Appraising The Graduate: The Mike Nichols Classic and Its Impact in Hollywood (Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2011) 58.

It was with his casting of Benjamin Braddock, described in the book as a tall, blonde, and athletic, that Nichols took his biggest risk. Unable to resist the urge to engage in Jewish ethnic networking, he passed over Robert Redford for an unheralded, diminutive 29-year-old Jew, Dustin Hoffman. Nichols cast Hoffman, “despite the fact that he was virtually unknown and looked nothing like the leading man described in the script, which called for a tall, blond track star, not a short, Jewish guy with a schnoz for the ages.”[6]Steve Almond, “Remembering Mike Nichols And The Cinematic Landmark That Was ‘The Graduate,’” wbur, November 21, 2014. https://www.wbur.org/cognoscenti/2014/11/21/mike-nic...almond Hoffman later recalled telling Nichols, “The character is five-eleven, a track star. … It feels like this is a dirty trick, sir.” The director replied, “You mean you’re Jewish, that’s why you don’t think you’re right. Maybe he’s Jewish inside.” Nichols claimed that casting Hoffman emphasized Benjamin’s alienation from the WASP middle class world around him and its oppressive expectations. For the Jewish director Steven Soderbergh, Nichol’s choice was “the seminal event in the defining of motion picture leading men in the last 50 years.”[7]Scott, “When The Graduate Opened Fifty Years Ago,” op cit.

Director Mike Nichols on set with Dustin Hoffman and Anne Bancroft
Director Mike Nichols on set with Dustin Hoffman and Anne Bancroft

A number of early reviews of The Graduate described Hoffman as “ugly.” An article in Life magazine referred to him as “a swarthy Pinocchio,” and made humorous reference to his prominent nose. According to Gray, however, “What was important was the way young audiences embraced Hoffman, big nose and all. Suddenly it was okay not to look like Robert Redford and still play a romantic leading role.”[8]Shapiro, “50 Years Later,” op cit. Hoffman’s anti-heroic character gave the green light for Hollywood to promote “the ethnic Jewish matinee idol and youth icon in the forms of George Segal, Elliot Gould, Richard Benjamin, Charles Grodin, and Gene Wilder.”[9]Whitehead, Appraising The Graduate, 63. These Jewish romantic leads were invariably paired onscreen with beautiful non-Jewish actresses like Marsha Mason, Candice Bergen, and (in the case of Dustin Hoffman) blondes like Mia Farrow, Faye Dunaway, Susan George, and Meryl Streep. The new era was boon for Jewish actors, who, as Gray points out, suddenly

no longer had to fret about not resembling the WASP ideal, nor did they need to hide (as such stars as John Garfield and Kirk Douglas had done) behind anglicized names. The casting of Dustin Hoffman as The Graduate’s leading man was a shock to Hollywood, which had spent decades trying to sidestep the Judaic roots of its founders. But in the wake of The Graduate, young Jewish males were suddenly everywhere, and often they were playing characters with backgrounds similar to their own. This was the era that launched Richard Benjamin (Goodbye, Columbus, 1969), and Richard Dreyfuss (The Goodbye Girl, 1977), along with Grodin. It was all part of what film critic J. Hoberman, paying tribute to Elliott Gould in the Village Voice, wittily called the Jew Wave.[10]Shapiro, “50 Years Later,” op cit.

While celebrating the “Jew Wave” inaugurated by Hoffman’s casting as Benjamin Braddock, Shapiro laments that Hollywood’s enthusiasm for casting Jews as romantic leads didn’t extend to Jewish women, who, she contends, “still struggle to be cast in a lead if they don’t look like Natalie Portman, Mina Kunis or (yes, she’s Jewish) Scarlett Johansson. Men can keep their original noses and surnames (Ben Stiller, Jason Schwartzman, Adrien Brody, Adam Brody, Adam Levine) but Jewish women elect for plastic surgery to ‘correct’ what Hollywood execs like Harvey Weinstein deem ‘unfuckable’ looks, and then hide their names and heritage.” Shapiro also resents that some Jewish biopic female roles have been handed to non-Jews like Nicole Kidman (as Diane Arbus) and Felicity Jones (as Ruth Bader Ginsburg)—despite the existence of Jewish actresses that “meet or even surpass most people’s standard of beauty” like Natalie Portman, Rachel Weisz, and Mila Kunis. This is largely, she insists, because “Hollywood seems to have never gotten over its infatuation with blondes, especially when paired with dark-haired men.”[11]Ibid.
(Shapiro, “50 Years Later,” op cit.)

Hollywood did make efforts in the 1960s to promote Jewesses as romantic lead characters. The Jewish film historian Neal Gabler notes, for example, in his book Barbara Streisand: Redefining Beauty, Femininity and Power, how, in the late sixties, Streisand was repeatedly cast by Hollywood studios who deliberately attempted to make her Jewish ethnicity part of her public appeal. Gray notes that “In the wake of her success, many young girls thought twice about requesting a nose job as a Sweet Sixteen gift. But I would argue that Streisand started no trend toward the acceptance of other leading ladies who defied the WASP standard of physical attractiveness.”[12]Ibid.
(Shapiro, “50 Years Later,” op cit.)

Dustin Hoffman certainly defied the WASP standard of male physical attractiveness, and Nichols sympathized with the young actor’s view of himself as an alienated Jew in a gentile world, and Hoffman, in turn, was able to comprehend the role once “he caught Nichols and Henry’s vision of Benjamin as the ultimate outsider—not a part of the culture, but not a part of the counter-culture either.” Nichols and Henry envisioned the Braddock character as a “genetic throwback” among the “walking surfboards” of angular, blond vigor—the American WASP mainstream. Nichols wanted Hoffman to project an estrangement that began in the blood. Renata Adler, writing in The New York Times, was the first to openly state the reality of Benjamin’s Jewish identity—with the Jewish film critic J. Hoberman endorsing Adler’s observation, identifying Benjamin as an obvious “crypto-Jew” and “an example of an ascendant Jewishness” in Hollywood.[13]Whitehead, Appraising The Graduate, 63.

Dustin Hoffman as Benjamin Braddock: “an example of ascendant Jewishness”
Dustin Hoffman as Benjamin Braddock: “an example of ascendant Jewishness”

Hoffman won the role over Charles Grodin, another Jewish actor who was no model of conventional WASP good looks. On the morning of Hoffman’s screen test for the role, he was marched into the makeup chair, where experts worried over his thick eyebrows, muscular neck, and less-than-perfect features. Hoffman recalled Nichols fretting, “Can we do anything about his nose?” Two hours later, when he went before the camera alongside co-star Katharine Ross, matters got worse: “The idea that the director was connecting me with someone as beautiful as her, it became an even uglier joke. It was like a Jewish nightmare.” Trying to ease the tension between them, he pinched or patted Ross’s buttock (accounts differ), leaving her furious. Nor did his reading of the role of Benjamin run smoothly. Just before the film’s release, when Ross was asked about her first impression of Hoffman, she pulled no punches: “He looks about three feet tall, so dead serious, so humorless, so unkempt.” She remembered thinking “This is going to be a disaster.”[14]Beverley Gray, Seduced By Mrs. Robinson: How “The Graduate” Became the Touchstone of a Generation (Chapel Hill, NC: Algonquin Books, 2017), 42-3.

While Benjamin Braddock might have been, according to Nichols, Jewish on the inside (and on the outside to the extent of his casting Hoffman), the Braddock and the Robinson families were supposed to be representative of WASP middle class America. Despite this, Jewish characterizations even crept into the portrayal of these characters, and Gray notes how

the film is basically Jewish in a Lenny Bruce sense: New York neurotics are all Jewish, whatever their ethnic and religious background. Interestingly, the two overtly New York characters in the movie, in terms of speech patterns, are Ben’s father and Mrs. Robinson. I can certainly see Mr. Braddock (played by William Daniel) as an upwardly mobile “Jewish” man, enjoying the fruits of his labors. And of course Mrs. Robinson is the very definition of neurotic. But her husband and daughter don’t seem in any way Jewish to me, despite their presence in a Beverly Hills mini-mansion of the type that Jews of that era favored and that I recognized all too well.[15]Shapiro, 50 Years Later,” op cit.

As those who have seen the film know, Benjamin Braddock sleeps with Mrs. Robinson but loves her beautiful daughter, Elaine, who is disgusted when she learns what her mother and boyfriend have done. Elaine ends her relationship with Braddock and becomes engaged to Carl Smith, portrayed by the decidedly non-Jewish actor Brian Avery.

Carl Smith (Brian Avery) with Elaine (Katharine Ross)
Carl Smith (Brian Avery) with Elaine (Katharine Ross)

Undaunted by Elaine’s rejection, Benjamin pursues Elaine and crashes her wedding. This scene, as conceived by Nichols, is laden with Jewish symbolism and socio-political fixations. Hoffman’s character invades the sanctity of the church (a metaphor for the Jewish infiltration of Western societies?) to take Elaine from Carl who is depicted as Braddock’s physical and ethnic opposite (a tall and blonde Nordic archetype). Benjamin uses Christianity’s most sacred symbol (a crucifix) as a weapon to fend off the wedding attendees’ attempts to stop this profane intrusion. He then thwarts their attempts to reclaim Elaine by jamming the crucifix into the door of the church, leaving them barricaded inside and allowing him to flee with Elaine (see lead photograph).


The wedding scene of The Graduate

Such overt anti-Christian imagery jarred with the film’s first audiences—but was only the start of Hollywood’s disparagement of Christianity, and seems tame by today’s standards. Such efforts culminated in depicting nuns in sexual roles. Notoriously, the opening scene of the pilot of Californication, a program starring and produced by the Jewish actor David Duchovny (whose father was a publicist for the American Jewish Committee), depicts a nun performing oral sex on Duchovny’s character Hank Moody in a church. This pornographic debasement of Christian symbols by Jews is a blatant way of defiling Christian culture.

The wedding scene in The Graduate is supposed to be a triumphant moment: two young people rebelling against and liberating themselves from the oppressive expectations of their parents and their pathogenic culture. The conclusion to The Graduate glorifies breaking away from familial, cultural (and implicitly ethnic) constraints in favor of individualism. The Graduate’s core theme can be broken down to a general societal and political defiance. In the first scene of the film, Benjamin rides to the left on an airport conveyor belt as everyone else accedes to the airport’s public announcement system’s request to “Please stay to the right.” The political symbolism is obvious.

The Graduate was made at a time when the New Left was ascendant in the United States, and when the ideas of Jewish intellectuals like Erich Fromm and Herbert Marcuse were displacing orthodox Marxism in leftist movements throughout the West. Indeed, Nichols’ film can be seen as a subversive exposition of ideas espoused by Marcuse in his seminal 1964 work One Dimensional Man. During the late 1960s and early 1970s, Marcuse’s work was probably the most influential social theory of its day and enjoyed a wide readership. In One Dimensional Man, he argued that advanced industrial societies like the United States repress their populations by creating false needs via mass advertising, industrial management, and modes of thought which resulted in a “one dimensional” universe of thought and behavior which stifled people’s capacity for critical thought and oppositional behavior. Marcuse advocated what he called the “great refusal” as the only effective opposition to these all-encompassing methods of social control. He championed sexual and ethnic minorities and outsiders “to nourish oppositional thought and behavior.”[16]Douglas Kellner, “Introduction to the Second Edition,” Herbert Marcuse, One-dimensional Man: Studies in Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society (London: Routledge, 1991), xi.

A generation of young radicals took up Marcuse’s texts as “essential criticism of existing forms of thought and behavior,” and Marcuse himself identified with the New Left and defended their politics and activism. For Marcuse, the traditional European family structure served “to legitimate authoritarian institutions and practices” and predisposed individuals to “accept social authority.” Alongside fellow Frankfurt School intellectuals Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno, he viewed the traditional Western family was an important institution “for the production of ‘authoritarian personalities’ who are inclined to submit to dominant authorities, however irrational.”[17]Douglas Kellner, Herbert Marcuse and the Crisis of Marxism (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984) 110.

Herbert Marcuse
Herbert Marcuse

There are also strong points of intersection between Marcuse’s ideas and those of Jewish post-Freudian intellectual Wilhelm Reich. In his 1933 book The Mass Psychology of Fascism, Reich argued that the authoritarian family is of critical importance for the authoritarian state because the family “becomes the factory in which the state’s structure and ideology are molded.”[18]Wilhelm Reich, The Mass Psychology of Fascism (London: Penguin, 1970) 64. Crucial for Reich was the repression of childhood sexuality, which, in his view, created children who are docile, fearful of authority, and in general anxious and submissive. Reich claimed the role of traditional “repressive” Western sexual morality was “to produce acquiescent subjects who, despite distress and humiliation, are adjusted to the authoritarian order.” Marcuse agreed with Reich that the “liberation of sexuality and the creation of non-hierarchical democratic structures in the family, workplace and society at large would create personalities resistant to fascism.”[19]Kellner, Herbert Marcuse and the Crisis of Marxism, 111.

Marcuse, like Nichols, a refugee from National Socialist Germany, is said to have been “extremely sensitive to the dangers of fascistic tendencies” and his work was an important part of the great cultural shift from the affirmation to the repudiation of inherited values.[20]Ibid., 296.
(Kellner, Herbert Marcuse and the Crisis of Marxism, 111.)
The familial, religious and ethnic ties of White people were presented by Jewish intellectuals like Marcuse (and Hollywood writers and producers) as an oppressive burden imposed by the past—a way in which parents encumber their offspring with an inheritance of dysfunctional norms.

Frankfurt School intellectuals, including Marcuse, held that the psychologically healthy White person was someone who had broken free from these dysfunctional norms (i.e., the traditional Western moral code), and realized their human potential without relying on membership in collectivist groups. The embrace of radical individualism among non-Jews, promoted by the likes of Marcuse, was, of course, conducive to the continuation of Judaism as a cohesive group. Yet while Marcuse promoted individualism and condemned White racial feeling as deeply immoral, he was a committed Zionist who strongly supported “the establishment of a Jewish state, capable of preventing the repetition of a holocaust.” Marcuse justified supporting ethnic nationalism for his own tribe on the basis that “The United States didn’t do a goddamn thing under Roosevelt about the persecution of Jews before and during World War II,” and because “There is a continued effective anti-Semitism that could explode at any time in a neo-fascist regime. … Anti-Semitism is rampant in all states, and still exists in all states.”[21]Herbert Marcuse & Douglas Kellner (Ed.), The New Left and the 1960s: Collected Papers of Herbert Marcuse (London: Routledge, 2004), 180.

This line of thinking motivated the activism of Jewish New Left leaders like Mark Rudd who actively promoted Marcuse’s ideas. Rudd claimed that for him and his New Left colleagues, “World War II and the Holocaust were our fixed reference points. We often talked about the moral imperative not to be good Germans. We saw American racism as akin to German racism towards the Jews.”[22]Philip Mendes, Jews and the Left: The Rise and Fall of a Political Alliance (Melbourne, Victoria; Palgrave MacMillan, 2014), 254.

Alongside intellectual activists like Marcuse and political activists like Rudd, Hollywood has played an incredibly important role in this Jewish campaign to attack and destroy the fabric of White American society. Hollywood’s guiding principle, as articulated by Jewish Hollywood director Jill Soloway, resides in the perceived necessity of “recreating culture to defend ourselves post-Holocaust.”[23]http://estherkustanowitz.typepad.com/myurbankvetch2...n.html This ethnic “defense” has entailed the promotion of radical individualism for White people, racial diversity and mixing, the denigration of Christianity, the hypersexualization of popular culture, the glamorizing of sexual non-conformity and the breakdown of traditional gender roles—all alongside constant reminders of “the Holocaust” with its concomitant themes of Jewish victimhood and unsurpassed German (White, European) evil. This is Jewish ethnic warfare waged through the construction of culture. The Graduate was an early shot fired in this ongoing war.

Notes

[1] Alec Scott, “When ‘The Graduate’ Opened Fifty Years Ago, It Changed Hollywood (and America) Forever,” Smithsonian Magazine, December 2017. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/graduate-opened-50-years-ago-changed-hollywood-forever-180967222/

[2] Laurie Gwen Shapiro, “50 Years Later, Just How Jewish Was ‘The Graduate?’” Forward, November 15, 2017. https://forward.com/culture/387524/50-years-later-just-how-jewish-was-the-graduate/

[3] Gus Cileone, “What does the water imagery in ‘The Graduate’ express about the 1960s youth mindset and destiny,” The Take, October 7, 2015. https://screenprism.com/insights/article/what-does-the-water-imagery-in-the-graduate-express-about-the-1960s-youth-m

[4] Shapiro, “50 Years Later,” op cit.

[5] J.W. Whitehead, Appraising The Graduate: The Mike Nichols Classic and Its Impact in Hollywood (Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2011) 58.

[6] Steve Almond, “Remembering Mike Nichols And The Cinematic Landmark That Was ‘The Graduate,’” wbur, November 21, 2014. https://www.wbur.org/cognoscenti/2014/11/21/mike-nichols-the-graduate-steve-almond

[7] Scott, “When The Graduate Opened Fifty Years Ago,” op cit.

[8] Shapiro, “50 Years Later,” op cit.

[9] Whitehead, Appraising The Graduate, 63.

[10] Shapiro, “50 Years Later,” op cit.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Whitehead, Appraising The Graduate, 63.

[14] Beverley Gray, Seduced By Mrs. Robinson: How “The Graduate” Became the Touchstone of a Generation (Chapel Hill, NC: Algonquin Books, 2017), 42-3.

[15] Shapiro, 50 Years Later,” op cit.

[16] Douglas Kellner, “Introduction to the Second Edition,” Herbert Marcuse, One-dimensional Man: Studies in Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society (London: Routledge, 1991), xi.

[17] Douglas Kellner, Herbert Marcuse and the Crisis of Marxism (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984) 110.

[18] Wilhelm Reich, The Mass Psychology of Fascism (London: Penguin, 1970) 64.

[19] Kellner, Herbert Marcuse and the Crisis of Marxism, 111.

[20] Ibid., 296.

[21] Herbert Marcuse & Douglas Kellner (Ed.), The New Left and the 1960s: Collected Papers of Herbert Marcuse (London: Routledge, 2004), 180.

[22] Philip Mendes, Jews and the Left: The Rise and Fall of a Political Alliance (Melbourne, Victoria; Palgrave MacMillan, 2014), 254.

[23] http://estherkustanowitz.typepad.com/myurbankvetch2005/2009/04/jenji-kohan-jill-soloway-and-the-hebrew-mamita-inside-the-jewish-noggin.html

(Republished from The Occidental Observer by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Arts/Letters • Tags: Hollywood, Jews, Movies 
Hide 271 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. This was another very good article by Brenton Sanderson. It reveals the intersectionality of various anti-White, Jewish-lead intellectual movements with subsequent (and subversive) Hollywood entertainment. This kosher cross-pollination has contributed mightily to the decline of civility, cohesion, and the White family in America.

    Radical Jewish intellectuals connected to the Frankfurt School inspired ferocious, young, anti-war Leftist Jews such as Mark Rudd (as well as Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin) throughout the 60s. These so-called ‘student idealists’ raged explosively against the America’s (anti-communist) Vietnam War yet they never made a peep about Israeli racism or Israeli aggression which Washington also financed during this time. These Jewish double-standards vis-a-vis Israel continue.

    ‘The Graduate’ was perhaps the first modern American movie I witnessed that featured a short, unattractive Jewish man in a romantic role that was clearly written for (and would normally feature) a tall, handsome gentile. I knew then that, in real life, aimless young dorks that looked like Dustin Hoffman didn’t generally ride off in the sunset with a gorgeous shika like Kathryn Ross. Ridiculous. Yet the casting (and symbolism) in ‘The Graduate’ turned out to be apt and timely. Jewish power in American life was reaching full maturity during the 60s. Few knew it at the time. Countless others are still totally unaware.

    But the 60s was a watershed era for the Jews. How fitting that young Dustin Hoffman got to bang two lovely shiksas; in this case, a suburban mother and her virginal daughter.

    I was just a teenager when I saw ‘The Graduate’, but I couldn’t help by notice the clear, anti-Christian theme that permeated this unpleasant film. ‘How could others not notice it’, I wondered.

    How is that so many other non-Jewish Whites were captivated by this subversive movie featuring an homely, young Jewish male in a destructive romance with a Christian mother and daughter?
    The story was a bit unbelievable. And the absurd casting made it even more so. Yet countless American apparently loved ‘The Graduate’ and were undisturbed by its story and message. Go figure. Their positive reactions I still find mysterious.

    I suspect many viewers of this film must have been hip to the Jewish angles within it. Yet when it comes to Jews, countless Americans have personal ‘blinders’ on at all times. These submissive goys may subconsciously wish to deny to themselves all potential thoughts that might be considered ‘anti-Semitic’. So they refuse to see what’s in front of their nose.

    Ironically, it’s possible the baby-boomers who loved ‘The Graduate’ are today’s parents of the social justice warriors who are toppling statues of Christopher Columbus and Robert E. Lee. Strange irony.

  2. Fussy pedantic point: Hoffman’s character in the final scene isn’t wielding a crucifix. It’s just a cross. A crucifix is a cross with the Corpus Christi affixed. You’ll rarely find a crucifix in anodyne mainline (Presbyterian, Congregationalist, Methodist) churches like the one in the movie, and never in very low church contexts like Baptist or Pentecostal churches, where iconoclasm reigns.. You will always find them in Catholic and Orthodox sanctuaries, and often in Anglican and Lutheran ones too, but not always.

    • Agree: Jett Rucker
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    , @Derer
  3. Jewish director Steven Soderbergh

    Is Soderbergh Jewish? I don’t think so.

  4. lloyd says: • Website

    Tall blond women have always gone for dark short men provided they have or will inherit a fortune. In 1939 movie Gone With The Wind Rhet Butler played by Clark Gable, Jewish family name Goebbles, marries pert Irish Scarlet O’Hara. But he leaves her because of her infatuation with character played by tall fair Leslie Howard. I suppose anti-Semites could read a lot into that and its reversal in The Graduate movie. I note the name of author of Graduate, Charles Webb. All other Internet sources agree he sold the film rights for a lot more than $1,000.

  5. The destruction of the white Christian nations has always been the goal of the Zionist Jews. The first Zionist Convention was held in 1897 and the bridgehead of Palestine set as a primary target by the Kazar thugs. They had been buying land there sine the mid 1800’s but realized it could only be gained militarily. The Jews, long prominent in the British aristocracy teamed up with fellow Anglo conspirators who were afraid of German market competition to instigate WW1 and establish the Bolshevik (Jew) regime in Russia. All of this was done with vast aid from the Wilson administration and Wall St. WW2 was a continuation of the zionist plan.

    The film industry has always been under Zionist Jew control. The Rothschilds agent J.P. Morgan bought editorial control of the 20 most influential papers in the U.S. before WW1 in order to propagandize the goyim against the Germans for WW1. The Jews have controlled the MSM ever since. This control has been very effective for the Jews in driving all of our conflicts from WW1 to the current phony ” War On Terror ” that is really just the Yinnon Plan for Greater Israel which requires the destruction or Balkanization of all the Arab countries using the blood and treasure of its main satellite Jewmerica with its Israeli Foreign Legion (U.S. military) with current shabbos goy cheerleader for the Kazar criminals, Trump. The Zionists also control almost all of our shabbos goy Congress through their supplication to aIPAC and other Jew organizations.

    Pioneered by the Frankfurt School, the Jews have worked every angle from the race card starting with Jew global banker and founder of the NAACP Jacob Schiff to use the negroes as proxy warriors through the so called civil rights mov. to ANTIFA and BLM to the fake Arbery, Breonna Taylor and fake Floyd. From Sandy Hook and Los Vegas to the feminist mov. and the me too in order to divide the sexes and destroy the family unit. From the Scofield notes for the Christian Zionist (worlds biggest contradiction) cucks to starting and still controlling most pornography in this country. From initiating the homosexual movement to the 1965 Immigration Act to the Kelergi Plan (Pan Europa of 1923) that is flooding the white nations of Europe with Africans. From the unconstitutional central banking cartel that has been depreciating our fiat currency at the rate of 50% every 17 years and accelerating now with the latest multi trillion dollar theft by the global bankers for their Wall St. friends as was done in 08-09 in the bailout for billionaires and now under the cover of the latest fake virus pumped by the Zionist criminal syndicate.

    What can be said of a country that once was a great Republic of Sovereign States founded on individual liberty and limited government? Now as all the cucks go around sucking their own exhaust waste back into their lungs, afraid of the latest Zionist hoax it is clear that like the animals on Orwell’s “Animal Farm” Jewmerica has been duped into becoming just another “democracy” run by the Jews.

  6. The Jewish Angle in THE GRADUATE has been much discussed before. But whatever its implications and meaning, there’s no denying the brilliance with which Mike Nichols made the movie, something that eluded him in later works… though CATCH-22 has its moments and CARNAL KNOWLEDGE is pretty compelling as adult drama. So, the talent has to be discussed in relation to the film’s impact. THE GRADUATE would likely have failed with critics and audience in lesser hands. Though Nichols ultimately didn’t turn out to be a great director, he made one great movie, THE GRADUATE. Likewise, other works by Jewish directors of the period must be considered(even in criticism) with an appreciation of their power as artists, wits, dramatists, expressionists. Stanley Kubrick made 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY. Roman Polanski made ROSEMARY’S BABY. Stuart Rosenberg made COOL HAND LUKE. Arthur Penn made BONNIE & CLYDE. Arthur Schlesinger made MIDNIGHT COWBOY. Richard Brooks made IN COLD BLOOD. Earlier, Blake Edwards made BREAKFAST AT TIFFANY’S. Though Sidney Lumet would make his great works in the 70s and 80s, he was emerging as a force as well. (Norman Jewison, who made IN THE HEAT OF THE NIGHT, isn’t Jewish despite the name.)
    Now, not all the above-listed directors attained greatness. Rosenberg made one great movie, COOL HAND LUKE, but was mostly a journeyman director. But for whatever reason, it was the Jews(and then some Italian-Americans) who were most adept at latching onto the new sensibility and conceiving of new possibilities for Hollywood. Of course, many new or newer talents were not Jewish. Sam Peckinpah, Robert Altman, Hal Ashby, and the like. But Jewish film-makers were among the key figures in the development of New Hollywood. They were bolder, hungrier, more curious, more radical, more hip to trends. They were also among the most admiring of the great European directors(most of whom were not Jewish) and some Japanese ones. To be sure, cinephilia of the Film Generation was somewhat different from the musical attitudes of Youth Culture. Whereas Rock fans had close to zero interest in pre-Rock music and foreign music — though Folk Rockers were more reverent of the past and other cultures — , Film Culture was about remembrance and international curiosity. So, the seminal film critics of the 60s didn’t just discuss the latest trends and hottest hits but wrote extensively about foreign cinema and classic Hollywood. College kids who had no interest in music prior to Rock might nevertheless look up to Howard Hawks and Orson Welles as cultural heroes or icons.
    Still, despite the respect accorded to the Old Hollywood greats by Andrew Sarris, Peter Bogdanovich, and their acolytes, the fact is the culture was changing fast. So, while even young cinephiles might enjoy a John Ford Western or Frank Capra comedy, they no longer believed movies should be made that way. There was a new spirit in the air, and Jewish film-makers were among the first to run with it. And yet, the Europeans and Japanese had been ahead of American Cinema in personal expression and experimentation. In a way, the new batch of Jewish film-makers had a greater affinity for non-Jewish-controlled foreign cinema and were rebelling against the Hollywood System controlled by old-fashioned Jewish executives. And they had their chance because the Old Studio system was either dead or moribund, just barely hanging on, as the result of Hollywood’s loss of theater monopoly and the rise of TV.

    One can socially critique movies like COOL HAND LUKE, THE GRADUATE, BONNIE AND CLYDE, and many others as hostile and subversive, and there is certainly a Jewish angle to this. Still, the real power and effectiveness of these works owes to their artistry and brilliance than their message. Also, they were refreshing because there is a bit of anarchist in each of us that roots for the oddball, eccentric, or underdog. And the same strains could be found in European and Japanese movies that, if anything, were even bolder in thumbing their noses at the established order and social norms. Nagisa Oshima, Shohei Imamura, and Hiroshi Teshigahara were not Jewish. Neither were European directors like Alain Resnais, Jean-Luc Godard, Bo Widenberg, Fassbinder, and etc. So, in some ways, the Jewish American directors were following in the leads of European and Japanese cultural pioneers and enfants terribles, though one could argue that modern radicalism anywhere in the world was inspired in part by Jewish Influence.
    At any rate, Jewish Power of Propaganda cannot be understood apart from the talent. Sergei Eisenstein’s propaganda films are crude as message but works of genius as formalism. ROSEMARY’S BABY would likely have been a third-rate movie in the hands of someone other than Polanski, just like JAWS would have been just another dumb monster movie if not for Steven Spielberg. (Polanski and other Eastern European directors are a special case. Whereas most of the great Western European directors were non-Jewish, many of the Iron Curtain’s ‘new wave’ directors, especially in Czechoslovakia and Hungary, were Jewish. Though the White Right generally sees Jews as radical leftists, many of these Hungarian and Czech ‘new wave’ Jewish film-makers were problematic to communist authorities for their espousal of individualism, irreverence, satire, and/or something approaching libertarianism. And even if not pro-capitalist, they were more favorable to social democracy than communism. Polanski detested communism, and Milos Forman, the Czech Jew in exile, found great success in Hollywood with ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO’S NEST, which would be very un-PC today, and AMADEUS, a work that is, at once, subversive of authority and defensive of genius as natural hierarchy.) Talent goes a long way, and whatever ideological agendas or ethnic biases may have colored the works of Jewish directors, there’s no denying that many Jews were not only born with natural intelligence but grew up with a genuine appreciation of arts/culture. As such, Mike Nichols’ main objective was to make a popular but personal art film inspired by the cinema of Europe. (Nichols was especially impressed with Fellini’s 8 1/2. THE GRADUATE also has nods to Antonioni and Truffaut.) But if some American directors miserably failed at drawing inspiration from Europe — THE SWIMMER had all the elements to be a great piece of personal film-making but suffered from strained uneven direction, and Lumet’s PAWNBROKER is an embarrassing assemblage of obvious homages to European Art House — , others found their own stride, and THE GRADUATE may be the most significant work in this spirit. One could tell it was a Hollywood movie riffing on European Art film mannerisms, and yet, it was so very American and Hollywood. But moreover, Nichols, unlike Lumet before him, totally made the work his own. Instead of imitation, he drew inspiration and found his own rhythms and tones. As such, while THE GRADUATE may resemble a work like BLOW-UP by Antonioni, it has a uniqueness all its own. Also, the greater appeal of movies like THE GRADUATE and MIDNIGHT COWBOY owed to the fact that American Jews were less hung up with intellectual conceits. As much as they admired European cinema, they also loved humor, effect, and fun. Increasingly with European Cinema, there developed the notion that true art cannot be much fun. Also, theory began to dominate practice. For instance, Pier Paolo Pasolini began his film career with lively works with expressive actors. But along the way, he got this idea that actors shouldn’t act(in the conventional sense). Godard’s films got increasingly theoretical and ideological. Ingmar Bergman’s films grew colder. Now, an artist who really knows what he’s doing can make it work, as Robert Bresson did. But it was as if all these aspiring auteurs in Europe were allergic to doing something that violated the spirit of cinema as art.
    In contrast, Nichols had far fewer such hang-ups. So, even as he drew certain ideas from European cinema, he didn’t mind adding lots of humor along with the songs of Simon and Garfunkel. Such use of songs might be deemed as cheating or relying more on non-cinematic expressions than on the pure possibilities of cinema. But the use of songs did wonders for THE GRADUATE, just like the use of classical music added another dimension to 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY. So, Nichols and others like him had the best of both worlds: The new language of Art Cinema as personal expression but also the eagerness to please and win over the audience with timeless tricks of entertainment. And that is why THE GRADUATE, like HAROLD AND MAUDE, works on so many levels. It is seriously committed to cinema as art but also shameless to provide a good show.

    So much of PC mentality is reductionist in evaluating works on their ‘toxicity’ level, e.g. ‘racism’, ‘misogyny’, ‘sexism’, ‘homophobia’, ‘antisemitism’, and etc. It’s too bad that this tendency exists on the Right as well. Now, it’s fair game to notice socially or politically problematic ideas and messages in any work, but the question still remains, why do certain works, regardless of their moral or political content, have such power and influence on society? And here, we have to address the matter of talent, brilliance, originality, and/or genius. While THE GRADUATE isn’t the work of a genius, it is a brilliant piece of film-making. And also a poetic one, even if it amounts to pop-poeticism, like the songs of Simon and Garfunkel. Likewise, THE GODFATHER movies would likely have been nothing special and soon forgotten but for the understanding, knowledge, and skills brought to it by Francis Ford Coppola. There’s no point to dismissing an entire work because of its politics or praising a worthless work because it has the correct message.

    Turman bought the rights to the book for $1,000 and sent it unsolicited to Jewish director Mike Nichols (born Mikhail Peschkowsky) who signed on to the project. Turman’s search for financing led him to Jewish film mogul Joseph E. Levine—“the schlockmeister of the world”—who put up $3 million… Nichols assigned Jewish screenwriter Buck Henry (born Henry Zuckerman)… Songs by the Jewish duo Simon and Garfunkel were used for the soundtrack. Given the many Jews involved in the film’s production, it’s hardly surprising that Jewish sensibilities and ideological fixations pervade the final product.

    But Jewish finance and Jewish producers had long been a thing in Hollywood. Also, tons of Jewish writers worked on scripts from the very inception of Hollywood. And many music composers were Jewish. So, THE GRADUATE is hardly different from works of Classic Hollywood in the preponderance of Jewish money and talent.

    In the hands of director Mike Nichols, however, the story became a scathing critique of bourgeois WASP American culture and the oppressive burden it purportedly imposed on young Americans. Nichols employs two recurrent visual metaphors to symbolize this oppressive culture: black-and-white stripes and water.

    Many people saw the movie that way, but I’m not sure Nichols meant it that way. When asked about Elaine and Benjamin by a young female fan of the movie, he answered that they’d probably end up just like their parents. Also, even though there is gentle mockery of upper middle class life, it’s hardly hateful. (If anything, even as the audience is glibly laughing at the ‘shallow’ people in the movie, they are attracted to the displays of affluence and the good life, also true of works like LA DOLCE VITA and LA NOTTE. Would THE GRADUATE have been as successful if it were about a working class guy living in a tenement?)
    Benjamin’s woes have less to do with social oppression than the loss of youth. He’s worried about the future, i.e. it has arrived. This is a universal problem faced by people all over the world. When you’re young, the future is always something in the distant horizon. It’s always a day ahead, like the song from ANNIE. Or consider how Scarlett in GONE WITH THE WIND always assures herself that ‘tomorrow will be another day’. This procrastination about the future became a bigger thing for the boomer generation as more of them grew up in affluence, could attend college, and followed their bliss, that was as long as one was young and still at work or play. But school eventually ends, and one must be an adult with all the responsibilities. So, even though the movie is based on Charles Webb’s novel, its spirit also flows from CATCHER IN THE RYE by J.D. Salinger. Braddock is not a victim of social oppression, that is made clear. His parents provided him with everything. He has a nice big room all to himself. He could attend the college of his choice far from home. His graduation gift is a fancy sports car. And as the movie makes clear, his parents pretty much allow him to do as he pleases. At one time, his father expresses displeasure with Ben’s taking it easy, but he doesn’t do much about it. Also, Mr. Robinson’s advice to Ben is that he should sow some wild oats and have the time of his life(without realizing it would lead to boffing his wife). Later, when his mother asks him what he does all night long and his answer isn’t forthcoming, she just walks away and leaves him alone; she’s a very understanding, even permissive, parent.

    Ben also has no problem with job prospects. ‘Plastics’, he can make lots of money working for corporations. So, what is bothering him? His youth is over. It went from looking-forward-to-life to life-itself. He’s going through what might be called a First-Age Crisis, the crisis that befalls someone who realizes his youth is definitely over and his first chapter as an adult begins. He doesn’t want to be like his parents or their friends, but it’s not because he hates them. It’s because it means just working, making money, and then growing old and retiring. Such is life, but there is nothing more to look forward to. And in the 1960s when youth itself became an identity in its own right, the boomers developed this notion of Forever-Young. They said stuff like “Don’t trust anyone over thirty” without realizing they themselves would be over 30 sooner than later. So, Ben’s problems are essentially personal and psychological(and generational) than social or cultural. The problem is not lack of freedom but too much freedom that he came to associate with youth. Finally, with graduation, he will have less freedom as a full-time worker who just grows older and becomes just another suburban man. Granted, there is a certain irony in his transition from student to full adult. On the one hand, he has more freedom after graduation. He doesn’t have to attend classes anymore. He’s his own man and can do whatever he wants. And yet, it’s a freedom of responsibility, a kind of drag and burden. In contrast, while as a student he was more under the control of institutions and his parents who paid his tuition, he wasn’t responsible for himself. As a son and student, his sole responsibility was to attend school and get good grades. He was taken care of, and furthermore, he could focus on knowledge and learning than on mundane things of life. And he could always look to the future as something special. But the day finally arrived, and it just proved to be another day, and all the days following that day will mean he will most likely become just another suburban man. His life will be comfortable and affluent but not particularly meaningful, as only a tiny handful of people actually get to pursue their dreams.

    [MORE]

    The water metaphor is less about societal weight on Ben’s shoulders than about Ben’s emotional state of melancholy and confusion. In a way, the watery depth is more a haven than a prison. Notice how he keeps running back to his bed room from the graduation party full of admiring friends of his parents. These people are full of affection and praise for Ben. Hardly oppressive, but he finds it insufferable because they all remind him of what he will be in two or three decades. So, he would rather be in his room staring into the aquarium. Thus, he feels comfortably numb. The fish, like the ducks in THE CATCHER IN THE RYE, may stand for a more ideal existence. Unlike Holden Caulfield who doesn’t know what to make of his life, the ducks naturally know to fly south for winter. The fish in the aquarium need not worry about anything as the tank is cleaned by humans and as they’re regularly fed. Having graduated, Ben is out of the fish tank of childhood for good and in the river of adulthood. Later when we see Ben having a good time with his affair with Mrs. Robinson, we see him floating on the water glinting with sunlight.
    A special thing about THE GRADUATE is it finds a special beauty in the melancholy. In a way, Ben wants to break out or break on through to the other side, but the meaning is in the struggle, not in the victory. He studied hard all his young life to be a top student and graduated with honors, but it all seems hollow once it’s behind him. Same with his ‘second graduation’ with Elaine as trophy from the church. His greatest desire is to win her heart and make her his. It becomes an all-consuming passion and obsession… but once he has Elaine with him in the bus at the end, he begins to feel somewhat empty again. The dream is always sad, even a bit depressing, because its realization seems so elusive, even impossible. The dreamer hopes the dream will become reality, but per chance it does, the result is anticlimactic. So, Ben is caught in a psychological trap. A neurotic-romantic, he’s given to aching for what’s beyond his reach. And yet, upon attaining his dream, he realizes that he was truly happy when his anguished self was in yearning. Once he gets it, he realizes it’s just more life and nothing special. It’s like the scene in BLOW-UP where a bunch of guys tussle with one another and go on a crazy chase over a broken guitar neck, but it is tossed aside once one guy has it for himself. It’s the curse of a dream coming true. It just becomes more of mundane reality and loses its luster as a dream.
    In a way, Ben’s problem isn’t all that different from the personal crisis of the young man in BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES. War was hell, and he dreamed of returning home alive in one piece, and he did. But as a civilian, he’s just another Joe, just another guy working 9 to 5 to make ends meet. As horrific as war was, he was a hero and felt more alive precisely because death was everywhere. But back in the States, where life is everywhere and so humdrum, he feels empty. And when he sees the many bombers rusting in the airfield waiting to be scrapped for metal, he senses another kind of death. End of war means life, but the airfield looks like a graveyard of heroism. Feeling alive isn’t the same as life. There can be lots of life but no sense of being alive, feeling alive. In contrast, one could feel most alive around death. While Ben hardly had to worry about death, the experience of growing up and graduating from school to school was a kind of adventure of mind and spirit. Every year meant he was rising another level, growing into adulthood. But once an adult, there is growing older but no more growing up. It’s like once one reaches one’s peak height, there is advancement in years, not more inches(except around the waistline).

    The perennial theme of Jewish alienation from a WASP-dominated mainstream American society played an important role in how the character of Benjamin Braddock—and the entire film—were conceived by Nichols—though this only became fully apparent to him after the film had been made.

    But it works in the movie because even the character in the novel is alienated. Indeed, many leading characters in novels and movies are outsiders, eccentrics, oddballs, or mavericks. We find such characters more interesting. Even Clint Eastwood as Harry Callahan is alienated from the System he works for. John Wayne’s character in THE SEARCHERS is something of a misfit, at odds not only with Indians but with fellow whites. Marlon Brando and James Dean became famous as malcontents. Orson Welles said he cast homosexual Anthony Perkins because his closeted neurosis might add something to the character of Joseph K. in THE TRIAL, and it seems Nichols had something similar in mind in having a Jewish character play Ben. I think it works better than it would have with Robert Redford, though a younger Paul Newman, as half-Jew and half-Aryan, might have been even better. Redford, though a capable actor, was a rather colorless and inexpressive one. The movie wouldn’t have been half-as-funny with Redford as Benjamin. Dustin Hoffman was an actor of limited range but fantastic at his best. His Ratso Rizzo in MIDNIGHT COWBOY is genius-acting.
    Also, Hoffman has an ambiguous presence in the movie, making it all the more interesting. He’s both Jewish and Wasp. Both boy and man. Both awkward and aggressive. Both timid and bold. Both calculating and mad. The Jew/Wasp tensions within the character intensifies the contradictions within Benjamin who is both eager and afraid to be free. Hoffman is short but physically fit. Topless, he does have the physique of a long-distance track star. Also, while not handsome, the young Hoffman is rather attractive from certain angles. There is also something of the ‘cute’ quality that Ringo had. And then, there’s the timing and intelligence in his acting, something truly rare in cinema as most actors aren’t known for brains.

    Nichols cast Hoffman, “despite the fact that he was virtually unknown and looked nothing like the leading man described in the script, which called for a tall, blond track star, not a short, Jewish guy with a schnoz for the ages.”

    But in the end, we must judge by results, and I think the success of THE GRADUATE is inseparable from Hoffman’s juggling of drama and humor. While an actor like Redford or Ryan O’Neal might have been closer in looks to the character in the novel, Hoffman had that blend of straight man and clown that made the role so different and unique. Also, the final part of the movie when Ben is moving back and forth from LA and Berkeley has something of the silent comedies of Buster Keaton and Charlie Chaplin, the tales of underdogs who overcome all obstacles to end up with the girl. Robert Redford running off with the girl would seem less amazing and outrageous than Dustin Hoffman doing so. Buster Keaton was a short guy but one who out-maneuvered the competition and usually came out ahead. Same goes for Harold Lloyd, and especially as Nichols came from comedy background, he was looking for the most comic as well as dramatic actor, and he hit gold with Hoffman.
    Now, take Jack Nicholson in ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO’S NEST. The character in the novel is much stronger, a tough Irishman who takes on three Negroes in the shower and beats them all up. Nicholson’s McMurphy is smaller and weaker and no match for the Negroes, but it’s a masterly performance, and he came to own that role. Many, indeed most, movies deviate from the novel or the original screenplay, but at the end of the day, the only question that matters is “Does it work”? Hoffman made it work. But then, Victor Mature played Samson and Charlton Heston played Moses, and they made it work, at least as entertainment.

    Hoffman’s anti-heroic character gave the green light for Hollywood to promote “the ethnic Jewish matinee idol and youth icon in the forms of George Segal, Elliot Gould, Richard Benjamin, Charles Grodin, and Gene Wilder.”[9] These Jewish romantic leads were invariably paired onscreen with beautiful non-Jewish actresses like Marsha Mason, Candice Bergen, and (in the case of Dustin Hoffman) blondes like Mia Farrow, Faye Dunaway, Susan George, and Meryl Streep.

    It’s been said that THE GRADUATE changed the rules of who can be a star in Hollywood, but this is mostly false. Hollywood always had lots of room for Jewish, ethnic, different, ugly, short, and weird actors, even among Wasps. Alan Ladd was a short guy. Humphrey Bogart, though Wasp, looked ethnic and could have passed for Italian, Greek, Spaniard, or Jew. But he was a big star. Short and funny-looking Mickey Rooney was one of the biggest stars of the 40s. James Cagney was no looker but tremendous star. The Jewish Paul Muni was in many prestigious roles. Peter Lorre and Edward G. Robinson, both Jewish, had many major roles. Short actors were nothing special in Hollywood. Many actors, if not downright short, were hardly tall. James Dean was 5’7. Marlon Brando was 5’9, not exactly short but far from tall. It could be that shorter men gravitate to acting because they have to be more expressive to gain the kind of attraction that taller men usually get. How tall is Tom Cruise? Long before Dustin Hoffman became a household name, Frank Sinatra was a big movie star. He was only 5’7, had pocked face, and was Italian. And movie stardom was often less about looks than the hook. Certain actors and actresses, even if not handsome or pretty, had a certain screen presence, an allure. Take Charles Bronson who could even be said to be ugly. But he had a great movie face. Same was true of Telly Savalis and Anthony Quinn. Tony Curtis the Jew played a Norseman in THE VIKINGS and did a pretty good job.

    As for George Segal, Elliot Gould, Richard Benjamin, Charles Grodin, and Gene Wilder, they usually starred in lesser or more ‘independent’ productions. Among the new batch of Jewish actors, the only one whose success matched that of Hoffman in the 70s and 80s was maybe Gene Hackman(though Henry Winkler hit pay dirt as the Fonz). Richard Dreyfus seemed to be on the up and up but soon faded. Of course, one could count Harrison Ford as Jewish, or at half-Jewish. Woody Allen might qualify but he was appreciated more as ‘auteur’ than actor.

    Hoffman won the role over Charles Grodin, another Jewish actor who was no model of conventional WASP good looks.

    Grodin, though no heartthrob, had a certain goofy charm. And unlike in THE GRADUATE where everything is ‘crypto’, THE HEARTBREAK KID is very much a public airing of the Jewish Male obsession with the ‘shikse’. It is in satirical than romantic mode(as in the case of THE GRADUATE) and, as such, cinematically less interesting but even more revealing of the Jewish mentality. Hilarious stuff.

    Such overt anti-Christian imagery jarred with the film’s first audiences—but was only the start of Hollywood’s disparagement of Christianity, and seems tame by today’s standards.

    Maybe Jews are doing white people a favor by bashing Christianity, a religion that originated from renegade Jews. In a way, what is more ‘crypto-Jewish’ than Christianity? Though Christ is often depicted in Western Art as an Aryan-looking fellow, He was actually Jewish and probably looked like more like Norman Finkelstein or Noam Chomsky. And speaking of neurosis, how about the story of a Man who claimed to be the Son of God and got Himself killed over it? Western Civilization is founded on Jewish Neurosis. So, even though Hoffman the Jew plays a Wasp in THE GRADUATE, white people over the eons have been worshiping a Jew with a big nose in the image of European whites. And look at the sculpture of David by Michelangelo. I’m thinking that David, being Jewish, looked more like Jerry Seinfeld or Sean Penn, but the statue resembles something out of Greco-Roman mythology.

    At any rate, when will whites find their own covenant with the ultimate power of the universe? As long as whites stick with Christianity, it means they are forever beholden to the imagination and vision of Jews. Also, Christianity, if followed to the letter, is a death cult as we are now seeing in the West. If Christian West was powerful in the past, it was because it heeded only about 1/4 of Jesus’ teachings. Go beyond that, and you end up dead. And if you don’t, you get blamed for hypocrisy, preaching ‘turn the other cheek’ while using violence to conquer and control the world. Christianity has been a great religion, but it is now dead. It’s very sad in a way, but it means the white race must finally GRADUATE toward a new consciousness with prophets of its own that can meditate on the ultimate power and receive the covenant that has meaning to whites and whites alone.

    In the first scene of the film, Benjamin rides to the left on an airport conveyor belt as everyone else accedes to the airport’s public announcement system’s request to “Please stay to the right.”

    I think ‘stay on the right’ in that moment meant stay to the right on the conveyor belt or in pathways, which is conventional rule in all places. It’s like people usually walk on the right side no matter which say they’re going.

    In One Dimensional Man, he argued that advanced industrial societies like the United States repress their populations by creating false needs via mass advertising, industrial management, and modes of thought which resulted in a “one dimensional” universe of thought and behavior which stifled people’s capacity for critical thought and oppositional behavior.

    Even if we disagree with Herbert Marcuse’s solutions, was he wrong in his critique of consumer-capitalism? Look all around today, and corporate-consumer-capitalism is a big part of the problem. The rise of Pop Culture as Main Culture has led to the one-dimensional idiot. And we need critical thought and oppositional thought more than ever.

    In the end, the real problem of whites was not ‘authoritarianism’ but complacency. Post-war boom made white people lower their guard and care mostly about the good life. They became passionless with crass materialism. The boomer generation rebelled against such complacency with utopian dreams and commitment to authenticity, but they too came under the power of materialism as their main inspirations came from pop music and TV. Like Peter Fonda said in EASY RIDER, ‘We blew it’. If the Greatest Generation drowned in alcohol, the boomers failed to find nirvana in pot smoke, which is now just more of big business.

    Reich claimed the role of traditional “repressive” Western sexual morality was “to produce acquiescent subjects who, despite distress and humiliation, are adjusted to the authoritarian order.” Marcuse agreed with Reich that the “liberation of sexuality and the creation of non-hierarchical democratic structures in the family, workplace and society at large would create personalities resistant to fascism.”

    There is obviously some truth to their claims. Any form of repression, sexual or otherwise, is to create a more stable order of unity and consensus. And it is true that ‘sexual liberation’ will undermine fascism as each boy and girl will be more into hedonism and self-gratification than suppressing one’s individual desires for the good of the whole, the volk. If German youths in the 1930s had been mostly into sex, drugs, and rock & roll, would they have paid any heed to Hitler? And same could be said for youths in communism, which is why communist nations did all they could to suppress individualism as expressions of capitalism.
    More interesting is why Marcuse and others blamed capitalism for the repression when it was obviously the forces of capitalism that were leading to the triumph of hedonism, ‘sexual liberation’, individualism, and youth culture of impatience. Maybe, it was difficult to immediately abandon the ideology, Marxism, that had shaped them for so long. Consciously or subconsciously, maybe the Frankfurt School was seeking to serve as the bridge that would allow the left to go from communism to capitalism as the more useful ideology.

    The Frankfurters were right that ‘sexual liberation’ would be bad for fascism. But they overlooked how ‘sexual liberation’ would lead to the rise of new barbarism. After all, sexual politics is hardly egalitarian as alpha males usually win and as women prefer winners over losers. Some women seek out long-term winners who gain success in professions, but other women seek out short-term winners: the thugs, studs, and athletes. So, instead of resulting in the peaceful eternal summer of love where everyone is happy with good vibes, it has led to the rise of demented heavy metal culture, rap culture, pornification of even kiddie culture, and countless displays of narcissism & vanity, indeed as if everyone is a diva, his or her own ‘hitler’. Fascism represses and channels virile barbarian energies in the service of civilization whereas the raw barbarian energies of ‘sexual liberation’ has led to the degradation of family and society, resulting in lots of violence and stupidity. Black African savages demonstrated that sexual licentiousness is no immunity to ultra-violence. Being sexually far less inhibited, blacks were generally unable to repress their wilder energies for the development of civilization, but they were murderous just the same. And the European barbarians long long ago were less hung up about sexual morality(before the coming of Christianity and its stricter ethos), but did that prevent them from rampaging other communities and raping and pillaging? Indeed, people like Marcuse seem blind to the fact that National Socialism gained in popularity precisely because Jews pushed the most demented kind of anti-values in the Weimar Period, leading to a new barbarism. Degenerate personality leads to social chaos, which leads to people demanding an authoritarian personality to clean up the mess.

  7. @mark green

    The big majority of gentiles just saw the Jew propaganda as entertainment, not realizing it was another attack on traditional western values. You have to look at things at a deeper level and analyze the content and who is behind it. What is the real message. The same thing can be said about the real world. The Zionists and their Jew controlled MSM have used the propaganda of a fake virus to create fear and the need for security among the target goyim to paint a false reality not just to cover the massive Wall st. thefts and make huge profits from another dangerous and worthless vaccine but to condition society to accept more totalitarian control and the loss of our most valuable possession, our liberties.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  8. J says:

    This kosher cross-pollination … Sir, we Jews are even less interested in assimilation. We are so few, that each Jewish boy going after a tall blonde is a demographic catastrophe for us.

    • Replies: @ploni almoni
  9. @Priss Factor

    I’m not sure I remember well details about the film and that I understood all that you wanted to say. But I try making some comments about your post. You speak of Hoffman’s (Benjamin Braddock’s) discontentment, allienation and of his growing old which all of them may be natural feelings and situations in the life of someone. And he overcomes all that and goes back to the normal ways, marring the woman that he wanted to marry and growing old like his parents. The story looks like a quite unremarkable story, maybe a classical love story.

    But this is not the whole story, of course. He sleeps with the wife of a family which are friends of his parents. After that he marries the daughter of this family. The father has a daughter who married a man who slept with his wife. This is quite distant from a possible usual affair outside of marriage. Hoffman (Ben) reaches the daughter through the mother and this in a certain way shakes, shatters or disintegrates the original family, or the family in its original form.

    The other part of the story is that the girl was going to marry in a church. But Hoffman appears in the church, ridiculizes the most important religious symbol and goes away with the bride leaving everybody behind them. He gets to the girl dissolving her family and ridiculizing their religion. Aren’t these also aspects of the film? What would have people have said if the story had happened in a Synagogue and they had used the star to beat the guests during a marriage cerimony?

    You also say that Christianity is a problem and that it’s dead. But if it’s dead, haven’t we left our problems behind? Why are there still all the social problems? You say that it’s a death cult. But is Christianity the real problem or the wars that have little to do with it? I’m not sure Hitler needed the youth to get to power. He was the result of a war. You also speak of the materialism and complacency of our capitalist culture. But in the end you seem to praise the Frankfurt School for bringing young people back to capitalism as the more useful ideology. I’m not sure this is a coherent point of view without more explanation.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    , @animalogic
  10. @Priss Factor

    He’s not. But anti-Semites tend to be a little paranoid.

  11. @mark tapley

    The big majority of gentiles just saw the Jew propaganda as entertainment, not realizing it was another attack on traditional western values.

    Mike Nichols, Buck Henry, and Mike Nichols certainly put a Jewish stamp on it, but I don’t see the movie as particularly anti-white or anti-Western. To link it with later developments of blatantly anti-white movies and TV shows is something of a stretch.

    It is certainly less scathing than REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE.

    • Replies: @mark tapley
  12. @Priss Factor

    Priss, your comments are amazing. Together with that Soiledsinema guy, you are the greatest film critic I know of! Are you a film studies prof? I was hoping you would write an essay on Storytelling under Trevor Lynch’s review to enlighten us about it.

  13. @UncommonGround

    And he overcomes all that and goes back to the normal ways, marring the woman that he wanted to marry and growing old like his parents. But this is not the whole story, of course. He sleeps with the wife of a family which are friends of his parents…

    Right, there’s a lot of craziness involved, and for that reason, Ben cannot go back to normal ways. What he does is crazy, but people root for him as the underdog romantic. It’s like David and Goliath. It’s the same reason we root for Tony Montana who defies the chief kingpin in SCARFACE. Ben is the scrappy fellow who pursues his dream come what may and runs off with the girl. But what he does isn’t normal. It’s not normal to expect a relationship with a girl whose mother you had sex with. It’s not normal or very honorable to come between a woman and her prospective groom. The scene when he informs his parents about the marriage says it all. They assume Elaine and Ben came to an agreement, but Ben says he decided on his own and that Elaine doesn’t even like him. And unbeknownst to his parents, there is the problem of Mr. and Mrs. Robinson. (We are not sure when exactly Mr. Robinson found out about the affair.) His father says his plan is half-baked, and he says, no, it’s completely baked. And it is. The normal and honorable thing would be for a guy to accept the reality of the girl being betrothed to another. The proper thing is to walk away, but Ben just won’t. To be sure, he decides to call it quits after Mr. McClusky(Norman Fell as landlord) tells him to take a hike, but then, Elaine tells him not to leave until he has a definite plan. And then, Ben is back to his crazy dreamer self.

    Things can never be normal with Ben and Elaine even if they do eventually get married. After all, she made her wedding vow and is legally wed to Carl Smith. So, she must go through the whole legal rigamarole of filing for divorce. And if Ben and Elaine were to tie the knot to make it all official, they will still be estranged from their parents, especially the Robinsons. And Ben’s father can’t be too happy either as his partner in the law firm is none other than Mr. Robinson. In time, Ben and Elaine as married couple will likely end up like their parents, but their lives can never be normal due to strained situations with their parents(and perhaps the scandal of the wedding crash).

    That said, THE GRADUATE had almost universal appeal because it was as sentimental as it was cynical. It was like the Beatles and SGT. PEPPER’S LONELY HEARTS CLUB BAND, an album beloved not only by youths but older people and even highbrow types. It was a Rock album pandering to Summer of Love and Youth Culture but it was also arty and even a bit old-fashioned, with tunes like “When I’m Sixty Four” and “She’s Leaving Home”, a song that is rebellious in message but traditional in delivery. (A HARD DAY’S NIGHT was also a winner with both young and older audiences.) Young people regarded Ben as a rebel-hero who says hell to ‘plastics’, experiments in free love, seeks authenticity, and takes action to realize his dreams. For older or more traditional people, it was a story about a guy who initially finds escapism with easy sex with an older woman but then falls in true love and wants commitment and marriage. As for the ending, it can be seen as a rebellion against social norms(as how many people crash weddings?) or confirmation of true love, the classic fairy-tale of a hero saving a damsel from distress. Now, why would Elaine be attracted to Ben when Carl Smith is taller and more handsome(and has good prospects as a doctor)? Ben has personality. Also, Elaine has a soft side and feels for others. Carl Smith is so sure of himself whereas there is a passive/aggressive boyish side to Ben that needs mothering. So, her maternal instincts kick into gear in the presence of Ben. (She is actually more mother-like than Mrs. Robinson who seems bitter that her youth was cut short by pregnancy and marriage.) Also, Ben is a funny guy, and humor goes a long way. Furthermore, love isn’t only about sexual attraction but the feeling of being appreciated. A person can fall in love with the love shown him/her by the other. For Carl Smith, Elaine may be a good catch but not the only one. If she slips from his grasp, he will likely find another good catch. But for Ben, Elaine is the ONLY ONE, and Elaine senses the depth of his passion for her.
    And it’s also what happened between them at the night club. Ben was acting like a total ass but later confesses that he went against his nature due to parental pressure. Of course, that’s not really true as the real reason he tried to sabotage the date was because Mrs. Robinson had forbidden him to date her daughter. Anyway, something clicks in that moment. Elaine is a physically a fully blossomed woman, but there is still something of the girl inside. You can tell she hasn’t yet lost her innocence, and she lives in something like a paper doll world. Ben realizes how much he hurt her, and he does everything to make amends and this creates a special bond between Ben and Elaine. With that kiss, Elaine goes from weeping girl to a real woman, and Ben goes from a confused adult without direction to a man who finally understands what gives his life meaning: Elaine as his true love. (At the same time, there is a quality of puppy love.) With Mrs. Robinson, he was toyed with and used, and he used her in turn. It was just about sex and to stave off boredom. An escapism from life. But with Elaine, there is no guile and gamesmanship. He feels natural in her presence. His plan was for a short date where he’d act the jerk, make Elaine dislike him, take her home, and be done with it. But Elaine’s reaction in the night club is more that of a vulnerable girl than an angry bitch. He sees a side of her he never expected, and in turn, something he didn’t know of himself comes out when he tries to console Elaine. At any rate, it is this ‘subversive’ and multi-faceted blend of cynicism and sentimentality that made THE GRADUATE so special. But the same could be said of THE GODFATHER, which is both a heart-warming family story and a cold & ruthless gangster tale.

    [MORE]

    The other part of the story is that the girl was going to marry in a church. But Hoffman appears in the church, ridiculizes the most important religious symbol and goes away with the bride leaving everybody behind them… What would have people have said if the story had happened in a Synagogue and they had used the star to beat the guests during a marriage ceremony?

    The thing in the church happens so fast that it hardly registers as anti-Christian screed. Also, whatever the significance of Ben wielding the cross as a weapon, it is funny as hell, and as characters in THE WILD BUNCH say, “I wouldn’t have it any other way.” The outrage element is part of the fun. A little irreverence never hurt anyone.
    Also, just look at the church. Its design is so Californian, so modernist and soulless. It looks like a bleached shell devoid of spiritual meaning. A church as status-symbol of the affluent and modern. So, it’s less a Christian ceremony than a matter of custom. They get married in a church because it’s just what people do. And who are among the attendees? None other than Mrs. Robinson, hardly a virtuous character. And there’s Mr. Robinson who pressured his daughter into marrying Carl Smith out of his seething rage at Ben. We don’t know much about Smith the ‘makeout king’, but he doesn’t seem the spiritual type. So, even without Ben’s presence, the wedding is just an empty show, a ritual devoid of spiritual or even much moral meaning. Elaine is getting married to please her father. Her heart is really with Ben.
    Ben’s wielding the cross as a weapon could be seen as a desecration of Christianity, but it could also mean he’s the christ-like figure for true love. He’s willing to sacrifice everything, even his sanity and limb, for the girl he loves.

    You also say that Christianity is a problem and that it’s dead. But if it’s dead, haven’t we left our problems behind? Why are there still all the social problems?

    Because we’ll always have problems no matter what. The problem with clinging to Christianity in our age is that it no longer provides the answers that people are searching for. As such, people need to seek out new visions to solve problems and find new directions. It’s like a horse. It is highly useful when it’s strong and hardy. But what use is a dead horse? Christianity is now a dead horse. In Europe, it’s totally dead. They say America is still religious, but no one gets fired or blacklisted for insulting God, Jesus, or Paul. But if you may be fired and blacklisted even at a ‘conservative’ so-called Christian institution if you criticize Fentanyl Floyd or Jewish promotion of globo-homo. For many Christians, even those on the ‘right’, the highest holies are Jews, Negroes, and Homos. Indeed, many churches would us believe that god and jesus serve Jews, homos, and blacks than anything else.

    You say that it’s a death cult. But is Christianity the real problem or the wars that have little to do with it?

    By ‘death cult’, I meant it is a suicide pact. If Christianity still had martial spirit, it would be in much better shape. In the past, Christianity served the West well in the form of hypochristianity. Christianity had to be hypocritical in order to survive and expand. The teachings of Jesus, such as ‘turn the other cheek’ and ‘meek shall inherit the earth’, don’t go too far as far as power is concerned. Jesus urged people to give away all their wealth, live in righteous poverty, and meditate on spiritual matters. But people who act that way end up dead or oppressed. If they believe in Heaven, they may expect something better in the afterlife. But most people are attached to the real world, and power is about money, weapons, hierarchy, and violence. So, the Christian West preached one thing but practiced something other. Now, the West wasn’t purely hypocritical and much of their values and practices derived from Christian morality. Still, the kindly side of the West relied on the hard side that kept and expanded power by ruthless means.

    But such kind of hypocrisy is no longer tenable, especially as Jews gained power in the West and never lose sleep pointing out all the hypocrisies of the West. This shame has been internalized by most whites. This has led to whites either rejecting Christianity or trying to practice a Christianity that is closer to the spirit of Jesus’s teachings… which can only serve as a death/suicide cult. Worse, there are so many idiots or opportunists who seek to use the church as a club for other agendas, often satanic in nature, like globo-homo and worship of savage Negro as Magic Negro. And of course, even non-religious and anti-religious people have the kind of zealotry derived from the puritanical strains of Christianity. If the church in our times is an empty shell devoid of spiritual passion, post-Christian passion of radicals is like spiritual fervor without a meaningful body. Shell without flesh and flesh without shell are, of course, both doomed.
    Christianity, both Protestant and Catholic, is dead as a useful and virile creed. When the Vatican has Pope Francis as top leader, what does that say? What is Mainline church in the US but promotion of globo-homo and Magic Negro? What is Evangelicalism but about More Wars for ‘Muh Israel’? There is the Orthodox Church, but it has no meaning to most Greeks who are secular. And in Russia, it is a museum culture than a living one despite all the new cathedrals built.

    You also speak of the materialism and complacency of our capitalist culture. But in the end you seem to praise the Frankfurt School for bringing young people back to capitalism as the more useful ideology.

    Frankfurt School was right to critique capitalism-consumerism and its mind-numbing and conformist influences, but its proposed solutions are useless because people like Herbert Marcuse were not honest, not least with themselves. Marcuse wailed against fascism, but he meant goy fascism. As he was pro-Zionist, he was for Jewish fascism. This is a key truth about Jews. They are so virulently anti-fascist precisely because they want fascism only for themselves. It is through fascism that both the right wing and left wing of a people can unite into a combined force. Fascism serves as the bridge and bond between left and right. Don’t make them fight one another but work together. This was the basis for National Socialism and Zionism. Where both ultimately failed morally is they went from nationalism to imperialism. Just like Jews hated Christianity and Islam for passing the secrets of the Jewish God to goyim, they hate fascism because it allows goyim to develop the kind of power specialized by Jews. Leo Strauss was a ‘rightist’ while Herbert Marcuse was a ‘leftist’. But what did they have in common? They were proudly Jewish and Zionist. For all their ideological discourse, identity came first. Zionism was created by Jewish socialists and Jewish capitalists working together. So, even as whites should give credit where it’s due — Frankfurters made useful criticism of capitalism and consumerism — , they must forge their own answers and solutions to problems, one that prioritizes the needs of whites. Jews are often interesting in their critique but useless in their proposed solutions, at least for goyim, as the utmost priority of Jews is to maximize Jewish power, not to make goyim more powerful. Frankfurt School is like a doctor that diagnoses the disease but provides the wrong cure.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Dumbo
    , @Ivan
  14. I don’t think it was conscious, but Ben’s scream in the church is so reminiscent of Rod Steiger’s wailing at the end of THE PAWNBROKER.

    As for Wasps trapped in the church, that has nothing on the ending of DIRTY DOZEN where Nazi officers are barricaded in the basement and roasted alive with gasoline and grenades. That is one cynical movie. Nazis are so evil they deserve to be slaughtered like animals. But American heroes are a bunch of crooks, criminals, thugs, and psychos. It’s like an insane hashing of BRIDGE ON RIVER KWAI and THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN. Truly a dirty movie.

    • Replies: @GEPAY
    , @syonredux
  15. @Priss Factor

    I never saw either of the movies you mention and did not link them to any other Jew propaganda. My t.v. is not linked to the satellite (rural area, no cable) and I wouldn’t waste my time or money on it anyway. I was just speaking in general terms that most people just look at the films as entertainment. They are generally not aware that much of the content is designed by the Zionist Jew controlled film studios to demoralize and gradually destabilize western societies. This is a generational process but once it is done it is very difficult to overcome. If you are going to change society then you need to change the goyim. This was the goal of the Jew Frankfurt School and of the Jew film studios and their MSM whores.

    Most people just believe what the Zionist gov. tells them. This shows how stupid and gullible they are when it is not that hard to seen that everything the gov. does is a lie and a fraud.

    The great political and social observer of the 1830’s, Tocquville foresaw the problem:

    Thus it daily makes the exercise of free choice less useful and rarer, restricts the activity of free will within a narrower compass, and little by little robs each citizen of the proper use of his own faculties. Equality has prepared men for all this, predisposing them to endure it and often even regard it as beneficial.

    Having thus taken each citizen in turn in its powerful grasp and shaped men to its will, government then extends its embrace to include the whole of society. It covers the whole of social life with a network of petty, complicated rules that are both minute and uniform, through which even men of the greatest originality and the most vigorous temperament cannot force their heads above the crowd. It does not break men’s will, but softens, bends, and guides it; it seldom enjoins, but often inhibits, action; it does not destroy anything, but prevents much being born; it is not at all tyrannical, but it hinders, restrains, enervates, stifles, and stultifies so much that in the end each nation is no more than a flock of timid and hardworking animals with the government as its shepherd.

    The Zionist elite with their Jew films and MSM want a system of obedient domestic animals that require the government to hold their hand and tell them what to do. It’s like Franklin said: Those who would give up their essential liberties for temporary security deserve neither.

  16. @lloyd

    Not sure you’re short and dark, but you sure are cute, “lloyd”.

  17. GEPAY says:
    @Priss Factor

    I liked your comments on the Graduate. I certainly liked the movie when I watched it. One certainly doesn’t have to be Jewish to feel left out of boogie society. The 50s in the US was not a fun one for lower class white people or black people or native Americans or Latinos or…. If one had a certain awareness it was easy to be alienated from what was perceived as mainstream culture. Consumerism and seeking comfort are essentially empty. I certainly identified with Benjamin’s alienation. Paul Simon has made some great music and it certainly worked well in the Graduate. I didn’t see the Jewishness when I watched the Graduate although if everybody else in the movie looked jewish they would have just reminded me of the Jews I went to school with’s families, Many of whom lived in the Jewish suburbs next to where I lived. Many of whom were moderately well off and belonged to the Jewish country club. Jewish girls didn’t go out with me – the little goyim guy who happened to be in their classes because he was bright. He was also poor. I was raised as a Methodist but although the sense of community was good for fellow “worshippers” I never felt any spirituality. It was a harsh world and time that Jesus lived in. All men are brothers. It’s harder for a rich man to get to heaven than for camel to pass through the eye of a camel. Chasing out the money lenders from the temples – good stuff but I imagine Jesus as connected to the source. Then organized religion happens. Look at Lao Tse and compare to what Taoism turned into. I don’t think one needs to blame the Jews for the emptiness most of Christianity has turned into in the US and Europe. Fundamentalist religios of any creed though are to be barely tolerated although they are passionate as Yeats noted while the …. Israel though is the 2nd most terrorist country in the world after the US. It is indeed an Anglo-Zionist empire that is creating much unnecessary misery in this century.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    , @Hibernian
  18. @GEPAY

    In a way, much of the modern form of Jewish Alienation derived from acceptance by White Society. As Sanderson wrote in the article, Jews were both ragging Wasps for not being accepting enough of Jews AND fretting that too much assimilation may lead to loss of Jewish identity.

    So, even as Jews felt alienated from Wasps, they also felt increasing alienation from their own roots. The more they became modern and especially ‘American’, they less they felt traditionally bound to Jewishness. It’s one reason why Jews cooked up ersatz-form of being Jewish, such as being fixated on the Holocaust or celebrating Globo-Homo.
    Barbra Streisand’s YENTL is both celebratory and critical of Jewish Tradition, and it features a woman posing as a man to be accepted into the world of Rabbis. Around the same time, Blake Edwards made VICTOR/VICTORIA and soon after, there was TOOTSIE where Hoffman plays a ‘woman’. And Woody Allen made ZELIG around the same time. Paradoxically, Allen’s film seems to imply that the thing that Jews fear most as harmful to Jewishness, which is assimilation, is also what defines Jewishness the most. In other words, Jews have developed remarkably adaptive strategies of assimilation. And yet, even as Jews morph and blend into goy societies, at the end of the day, they revert back to Jewishness; they don’t really transform into the other. It’s like an octopus can take on all sorts of shapes but returns to being an octopus. But if the octopus is so fluid and flexible in its shape and structure, is there a core structure of octopus-ness? Or is the essence of the octopus to have no definite form? It’s no wonder Jews are so into trans-business where there can be infinite number of ‘genders’. It’s like sexual Houdini-ism.

  19. Someone should make a wasp revenge version of THE GRADUATE.

    Ben is a son in a Jewish family but has blond hair and looks very Nordic. Later, he rescues Elaine Rabinowitz from a synagogue wedding and runs off.

    • Replies: @Mr McKenna
    , @ariadna
  20. Anon[113] • Disclaimer says:
    @Priss Factor

    @ What he does is crazy, but people root for him as the underdog romantic.

    Are you nuts? Maybe the other ugly guys.. nobody roots for a beautiful virginal woman to marry a toad. Much less her mother’s ugly lover.

  21. Hibernian says:
    @GEPAY

    It’s harder for a rich man to get to heaven than for camel to pass through the eye of a camel.

    But anything is possible with God.

  22. @lloyd

    I note the name of author of Graduate, Charles Webb.

    Odd thing about the movie is the Webb novel came out before Counterculture happened whereas the movie was made in its midst. The scenario feels all the more alienating because of it. It’s like an early 60s mindset time-traveled to the latter-60s. Now, one might say that those were just a few yrs, but SO MUCH happened between 1963 and 1967. That sudden sense of change was the subject of FUTURE SHOCK by Alvin Toffler. If Ben were graduating from high school in the movie, he might be ecstatic. Alas, he graduated from college and officially became an adult just when the culture of youth was taking off to new dimensions. He’s too young to identify with his parents generation but just old enough to feel out of sync with the youth culture. Thus, he feels alienated from old and young. And yet, he feels attracted to Mrs. Robinson who, though twice his age, seems defiant of growing older by making up her own rules. And part of the reason he may feel such attraction to Elaine is she’s still in school and therefore symbolizes the youth that has passed him by, at least in official capacity. Ben was following the track of being an Organization Man than a Creative Soul. Or, at the very least, he’s like an Early Beatle with suit-and-tie who suddenly finds himself transported to the Age of Aquarius.

    As for Webb getting only $1,000, I doubt if anyone foresaw what a super-hit the movie would be. Just the right talents came together to produce that miracle. Hollywood didn’t think THE GODFATHER would become a super-hit either.

    Indeed, most novels, bought cheaply or expensively, fail to produce movie hits.

  23. @fitzhamilton

    Fussy pedantic point: Hoffman’s character in the final scene isn’t wielding a crucifix. It’s just a cross.

    Much has been made of the Christian and Jewish angle of the story, but perhaps the main appeal is closer to Greek mythology and Western fairytales.

    It is through Elaine that Ben has finally found his true self and no longer feels so alienated. Thus, the problem was less about social alienation than auto-alienation. It suggests that an individual is only half-a-person, therefore a person can only be complete when he meets the soulmate. It lends a mythic overtone to the movie — Greek mythology says Zeus separated men and women from their embrace, therefore life is about men and women trying to reconnect with their lost mates.
    Early in the Sixties, there was a hit French movie called BLACK ORPHEUS, the telling of the Greek myth with black actors. THE GRADUATE is like the Jewish Perseus.

    • Thanks: Fluesterwitz
    • Replies: @HorstG
    , @Malla
  24. syonredux says:
    @Priss Factor

    Jewish director Steven Soderbergh

    Is Soderbergh Jewish? I don’t think so.

    So far as I know, he’s not Jewish:

    Birth Name: Steven Andrew Soderbergh

    Place of Birth: Atlanta, Georgia, U.S.

    Date of Birth: January 14, 1963

    Ethnicity:
    *Swedish, Irish (father)
    *Italian (mother)

    Steven is the son of Mary Ann Mitchell “Midge” (Bernard) and Peter Andrew Soderbergh, a dean and professor at Louisiana State University College of Education.

    Steven’s paternal grandfather was Sven Eric Berkov Soderbergh (the son of Johan August Söderberg and Ida Paulina Arvidsson). Steven’s grandfather Sven was born in Stockholm, Jakob och Johannes, Stockholms län, Uppland, Sweden. Johan was the son of Per Söderberg and Maria Sofia Bertström. Ida was the daughter of Johannes Arvidsson and Anna-Maja Olsdotter.

    Steven’s paternal grandmother was named Mary Margaret McGowan. Mary Margaret was born in New York.

    Steven’s maternal grandfather was named Anthony James Bernardo/Bernard. Anthony was born in New York, to Italian parents.

    Steven’s maternal grandmother was named Clara Venturine (whose parents were likely Salvatore Venturine and Marie). Clara was born in Pennsylvania, also to Italian parents.

    https://ethnicelebs.com/steven-soderbergh

  25. syonredux says:
    @Priss Factor

    . It’s like an insane hashing of BRIDGE ON RIVER KWAI and THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN. Truly a dirty movie.

    MAGNIFICENT SEVEN? I would have gone with THE DIRTY DOZEN:

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    , @trickster
  26. @Priss Factor

    But then they would have to die a horrible death!

    Conventions must be observed!

  27. Dumbo says:
    @Priss Factor

    Good review. But I personally never liked THE GRADUATE, which seems overhyped, and its success perhaps more due to Simon and Garfunkel’s songs. From Mike Nichols, I much prefer WHO’S AFRAID OF VIRGINIA WOLF, which of course is also an attack by a gay man (Edward Albee, maybe Nichols too) on heterosexual marriage, but it’s pretty funny.

    Though Christ is often depicted in Western Art as an Aryan-looking fellow, He was actually Jewish and probably looked like more like Norman Finkelstein or Noam Chomsky.

    I’m thinking that David, being Jewish, looked more like Jerry Seinfeld or Sean Penn, but the statue resembles something out of Greco-Roman mythology.

    Here I think you’re confusing the ancient hebrews with modern Ashkenazis, which are a different mix/breed and not really the same thing (just as modern Greeks are much more Turkish-looking than the ancient Greeks). We don’t know exactly how ancient hebrews looked, but there are descriptions of David as having red or light hair.

    As for the image of Jesus, the letter of Lentulus and the shroud of Turin, although they may be medieval forgeries, provided the needed evidence for a more Nordic-looking Jesus. We really don’t know. But I don’t think modern Ashkenazis are the model.

    • Replies: @Agathoklis
  28. syonredux says:
    @Priss Factor

    Among the new batch of Jewish actors, the only one whose success matched that of Hoffman in the 70s and 80s was maybe Gene Hackman

    Hackman isn’t Jewish:

    Birth Name: Eugene Allen Hackman

    Place of Birth: San Bernardino, California, United States

    Date of Birth: January 30, 1930

    Ethnicity: English, small amounts of German and Scottish, distant Dutch

    https://ethnicelebs.com/gene-hackman

    (though Henry Winkler hit pay dirt as the Fonz). Richard Dreyfus seemed to be on the up and up but soon faded. Of course, one could count Harrison Ford as Jewish, or at half-Jewish.

    Ford’s persona is extremely un-Jewish. Heck, Stanley Kubrick had no idea that Ford was half-Jewish:

    Kubrick frequently removed references to the Jewishness of characters in the novels he adapted.In Eyes Wide Shut, Frederic Raphael, who is Jewish, wanted to keep the Jewish background of the protagonists, but Kubrick disagreed and removed details that would identify characters as Jewish. Kubrick determined Bill should be a “Harrison Ford-ish goy” and created the surname of Harford as an allusion to the actor.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyes_Wide_Shut

  29. anon[191] • Disclaimer says:

    It’s good some people can dissect and peel back layers of movies like the Graduate looking for jewish propaganda when most of us can only remember one or two lines from the movie like “Invest in Plastics”. I guess I’m just immune to jewish propaganda.

  30. A Jewish actress said recently that producers and directors get upset when they find out she is Jewish. They want Shikshas in their movies, not nice Jewish girls. It’s an interesting phenomenon. I guess the Shiksha is like the forbidden fruit. And this article makes clear that Jews LOVE bedding Shikshas, to attract the envy of taller, blonder Goys everywhere. Nothing says success like stepping out with a gorgeous Shiksha, it seems, whilst remaining Jewish to the core.

    If anyone doesn’t know, “Shiksha” literally means “meat of an unclean animal”.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  31. Alfa158 says:

    I watched that clip in the article of the wedding scene and it looked truncated. Sure enough it was.
    https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Final+scene+the+graduate&docid=608006346418422509&mid=8FBF4FE28877636A48308FBF4FE28877636A4830&view=detail&FORM=VIRE
    I was interested in seeing the movie when it first came out because I had met Hoffman at USC when he was filming a scene for the movie there. Didn’t like the movie, the Benjamin character was a jerk and a loser, and the wedding scene was blatantly anti-Christian.
    The thing I noticed in the full version of the ending is that after Benjamin and Elaine get past the initial exhilaration, they end the scene in the back of the bus, sitting not touching, staring straight ahead and looking sobered. They seemed to be telegraphing the sentiment, “what the f*** did I just do?!”

    • Replies: @Ray P
    , @Priss Factor
  32. dually says:

    It’s myopic to write an essay about the culture of the 1960s and leave out the most important backdrop – the Vietnam War draft. Like our current upheaval, the 1960s were a revolution of the rich (aren’t they all?) against the poor and working class, specifically targeting the paternal social contract, which protected the working class family, and the draft, which instituted a kind of egalitarianism between rich and poor.
    I don’t remember any Bolsheviks at the theaters with barking attack dogs and pistols held at the backs of the WASP’s heads to force them to watch these, and similar anti-Western movies. Judeo-WASPs have had a long history together of endless Reformation, Revolution, and wars fought in their mutual interest, starting with the English Civil War and Cromwell.

  33. @syonredux

    Hackman isn’t Jewish:

    Now, that I find surprising.

  34. @syonredux

    MAGNIFICENT SEVEN? I would have gone with THE DIRTY DOZEN:

    ??

    I was talking of DIRTY DOZEN.

    • Replies: @syonredux
  35. I am Robert says: • Website

    Thank you for the excellent review. It has helped me understand much which had remained hidden.

    I saw both ‘The Graduate’ and ‘Lolita’ somewhere around 1980, and found the former much more disturbing than the latter.

    Was Kubrick an “accidental” Jew?

  36. But than Dustin did play more suitable Jewish role in Midnight cowboy.

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
  37. Anonymous[265] • Disclaimer says:

    That was a Cross, not a Crucifix. Crucifix has a Jew hanging on it.

  38. GMC says:

    One of the reasons that that Jews were successful in destroying european cultured America, was because the American people were Cool – Laid back, easy going, enjoyed being a middle class society with a home and 40 hr. work week – WW II guys were doing good. Most Americans figured that eventually, all Americans would love to live like this, and would join in building the country up . I grew up in the 50s and 60s and it looked to me that we were headed that way – even thinking that the Nam War and Race war at home would straighten itself out and we could build off of it. Couldn’t find a job after working overseas in 2009 – I found one in Dallas, driving truck from Brooklyn to Miami to Seattle and inbetween. There are still many many many good people in the USA , but the Americans got backstabbed by their own and some – not their own. After the Graduate, the jews led the recon, for the Zionists, that kept up the propaganda movies and sucker punched the American Dream with their lobbyists, corporate takeovers, 65 open/unlimited immigration law, government takeovers and International crime syndicate. Americans will have to fight like Hell , in order to get back their country.

    • Replies: @HeebHunter
    , @Durruti
  39. Franz says:

    I’m a bit on a limb here. But a 1967 audience would have been made up of people the same age as the author Webb (b. 1939) and most likely non-political future Yuppies. The film was an adults only thing.

    This is no complaint, but the article neglects to point out how badly the film aged by the time a significant number of younger Americans DID see it, at it’s tenth anniversary. Between the oil shocks and trucker’s strikes and closing factories. nobody could figure out what the dumb main character was “alienated” about when the world was being handed to him on a silver platter. The 10th anniversary re-release was dead on arrival, and pulled early. Maybe not a large young audience, but a decidedly significant reaction.

    This part is interesting:

    Benjamin uses Christianity’s most sacred symbol (a crucifix) as a weapon

    He swings a cross a bit, true, but mainly he uses it as a bolt to keep the Christians inside. There might be symbolism in there all right. Likely unintentional and most certainly not the point Jewish filmmakers would want to make.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  40. I actually read the book,(my older sister had it) before I ever saw the movie. The book was good,but I don’t remember much about it,except this: Benjamin recounts his shock at being confronted,while hitchiking,with a lecherous gay Indian.

    “A queer Indian! Can you believe it! A queer Indian!”

    Did the author anticipate Nick Sandman?

  41. Alden says:
    @mark green

    What I find even stranger was the admiration of boomer goyim men for the fumbling nerd creep Woody Allen. For some reason, boomer men made Allen popular. He was even more horrible to look at than Hoffman and his movies were just crap. But men my age flicked to his movies.

    • Replies: @Ray P
    , @James O'Meara
  42. Alden says:
    @lloyd

    Scarlett has black not blonde hair and was not described in the book as tall nor played in the movie by a tall actress. There’s nothing Jewish about the book or the movie. Gable was dark but about as non Jewish as Mel Gibson Actor Leslie Howard was Jewish and played a nerd in the movie. Scarlett tried to marry the Howard character by he married someone else at the beginning of the movie.

  43. And yet, WE allow this to continue, WHY????? Is the family structure no longer important, especially unleashing sexual liberation onto the population who became convinced sexual activity is for “FUN” not in the marriage bed procreating children or Our next generation, who gives a fuck I guess, right??

  44. Hegar says:

    This is a good description of part of the Marxist Frankfurt School and its Cultural Marxism, promoted by Jewish socialists (usually the Frankfurters themselves) in academia and in Hollywood.

    Yet Ron Unz has allowed on his website the pro-Soviet communist “Eric Striker” who lies to his kiddie audience on Twitter that the Right is responsible for mass immigration, homosexuality and race mixing propaganda in the West, “because they want lower wages”. He tells them that “you didn’t see this in the Soviet Union, only in the West!” Anyone with the slightest knowledge of communist history knows all of this was invented by communists, because they couldn’t win with their ordinary fever dreams about the economy. They had to attack the White culture and race instead.

    “Eric Striker” (not his real name) knows this but lies. Not once, but constantly. As a communist, truth and lie are just different tools to him. He has claimed to be a well-off psychiatrist (weird) but actually studied four years of history in college, which is simply four years of Marxist propaganda. He has no other education. And Unz allows this swarthy mixed Latino-White on his website?

    A guy who claims Cuba and North Korea are great because “they have no immigration”. Odd how “Eric Striker’s” paradises all have to forbid people from leaving. Something he has mentioned … zero times.

    • Replies: @animalogic
  45. Anon[116] • Disclaimer says:

    There are endless documentaries and informative pieces on Youtube where young people can be informed about the world. Hollywood film will never have more than a quarter of the power it had during its apex to inform the populace. Thats a good thing too. (((They))) abused it.

  46. Johan says:

    Jews absolutely love democracy (except in their own country, where they fake it), because democracy is decline, and decline is something which you can feed on, you can sell cultural junk to the masses to name one thing. As the readers here know, they got mighty right and influential from this practice. And we are left to waste our time on an analysis of their junk.

  47. @mark tapley

    The greatest trick that “Jews” have used is to convince people that they don’t exist.

    • Replies: @mark tapley
  48. Gordo says:

    I always found that film creepy and disgusting.

  49. JQ says:

    Lets then assume Meet the Parents and meet the Fockers is the sequel to this film,

    The white conservative awkward family that welcomes the new boyfriend,
    the beautiful blonde girl that could not find love with the ex boyfriend
    who just happen to be a white successful man.

    Just the below average comedy but I felt some discomfort at the message,
    the clues and the need to overemphasize sex (Conservative man no sex or bad sex)
    while the liberal (very liberal) family is happy!

    I’m not even white and my best friend is a Jew and even him hated that movie.

  50. @Dumbo

    AncientDNA samples confirm the ancient Greeks look much like the modern Greeks. Read up on it if you can read.

    • Agree: Ivan
  51. @UncommonGround

    My memories of “The Graduate” are less than … crisp. I recall it as a film of silences. Absence of communication seems to be a major theme — which plays into the alienation etc. Its as if these people have nothing worthwhile to say. Their lives are both full & complete, yet meaningless & bourgeois. Ben’s parent’s nagging to get him into the scuba gear which he wears as if he’s woken up in a parallel universe — not QUITE the real one. Recall the almost painfully embarrassing moments when Ben tries to get Mrs R to talk after the “sexual act”. Mrs R only comes alive, just, when Ben rejects her for her daughter ( not that the rejection is the issue — she’s like a stubbed out cigarette).
    The atmosphere of this film is uncomfortably surreal — although all its surfaces are blandly real.

  52. HorstG says:
    @Priss Factor

    Note Hoffman’s character punches the guy hugging him from behind in the side, John 19:34.
    Which in turn refers to the making of the woman from a rib from the side.

  53. @Hegar

    My comment is aimed at “history”.
    ” but actually studied four years of history in college, which is simply four years of Marxist propaganda.”
    Maybe — but likely not. The study of History is so diverse that generalizations in the absence of facts are unwise.

  54. My first Alfa Romeo, I owned eleven in sucession, was the very same model, a so-called “Duetto” as driven by DH in this flick.

    Mine was powder blue, and Alfas being the most roadable rides ever created on planet mirth, their DOHC four-banger a jewel of auto tech, the butter smooth five-speed wonderful, plus four-wheel discs way back in 1966.

    (Yeah I know this is non-sequitur info)

    AJM

  55. @mark tapley

    “Islamic nations” on the other hand……?

    • Replies: @mark tapley
  56. El Dato says:
    @mark green

    But the 60s was a watershed era for the Jews. How fitting that young Dustin Hoffman got to bang two lovely shiksas; in this case, a suburban mother and her virginal daughter.

    I really should upgrade my goals in life.

  57. trickster says:

    Give the Trickster a break !

    I am always amazed to go to the movies and before the show starts some fresh faced good looking gay who comes across as a complete dunderhead interviews other fresh faced good looking gays and lesbians with equally vacant faces and opinions about the characters in an equally vacuous movie.

    The conversation would go something like this.

    “How did you feel about playing Billy Bob in Donkey Farm 23”

    Actor/ actress : “I really enjoyed the role and spent 6 months researching the character. I have to tell you though that the Producer, Director are very talented, sweet, supportive, compassionate blah blah……Now the reason I liked playing this character is because he is fresh, he is honest, he is sooooooooooooooooooooo funny, he has a great deal of empathy but is not afraid to be assertive, he is totally awesome and just short of sooooooooooooooo totally amazing blah blah, he is self centered but not a narcissist , hopeful but not an optimist and all about racial equality while respecting and honouring his own grayness”.

    In the meantime the movie is a semi cartoon about a cartoon donkey who is taken in by a kind couple who run a farm for real donkeys in the Arizona desert. The cartoon donkey chase them around and they chase him around and Billy Bob is the guy who imparts his wisdom to them and advises them not to shit all the place. There are “amusing” comments here and there in the movie and the intellectually challenged in the audience who have stumped up their $10 for the show plus another $20 for junk food give their vulgar approval with silly laughter and ” that;s soooooooooooooo funny. He is sooooooooooooo cool, totally amazing. I give it 4 thumbs up !”

    Yes, you would think these bozos are attending and discussing some highly intellectual and subtle aspects of the works of Shakespeare, Maupassant or Thakeray.

    Come on. The Graduate was a movie about a young Jewish guy who fucks an older Jewish woman. End of story.

    Dont make it out to be some highly intellectual work of literature deserving of deep and penetrating thought and analysis. It is a highly avant garde work of literature adapted for the screen as much as those 0.10c peep shows one could check out back in the day on 42nd Street near to the Port Authority building in New York City.

    • LOL: Ivan
  58. Brilliant analysis of jewish aspects of The Graduate. The author loses it by placing Marcuse in the center of the jewish conspiracy, who is quoted as agreeing with Nietzsche who advocates that the hero not be enslaved by a slave religion Christianity. Nietzsche is echoing Callicles in the Gorgias whose theory of the social contract is that the many enslave the young cubs among them by instituting the laws of the city about justice and injustice. Callicles argues that the tyrant who does what he wants is just by nature. Marcuse was in favor of doing your bliss which is repeating what has been argued for in Plato’s short stories, by Nietzsche and many others. Its the Foucalt/Derrida schtik. The tenured professor teaching that all is permitted is not unknown. It is not a jew thing.

    Aside the useful review of the Graduate, the subsequent exposition, revealing more about the jewish conspiracy, to show how it all ties together, Marcuse and whoever, does not convince.

  59. Ivan says:
    @Priss Factor

    Pretty sophisticated operation you have going there Priss. Snowball the issues with a great deal of analysis, but punt and blame Catholics for Global Homo and the Magic Negro. Careful your slip is showing.

  60. Ray P says:
    @Alfa158

    Nichols (the director) supposedly had the two actors play this scene on the bus over and over until they were thoroughly fed-up and tired. Rather like the Stanley Kubrick method.

  61. Robjil says:

    1967 was the important year for Jewish power. The Graduate was a celebration of that power.

    June 8 1967 – Israel attacked the USS Liberty.

    Israel wanted to sink it as a false flag.

    The motivation was get the US to join in the 6 day war. It is quite bizarre that it was only six days, June 5-10 1967. Six days is perhaps a game on six mania of Jewish culture. The 60s decade fetish could be a similar thing.

    Israel got a lot of land from the war – Sinai, West Bank and Golan Heights. Sinai was later given back. Golan Heights was officially labeled part of Israel on Purim 2019 by the Trump regime.

    The Summer of Love, hippies in San Fran was massively promoted in 1967. Thousands of youths descended in San Fran that summer.

    If the USS Liberty went to plan, what would all these drug/sex Zion MSM zombies think of the US going to war for Israel? Zion MSM had a plan. Me-ism, which is drug/sex cultism, is a perfect tool for that. The navel gazers are pumped up with Me-ism divide and conquers games. Wars are faraway, thus, Zion MSM can lie easily about the reasons for the war, like it does for every war since the Zion 9 11 false flag. Who would know the difference?

    1967 is still with us after all those years. Drug/sex culture navel gazing is the go to in Zion MSM.

    Drug/Sex cultists await every command from Zion MSM for their next step. BLM is a classic example of Drug/Sex cultism. It divides and conquers the Gentile masses.

    Wars done for Zion are nothing burgers to Zion MSM Sex/Drug zombies. Why? Zion MSM loves wars that are “Good for the Jews”. Zion MSM dictates only things that help its cause. The Zion MSM Sex/Drug zombies just follow orders of their rulers.

    • Replies: @Ivan
  62. Vojkan says:

    I was a teenager when I saw The Graduate for the first, and to this date, only time. I remember thinking then that Americans really were a nation of morons. I realised only years later that it was actually a Jewish flick to the core, a collage of Jewish clichés. Conceited, obnoxious, tedious. The kind of flick liberal goyim dorks are eager to eulogise.

  63. cranc says:

    Working from the principle that all politics is really a veil over religious questions, I wonder about the other religious veins of the Sixties counterculture era. The prominence of institutional Christianity in Western society had been unravelling since well before Darwin’s time as part of a general swing towards materialist philosophies combined with a critical approach to the biblical literalism of preceding eras. What came in place of its decline was not just the tribalism of Judaic activists working in economics, culture and academia, but a public interest in Eastern philosophies, pre-Christian European traditions and a fundamentalist Christian ‘revival’. I am still not sure how much the rise of Jewish Power is due to an opportunism pursued within a declining civilisation, and how much a plan spanning milllenia. Hollywood was surely always set to be a corrupting force upon moral norms unless there was some seriously strong ethical institution guiding the industry of film making. By the time of film’s emergence such (Christian) authority was long gone.
    I was sold the Sixties II, in the early 90s. As a young man from an English liberal family, I was hooked by the story that ‘Christianity was the cause of the world’s shit’, and that the rebels of a generation before had the answers : i.e. an anti-establishment counterculture. I read Abbie Hoffman and Willhelm Reich. It all made sense at the time. It takes a long time to unlearn things from early life when one is shown the other side of things.
    So I wonder about the attitude of other religious traditions to the materialistic and supremacist aspects of Judaism. What do, for example, Buddhists (when allowed to speak without fear of repercussions) think of Jewish political and cultural activism ? For that matter the same could be asked of any ostensibly tollerant and universalist philosophy when confronted by the subversive domination ambitions of particularists (- and ones that cannot be openly criticised in our culture) ?
    The early 90s saw an explosion of a more stripped down hedonism in the shape of the dance music scene: basically a giant gay club that was exported around the counterculture that then went mainstream. There were a lot of references back to the druggy days of the Sixties in those times, a lot of people ended up on heroin, or mangled in their serotonin cells. Who was shaping the culture at that juncture?
    If anyone has any shortcut pointers to reading more on these subjects, I would welcome them.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  64. Ray P says:
    @Alden

    I was surprised when I learned that Allen had a coterie of female fans. But he did. (Look up Kathy Shaidle’s old columns on Takimag or PJMedia wherein she a few times discussed her gang of girls adoration of Woody and the anguish over it ending). Up until the early nineties revelation of his interest in Mia Farrow’s children.

    • Replies: @ariadna
  65. @mark green

    “Yet countless American apparently loved ‘The Graduate’ and were undisturbed by its story and message.“

    This the typical American insouciance that culturally spills over to other Christian countries with such movies radiating subliminal messages which poison the green minds while Christians pay for and contribute to their cultural debasement. Just remember that those were the opening salvos of Hollywierd against Christianity thereby testing the waters which proved ideally placid for Jewish film producers excoriating Christianity and emboldening them all the way to ‘ Da Vinci’s Code’. If the roles were reversed, Jewish protestors would be picketing in front of every movie theatre and raising media hell over the event. We should also note how Hollywierd avoids antagonising Muslims for fear of their reaction like the one exhibited towards Theo Van Gogh.

    • Replies: @Gast
  66. sonofman says:

    When I first watched The Graduate (and everytime subsequently) all I can see is Anne Bancroft. I never understood why he picked Elaine over Mrs. Robinson.

    • Replies: @follyofwar
  67. @Zarathustra

    He wasn’t Jewish, he was an Italian named Enrico “Ratso” Rizzo.

    Moreover, I’m surprised that so many whites are so convinced by these films. Hoffman in the graduate not only does not look Anglo-Saxon he also looks 15 years too old for the role-he’s only about 30 but even then the non-stop smoking and nascent cocaine use made him look about 35. In 1967 Hoffman looked older than Bancroft.

    Ross looked the right age and ethnicity but Hoffman looked like far too old.

    And Gene Hackman was not really a paragon of the sixties. He was already 40 years old in 1970. He was most famous for playing Lex Luthor in SUPERMAN. Even in the late sixties he was playing down-at-the-heel middle-aged men. Hackman usually played older than his years.

    But here is the real question.

    Why re Jewish youth less affected by the ructions of societal change than Anglo-Saxons.

    Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin might have been in the sixties counterculture up to their necks but in 1987 they were not the older hippies unemployed and collecting bottles around campus who took one too many acid trips.

    Why does the media have more of an effect on whites than Jews? You don’t see many Jews who want to imitate the Beastie Boys but you see millions of whiggers who want to be Eminem.

    Jews all went through the sixties but their entire social dynamic was not completely torn apart by it.

    Why?

    Asians went through the sixties as well, and had Yoko Ono, an avowed drug taker and orgy lover, but few Japanese Americans ended up being psychedelic derelicts.

    But back to THE GRADUATE. What is the deep social meaning. That a dork finds a desperate MILF and stalks her daughter?

    How long does the rebellion last? Five days until she decides she wants to change her underwear and realizes Hoffman is an unemployed dorky waster with psychological problems who makes up pathological lies?

    Benjamin had no positive qualities. Who could admire him?

    • Thanks: Zarathustra
    • Replies: @trickster
    , @Zarathustra
  68. Gast says:
    @Joe Levantine

    But in the end Christianity was just a slave religion the jews gave us. A slave religion full of bad advice (“love your enemies”, “don’t plan”, “stay poor” etc.). I understand that Christianity became somewhat stabilizing during long periods of time while being state religion in White nations, but now it has come full circle, and the Christian churches are now as hostile to the White race as it is possible and as it was planned by its founders. So, I won’t shed any tears when Christianity gets attacked, even when it is for the wrong reasons by jews.

    Regarding the movie: Never watched it, don’t plan to do it, since I always found the little rodent Dustin Hoffman repulsive. And the plot sounds as uninteresting as it gets. Even Simon and Garfunkel do nothing for me. Boomer poison.

    • Agree: Johnny Smoggins
  69. You missed the bit in the book that was left out of the movie but which totally explains why he ‘stumbled’ into sex with Mrs Robinson:

    He went hitchhiking to see America and was picked up and molested by a predatory homosexual.

    To prove he wasn’t a fag he had to screw a woman as soon as possible. Back then young men secretly feared they might be fags, even if they were victims of one. It was scary, like being dragged off to a mental hospital in One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest because you were merely weird. Unless you put youself in the mindset of the time you won’t get half of it.

    • LOL: trickster
    • Replies: @trickster
  70. trickster says:
    @syonredux

    The Dirty Dozen was “required” viewing in the East German Army particularly for officers in the Friedrich Engels Military Academy. The idea was that officers were to get an impression and assess the mindset of Americans as regards to the capability of the Warsaw Pact particularly East German forces during the Cold War period. I looked at this movie with a former field grade East German officer, a particularly hard man who rarely smiled but I had to help him up off the floor.

    For a start the idea that Jim Brown would be a hero was a cause of mirth and great sarcasm as it was well known that blacks in the US army in Germany were not only an undisciplined rabble but had stated they had no intention of fighting a white man’s war. As well, Germans were always portrayed as idiots. For example, the American soldier would throw a pebble, the German would go to investigate, conveniently turn his back and of course our hero would do him harm. This always caused uproarious laughter and raucous comments.

    In fact the East German Army was greatly feared by the West more so than even Soviet Forces. Lee Marvin I seem to remember served in WW2 which catapulted him to Hollywood fame but in an interview I saw with him sometime back his experience confronting the boys of the Wehrmacht was anything but pleasant….or a cakewalk.

    Dont get me wrong, the DD was great entertainment but historical bunk. Like Rambo which sold out in the Middle East, the opposition dismissed these flicks as worthless Yankee propaganda not even worth the price they sold for pirated. Had we sent Sylvester into Iraq he would have returned in a sandwich bag with his red scarf attached!

    Inglorious Basterds was another entertaining flick but again sheer propaganda rubbish and fantasy. I looked at it for a few minutes and then left to dry the dishes.

    You got to hand it to the the Hollywood boys, they know how to make a shit souffle and sell it like fresh caviar.

    • Thanks: Ivan
    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
    , @trickster
  71. trickster says:
    @axually it does

    THE GRADUATE 2

    Axually, that was a great opening for the sequel. Can I expand on your proposed script ?

    Act 2 Episode 1:

    But after he screwed the old Jew woman he discovered he really was a fag. He hitchhiked to San Francisco and “stumbled” into a gay bar anxious to to be victimized by hung studs who toked, loked and piped up while they lined up.

    Then he was dragged into a mental hospital because he was cuckoo, the Doctors and other queer patients hammered him some more. He escaped by tearing up the kitchen centre isle, busting through a poured cement wall and escaping to Thailand where he is a certified pervert searching for his inner child.

    ***the camera pans to the Thai Police arresting the degenerate and throwing him in jail where he is buggered like there was no tomorrow. Finally, he has found his true home and made peace with his inner self*****

    THE END

    Well “Axually” watch for the Unz trolls to start analysing the character ad nauseum. Also if this story line appears as a movie remember you and I should get some of the box office proceeds.

  72. @syonredux

    Half a jew? Maybe he made that shit up to get a job? Carpentry is hard work.

    “Uh,scuse me. Uh,my mom was a jew,btw.”

    • Replies: @syonredux
  73. MLK says:

    Capitalizing “White” is a reactive tell. Like so many critics, you’re trapped in your seeming opponents categories in a most self-defeating way.

    The Graduate has long struck me as not just a Jewish male fantasy, but of the particular variety unsurprisingly attuned to the director Mike Nichols.

    Mrs. Robinson represents the loveless constraints of marriage to a bossy Jewish wife. You should think a little harder about the contours of the symbolic prison Ben is in.

    Elaine the youthful female beauty ideal all men dream of falling in love with us and sacrificing for regardless of tradition.

    I’m fascinated that you seemingly didn’t notice that the Marcuse quotes you included, with minor word substitution. speak to today’s youth obediently under the thumb of substituted “tradition” and the baby boomer generation selfishly deploying it before they die off.

    The older I get the more I notice how much vaunted reasoning is actually of the post-hoc variety. It sounds flippant but true nonetheless — the sexual revolution began with post-war corporate/establishment men beginning the process of not just exempting themselves from monogamous marriage and child-rearing. No longer was the quiet wave goodbye of responsibility enough. They wanted to retain their establishment prerogatives, stigma-free.

    It shouldn’t surprise that this opened the floodgates to those with other more out there predilections inciting they be able to go Loud and Proud.

    It seems that Baby Boomers will remain a giant boil on the neck of this great country until they die off in sufficient numbers. They simply cannot forgive their parents (greatest) generation for their sacrifice and fidelity on their behalf.

    • Replies: @pecosbill
  74. trickster says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    It was an intellectually stimulating movie, representative of the sixties, full of twists and turns, reflections of subtle character traits and the dark dimensions of the psyche of young men who hunt wrinkled up old muff and finally service their daughters. Ask any movie goer with an IQ of minus 50 !

    One commenter on UNZ even commented on the silences in the movie and seemed to attach some mystic meaning to them. I remember the days of my youth when I was very talkative at the beginning of a date and silent after busting my nut. My most meaningful comment would be “I’ll call you soon” as I zipped up my pants on the way out.

    There must be a deep philosophical moral there somewhere that is worth extensive analysis. LOL

  75. Trinity says:

    I thought this film SUCKED BALLS, I never could see what all the hoopla was about. I think Dustin Hoffman sucks balls as an actor as well and I am not saying that because he is a Jew, he just blows. How about the Jewy movie, Marathon Man, where Hoffman plays a long distance runner who is stalked by an old Nazi played by Laurence Olivier. One memorable scene involved the Olivier character walking around in NYC and out of thousands walking on the street, he is recognized by some old Jewess bat who was in one of the Nazi camps where the evil Olivier character happened to torture Jews. Think of the odds of this happening? lolol. The old Jewess starts having a fit and shouting his name. haha. Never mind that the old Nazi played by Olivier had aged and shaven his head. Wow, that old Jewess must have had an incredible eye for details or maybe she was superhuman. lolol. Obviously her memory was still sharp even well into her golden years.

    I will say that despite a WASP writing this book, this film promoted cougars before cougars was even a definitive term for middle aged women seeking young male companionship. The promotion of young males and older women would go on and be a recurring theme in many (((Hollywood))) films. While on the surface, this theme seems harmless, what young 20-something male doesn’t want to bed a hot 40-something female, it is more sinister once one digs deeper. By promoting these type of relationships, it discourages the nuclear family and procreation. Obviously if some young guy is wasting time in bed with a woman in her 40’s he is not out there making babies with a young woman in a healthy relationship that involves marrying a woman in her 20’s and having lots of white children.

    The Graduate was just another SUCK ASS OVERLY HYPED PIECE OF JEWISH GARBAGE, whether the book was written by a WASP or not.

    • Replies: @Ivan
    , @BL
    , @Alden
    , @DaveE
    , @Alfred
  76. Nerdy, nasally voiced Dustin Hoffman was similarly miscast as Italian street tough Rico Rizzo in Midnight Cowboy.

    Though a very good actor, Hoffman wasn’t convincing in the role. He got the slimy part right but just didn’t come across as the sort of tough guy that the role was meant for.

  77. Ivan says:
    @Robjil

    I recall reading that Moshe Dayan admonished the Americans that they were never going to win in Vietnam. Imagine that : People like Westmoreland who fought in Europe and Korea didn’t know how to win a war! But I think Dayan forgot to mention that the grand strategy of Hanoi was to rely on the US anti-war hippie and drug crowd to win.

    Don’t get me wrong I do think the US effort was significantly hampered after the killing of Ngo Dinh Diem . But he was a Catholic so he deserves it as the Proddies would.say. Westmoreland and others such as Curtis le May fought to install Syungman Rhee in South Korea a man who was a byword for corruption and they succeeded in turning the tide against the Communists. But according to analysts from the Abbie Hoffman school their efforts would yield no victory in Vietnam – not least due to the efforts of the anti-war crowd itself.

    • Thanks: Robjil
  78. ariadna says:
    @Priss Factor

    “…. a wasp revenge version of THE GRADUATE.
    Ben is a son in a Jewish family but has blond hair and looks very Nordic. Later, he rescues Elaine Rabinowitz from a synagogue wedding and runs off.”

    No, that would be no revenge version at all. In fact it would be a re-confirmation and affirmation that Jews are the umbilicus orbi.
    It would be just another very Jewish movie in which the Jews pat themselves on the back for their ‘revolutionary spirit.’
    Not a “revenge,” but rather simply a truly WASP movie would be one in which there are no Jews and especially no Jewishness of message or mentality.

  79. @sonofman

    I had the opposite reaction. Bancroft’s chain smoking character made my skin crawl. As for Hoffman, I wanted to beat the snot out of that creepy little lazy rudderless man-child (minus the nose I was short and too much like him), and elope with the beautiful, unobtainable Elaine. Of such fantasies wet dreams are made.

  80. “The big majority of gentiles just saw the Jew propaganda as entertainment, not realizing it was another attack on traditional western values.”

    Any critical analysis of Jewish film-making, such as this article, will get you an accusation of anti-Semitism. Self-censorship is why the big majority of Gentiles have been blissfully unaware of what has been right before their eyes for the past half century.

    Its a double edged axe which is now bouncing back on those who wielded it.

  81. chris says:
    @Priss Factor

    Now just one cotton-pickn’ minute there, Priss!

    First of all you didn’t mention Fellini in your diatribe; that’s inexcusable.

    Secondly, Rosmary’s Baby WAS a 3rd rate movie and remained so in “the” pedofillic “hands” of Polanski.

    Third of all, Jaws, Spielberg’s only good movie, is an aquatic adaptation of Hitchcock’ The Birds, it looks and feels like no other Spielberg movie and the suspense and dynamic is all Hitchcock.

    And just a little aside, it would be really funny if someone would remake The Graduate with Kathrine Ross’ part played by an equally dopey actress (relative to Dustin #metoo Hoffmann) a la Barbara Streisand, the ending of the movie would obtain a completely new meaning; everyone would be quite relieved that the poor WASP guy would have been saved from certain disaster!

    • Replies: @chris
  82. anonymous[391] • Disclaimer says:
    @Priss Factor

    I believe the question of Soderberg being jewish began when he married Jules Asner a goy fashion model and popular cable tv show host back in the 1990’s and former wife of the son of the very jewish actor Ed Asner.

    Jules Asner wrote the screenplay for her husband’s film Logan Lucky using the name Rebecca Blunt.

    Soderberg like his protege Christopher Nolan is one of last of the big time goy directors making films that appeal to goy men.

    Sailer is a admirer of both men’s work. Perhaps the feelings are mutual.

    Maybe Soderberg’s opinion on The Graduate are a partial reflection of having read our Steve’s own insights on the film.

    But the last thing we would want to do is dox Soderberg as a closet Nazi. So I am personally 100% behind thinking of Soderberg as a Jew. We are going to need all the krypto cis hetero huWhite males we can the way Woke Hollywood is going.

  83. Ivan says:
    @Trinity

    Marathon Man was a good movie. Sir Laurence did come across as a pretty scary Nazi. I don’t recall much about Hoffman’s performance. The Graduate though was a tiresome movie As you say most young men in their 20s would not mind an auntie with money for free sex. That’s what many Indians like myself grew up hoping for. But the stupid Mrs Robinson song made no sense at all. After all both parties were looking for zipless sex. What has love got to do with it as Milan Kundera would have said.

  84. ariadna says:
    @Ray P

    I have often wondered if a neurotic like WA has panic attacks, fearing that a thundering consensus over his utter intellectual mediocrity is not far off. However that would require far more than neuroticism.

    • Replies: @Dumbo
    , @Ray P
  85. And don’t forget the WASP-y wife of Mike Nichols, the gorgeous Diane Sawyer.

  86. BL says:
    @Trinity

    SUCKED BALLS . . . sucks balls . . . he just blows . . . SUCK ASS . .

    A word to the wise, while you’re of course safely anonymous behind “Trinity,” the Wachowski brothers then sisters female ideal for their “Neo,” you might consider how amusingly obvious your gay ideation is.

    How you interpret Ben’s relationship with Mrs. Robinson as “promotional” is beyond me. With all due respect, you seem very confused about both yourself and the movies you watch.

    • Replies: @Trinity
  87. @trickster

    Lee Marvin fought in Japan. Bronson was in the Pacific. Telly Savalas was actually in US intelligence services.

    My feeling was that age 47 Bronson looked too old to play a GI. Bronson was in good shape but he always looked lined and old.

    Donald Sutherland was about the right age and physique as was Jim Brown but the rest of them were too old to be draftees.

    Clint Walkler was Czech, but was playing a Native American, which I never bought either. In those days they used whites to play Indians like Neville Brand who was Dutch who didn’t look Native. Bronson kind of did. He was a Lipkin Tartar.

    And the DD weren’t supposed to heroic. Brown kills Savalas out of sheer spite for being a redneck.

    They commit a cowardly act-throwing grenades on innocent women trapped with the officers.

    At any rate, the problem with war films is using actors who look old enough to collect social security.

    • Replies: @Trinity
    , @Alden
    , @trickster
  88. Plenty of us who are not Jews celebrate the debasement of Christian culture. Christianity is no more than a paganized version of Judaism, mixing Graeco-Roman religious beliefs with the ugly intolerance of the Jewish prophets. It is one of history’s great ironies that Christianity, despite its traditional Jew-hatred, is the vehicle by which the homophobia, misogyny, and arrogant nationalism of second temple period Judaism were spread across the globe, at a terrible price in human misery.

    Jews occupy such an outsized place in western imagination because of the hateful role they were assigned in the mythology of Christianity, as the murderers of god himself. Absent this bizarre fantasy, we would notice them no more than we do any other ethnic minority.

    • Replies: @Agathoklis
  89. geokat62 says:

    This is Jewish ethnic warfare waged through the construction of culture. The Graduate was an early shot fired in this ongoing war.

    Thanks for the heads up… very helpful!

    The film was released in 1967 and someone finally exposes its nefarious purpose over 50 years later.

    It’s somewhat analogous to the dirty deeds of the Mossad being exposed so long after a sufficient period of time has elapsed that it renders such exposure innocuous.

    • Replies: @chris
  90. chris says:
    @chris

    Correction of course, you do mention Fellini, not as the great Europeans but only as one who was found by Hollywood to be so.

    Woody Allen made Stardust Memories as an homage to Fellini, and the great Russian director Mikhalkov talks about how they learned from Fellini in the making of Oblomov. Fellini influenced his whole generations and will do so many more to come.

    BTW, not that it means much, but Fassbinder was Jewish

    • Replies: @UncommonGround
  91. 36 ulster says:
    @Nosquat Loquat

    MORE than a little, like their antagonists, with whom they seem to have a symbiotic alliance.

  92. @dually

    This. The coming calamities are well deserved. And the results no matter what will lead to one outcome.
    The very idea of liberalism and a mutt country like JewSA will be discarded forever.

    That will be God’s revenge against the wilful servants of Satan.

  93. @Jeff Stryker

    At one time this theme was recurrent in Europe.
    We did call it silver wind.

  94. Z-man says:

    Even to this day audiences revolt to being force fed to watch obviously Jew actors playing against type and with white women. Right after ‘The Graduate’ Katherine Ross was paired with Robert Redford in ‘Butch Cassidy…’ with audiences flocking to that movie. Hoffman’s career peaked with ‘The Graduate’. He played second banana in ‘Midnight Cowboy’. Audiences are smarter than you give them credit for.

    • Replies: @follyofwar
  95. @GMC

    Your kind is just paying for 1945. Did you mulatooes really think you could have had gotten away after helping ensure the existence of communism?

    Your grandpa was a piece of shit. Your nation is also an unrepentant piece of shit.

  96. Malla says:
    @Priss Factor

    Greek mythology says Zeus separated men and women from their embrace, therefore life is about men and women trying to reconnect with their lost mates.

    I hava feelin that Jews copied a lot from Greek mythology and philosophy and show it as their own now. The Greeks (and Romans and Egyptians and Persians and…) that they hated so much.

  97. @Z-man

    WHAT? I guess you forgot Hoffman’s Oscar-winning performance as the autistic savant in “Rain Man.”

    • Replies: @Z-man
  98. @Priss Factor

    Good grief, Priss, don’t write “War & Peace” 2.

    While I agree with much you wrote, I would say:

    a) you confused eras. New Hollywood is, I think, a later phenomenon & these 60’s movies are reflections of spirit of times. Basically, late 60s & early 70s Hollywood films are a mix of everything, from European cinema to drug culture & whatnot.

    b) most of these films are dated & didn’t age well. Perhaps that was such a time, I don’t know. Fashion sucked, hairdos sucked, acting sucked, dialogs sucked, politics sucked.

    Graduate certainly did have a Jewish angle, more than most rather good movies of that era- but it wasn’t much of a success outside of the US. As far as I know, Midnight Cowboy was a success, as well as some Polansky, while Easy Rider was a hip road movie, nothing more.

    Forman’s One flew… was the most acclaimed, but it belongs to a later period. Most movies you mentioned are period pieces which, by now, seem to be as dated as Cold war.

    • Replies: @Alden
  99. Trinity says:
    @BL

    How about, YOU SUCK. YOU BLOW. Tel Aviv SUCKS ASS, Shlomo (((troll.)))

    With all due respect, your (((trolling))) is pretty lame, perhaps, (((they))) could find you another line of “work.” Is Dustin (((Hoffman))) one of your favorite “actors?” I bet you are a huge Roman Polanski and Harvey Weinstein fan as well. hehe.

    • Replies: @BL
  100. I’ve noticed that a lot of people today do not know the distinction between a cross and a crucifix.

  101. Dumbo says:
    @dually

    Yeah. It’s hilarious to see people crying about the “evil Jews who removed the WASPs from their righteous place in the elite during the 60s”. Oh, those poor, poor innocent WASP gazillionaires.

    It was not a coup. WASPs are not retards or victims. It was not rape, it was consensual. A symbiosis, if you will. And it continues to be so. If not, what are WASP gazillioniaires doing at all to contain immigration, to fight against globo-homo, etc?

    If anything, anglo elites have been allied with Jews for a long, long time.

    • Replies: @dually
  102. Trinity says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    They had Burt Reynolds playing a half breed Indian on Gunsmoke as well. haha.

    Good old Charlie was even older when he played a street fighter in “Hard Times,” one of my favorite Bronson movies. Obviously, this might have been loosely associated with The Manassa Mauler, Jack Dempsey’s early life of riding the rails and picking up fights in bars for cash, Dempsey recalls often going without food for a few days in his salad days of learning the Sweet Science. Dempsey was lighter back then, maybe a buck seventy at most, had a squeaky voice, and wasn’t seen as much of a threat against much larger roughnecks until they felt that tremendous power and ferocity of a tiger. Bronson was I think in his early “fitties” when he made “Hard Times” and he looked great, but like you say, his face told the real tale of how much he had been beaten down by Father Time and Mother Nature. Bronson was a heavy smoker, and they wouldn’t often have to take breaks during the fight scenes from what I have read, seems Charlie’s inside condition didn’t match up with his outside condition. Good actor, unlike all the UNTALENTED midget named Dustin Hoffman.

  103. Alden says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    The problem with many films is using actors 30 years too old for the part. There’s a Netflix TV series about King Charles 2 of England. His mother, Queen Henrietta was about 47 in 1658 when the movie began. The actress who played her looked about 75. A major woman character, Barbara was 18 when she first met Charles. The actress who played her looked about 45.

    Donald Sutherland as the father of 5 children age 22 to 14 looking like 90, staggering around like someone in a nursing home. Movie made it clear he was married to a wife around his own age, not a much younger wife. So there they were, 90 and 60, parents of a 14 year old.

    Another movie; baby too young to walk, about 10 months old. His mother early 50s. Her mother early 60s. So grandma had a baby at 10 or 11 and daughter had a baby at 52.

    English movies and BBC tv shows specialize in ugly actresses or make them up and use lighting and camera angles to make them look not plain but just ugly. Ugly faces are OK for the stage I suppose. But closeups on a movie or even a small TV screen, who wants to look at ugly people?

    Movies are a visual medium. I see enough ugly people whenever I leave the house. Who wants to pay for a movie or a streaming service and look at ugly and or ancient wrinkled faces?

    I couldn’t stand Hoffman. The worst was that one with Tom Cruise on a cross country car trip. Why not just fill him up with muscle relaxers and tranquilizers and load him on a plane? Hire a psychiatric tech as they’re called so there would be 2 people to handle him.

    • Replies: @Dumbo
  104. Dumbo says:
    @ariadna

    I think Woody Allen himself realized, already in the 80s, that he was no genius. In terms of talent or originality, he could not get close to the level of his idols Fellini, Bergman, Billy Wilder, so he specialized in some kind of artsy-light movies that were cheered by the Academy but not so much by the public at large, which dwindled since his “early funny ones” (which were probably the best films he made).

    He himself has said many times that he doesn’t care if his films are all thrown in the garbage. He is very far from being a perfectionist, he admitted he was very lazy to make real works of art (or even entertaining movies, at this point) and that his method of working is minimum effort. Honestly, if he wasn’t Jewish his career would have ended much longer ago.

    So I don’t think he cares much one way or another.

    On the positive side, he’s not the worse Jewish film maker around; I mean he doesn’t seem to care too much about making films with multicultural casting (he doesn’t even seem to like blacks very much, even his film about a jazz musician was with Sean Penn) or with feminist themes (if anything, he’s a misogynist). People like J. J. Abrams are much worse, and have more influence.

    But I’ve stopped watching his movies long ago; the last one I watched was that awful one with Larry David. Honestly, most of his output is garbage, even for his fans. He always made 5 or 6 bad ones to each relatively good film.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/10/woody-allen-wonder-wheel/537876/

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/woody-allen-admits-he-is-too-lazy-to-make-great-films-10431756.html

    • Replies: @Anonymouse
  105. Alden says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Goldie Hawn’s early mid 70’s comedies were pretty good But as you say, very dated. Without her comedic talent and looks, they would have been awful. She was paired with a couple wrinkled old men, but the script made it clear they were old, not her age, so that was OK.

    Easy Rider turned me off in that scene where Nicholson was bitching to the waitress about his toast in a busy diner. I guess he was sticking it to the establishment in that scene, a true rebel.

    Nicholson is really short. About my height which is 5’3. Unlike Hoffman though, he’s a great actor. His best part I believe was Jimmy Hoffa. He really made the movie.

  106. BL says:
    @Trinity

    Look, it’s a free country, I just figured someone should tell you that it’s rather obvious what you’re thinking about a lot.

  107. @Bogus Pogus

    A Jewish actress said recently that producers and directors get upset when they find out she is Jewish. They want Shikshas in their movies, not nice Jewish girls.

    Could it be that another Jewess is crying victim? Oh boo hoo, Jewish Hollywood discriminates against Jewish girls like me.

    First, I’m sure there are tons of roles of Jewish women in Hollywood, especially in the production and executive department.

    Also, you mean Hollywood didn’t know Gal Gadot is Jewish when they cast her as Wonder Girl? She’s Israeli.

    Bette Midler was a big star. So was Debra Winger.

    And the idea of ‘nice Jewish girl’ is hilarious. Jewesses may be lots of thing but ‘nice’ isn’t one of them. Jewesses are among the biggest jungle-feverites in NY.

    And then the half-Jewesses like Carrie Fisher and Jamie Lee Curtis. And Scarlett Johansson.
    And Jill Clayburgh, one of the biggest stars of the 70s. And Goldie Hawn.

    Also, the casting department in Hollywood is dominated by women, and they tend to favor the Un-Wasp-type.

    How else do you explain the rise of Sandra Oh and Catherine Keener? They lack look and talent. Keener isn’t Jewish but half-Lebanese, which makes her half-Semitic.

    • Replies: @Alden
  108. SafeNow says:

    “Paul Simon has made some great music and it certainly worked well in the Graduate.”

    Indeed it did. But Roger Ebert, in his original review of The Graduate, referred to “the forgettable music of Simon and Garfunkel.” Years later, Ebert good-naturedly acknowledged “I was wrong.” And wrong he was, about the music that ranks number 6 in AFI’s top-100 list of movie songs. There’s a lesson in this: Do one thing. Ebert, arguably the greatest movie critic who ever lived, was trying to be a music critic.

    As for Benjamin’s Jewish traits: I read many of Philip Roth’s novels, and I think a list of Jewish-protagonist traits emerging from these closely matches Benjamin’s traits in the movie.

  109. @Alfa158

    wedding scene was blatantly anti-Christian.

    Actually, the most anti-Christian thing Hollywood did was make those long, boring, dull Biblical Epics that made religion seem sanctimonious and lame. Even estimable talents fell under the weight of such epics.

    Nicholas Ray, who couldn’t be boring if he tried, got tremendous boring with KING OF KINGS. George Stevens made his worst movie and one of the worst epics ever with THE GREATEST STORY EVER TOLD.

    Also, if Christianity has been killed in THE GRADUATE, it is by the California Sun, materialism, affluence, and individualism. The church itself is a modernist architecture devoid of spiritual flavor.

    • Agree: Bardon Kaldian
    • Replies: @Dumbo
  110. Alden says:
    @Trinity

    I didn’t like it either. The reason Mrs Robinson went after Benjamin was to get him away from the daughter, not because she really wanted him.

    Elaine and handsome med student were talking about marriage. Along comes Benjamin. Mrs Robinson diverted Ben from Elaine long enough for Elaine to get engaged to handsome med student.

    Book was written in 1963. Even then even wealthy parents wanted their daughters to be able to make a living, not sit around like Jane Austen 18 year olds waiting for daddy to come up with a dowry so they could get married. The marriage or nothing idea was dated in 1963 and worse in 1967.

    Awful movie. The runaway bride in a big wedding dress was another ridiculous cliche.

    My 4 favorite movies. Braveheart, Mars Attacks The Grifters and Idiocracy

  111. Dumbo says:
    @Alden

    I don’t think cinema is about “ugly” or “beautiful” (although of course beautiful people are usually nicer to look at), but about interesting people. Some people, even if not pretty, have a certain charm or charisma that makes us want to watch them. Bogart and Bette Davis were no beauties, but they had talent and charisma. Charles Bronson was ugly and not even a good actor, but in Once Upon a Time in the West, he’s great. Shirley Booth was no beauty but she won the Oscar deservedly.

    Other actors can be very beautiful but shallow or boring (i.e. Angelina Jolie).

    Cinema is a visual medium but like painting it also leaves room for the grotesque, the strange, even the ugly (as long as it’s interesting).

    That said, I never saw that much charisma in Hoffman, even in his best movies. But he has an unusual face and voice, and perhaps in some films this can work (Midnight Cowboy, Straw Dogs).

    • Replies: @Alden
  112. Dumbo says:
    @Priss Factor

    Yeah, I think it’s hard to make films about religious themes because you try too hard to be respectful but can end up taking too little risks, or becoming ridiculous or sanctimonious.

    Most overtly “Christian-themed” movies are pretty lame. Maybe the good ones are that one about Saint Francis by Rosselini, Tarkovsky’s Andrei Rublev, Joan of Arc by Dreyer, Pasolini’s Gospel according to St. Matthew, those are the few ones I can remember.

    • Replies: @Culpepper
  113. @dually

    It’s myopic to write an essay about the culture of the 1960s and leave out the most important backdrop – the Vietnam War draft.

    Vietnam was huge, and its absence has been mentioned in discussions of THE GRADUATE.
    But war or no war, I think it would have been a hit just the same and just as culturally significant.

    If the movie were conscious of the war, Benjamin might be more eager to further his education to avoid the draft. But he seems indifferent on that matter, so it’s almost as if the whole movie is taking place in an alternative universe of the 60s.

    But for the most part, Vietnam hardly appeared on the Hollywood radar until it finally ended, and the rise of New Hollywood directors tackled it with a vengeance: COMING HOME, APOCALYPSE NOW, and THE DEER HUNTER especially. And the 80s saw RAMBO, a dumber variation of GREEN BERETS, and PLATOON, the first movie to be made by a Vietnam vet. FULL METAL JACKET used Vietnam but was about deeper meaning of man and violence. In TAXI DRIVER, it’s in the background as Bickle is a Vietnam vet. (But his craziness seems unrelated to the war.) In contrast, Vietnam might as well not exist in THE GRADUATE. Perhaps, this was what Peckinpah was playing with when he cast Hoffman in STRAW DOGS. A man who is oblivious to social currents and hides from commitment… until reality comes at him with full force, and he is forced to make a stand. Hoffman turns into guerrilla fighter protecting his turf in the movie, though it’s ironic because he’s a foreigner in another people’s land. Also, he’s once again crypto-Jewish as there’s no mention of his Jewishness.

    Though war isn’t mentioned in the movie, Ben does go on a warpath. His mad quest for Elaine anticipated Richard Dreyfus’s mad dash for Devil’s Tower in CLOSE ENCOUNTERS. It’s as if the human spirit, perhaps the wandering Jewish soul most of all, needs vision and motion, or else it just withers into mediocrity. Hoffman also went on the warpath in LITTLE BIG MAN, a remarkable movie that unfortunately dispensed with many complexities of the novel and degenerated at the end into anti-white propaganda. Still, lots of fine moments. But back then, pro-Indian movies were a thing. Still, there was Robert Redford in JEREMIAH JOHNSON where the tough white man defeats a whole slew of vicious Indians. Made by Jewish Sydney Pollack, and Jewish John Milius worked on the script.

    Could MIDNIGHT COWBOY as a kind of reverse of THE GRADUATE? Unlike Braddock, Joe Buck is a poor lad with no education and prospects. He has no family. GRADUATE begins with Ben going from NY to CA, whereas MIDNIGHT COWBOY begins with Joe Buck going from Texas to NY, on a bus. And NY is presented as a seedy, nasty, and corrupt place. Tall and blonde Joe Buck, for all his stupidity and naivete, comes across as a far more sympathetic character. He meets a Jewish hooker, and she’s a nasty one. He later meets a Jewish homo kid who sucks him in a theater but refuses to pay. Italian Ratso Rizzo rips him off, but they become friends because they’re lonesome.

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    , @dually
  114. Alden says:
    @Priss Factor

    Sharon Stone’s career was blocked for years because the Jews considered her too bland and Barbie Doll instead of drop dead gorgeous.

  115. @Alden

    Easy Rider now seems such a monumental cliche that it is hard, almost impossible to take it seriously. Nicholson could act & was lucky to make a few, I think, permanent movies (One flew…, Chinatown, maybe Prizzis & a few minor roles).

    He’s good, but overrated.

    Lumet, Nichols,…. all good, but not that good. And of course, they’re not great directors.

  116. Z-man says:
    @follyofwar

    The ‘white’ male lead in that movie was Tom Cruise who got great reviews for trying to act next to the idiot savant character that Hoffman hammed all thru that picture.

  117. Alden says:
    @Dumbo

    I’m an aesthete, a person who hates to look at ugly unattractive things like Angelina Jolie’s ugly face and stick thin arms and legs. She’s a great actress and being so thin looks great in clothes when her arms and legs are covered. But the grapefruit stuffed cheeks and 2 hot dog lips. Yuck!

    I understand she’s very sexually appealing to men. She put in years of hard work appearing in so many movies as wife or girl friend with few scenes. Then she made it, admirable.

    Her best movie is an old one. If you like her rent or buy the DVD. Original Sin set in 1890 Cuba co star Antonio Banderas. He’s a wealthy Cuban engaged to a bride he found through a match making service. Jolie and her husband boyfriend whatever are actors , con artists grifters on the same ship as the bride. They kill the bride, throw her overboard and Jolie assumes her identity

  118. @Priss Factor

    Isn’t all this Jewish stuff too exaggerated? Definitely, it is visible in Graduate, but I never thought of Straw Dogs as anything Jewy.

    Jewy angle is evidently present in most movies about Nazis & Mengele (Mengele porn), as well- understandably- as in the flood of Holocaust themed films that made the whole issue rather boring.

    And yes, post festum, The Pawnbroker was a great film.

  119. syonredux says:
    @Giancarlo M. Kumquat

    Here’s some info on his background:

    Harrison Ford

    Place of Birth: Chicago, Illinois, U.S.

    Date of Birth: July 13, 1942

    Ethnicity:
    *father – Irish, some German
    *mother – Ashkenazi Jewish

    Harrison Ford is an American actor and producer. He is the son of Dora/Dorothy (Nidelman), a radio actress, and Christopher Ford (born John William Ford), an actor and advertising executive.

    Harrison’s father was born in Manhattan, New York, of three quarters Irish and one quarter German ancestry. Harrison’s mother, also born in New York, was Jewish, the daughter of Jewish emigrants from Minsk, Belarus (at that time, Minsk was part of the Russian Empire). Harrison was raised around both Catholicism (his father’s religion) and Judaism (his mother’s religion).

    Harrison’s paternal grandfather was John Fitzgerald/Edward/H. Ford (the son of Thomas F. Ford and Mary Tuohey/Touhey). John was born in New York, to Irish parents. Thomas was the son of John Ford and Mary Calkins Coggan, who was from County Mayo.

    Harrison’s paternal grandmother was Florence Veronica Niehaus/Von Niehaus (the daughter of Charles Niehaus and Della Conway). Florence was born in New York. Charles was of German ancestry. Della was born in New York, to Irish parents, Roger Conway and Bridget Rooney.

    Harrison’s maternal grandfather was named Harry Nidelman/Needleman. Harry was born in Minsk, to a Jewish family.

    Harrison’s maternal grandmother was Nachama “Annie/Anna” Lifshitz/Lipshitz/Lifschutz (the daughter of Chaim/Khiam/Khaim Ha Levi “Jacob” Lifshitz and Reisa/Rochel/Leah Shmerkovitz). Nachama was born in Minsk, to a Jewish family. She met Harrison’s grandfather, born in the same city, in the United States. Chaim was the son of Eliezer Aron Lippman, who was born in Ukmergė, Vilnius, Lithuania, and of a woman whose surname was Halevi.

    https://ethnicelebs.com/harrison-ford

  120. syonredux says:
    @Priss Factor

    I was talking of DIRTY DOZEN.

    Sorry. For some reason, I thought that you were saying that BASTERDS was a mixture of SEVEN and KWAI.

  121. SafeNow says:

    Incredibly interesting information, analysis, connections, and insights by the essayist and commenters. Thank you. (Glad you guys weren’t in my literature courses in college, you would have ruined the curve for everyone else.) The Unz webzine at its best, nothing else like it.

  122. @J

    few? In every country in the world?

  123. Alfred says:

    One Sunday morning, around 1970, my Iranian girlfriend was walking in London’s Sloane Street. Suddenly, she was almost pounced on by a frantic Dustin Hoffman. He asked her where he could buy some flowers. She explained that all the shops were closed. He give her another look and told her “you are a very beautiful girl” before rushing off.

  124. Be as it may……

    1. film is a young art (when it is art). It is, essentially, the best entertainment (along TV shows).

    2. canonical great works are well established because they’ve been around for such a long time (Shakespeare, Dostoevsky, Rembrandt, Goya, Bach, Beethoven,…). Film- not so. Also, film is not created by a single artist. The whole bunch of them.

    3. I am not even sure about works many critics & theoreticians agree on. Will Citizen Kane last? Potemkin? Most of Hitchcock? Kurosawa? ….

    Anyway, I must admit I find a few oldtimers/near-oldtimers I appreciate (The Throne of Blood, Cries and Whispers, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, The Last Picture Show, Umberto D, The Grapes of Wrath …) simply more vital than even the best films of past, say, 10-15 years.

    They have more life in them.

  125. DaveE says:
    @Trinity

    You said it. I was just graduating from engineering school when I first saw The Graduate. I was looking for a job and I was getting all kinds of (looking back) BS advice. The scene where Hoffman is standing by the swimming pool and Mr. Robinson gives him some “deep” career guidance, the word “plastics” was his advice – that scene cracked me up. But as the movie progressed it becomes sicker, more twisted and degenerate and obviously contemptuous of the Goyische world – it was pretty clear what was going, even for me as a young graduate in the early 1980’s

    I also gotta say, Mr. Trinity – your comments are a HELL of a lot funnier than anything jew-infested Tinseltown has cooked up in the last 70 years – Thanks! (Although that shlomo-clown BL gives me a laugh, I gotta say….!)

    • Thanks: Trinity
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  126. @Franz

    I’m a bit on a limb here. But a 1967 audience would have been made up of people the same age as the author Webb (b. 1939) and most likely non-political future Yuppies. The film was an adults only thing.

    Simply not true. THE GRADUATE was a winner with both old and young. That’s why it was a super-hit at the box office. Different groups saw it the way they wanted to. I’m sure Jews especially loved it, but Jewish attendance alone wouldn’t have assured a massive hit, one of the biggest after SOUND OF MUSIC.

    article neglects to point out how badly the film aged… Between the oil shocks and trucker’s strikes and closing factories. nobody could figure out what the dumb main character was “alienated” about when the world was being handed to him on a silver platter. The 10th anniversary re-release was dead on arrival, and pulled early.

    But re-releases rarely do well. There have been exceptions of course: LAWRENCE OF ARABIA, GONE WITH THE WIND, STAR WARS, E.T., and some Disney Classics.
    As for THE GRADUATE being dated, that’s true on some level. It is a very much a culture-specific 60s movie. But the same could be said of any movie centered on youth culture. REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE, THE WILD ONE, SATURDAY NIGHT FEVER, RISKY BUSINESS, and etc.
    One could say most of 60s rock now sounds dated.

    But what matters is there were things in THE GRADUATE that worked as art/entertainment and had a timeless and universal appeal: the Crisis of Youth, first love, passion, prince saving the damsel. THE GRADUATE was long a top drawer on late night TV. And the college screenings in 85 and 86 were very popular, with lots of laughter and cheering. Full attendances(in churches used as theaters, btw). Perhaps, it had new relevance in the Reagan 80s than in the 1970s that was still coping with hangover from Vietnam, Watergate, race riots, and stagflation. The Morning in America Reagan 80s revived the culture of suburban affluence and well-being, and perhaps the audience were reacting to that. In a way, RISKY BUSINESS became a hit for the same reason. And FERRIS BUELLER’S DAY OFF. The difference, of course, is Tom Cruise as Joel is only horny and Bueller is shamelessly out for a good time. They are not alienated.

    The alienation element in THE GRADUATE may owe more to Nichols’ love of European cinema than Webb’s novel. In the novel, Ben goes for searching for meaning soon after college but returns home after two weeks. He didn’t find anything and is glad to be home. In contrast, Nichols very much had in mind the more neurotic or philosophically oriented art cinema of Europeans like Antonioni, Bergman, Godard, Truffaut, Bunuel, Resnais, and etc., and so, he grafted some of those Europeanisms onto Benjamin. That accounts for the artiness of the movie.
    Also, alienation isn’t about material hardship but a sense of psychological disassociation or cultural disconnection. Antonioni’s films beginning with L’AVVENTURA were mostly about rich people, and they were alienated precisely because they were surrounded by soulless modernity and cut off from the past that no longer had relevance. They lost the past but had yet find a place in the New. In a way, physical hardship makes a person less alienated because he’s too busy struggling to make ends meet. In contrast, the affluent have time for books, leisure, reflection, and etc. All such are good but can lead to self-conscious sense of being adrift in a world of plenty but no core meaning around which all else revolve.

    Still, even without the nod to European cinema, the middle class culture of the 1960s, especially before the Summer of Love and Woodstock, was relatively more stuffy, straight, and centered on shame. So, Ben is flustered when Mrs. Robinson begins to seduce him. He feels ill-at-ease and struggles to do the right thing. The womanizing James Bond became a huge cultural icon in the decade, but the older boomers still had inhibitions and doubts. In a way, Beatlemania was both a sign of changing times and a clinging to innocence. The girls were going batshit crazy about the Fab Four, but they were sold as ‘cute’ than dangerous, as Elvis initially seemed, that is before he spoke about how he called older people ‘sir’ and dearly loves his mama. Ben tries to be cool but is initially awkward when he calls on Mrs. Robinson for the affair. This comic element needed a skillful and intuitive actor like Hoffman. Redford or some other actor wouldn’t have been so funny in a scene like this:

    “It’s pretty hard to be suave…” LOL

    Values changed, and not necessarily for the better. At the ending of L’AVVENTURA, the cheating male character weeps and feels some guilt. The character in LA DOLCE VITA is disappointed with himself that he chases after fun instead of committing to any one person or doing something meaningful. Such pathos, sentimentality, and conscience used to be at the center of human consciousness, but shamelessness and unfettered vanity became the new mode. So, Joel in RISKY BUSINESS feels no shame about anything. It’s just about the money. In a way, John Hughes FERRIS BUELLER is a throwback to old-fashioned screwball comedy and slapstick, but Bueller is happily glib and shamelessly pulls any trick to get his jollies. And they have no use for meaning.
    Many students in the 60s majored in the humanities and felt search for meaning was what mattered most. By the 70s, it was the Me-generation, and the 80s went fast from Morning in America to Nights with one-night stands, and all without shame. And 90s saw the rise of hip hop and the final process in the pornification of culture. (In a way, cancel culture may be a reaction to the soulless and shameless lack of inhibitions that define the culture. When anything goes, there can be no values. But perhaps human nature craves some kind of righteousness, and so, we have people seeking ‘spiritual’ meaning, even if it means canceling others for expressing irreverence toward saint Fentanyl Floyd.)

    So, it’s not just THE GRADUATE that seems ‘dated’ but all of art cinema of the 50s and 60s. Who needs humanism when you got nihilist-narcissism as the ultimate cool? Who needs guilt and conscience when life is all about ‘liberation’ and pride in whatever you like: Even Slut Pride.
    One could say that ALL OF ART AND CULTURE are ‘dated’ in our degenerate age. After all, most of human history has been about meaning, place, conscience, shame, and guilt. But society came to regard all such as ‘repressions’ and ‘hang-ups’.
    Even though some may argue THE GRADUATE is a shameless movie that strikes a dagger into old morality, the corrupter is the older woman. Mrs. Robinson is the most rebellious character, whereas it is the young Ben and Elaine who come to value true love with an almost innocent passion. In the end, Ben doesn’t want to be a suave 007 type, a character created by Ian Fleming, a Anglo-Imperialist of the Old School. (William F. Buckley’s Blackford Oakes beds the Queen of England, I hear.) He wants a life with Elaine.

    If movies like THE GRADUATE have lost their relevance in our time, that is our loss. At least Ben struggles with what he’s doing and tries to reclaim some kind of meaning. In contrast, it’s just shamelessness upon shamelessness in our culture. There have been exceptions to be sure, especially Whit Stillman whose METROPOLITAN, which is set in 1969, and features characters who at least try to think through things than just jump in the sack.
    With CARNAL KNOWLEDGE, Mike Nichols showed the dire logic of the Sexual Revolution. Being a liberal, he was probably for it, but he knew it came with a cost. What does it profit a man to gain more pooter but lose his heart?

    With CARNAL KNOWLEDGE, Nichols may have been striving for something like THE GROUP by Mary McCarthy. (The movie of THE GROUP by Sidney Lumet is interesting. It is still burdened with tired Hollywood conventions yet moving toward a new sensibility.)

    Even if THE GRADUATE has faded from the cultural radar, I think it will be rediscovered if only for its film-making which is marvelous on so many level. Unfortunately, its great success made Nichols overly self-conscious and conceptual than intuitive and inspired. CATCH-22 is an elaborate production with impressive moments but it lacks spontaneity and bogs down at times like IT’S A MAD MAD MAD MAD WORLD, with its jokes both underlined and in bold letters, the very opposite of the spirit of the novel. And even though CARNAL KNOWLEDGE is an intelligent work, it feels as if made in an Art Lab. A sexual tale has been rendered sterile. But the Nichols on THE GRADUATE was looser and nimbler, more deft with instinct, and the movie was done to perfection from beginning to end. Nichols found just the right angles, turns, tones, and moods. Take the scene where Benjamin gets up to take leave of Robinson’s house and the camera smoothly moves to Mrs. Robinson. Perfect framing. The use of zooms, hand-held camera, musical montages, long-takes, wide-angle frames, and telephoto lens is absolutely top-notch and perfect for every moment.

    Once or few times every decade, some director tries to make his own GRADUATE, with rather unfortunate results, as with movies inspired by THE GODFATHER. It’s difficult to repeat a peak achievement. LESS THAN ZERO is the most obvious one. ST. ELMO’S FIRE tries to be combo of THE GRADUATE and THE GROUP(along with GREAT GATSBY and several other novels/movies) and fails miserably(but is a most fascinating failure). Though SOMETHING WILD’s character is older and settled compared to Ben, it seems closest in spirit and quality to Nichols’ work. BLUE VELVET would be THE GRADUATE sucked into a black hole. In the 70s, movies like LOVE STORY, HAROLD AND MAUDE, and PAPER CHASE surely took some pointers from THE GRADUATE. And for younger audiences, the appeal of Michael Corleone in THE GODFATHER may not have been much different from that of Braddock.

    And THE GRADUATE was one of the first Hollywood movies to have a distinct look. The lighting and use of shades created an effect like nothing before. In contrast, THE GROUP is marred by conventional visual style shared by so many movies. It’s a different kind of movie but still looks like those 50s Doris Day movies. Hollywood did wonderful things with b/w but forced most directors to stick to the standard palette and lighting. But in 67, several movies broke out of that mold, eventually leading to works like MCCABE AND MRS. MILLER that looks no other film.
    Sadly, these personal styles more or less faded, and just about all of later Altman and Nichols movies came to look alike, hardly distinguishable from stuff like BROADCAST NEWS.

    • Replies: @Anonymouse
    , @Franz
  127. @cranc

    The prominence of institutional Christianity in Western society had been unravelling since well before Darwin’s time as part of a general swing towards materialist philosophies combined with a critical approach to the biblical literalism of preceding eras.

    True, but I guess the 60s saw Vatican II and the Six Days War(and elevation of Holocaust as new religion).

    Guess which side won?

  128. I know some will disagree, but I find two best Christ films Zeffirelli’s & Gibson’s. They have so much powerful scenes which leave other movies in the dust.

    • Replies: @Z-man
    , @Priss Factor
    , @Dube
  129. @chris

    BTW, not that it means much, but Fassbinder was Jewish

    It seems that he wasn’t. There is no sign in wikipedia or other places that he was Jewish.

  130. Z-man says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Mel Gibson is Da Man.
    The Jooz tried to squash his Passion but the audiences wanted to see if and did and overpowered the Vampire Squid.

  131. @Dumbo

    Woody Allen made at least one good movie, Manhattan Murder Mystery about killing Angelica Houston who wouldn’t accept breaking up with the philandering hero played by Alvin Alda, who kills her and gets away with it through difficult to accomplish strategms and after many years realizes he has pretty much forgotten the killing.

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
  132. @Priss Factor

    Where’s your jew obsession? Just kidding.

    Nichols was a great director. You might have mentioned and analyzed Angels in America.

    Also great with Elaine May back when they did hilarious skits in the Compass theater in Chicago.

  133. Rdm says:

    Review on F.R.I.E.N.D.S would be an amazing eye opener for every idiots in 90s.

    Ross Geller played by David Schwimmer (Jews)

    – dated whites, blacks, asians, you name it.
    – highly educated
    – become professor

    Monica Geller played by Courteney Cox (Jews)

    – wouldn’t date a white guy Chandler Bing played by Matthew Perry (White) even if there’s only one guy left in the world
    – Chandler a bit of bi with Joey as well, is foretelling manifesto for all the Whites in coming years.

    Rachel Greene played by Jennifer Aniston(White)

    – no matter how hot she was back in college, has been a queen, at the end of the day, she’s destined to carry a baby. The question is who’s the father?
    – while she’s finally found herself into Ross, Ross was sleeping around with many girls.

    Joey

    – needless to say a twelve year old idiot and sex maniac

    In line with this, while we’re arguing whether a certain topic/movie/genre/story is Jewish or anti-semite, look at Trump, although touting anti-semites, let his daughter marry a Jew and she becomes a practitioner of Jewish tradition.

    And those rednecks from flyover zones, brandishing MAGA hats, thinking supporting Trump will bring back their Whiteness are basically awaiting with some oil lotion if necessary for whoever wants to …. with them.

    • Replies: @follyofwar
  134. About 7 years after The Graduate came out I was in high school and someone(s) in the school or district decided to show this movie on a Friday evening in the school theater for a small ticket charge. We were told what a masterpiece of a movie it was and juniors and seniors were required to attend the preview during school hours. Oh yes the preview was definitely erotic which was so pleasing to our youthful sexual desires and appetites. I did not attend the movie night but just seeing the preview certainly had an affect on me … older woman – younger guy.

    Today I understand a lot more of what’s been going on, who is doing it and who has the power to do it.
    School officials who back then probably called themselves “Christian” should never have allowed this movie into their schools. It’s bad enough that international Jewry has corrupted churches and church denominational leaders, etc … etc … along with the Bible itself. Clearly this movie was aimed at the male students and had absolutely nothing good in it except eroticism. But at that age and from a dysfunctional loveless home I was starving for it.

  135. @Gast

    “ love your enemies”, “don’t plan”, “stay poor” etc.)”

    Love your enemy means do not get consumed by hatred. Don’t plan is not exactly what Christ said when he reminded people that God takes care of the birds which do not plan; the message was do not get consumed with worries. Stay poor is nowhere in the New Testament. Jesus puts the worshipers of Mammon under the spotlight who today make up the 0.01 % of the US population and who are constantly increasing their power and their wealth at the expense of everybody else.

    Christianity is an open ended philosophy that is meant to organise man’s relationship with the creator. Nowhere it tries to impose a social body of laws the way Islam and Judaism do. Here I am concerned that like most critics of Christianity, you are mixing between Christianity and Churchianity. The Catholic Church has been in bed with usurers since the Renaissance and Vatican II was nothing more than the official promulgation of a something that had been hidden for centuries. Pope Francis is a crypto globalist and his message about opening up Europe to immigrants from Asia and Africa do not resonate with most White Christians. SJW and Antifa are the foot soldiers of the moneyed elites whose job is to keep the people divided while they are sucking the blood of the rest of us. Hollywierd is one of their most potent weapons in shaping up minds within the matrix of control. That is why I have refrained from watching Hollywierd movies for more than a decade.

    • Replies: @Gast
    , @Jean
  136. @Bardon Kaldian

    The only Jesus film in my opinion is Pasolini’s GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW. It’s not perfect but unique and imaginative.

    Zeffirelli was a lousy movie-maker, a dealer in kitschy post cards.

    Gibson’s PASSION is about Jesus in WWE. It has nice moments, especially in the first half and in the carrying of the cross, but the over-emphasis on the physical suffering of Jesus made it less about passion and more about pain. The message was Jesus is so great because he got his ass whupped worse than any man. But by that measure, Tuco of GOOD, BAD, AND UGLY should be sainted too. He got his ass whupped real bad too. So did the Terminator in Part 2.

    Gibson is not without talent but the most literal-minded director around. Take HACKSAW RIDGE. It start out weak but gains power in the training camp scenes. Really good stuff. But once we move to the war scenes, the violence is so over-the-top it’s like the opening scene of SAVING PRIVATE RYAN that NEVER ends. It’s so over-the-top that it stops being horrifying and reaches level of self-parody and makes us feel giddy like with the scenes in TROPIC THUNDER.

    It seems Gibson feels alive only with endless mayhem.

    • Replies: @Jean
  137. Ray P says:
    @ariadna

    In an interview some years ago, Allen said that his limitations as an actor in film put him in two roles: intellectual or sleaze-bag, of which the former was an act and the latter because he was one. Many of his films make fun of intellectuals and persons’ pretension to being such.

  138. @Anonymouse

    He made a few very good movies. True, he was over-hyped, but I think these movies will last:

    Everything you always wanted to know about sex
    Love and Death
    Annie Hall
    Zelig
    The Purple Rose of Cairo
    Radio Days
    Midnight in Paris (perhaps)

    • Replies: @Stan Adams
  139. Anon[386] • Disclaimer says:
    @mark green

    The simplest answer is that many ‘White’ groups(particularly Mediterranean types like Spaniards and Italians) are full of unattractive men who physically resemble Hoffman more than Redford, so they identify with him more.

    • Agree: GoRedWings!
  140. @DaveE

    But as the movie progressed it becomes sicker, more twisted and degenerate and obviously contemptuous of the Goyische world

    Why such puritanism when it came to movies? Plenty of white goy novelists had written about all sorts of vices. Hemingway and Fitzgerald’s books are about lost souls who do all sorts of dubious things. SUN ALSO RISES is more ‘degenerate’ than THE GRADUATE, book or movie. GREAT GATSBY is a deeply disturbing novel, about both wasps and Jews. The anti-Semite Celine pioneered a new kind of writing, and his stories were filled with people of questionable character, to say the least.

    Also, Jews at the time were also making fun of themselves. Don Rickles roasted everyone. Woody Allen loved to crack jokes about Jews(as well as goyim). Mel Brooks made THE PRODUCERS in 1967. It mocks everyone, especially homos.

    And if anyone subverted conventions of the movie Western(which owed a lot to Jewish Hollywood), it was the Catholic Italian Sergio Leone.

    One great advantage of Jews in arts & letters for the longest time was they had to grit their teeth and tolerate and even accept things they didn’t like. In other words, they couldn’t keep kosher in dealing with the wider world. There were too many goyim, and they were too goyish and too Christian and too powerful. And often anti-Jewish and willing to express such feelings. And yet, this made Jews stronger in a way. It may be that losers can’t be choosers, but those who are forced to choose everything can take ideas from all sides and can see things from all sides. Jews couldn’t cancel Celine, and so, he wrote and came to be a major influence on Jewish authors such as Philip Roth. Jews couldn’t cancel Wagner(except in Israel), and so many Jewish composers drew inspiration from him. Jews couldn’t cancel Christianity, so they wrote some of the best Christmas songs. So, even as Jews felt resentment, they drew ideas and inspirations from the other side. They had no choice, but this made them stronger. If a vegan is forced to eat meat, he may resent it but he will grow stronger. He will weaker if he has the power to ban meat and stops eating meat.
    Because Christians and whites could either ignore or suppress Jews in the past, they could only keep with what they liked. In contrast, because Jews had to deal with goy culture that was all around them, they came to learn a trick or two from what they didn’t like. Kubrick used Richard Strauss in 2001, but suppose Strauss had been canceled and banned because he worked in Nazi Germany.

    In a way, it could be Jewish cultural power could now be waning precisely because they’ve gained the power to shut down things they don’t like. So, many interesting talents and thinkers are canceled and blacklisted. Jews may feel safer and more secure as a result, but they’re also creating a culture where everything must be Jew-friendly and suck up to Jews. We now live in a world when Jews can cancel people like Hemingway, Fitzgerald, TS Eliot, Richard Wagner, Celine, Gore Vidal, Knut Hamsun, and many others for their antisemitism, real or imagined(or exaggerated). By suppressing lively goy cuture, Jews have less inspirations to draw from the goy world.
    Indeed, just look at American Conservatism once it canceled people like Joseph Sobran. As the new rules became ‘Is it good for Jews?’, conservatism turned into all-out cuckservatism.

    Maybe Jews realize the dangers of this on some level. In the past when Jews were surrounded by plenty of goy culture and expressions that weren’t always Jew-friendly, they learned to adapt, learn, draw inspiration, and be vigilant. But in a Jew-power world that has made everything so kosher-friendly and Jew-secure, not only will Jews have less ideas to draw from the goy world(as Jew-friendly hacks are favored over controversial talent) but Jewish kids may grow up nonchalant, apathetic, and lazy. Why should the young ones worry when every goy is always praising Jews and when Jews can easily cancel anyone deemed ‘antisemitic'(or even ‘homophobic’ or whatever)? Jews will become like spoiled princeling brats. That may be why Jewish Power exaggerates the ‘antisemitic’ threat just when goyim are more slavish to Jews than ever. It could be that Jewish Power is nervous that Jewish young may become slack and take things for granted in an overly kosherized world. So, tell them that there are nazis everywhere because… uh… anyone Jews don’t like is a ‘nazi’. The more Jews gain nazi-like power for themselves, they more nazis they see everywhere.

    • Replies: @Z-man
  141. hhsiii says:

    Funny scene from Barcelona.

    The guy who plays Mr. Robinson is a great charater actor. Murray Hamilton. From North Carolina. He was in No Time for Sergeants, with fellow NC boy Andy Griffith. And most famously, aside from Mr. Robinson, as the Mayor in Jaws.

    I like the Graduate. It obviously resonated with a huge audience. Count me a dark-haired, non-Adonis WASP so that part is kind of universal, nerd gets girl. But it is obviously of its time.

  142. Look, the Graduate was popular for three reasons. First, it was well-made. Second, it was different and fresh, and third it was aimed at young people.

    Hoffman is perfectly cast, not because he’s Jewish but because he’s smart, small, and has a baby-face. He’s the prefect guy for the role, The mean old adults are materialistic and morally rotten and there’s sweet little Ben, who just wants to find love. He’s the underdog kids could root for.

    And the Graduate was one of the first 1960s youth movies. never trust anyone over 30. Old people bad vs young people as rebels and full idealism. Easy Rider has the same vibe. As does Cool hand luke, despite the fact that Paul Newman was 40 (!).

    The Jewish angle would’ve gone over everyone’s head in 1967. People forget that information was scarce and there was zero effort ( quite the opposite in fact) to publicly identify actors/Directors/etc. as Jewish. Paul Newman never discussed being Jewish. No one talked about Newman being Jewish. Hoffman and Nichols aren’t particularly Jewish names, and i’d bet most people in the audience in 1967, didn’t know or care that he was Jewish. Nor did most people know or case that Ann Bancroft was actually Italian.

    Above all the movie was new and fresh. It was someone different than the usual comedies that Hollywood was churning out in the mid 60s.

    • Agree: hhsiii
    • Replies: @Trinity
    , @hhsiii
  143. My wife likes to answer trivia questions. It turns out that a Jew rabbi and physician was the first to describe a sealed thermometer using alcohol in the 16th century. Which got me thinking as how I could return the jew haters on this forum to sanity. I remembered that jew physicians in Medieval Europe and even in Turkey and the Arab world were famous as go to doctors to cure disease. Even today jews seem prominent in medicine.

    How then do you fit this fact into the jew conspiracy against Western civilization? I’d guess that some might say that it’s part of the conspiracy, the Elders of Zion assign a certain percentage of jews to go and become doctors to hide the jew conspiracy. Same with jew comedians like Groucho Marx and Jack Benny beloved by many. They too were assigned to make funny so as to hide the jew conspiracy.

    Or maybe Jack Benny wasn’t part of the jew conspiracy, ’cause the Elders of Zion kept him in the dark and didn’t tell him and he made funny all on his own.

    • Replies: @Jean
  144. Gast says:
    @Joe Levantine

    “Stay poor is nowhere in the New Testament”

    Well, what about Matthew 19, 24?

    “Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

    • Replies: @Joe Levantine
  145. @Sya Beerens

    You didn’t finish you sentence. We never had any trouble with the Islamic nations until we took up the Zionist Agenda. America was respected and admired all over the world as example of individual liberty and free enterprise. The invasion, occupation, destruction and murder of over a million people has radicalized many muslims that would have been moderate towards Jewmerica. The destruction of the Arab countries is the goal of the zionists in order to fulfill the Yinnon Plan for Greater Israel.

    The Jew initiated Kelergi Plan (Pan Europa est. 1923) flooding Europe with Africans is another part of the Zionist plan to destroy the White nations. Once this is accomplished, global Gov. will be easy.

    Many muslims have become the proxy warriors for the Jews as many Amer. negroes have been for decades. All of this is just part of the plan to divide and conquer. The Zionists have to have war, conflict and hatred to advance their agenda.

    • Replies: @Sya Beerens
  146. Z-man says:
    @Priss Factor

    Yes, remember Joe Sobran and his backstabber, the original cuck William F. Buckley.

    • Replies: @Giancarlo M. Kumquat
  147. @animalogic

    I know lots of the Jews think we gentiles exist to serve the “Chosen.” They think they are still under the Law of Moses.

    Joshua 9:27

    Joshua made them woodcutters and water carriers for the congregation and for the altar of the LORD, in the place which He would choose, even to this day

  148. @Alden

    “But men my age flicked to his movies.”

    Well, you have to understand, they didn’t have the internet or even much in the home video line, so there wasn’t much else to flick at.

  149. pecosbill says:
    @MLK

    It seems that Baby Boomers will remain a giant boil on the neck of this great country until they die off in sufficient numbers. They simply cannot forgive their parents (greatest) generation for their sacrifice and fidelity on their behalf.

    The so called ‘greatest generation’ was the worst, second only to the Lincolnites. The not-so-greatest generation elected FDR four times, and gave virtually one party control of congress until the 1990s except for a small interlude. They voted for FDR who prolonged the depression and agitated for US involvement in a European war of no real concern to America. This generation happily let their young men be drafted and sent off to the meat-grinder, all for nothing since the US and the West simply lost WWII as is plain to see now.

    The not-so-great greatest generation allowed a war in Korea perpetuated by the hapless Truman, elected criminal/pervert/sick JFK the first boy president and ‘landslided’ in LBJ who gave us Vietnam and who quit, like Truman did in Korea. The not-so-great generation gave us all the various ‘civil rights’ laws, bus ordered desegregation, section 8, fair housing and many other atrocities such as public housing.

    FDR removed the dollar from gold and Nixon finished it off by closing the gold window because LBJ’s guns and butter approach pumped too much paper on the world for dollars to be redeemed in gold on demand.

    The not-so-greatest generation also elected war criminal IKE who issued illegal orders for the 101st to invade Central High. IKE and shades of Lincoln. Of course IKE felt safe politically because the South was one party democrat at the time and he knew his illegality would never be questioned in light of the civil rights context.

    Boomers had nothing to do with these massive disasters as the laws of the time prohibited voting until 21 years. Indeed, many ill advised policies happened before they were born.

    Boomers took the brunt of the Vietnam war being draftees, volunteers, or volunteers under threat of the draft. They also were saddled with burdens of the cold war due to the not-so-greatest generation having lost WWII.

    I’m not a Boomer but I do remember that generation of self misled and self misguided bright young white kids many of whom were so called hippies. The roads they took ended up in a Charles Manson massacre and Woodstock debacle. Then they became the establishment and refused to have kids and one reason for that was they had to support black and Mexican kids in addition to their own.

    Tom Brokaw, a hack news reader, coined the term greatest generation. They were great because they were Goy willing to sacrifice themselves and their own to save the Jews, Stalin, and the British empire, their mission in life. Brokaw himself having no military record I could find appears to be the typical liberal hypocrite who lived an idyllic life, from a well established family in Montana far away from the horrors of war and the debacles he supported.

    Greatest generation my a*s.

    • Agree: Alden, TheTrumanShow
  150. Elaine ends her relationship with Braddock and becomes engaged to Carl Smith, portrayed by the decidedly non-Jewish actor Brian Avery.

    Ironically, the first google result for Brian Avery is an article about a man with the same name who was shot in the face by the IDF.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Avery_(activist)

  151. Trinity says:
    @Honesthughgrant

    Not that up on my Jew or not a Jew, but isn’t Paul Newman only partially Jew(ish?) Newman, regardless of whether he was partially Jew or not, was a fine actor, definitely head and shoulders above someone like Dustin Hoffman. Hoffman was better suited for playing second fiddle to a leading man like he did in Midnight Cowboy, and in one of my favorite movies, ( even though Hoffman was in it), Papillon, with Steve McQueen. Newman played in a few of my favorite movies, besides the EXCELLENT MOVIE, Cool Hand Luke, I very much enjoyed, The Hustler, and Hud. I liked the movie, Slap Shot, not because of Newman, but because of the Hanson goons. lolol. I thought the movie, One-Eyed Jacks with Marlon Brando was a fine movie, a favorite of mine definitely. As for Mel Gibson, the best movie he ever directed in my opinion is Apocalypto. I agree with the poster earlier, Gibson focused way too much on the beating of Christ in The Passion. A bit too gory for my taste, but hey, maybe Mr. Gibson wanted it that way to show people how much Jesus Christ suffered and endured so that we could be saved.

  152. chris says:
    @geokat62

    How funny would it be if someone were to update this movie for today and have it set in an ethnic Jewish community where the goy steals the Jewish bride, blocking the door to the synagogue with the menorah. Then, the vindictiveness of the attack on that community would be all too obvious.

    Also, I always thought the character in the movie, who at the party recommends to Jonathan to go into ‘plastics,’ was, far from depicting a WASP, an archtye of a Jewish character. This would have been ubiquitously cited as a typical anti-Semitic smear had the shoe been on the other foot.

    • Agree: geokat62
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  153. @Observator

    Correct. Prior to the rise of Christianity they were an exceedingly unimportant people. The Greeks hardly made any references to them. Persians, Egyptians, Romans, Indians, Scythians, Italic peoples, Sicels, Nubians, Thracians, Illyrians, Ethiopians, Celts, Syrians and Arabs were more important.

  154. Jane says:

    What a load of 5h1t from the parasites resentful of inconvenient truths, let’s talk about WWII, who was the advisor who convinced FDR not to allow the refugees aboard the USS St Louis to enter the US? The same Bernard Baruch who along with his fellow Jewish bankers in NY, London, France, Germany financed the bolshevik revolution. Bernard boasted in his memoir of how proud he and his brother were when they found daddy Simon Baruch’s high level klan regalia (Simon Baruch was one of the cofounders if the klan, a confederate officer and slave owner, did you know there is a Jewish daughters subset of the daughters of the confederacy?)

  155. @Alden

    Five Easy Pieces not Easy Rider. Take it easy.

    • Replies: @Ray P
    , @Alden
  156. @pecosbill

    The not-so-greatest generation elected FDR four times, and gave virtually one party control of congress until the 1990s except for a small interlude. They voted for FDR who prolonged the depression and agitated for US involvement in a European war of no real concern to America.

    In hard times, people want a strong man, and FDR acted as if he was busy DOING SOMETHING. Germans voted for Hitler for the same reason. And while FDR agitated for war, Hitler started the war.

    This generation happily let their young men be drafted and sent off to the meat-grinder, all for nothing since the US and the West simply lost WWII as is plain to see now.

    Most Americans were opposed to intervention, but after Pearl Harbor…

    The not-so-great greatest generation allowed a war in Korea perpetuated by the hapless Truman,

    That was a Police Action. Congress didn’t approve it.

    elected criminal/pervert/sick JFK the first boy president and ‘landslided’ in LBJ who gave us Vietnam and who quit, like Truman did in Korea.

    Seeds of Vietnam War were planted by Eisenhower. Once South Vietnam was created and made a clientele of the US, American presidents had to lend support. Also, the American Right was hellish on the Liberals for going easy on communism.

    The not-so-great generation gave us all the various ‘civil rights’ laws, bus ordered desegregation, section 8, fair housing and many other atrocities such as public housing.

    But the black problem goes way back. And from the black POV, they’d been denied basic rights for too long.

    • Replies: @pecosbill
  157. @Alden

    Nicholson is really short. About my height which is 5’3.

    No, he’s 5’9. Not tall but not 5’3.

    Dudley Moore, there was a shorty as a star.

    • Replies: @Alden
  158. @chris

    How funny would it be if someone were to update this movie for today and have it set in an ethnic Jewish community where the goy steals the Jewish bride, blocking the door to the synagogue with the menorah.

    How about reverse the sexes? Betty Braddock is seduced by an older man.

    Or how about a PLANET OF THE APES version. Graduape.

    Or how about a Wasp family adopts a young Tony Montana as son and he plays the Ben role.

    • LOL: Hibernian
    • Replies: @chris
  159. @Gast

    But in the end Christianity was just a slave religion the jews gave us. A slave religion full of bad advice …..

    When I read that, I thought, ‘Wow, someone else sees it that way too.’

    I lived and worked in the heart of Jewish America (NYC) many years ago, for a decade. You learn ALOT about Jewish outlook, disposition, motivations, etc. just by living there. Then I spent 30 years in the Bible Belt and, let me tell you, the NE and the SE are utterly different planets!

    The predominant denomination in the SE, by a long shot, is Baptist. Their approach to life is almost diametrically opposed to the way Jews live and think. It took me a long time to realize it but, almost every common behavior or belief amongst multi-generational Southerners is based on some Biblical teaching. If you ask them why they think a certain thing or do something a particular way — 90% of the time the answer (if they even know — often it’s just repeated behavior) is some verse from the Bible or because that’s the way their Mama or Daddy did it. Which brings me to my nutshell response if I’m ever asked to define what Southern culture is like. I reply, “It is all based on control and obedience.” Independent thinking, unusual ways of approaching something, sharing knowledge, asking questions — NONE of that is encouraged or appreciated.

    They are taught, what I call, “the template, period”. Meaning, the Bible gets drilled-in early and often as an absolute, what Mama and Daddy decree is also to be adhered to and no discussion is needed, males rank higher than females, etc.

    Well, who created the written text that promotes such a suffocating, narrow, obedient, incurious, subservient way of living? Yup, those clever Jews did. My phrase, which I’ve only ever uttered a few times b/c most people couldn’t handle it is, “the Jews created a servant class for themselves when they wrote the Bible”…. and promoted the characters and stories. I lived amongst those servants for 3 decades but, finally escaped. ;o)

  160. @Z-man

    Buckley was a lifelong in the closet pole smoker.

    • Replies: @Alden
  161. anon[416] • Disclaimer says:
    @Nosquat Loquat

    Anti Semitism is a big wide long broad brush . Its a net . Jewish fishing industry uses it to catch the shoal of the Goym fish . Any ripple is seen as evidence of presence and the net is lowered . So if you hear someone asking for discussion and exchange of ideas between Saddam and Bush or between Iran and USA ,he would be automatically nabbed in the net and paralyzed ,out of the water , now unable to breathe .

  162. dually says:
    @Priss Factor

    I consider the Levantine Jewish-like looks of the Italians, especially the southern Italians, to be used in movies like The Godfather as a proxy for Jews in Hollywood to portray themselves. I think the Jewish Mob were much more successful than Italians in going underground – and surviving, to reemerge in places like Hollywood, which is completely mobbed-up; while the Italian Mob seems to still be thriving in Eastern big-city politics.

    From my own observation, the decline began with Dog Day Afternoon, where Al Pacino introduced the West to complete neurotic degeneracy with his transsexual romantic interest. Down the road to perdition we go!

    Deniro’s deranged Vietnam Vet Taxi Driver was a stock character of Hollywood since the War, because whom the draft dodgers feared – they hate; which, along with the complete defamation of the working class in movies like Deliverance, was the first step in completely marginalizing the working class, and later, the the middle class; and now even upper class Judaeo-WASPs are beginning to marginalize themselves! Revolutions always end up eating their own.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    , @syonredux
  163. Ray P says:
    @Ancient Briton

    It must be a ‘woman thing’ but Kathy Shaidle (Takimag) had a similar negative reaction to the famous diner scene (in Five Easy Pieces) between Nicholson and the waitress since the working woman was simply trying to do her job and Jack gave her a hard time. (Although that scene is about his character’s self-destructive nature – he says to the admiring lesbian hitch-hiker in his car after getting thrown out: “It was really clever? I still didn’t get my sandwich.”) Shaidle also disliked Nicholson’s mocking and abusive treatment of Nurse Ratched in Cuckoo’s Nest – she was another tough working-woman trying to keep a bunch of work-shy, worthless, useless men in order.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    , @dually
  164. @Rdm

    I haven’t read every comment, but I was wondering when someone would mention blonde shiksa Ivanka marrying Jewish nerd Kushner. In the looks department she certainly could have done much better, and she didn’t need Kushner money. The parallels between homely Jews Hoffman and Jared winding up with tall, beautiful gentile girls are obvious. I’ve read that Trump wished she had married Tom Brady.

    But in Benjamin Braddock’s case I suspect Elaine’s infatuation may have quickly evaporated when she came to her senses. She was just too young, not in love with her fiancé, and didn’t want to be pushed into marriage. Braddock, loser though he was, at least saved her from that.

    • Replies: @Rdm
  165. Small doses. They give it to us in small doses. My dad used to tell me that. Cecil B. DeMille saw it during the early 1930’s, but that drunken blowhard, John Ford and (((others))) went out of their way to neutralize him. Then you have TV (((Norman Lear))). Remember “People for the American Way”? Look at the anti-white poison that leftist useful idiot goyim actor, Carroll O’Connor used to spout every week. And, the clueless white Americans ate it up.
    I saw the graduate when it came out. I was in college. The whole premise was clear as a bell to me, even at age 20. The fact of a homely, sawed-off little Jew triumphing over the tall, handsome, blond medical student was the wet dream of every (((male))) who secretly covets the schickse(sp?). I saw that in college in SoCal. Beating back the goyim with my religious symbol was a nice touch for the typical 1960s counter-culture “anti-hero”.
    Of course, as you examine the antics of these #metoo degenerates(Hoffman, Weinstein, etc.), it becomes apparent that sometimes what goes around, comes around. One can only continue to hope more and more of these Khazar degenerates will get their just deserts. Anathema sit.

  166. Alden says:
    @Ancient Briton

    I never saw Five Easy Pieces . I referred to the scene in Easy Rider. Nicholson and Peter Fonda were in a diner eating breakfast and Nicholson’s character harassed the waitress about his toast.

    Same scene in 2 different movies. Writers wrote similar harassing the waitress scene for Nicholson’s character to show what a rebel the character was.

  167. @dually

    I consider the Levantine Jewish-like looks of the Italians, especially the southern Italians, to be used in movies like The Godfather as a proxy for Jews in Hollywood to portray themselves.

    Jews surely saw that angle in THE GODFATHER, but the novel was by an Italian-American and it was directed by Coppola. In some ways, it’s Jews seeing themselves through Italians, and it’s Italians dreaming they’d been as smart as Jews. Michael is smart and out-maneuvers everyone, even Roth. Likewise, ROCKY series was a fantasy where Italian American guy beats the Negro and becomes champ. Interesting that Sal, whom Michael says was always smarter(than Clemenza), was played by Jewish Abe Vigoda.

    From my own observation, the decline began with Dog Day Afternoon, where Al Pacino introduced the West to complete neurotic degeneracy with his transsexual romantic interest. Down the road to perdition we go!

    DOG DAY AFTERNOON is a truthful movie, one that qualifies as art. It’s not entirely truthful about the events the inspired the movie but thoughtful about the psychology of sociopaths and the idiot masses hungry for folk hero celebrities and sensationalism. I don’t see the movie as endorsing trans-gender lunacy like later movies like DALLAS BUYER’S CLUD. Art must tackle difficult and disturbing subjects as life isn’t a bed of roses. It’s Lumet’s first genuine great movie topped only by PRINCE OF THE CITY.

    Deniro’s deranged Vietnam Vet Taxi Driver was a stock character of Hollywood since the War, because whom the draft dodgers feared – they hate; which, along with the complete defamation of the working class in movies like Deliverance, was the first step in completely marginalizing the working class, and later, the the middle class;

    But as deranged as Travis Bickle is, the audience is made to empathize with him because NY of the 70s is depicted as a grimy, sleazy, and corrupt place. Even though Bickle is clearly crazy, we can understand why he wants to lash out at the phonies. He’s Holden Caulfield on steroids.

    As for DELIVERANCE, I don’t think those ‘mountain men’ count as working class. They live in a world of their own. And the city slickers are not hipster liberals but solid middle class types, the kind who usually vote Republican. In a way, the dynamics of DELIVERANCE is somewhat like the one in STRAW DOGS. The city folks are hounded by mountain men, but they are the intruders in another people’s territory. So, in a way, they are the trespassers, just like Hoffman’s character is in the small English town. Also, it’s modernity that is building a dam and uprooting entire communities. Also, the ‘mountain men’ seem to be rustic homos as they bugger Ned Beatty and scream ‘squeeeeeeeaaaal like a pig’. DELIVERANCE is an ambiguous work and a great movie by John Boorman.

    • Replies: @dually
  168. @Ray P

    Nicholson and the waitress since the working woman was simply trying to do her job and Jack gave her a hard time.

    While I side more with the waitress, both were giving each other a hard time. She said one can order a sandwich but not just bread. He says he will pay for the price of the sandwich if he’s served two slices of bread. She’s sticking to rules, but there is a certain logic to his request. He will take the sandwich but only with the bread and nothing else.

  169. pecosbill says:
    @Priss Factor

    In hard times, people want a strong man, and FDR acted as if he was busy DOING SOMETHING.

    In hard times people want smart men. The not-so-greatest proved they were not so bright and discerning voters by electing FDR a third rate intellect and forth rate character who lied and bamboozled them into a destructive war. He sold them the idea of free stuff, communism. It’s likely most of that generation never put two and two together.

    Germans voted for Hitler for the same reason. And while FDR agitated for war, Hitler started the war.

    Not so, the British and French started the world war. They declared war on Germany first before Hitler retaliated. Hitler offered peace arrangements to Britain to end the conflicts but was ignored. Hitler’s enemy was Stalin and the communist who he ran out of Germany and assisted Franco in running them out of Spain. Britain saw a rising competitor in Germany in the 1930s and wanted her destroyed.

    That was a Police Action (Korea). Congress didn’t approve it.

    Yeah sure, Truman’s slight of hand to avoid going to congress for a declaration of war. Tell the ‘police action’ story to the marines at the frozen chosen or at the Inchon landing. Congress did not disapprove it either.

    Seeds of Vietnam War were planted by Eisenhower. Once South Vietnam was created and made a clientele of the US, American presidents had to lend support.

    The French at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu 1954 asked for Ike’s help and he refused. He had said that a US war in the mainland of Asia would be a mistake. He was correct. Lending support does not mean sending ground troops. JFK put the first troops in and LBJ escalated to a full scale war based on the made up and fraudulent Gulf of Tonkin incident.

    Also, the American Right was hellish on the Liberals for going easy on communism.

    So what? During those times the so called right wing controlled absolutely zero part of the government except for the senate for a couple of years. All they could work was there mouths. Many a left winger during that time were ‘red baiters’ as well.

    But the black problem goes way back. And from the black POV, they’d been denied basic rights for too long.

    Even so, legal action through laws was the way to go, not by decrees from thugs in black robes and a actions by a president (IKE) who should have been in prison for war crimes along with Churchill.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  170. Alden says:
    @Priss Factor

    Oh really? And where did you get that information? Wikipedia? I’ve known him for years. First met him when he used to come to San Francisco with then girl friend Angelica Houston. She’s the 5’9 one, not him. They were Mutt and Jeff. Now I live not that far from him and see him around. He’s about my height, 5’3. We all shrink with old age.

    Personal knowledge VS wikepedia

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    , @Ron Unz
  171. Alden says:
    @Giancarlo M. Kumquat

    Unusual that a loudly self proclaimed catholic of his generation would have only one child.

  172. Ethnic actors were a big thing with Beach Party movies.

    Frankie Avalon. And brunette Annette Funicello the cutie surrounded by blondes.

    Lovely moment:

    And around a decade after THE GRADUATE, there was the musical GREASE where ‘greaseball’ Travolta hook up with blonde Olivia Newton-John.

    Two kinds of youth movies: Ones made in the moment and ones that dwell on nostalgia or autobiography.

    REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE, THE GRADUATE, SATURDAY NIGHT FEVER, BREAKING AWAY, and RISKY BUSINESS reflect the times in which they were made.
    In contrast, AMERICAN GRAFFITI, FOUR FRIENDS, DAZED AND CONFUSED, and C.R.A.Z.Y revive bygone eras. The latter films have less chance of becoming dated because they were made after the fact with more perspective.
    And then, there are movies made in the moment but reflecting an earlier era. Scorsese’s MEAN STREETS is set in the 70s, but he drew inspiration from his youth in the late 50s and 60s. As such, the character of Charlie seems somewhat obsessed with moral hangups of an earlier era.
    Something similar is afoot in SOCIAL NETWORK. Aaron Sorkin projected his generation’s Jewish neurosis onto Zuckerberg, a creature of the 2000s whose world was very different.

    A precursor of THE GRADUATE was A MAN AND A WOMAN. It used the stylistics of the French New Wave in service of pop romantic fantasy, and it was a hit and won awards. But Lelouch’s technical mastery was questionable and he resorted to too many musical montages and visual trickery to compensate for weak plot and characterization. There is a lot for film-makers to learn from THE GRADUATE but not so much from MAN AND WOMAN, which only works in short bursts as proto-music-videos. Still, what a nostalgic journey to a France that is now lost to Diversity.

    Another film that might have inspired Nichols may be IL SORPASSO(THE EASY LIFE), especially in its use of music.

    While some white guys may not want to see blonde girls with Jews or Italians, it’s much worse now as the blondies are with the Negroes.

    But then, white men pioneered this race-mixing business. They impregnanted browns of South America. They got black women pregnant in the South. There was the legend of Pocohontas. And plenty of white soldiers overseas had affairs or sex with women in Asia and South Pacific.
    There was SAYONARA before THE GRADUATE. Brando had a strange fetish for brown women.. and Deniro only seems to go for blacks. And James Bond boffed women of all races.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    , @syonredux
  173. dually says:
    @Dumbo

    If anything, anglo elites have been allied with Jews for a long, long time.

    People generally, Indo-Aryan “white” people especially, primarily divide themselves less by “race”, than into caste, or financial class. In the 1960’s cultural revolution, which began around the time of The Graduate, the rich liberated themselves from the social contract because they didn’t want to fight in Vietnam.

    America blames everything on race, not class, because at the time, America was trying to sell itself as a “classless” society, in opposition to the USSR, which was very class-conscious. Consequently, all social problems came to be blamed on race, not class – and these still are, although the narrative long ago became preposterous.

    After the fall of the USSR, instead of admitting the truth, affluent Judeo-WASPs decided that their privileges should be sacrosanct, including the coveted privilege of “victimhood”, and they made those deplorable poor-to-middle-class whites into their “oppressors”. Air-headed rich women, in particular, started to assert themselves, because as everyone knows, without the USSR, a major war is impossible, so they didn’t need men anymore to do the fighting.

    Aliens (1986), directed by James Cameron, presented what the new feminized future would look like, introducing the gender role-reversals that we are now familiar with in media. I remember this film in particular, because at the time, I stood up and walked out of the movie theater for this reason – and I haven’t been back inside of one since – have I missed anything?

    • Replies: @artichoke
  174. syonredux says:
    @dually

    I consider the Levantine Jewish-like looks of the Italians, especially the southern Italians, to be used in movies like The Godfather as a proxy for Jews in Hollywood to portray themselves.

    Probably something to that. However, that interpretation is complicated by the ways in which GODFATHER I and II function as an Italian-American power fantasy. The Corleones/Michael defeat everybody: Jews (Jewish studio boss Waltz and mobster Moe Green in I, Hyman Roth in II), the Irish (Sterling Hayden’s Captain McCluskey in I), and the WASP elite (the Senators in II).

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8cE3ZekgCY

  175. dually says:
    @Ray P

    the working woman was simply trying to do her job and Jack gave her a hard time

    This much ballyhooed piece of “film art” is the scene that I consider to be the point in the 1960s where the upper-class drew the line in the sand – a not-so-subtle message that the Cultural Revolution was not for the working class, who, unlike the upper class draft dodgers , still had a war to fight.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  176. syonredux says:
    @Priss Factor

    And plenty of white soldiers overseas had affairs or sex with women in Asia and South Pacific.
    There was SAYONARA before THE GRADUATE.

    There was a whole cycle of films in the ’50s and ’60s that revolved around European-Asian interracial relationships:SOUTH PACIFIC, DIAMOND HEAD, HOUSE OF BAMBOO, CHINA GATE, THE CRIMSON KIMONO, THE WORLD OF SUZIE WONG, JAPANESE WAR BRIDE, etc. Heck, the first non-White woman that James Bond bedded was East Asian (A White girl in Yellowface makeup in DR NO, and the real thing in YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE).

    I’ve always suspected that they were more palatable proxies for Black-White miscegenation, the thin edge of the wedge, as it were.

    • Replies: @Alden
  177. dually says:
    @Priss Factor

    I don’t think those ‘mountain men’ count as working class. They live in a world of their own. And the city slickers are not hipster liberals

    If you don’t equate people who actually work for a living as “working class” and city slickers as hipsters, then you must be speaking your own language.

    The fact that you think that they lived “in a world of their own” shows how easily you’ve bought into the dehumanization of rural people.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  178. syonredux says:
    @Priss Factor

    Interesting to note that Mike Nichols’ final wife was uber-WASP Diane Sawyer….

  179. artichoke says:

    Not very Jewish to say “Oh Jesus God” when he sees them kissing at the beginning of the scene!

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  180. ANON[113] • Disclaimer says:

    Boring AF movie. Only thing worth watching was Anne Bancroft being a slut. That is from the teenage view at the time. Katherine Ross was hot, but didn’t show skin, so that was that. Mostly a satirical pacing, with the intended audience being college dweebs and suburban guys that WISH they could get that lucky. Agree with the various critiques listed, but realistically no one cared for that s**t except academics and critics. Is good to know how many Jews were involved in the production though, and yes it does represent Jewish sexuality. We had a JAP that used to come by during high school and she learned about oral from blowing her brother, who was in med school at the time (When she was 9). No shame in their game

    • Replies: @Ray P
  181. artichoke says:
    @dually

    I wouldn’t know because I seldom went to movies even before they started to be freighted with such “messages”, but then I definitely stopped going.

    • Agree: dually
  182. Dube says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Pasolini’s is in a class by itself, the best not only for its power with cinematic minimalism, but also of course because it is the Gospel According to Matthew.

    Mel Gibson’s Satan might be a special Oscar winner for Best Satan. Selecting a female to scream hatred at God with the briefest flash of thigh and exposing her shorn hair while crouched on the parched and ruined earth seems an insight to ponder about the once most cherished cherub.

  183. @pecosbill

    Very well put, but most likely to little avail. There seems to be an inexhaustible stream of commenters crying about “Baby Boomers” without having the slightest idea of what they’re talking about.

  184. Alfred says:
    @Trinity

    One memorable scene involved the Olivier character walking around in NYC and out of thousands walking on the street, he is recognized by some old Jewess bat who was in one of the Nazi camps where the evil Olivier character happened to torture Jews. Think of the odds of this happening? lolol.

    I have had several similar experiences. It is much more common than you imagine.

    1- I was living in London and visiting my brother in Washington, DC. Plane arrived late in New York. I didn’t know about the shuttle to Washington. I went to Manhattan. Could not find hotel room. Left luggage with some girls in a bar and went hunting. Entered a huge hotel. Some Iranian guys recognised me. I did not know them. They told me that there was a wedding reception on the nth floor. Almost forced me to come and meet the bride and groom. I went along. Had to shake hands with a massive number of people. Eventually escaped. Found room in the Pierre. Collected luggage and went there.

    2- I was living in Iran. I visited London. A stranger stopped me. He was a friend of my younger brother (we look similar). He said that he knew that I was not my brother but he asked after him. The guy had been to school with my brother. He had been an officer in Northern Ireland but became disillioned and gave up his commission.

    3- After the Revolution in Iran, I visited my older brother in DC. I was walking in Georgetown. A guy sitting on a fence greeted me in Persian. He was an Iranian Jew who I had shared an office with. He told me that he first went to Israel but felt unwelcome. Later, this same guy and his brother robbed Iceland out of hundreds of millions and helped crash their economy. Famous scandal.

    Robert Tchenguiz borrowed £1.25bn from the failed bank to finance deals

    Robert and Vincent Tchenguiz arrested in Iceland probe (2011)

    4- I was on a plane flying between Tehran and Dubai. I was seated next to an elderly Irish couple. It turned out that they had gone to a village school with my mother 50 years earlier.

    5- I was sitting at a café – Le Grand Corona – in Paris. I had not seen my Iranian girlfriend for years. She was living in London. I was sitting indoors. I had a date with a Scottish dancer/choreographer at the Crazy Horse. My ex passed in front of the café and saw me. She entered. She came to our table and picked up the heavy glass ashtray. I was not sure whether she would smash it into the head of the girl or throw it at the plate glass window. After a moment, she put down the ashtray and left. The Scottish girl was so scared that I never saw her again.

    I am sure there are a few more but my memory is like a sieve.

  185. @dually

    If you don’t equate people who actually work for a living as “working class” and city slickers as hipsters, then you must be speaking your own language.
    The fact that you think that they lived “in a world of their own” shows how easily you’ve bought into the dehumanization of rural people.

    Don’t be a dammy. If everyone who works for a living is ‘working class’, so are doctors and lawyers.
    ‘Working class’ has connotations, and it refers to men involved in industry like mining, factories, and etc.

    The rural backwoods people in DELIVERANCE are like people that time forgot. Also, they are somewhat inbred and cut off from general trends in the larger society. Is this good or bad? The movie is ambivalent.

    Amish live in a world of their own. Sure, they work hard, but they are not typically what we call ‘working class’. Hippies had their own communes. The commune in EASY RIDER also leaves us ambivalent. The hippies are trying to make it work but they seem a bit flaky.

    Also, why shouldn’t certain groups live in a world of their own, for good or bad. Black ghetto underclass live in a world of their own. There are Mexican-American communities that mostly keep to themselves and speak Spanish and watch mostly Spanish programs. Same with Chinatown. And Scorsese’s Little Italy in MEAN STREETS is a world unto itself. It has its own code and ‘values’, for good or ill. And there are Ultra-Orthodox Jewish communities. Many American Indians still live in Reservations.

    All such self-isolating societies are objects of both fascination and dread. What is THE GODFATHER about but Michael departing from mainstream America and taking up the top position in an insular clan.

    Also, are the city folks in DELIVERANCE so admirable? Burt Reynolds talk big but when injured, whimpers like a baby. Ned Beatty’s fatso just whines about mosquitos. And Ronnie Cox’s character is naive enough to think ‘muh Constitution’ means much in them there parts.

    Anti-working class and anti-rural message came much later in Hollywood movies. Hollywood made many Save the Farms movies in the 80s, if only as dig to Reagan. John Sayles made MATEWAN. Barbara Koppel made the famous docu HARLAN COUNTY USA. And there was COAL MINER’S DAUGHTER and HEARTLAND. And the show LITTLE HOUSE ON THE PRAIRIE. And TV shows like THE WALTONS. And FIDDLER ON THE ROOF that features Jews in rural setting. THE DEER HUNTER was very respectful of working class community.

    And even though homo rednecks are indeed frightening, most of the folks in them parts are shown as decent folks. When Ned Beatty and Jon Voight share a meal at the table of townsfolk, they are treated real well. And it’s good corn.

    Also, James Dickey, who wrote the novel, was no lily liverered libby-dib. He plays the sheriff, and we can understand his contempt for the city boys. They just came for adventure in a part of the world that others call home.

    John Boorman later made EMERALD FOREST, and it condemns encroachment of modern world on the Amazonian forest. And there is that feeling for nature in DELIVERANCE. Sure, the rustic folks may be rough, but they found their niche in that part of the world. And their community will be erased because more development planned by city folks. So, there is no easy villain in the movie… except a couple of homo rednecks or pinknecks.

    • Replies: @dually
    , @Trinity
  186. Dube says:

    My Graduate movie review is of the audience reaction to the blatant Cross door-jamming scene, with hysteric laughter. Some know when to laugh and when not to laugh, even while upholding free expression. I was a rock-ribbed atheist, and I know that memory morphs, but I think I was silent.

    Marcuse. In the last of several brief but significant (to me) conversations, I told him, in answer, that I was supporting myself with a small pocket-change business knocking on doors. He surprised me by asking, through cigar smoke, “Couldn’t you get a better job than that?” I thought, this is the Marcuse of the Great Refusal? I think that he was at least somewhat amused and not just gruffly contradicting ideology.

  187. @dually

    This much ballyhooed piece of “film art” is the scene that I consider to be the point in the 1960s where the upper-class drew the line in the sand – a not-so-subtle message that the Cultural Revolution was not for the working class, who, unlike the upper class draft dodgers , still had a war to fight.

    While the restaurant scene is on the cheap side, Nicholson’s character is not a hero. If anything, he turns out to be a self-pitying self-absorbed scoundrel who can never make up his mind. He can’t fit in anywhere. He’s of fancy background and got good education, but he rejected all that to be real and authentic. He chose a working class life and hangs around with working class people. With them, he feels ‘real’, but he can’t help looking down on them as ignorant idiots. All said and done, despite his working class posturing, he is a snob, sophisticate, and cynic… much like Albert Brooks can’t really fit into Middle America in LOST IN AMERICA.

    But when he goes back to visit his family, he doesn’t get along with them either. With working class folks, he feels smugly superior. But with intellectual types, he feels defiantly ‘real’ because he’s been with the regular folks and brought along some bimbo tart(Karen Black). But at the end, he betrays everyone. He leaves the woman behind in a gas station. He’s alienated from everyone and everything. He is loyal to no one.

    FIVE EASY PIECES isn’t a great film but it tried to say something honest and true about the post-liberation anti-climax. It reflects a conceit on part of many in the 60s. They thought they would reject privilege, the good life, and touch Real People or even Indians. Or Jewish intellectuals would go to the South and teach black kids to become brilliant scholars. But over time, they grew disillusioned and returned to class consciousness and became yuppies… just like the couple in LOST IN AMERICA soon head back to the city after their pathetic conceit with being ‘real’.

  188. @Alden

    Personal knowledge VS wikepedia

    Then, we need Aldenpedia.

    Btw, it could be that he’s not 5’3 but you’re really 5’9.

    • Replies: @Alden
  189. Ron Unz says:
    @Alden

    Oh really? And where did you get that information? Wikipedia? I’ve known [Jack Nicholson] for years. First met him when he used to come to San Francisco with then girl friend Angelica Houston. She’s the 5’9 one, not him. They were Mutt and Jeff. Now I live not that far from him and see him around. He’s about my height, 5’3. We all shrink with old age.

    Personal knowledge VS wikepedia

    That’s really astonishing if true. Actors and celebrities always use their PR people to lie about their height, but I always thought it was just an inch or two. So it’s really astonishing if Nicholson’s “official height” is 5’10” but he’s really just 5’3″.

    But is that really correct? Danny DeVito, his co-star in Hoffa, is supposedly 4’10” and here’s a photo suggesting that Nicholson is around a foot taller, which was exactly my impression from when I saw that film:

    https://www.gettyimages.co.nz/detail/news-photo/actors-danny-devito-and-jack-nicholson-perform-onstage-news-photo/106339718

    I certainly don’t recall Nicholson being so much shorter than all of the costars in his many other films. Were those co-stars also very short?

    You say Angelica Huston is 5’9″ and that’s about what the Internet says as well. But all the photos I found of the two of them together seem to suggest they’re roughly the same height:

    https://www.google.com/search?q=jack+nicholson+anjelica+huston+movie&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X

    Could he possibly be wearing 5-6 inch platform shoes in all those different films and photos?…

    • Replies: @geokat62
    , @Rdm
    , @Alden
  190. Hibernian says:
    @pecosbill

    Lending support does not mean sending ground troops. JFK put the first troops in and LBJ escalated to a full scale war based on the made up and fraudulent Gulf of Tonkin incident.

    Eisenhower sent advisers, although they were few in number. This was the beginning of MACV. At first they were logisticians, but it grew beyond that; some of them were in combat; more and more of them as time went on. There were only 300 of them when he passed the baton to Kennedy. Still, he was the one who got our foot in the door.

    • Replies: @pecosbill
  191. Hibernian says:
    @artichoke

    Some Jewish people are repelled by any explicitly Christian imagery or language, and certainly don’t use it themselves, except perhaps very occasionally in mockery; others, not so much.

    • Replies: @artichoke
  192. dually says:
    @Priss Factor

    Anti-working class and anti-rural message came much later in Hollywood movies.

    No, it started with Deliverance.

    Also: The only scene worth the price of admission in Easy Rider is the last one.

    • Replies: @dually
    , @Priss Factor
  193. dually says:
    @dually

    Self-corrected: It started with Easy Rider.

    naive enough to think ‘muh Constitution’ means much in them there parts.

    The demonized red neck in the last scene portrayed a distinct concern for the Second Amendment.

  194. Culpepper says:
    @Dumbo

    One you may have missed: The Island

    ‘”The Island” is a 2006 Russian biographical film about a 20th century Eastern Orthodox monk. Pyotr Mamonov, who plays the lead character, formerly a rock musician in the USSR, converted to Eastern Orthodoxy in the 1990s and lives now in an isolated village. Film director Pavel Lungin said about him that “to a large extent, he played himself.” Mamonov was first very hesitant to play in the film, but then was urged by his confessor to play the character. After the filming, one of the movie crew staff decided to stay on the island and live there as a hermit.’

    Worth watching

    • Replies: @Dumbo
  195. dually says:

    Benjamin uses Christianity’s most sacred symbol (a crucifix) as a weapon to fend off … by jamming the crucifix into the door of the church, leaving them barricaded inside

    I’m practically certain that the cross would be easily recognizable as a vampire-type visual reference to movie-goers in December, 1967, considering that Polanski’s The Fearless Vampire Killers, which contained similar imagery, as well as being a much, much better film, was released in November, 1967 (both in the USA). The so-called “cult” status of The Graduate was mostly due to the iconic Simon & Garfunkel soundtrack.

  196. chris says:
    @Priss Factor

    All funny, Priss!

    The point, of my change of settings, however, was to show how vicious the attack in the original movie was.

  197. Franz says:
    @Priss Factor

    it’s not just THE GRADUATE that seems ‘dated’ but all of art cinema of the 50s and 60s. Who needs humanism when you got nihilist-narcissism as the ultimate cool? Who needs guilt and conscience when life is all about ‘liberation’ and pride in whatever you like: Even Slut Pride.

    I can agree with that. The turn-off in that era was how these movies were over-advertised to the point people hated them almost before they hit the screens. The Graduate. Bonnie and Clyde and others around this time were painted as life-changing and “meaningful” to the point that a few years later, old time programmers like Airport did bang up business because of what they weren’t.

    When the really younger segment of the audience of ’67 took to the screen in big numbers, it was a full decade later for Star Wars. Counter-programming and then some.

  198. @Gast

    Rich man. Think of Warren Buffet ( or may be buffoon), Bill Gates ( or Kill Gates), George Soros, Jeff Bezos, Sheldon Adelson et al and most importantly THE MONEY CHANGERS that we call today bankers ( or banksters). Being rich in a fair and square way when you still have compassion to your fellow man does not put you with those alluded to by Matthew.

  199. Dumbo says:
    @Culpepper

    Oh yes. I forgot this one. Actually I watched it somewhat recently. It’s very nice. Great character.

  200. geokat62 says:
    @Ron Unz

    here’s a photo suggesting that Nicholson is around a foot taller

    • Replies: @Alden
  201. Ray P says:
    @ANON

    We had a JAP that used to come by during high school and she learned about oral from blowing her brother, who was in med school at the time (When she was 9). No shame in their game

    He was going to be a doctor!

  202. Rdm says:
    @Ron Unz

    The same as Tom Cruise. Most of his movies, you’d see “Ground shot camera” angle to make him look taller.

  203. trickster says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    You are right. Lee fought in the Pacific.

    However for the D/dozen apparently the studio hired a former German officer to school the some of the actors for their roles and be some sort of technical adviser. I read that that “schooling” did not go very well with a host of complaints about their appearance and demeanor. Lee commented that after 20 years the discipline instilled was still apparent in this German.

    In addition, Lee also acted in the Big Red 1 another movie where he did quite a bit of research for the role. The Big Red was mauled by a fast moving German counterattack at Kasserine. One German sergeant commented sarcastically it was obvious the Americans knew nothing about desert war and in fact nothing about war. The Big Red also knocked up against the 352nd Infantry Division on Omaha where it got another drubbing from the Germans.

    It seems that Lee came to the realization that while his movie roles tended to portray the Germans as complete idiots who fell for every Allied ruse the reality was far, far different, that they had been as ferocious as the Japanese he encountered in the Pacific.

    I have not seen the Big Red and doubt whether I will. Notwithstanding that the Americans did learn their trade in WW2 albeit with some hard lessons these movies tend to be too RAH RAH !!

    As an aside I know many kids are enthralled with the antics of the “heroes” and now with the prevalence of video games (where they can restart if they get demolished) see themselves as a super hybrid of the Expendables and Terminator all rolled into one. Hopefully they will live out their lives in continual tranquility and be happy in this illusion !

  204. Rdm says:
    @follyofwar

    I rarely see this brought up either. That’s why I brought it up.

    What I observed over the years has been this. Objectively speaking, Jews are particularly good at story telling. Even the story is ridiculously impossible to achieve, they’re good at regaling the story. The bottom line is, the transaction becomes the talk of the town. Eg, many rampant out of this world stories in Bible, the dead becoming alive again, river full of blood, all the shit, but the story must continue and we’re still talking about it. That’s how good the story teller is. That was way before the screen.

    When you’re reading a book, the protagonist is what you imagine, not what you see. So as long as the story holds, everyone enjoys the flow. It became different when the motion pictures took the center stage in story telling. You cannot simply imagine what the protagonist would look like. It’s right in front of your eyes for 2 solid hours. the medium becomes different.

    You’d probably notice that Hollywood used to sell Jews story with Whites medium. You’d see people arguing over who’s who the story was, like Blacks shouldn’t play Spiderman, Superman because it was intended for Whites only, etc. The reality was those comics were written by Jews and characters were mainly hand-drawn by Asians. But Whites argue like they belong to those comic characters by birthrights.

    The Jews Whites dynamic is so subtle and interesting that Jews are also good at playing balls Whites against Blacks.

    When I see Ben Shapiro on the street, I DO NOT see him as a White guy. But he himself believe that he IS a white guy.

    So go figure out this dynamic.

  205. trickster says:
    @trickster

    Comment 73, Paragraph 3, the last line should have been better worded. Jeff Stryker pointed out Lee Marvin served in the Pacific. He is quite correct and I expanded and refined this point in my reply to Jeff with my comment 203 (or thereabouts).

  206. Trinity says:
    @Priss Factor

    No, the hillbillies in the North Georgia Mountains are not inbred now or were they inbred when Deliverance was made. Did or does incest exist in the rural communities in the South, I am sure it does but it isn’t anywhere near the norm, incest and inbreeding exists far more in Israel and in Jewish communities than it ever did in the rural South. Inbreeding exists far more in the Middle East, South and Central America, and Africa far more than in the rural South. Hell, inbreeding is probably just as common in Los Angeles and New York City as it is in the rural South. Have you ever actually been to North Georgia, or any rural community in the South? Do you actually believe everything you see in a movie is reality? If I ventured into some backwoods community, I am sure I could see some sights that wouldn’t be normal, but then again I can venture into a large city and see some very abnormal sights as well. People walking streets having conversations with themselves in the streets, blowjobs in alleys and on subway stairs, a person defecating on a train, a guy with swollen purple ankles sitting in the heart of the financial district, being approached in a bar by some girl with hairy armpits and asked if I liked oral sex, some poor guy parroting “shine” “shine” nonstop on the Staten Island Ferry, guys walking around in peep shows with mops and buckets, etc., this was the NYC that I encountered in the 1980s. Give me inbred rural hillbillies any day of the week.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Priss Factor
  207. TGD says:
    @mark green

    But the 60s was a watershed era for the Jews. How fitting that young Dustin Hoffman got to bang two lovely shiksas; in this case, a suburban mother and her virginal daughter.

    Ann Bancroft was of Sicilian extraction and could easily pass as a Jewess. With so many actual waspy female actresses around, why did Nichols choose the frumpy, middle aged Bancroft?

    I never liked “The Graduate.” I was in my early 20s when it came out so I must have been one of the few “baby boomers” who weren’t impressed. I thought that the movie was too slow and really too conventional. I wasn’t looking for “deeper meanings” in movies.

    What I liked was a a movie that came out a year earlier with the same theme of an alienated young male trying to get his bearings in the world of his parents generation: “You’re a Big Boy Now.”

    That movie was actually the master’s degree thesis of Francis Ford Coppola and it had an “edgy” and impressionistic quality that appealed to me at the time. They say that Nichols was also impressed with the movie. And it starred the beautiful young actresses Karen Black and Elizabeth Hartman, who were real “cock teasers” to use the vernacular.

    Sadly, “You’re a Big Boy Now” has disappeared from the playlists of the pay movie channels unlike “The Graduate,” which is shown fairly often.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  208. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Trinity

    Priss is like a lot of commenters. Priss makes too many comments based on what priss reads in newspapers and the internet instead of reality priss has actually seen or experienced.

    I’ve never been to Appalachia or California, so I won’t comment about those places.

  209. hhsiii says:
    @Honesthughgrant

    Good points. Nichols, Hoffman, Buck Henry, all pretty talented. Anne Mrs. Mel Brooks Bancroft. They were on the top of their game

    You also already had stuff like Your Show of Shows and Caesar’s Hour. All before my time, but with Neil Simon and his brother, Woody Allen, etc. With Caesar, Carl Reiner as a kind of everyman (In the Russians Are Coming he plays WASP), the little-remembered but excellent Howie Morris (who later played Ernest T. Bass on Andy Griffith, now there’s a subversion of redneck american culture, lol).

    They did a running skit called the Commuters with Nanette Fabray. Spoofing isn’t limited to one religious group, but I don’t think people thought much about Reiner’s background back then (or when he was playing Allen Brady in Dick Van Dyke).

  210. Alden says:
    @Ron Unz

    There’s always a taller woman bending her knees to subtract 4 or 5 inches when photographers suddenly appear. He like everybody else shrinks with old age The cartilage of the spinal disks is crushed between the bones. Lots of spinal disks so torso shrinks I suppose legs remain the same length.

    For tv and movies they use sturdy boxes and walkways. The shorter one stands, moves and walls on the boxes & walkways. It’s a standard part of acting and photography to be able to move up and off the boxes and make it look smooth.

    2 1/2 men is a good example. Cryer must be really short. Notice the living room set has 2 levels, around the door, stairs and window. Plus Charlie always walks around the house in socks instead of shoes and Cryer always wears shoes, probably with a lift. Cryer with his lifts stands on the lifted area and Sheen on the lower in his socks. Plus all the kitchen table scenes with one or both sitting. The actresses look tall, but they’re just medium tall, 5’7 going by their wiki pages. The actresses are all about the same height as Sheen.

    Replacement Ashton what’s his name is tall. So more complicated to make Cryer look taller. But that’s their technique and skill So everybody just does it. I’m sure Ashton is good at bending his knees, Cryer at getting on and off the boxes and cameramen and editors making it look all smooth and natural by now.

    Judging by Dianne Keaton his co star in Godfather films, Pacino must be really short. She’s my height 5’ 3 5’2. All those scenes in Godfather where they’re dancing or standing talking they look about the same height. Unless he has 2 inch lifts in his shoes.

  211. Alden says:
    @geokat62

    Nicholson is behind the podium and standing on a box at least 8 inches tall.

  212. Ron Unz says:
    @Alden

    There’s always a taller woman bending her knees to subtract 4 or 5 inches when photographers suddenly appear…For tv and movies they use sturdy boxes and walkways.

    Well, I suppose that’s possible. But the comparison photos are so numerous and uniform, I just find it difficult to believe. Also, Nicholson really looks a foot taller than DeVito.

    Judging by Dianne Keaton his co star in Godfather films, Pacino must be really short. She’s my height 5’ 3 5’2. All those scenes in Godfather where they’re dancing or standing talking they look about the same height.

    Well, Pacino’s “official Internet height” is 5’7″, so it’s easy to believe that his PR people boosted it and he’s really just 5’5″, which would make those scenes look reasonable, especially if she’s wearing heels.

    An inch or two of PR deception is easy to imagine. What I just find it difficult to believe Nicholson is really 5’3″ and his PR people turned that into 5’10”. But admittedly, I’ve never met him in person…

    Just out of curiosity, I checked McCain’s “Internet height” and it’s listed at 5’9″ but when I met him once or twice, I’m pretty sure he was more like 5’6″ or 5’7″…

    • Replies: @anon
  213. Alden says:
    @Priss Factor

    I run into neighbors. I see them. Chat with them. No big deal.

  214. @Trinity

    No, the hillbillies in the North Georgia Mountains are not inbred now or were they inbred when Deliverance was made. Did or does incest exist in the rural communities in the South, I am sure it does but it isn’t anywhere near the norm, incest and inbreeding exists far more in Israel and in Jewish communities than it ever did in the rural South.

    There are gradations of local yokel folks in DELIVERANCE. After all, there is even a modern hospital in them parts. And the sheriff looks like a pretty sharp guy, not some dummy. And the people Beatty and Voight meet at the dinner table seem like decent normal people.
    So, the movie is not saying ALL the people in that region are such-and-such or inbred.
    Likewise, there are fancy middle class blacks in NY and there are hood-rats who seem downright demented(and even inbred). And there is a huge difference between Ivy League Italian-Americans and ‘goombas’ who seem downright Neanderthal in many ways. And there are urbane Jews, and there are ultra-Jewishy-Jews.

    DELIVERANCE isn’t saying ALL the people in that region are inbred. Rather, we see a backwoods community that lives apart from the larger community. These are folks that time forgot. As they mostly keep to themselves, they are likely to be more inbred. These folks live apart from your average hillbilly. It’s like there are poor blacks(who still seem human), and then, there truly demented ghetto blacks who look and act like entirely another species.

    What DELIVERANCE is saying that even though most folks in the region are normal, they do have kinship links, direct or extended, with other kinds of folks. But this is true of Jews as well. A rich urban Jewish lawyer could have cousins who are Hasidim. Or, an Italian American doctor in nice part of town and good manners could have an uncle who’s a mafia hood.

    In contrast, Burt Reynolds is a loner and individualist. He doesn’t even seem to be married. Voight and others are into modern nuclear family. As such, they are freer but without links and a sense of community. In contrast, even though some folks in the local community in DELIVERANCE are lowly creatures, they do have a sense of kinship and community. But the whole town will be destroyed by flooding by plans devised by urban folks. Even the coffins will have to be dug up. The anthropological aspect of the movie is more damning of the modernizers and more sympathetic to townsfolk. While some backwoods fellas are crude & demented, they have formed a bond with the natural surroundings. Good or bad, they are the native species whereas the four men with their canoes are mere visitors, even usurpers.

  215. Alden says:
    @syonredux

    I never saw South Pacific in a theater. Only on TV the race mixing pro black anti White message just jumps out. And Nellie was from segregated Little Rock Ark, not so subtle when republican Eisenhower sent the army to poke bayonets at White high school girls. the actress who played Nellie was a plain little thing. The French father of the half Pacific Islander kids was some gorgeous good husband type. And Nellie was hesitant because the kids were mixed.

    Worst part of that movie was the local teen age girl some American soldier was in love with. She was slim and pretty but her mother was 250 pds and really ugly. I loathe that type of miscasting where siblings, parents and children don’t look alike.

    Speaking of, there’s a Netflix movie The Buccaneers about 4 young women. Conchata Ferrell, Charlie Harper’s maid Berta plays the mother of one of the girls, Lizzie. First line out of her mouth is “ My Lizzie has such a small waist” Ridiculous! A mother with a 6 ft waist measurement, Lizzie’s waist won’t be small for very long. Cast Conchata and cut that line.

    Then there were all the Sydney Poiter movies of him with a White woman. He worked for some White nuns and saved their farm or something. Absolute worst was. One Potato Two Potato. He met a blind White woman. She couldn’t see his color and they fell in love. Such subtle symbolism. About as subtle as the evil Germans and Japs and saintly Americans in WE2 movies.

    After those St Sydney the perfect man roles, Poiter disappeared. Supposedly he refused to take any supporting or even co lead roles. He could have partnered with someone like Walter Matthau in cop spy movies. Lots of male actors move in and out of lead and supporting roles, like Martin Landau . Lots of male actors don’t really get going till 45.

    But that was not enough for Mr Perfect hero
    Poiter.

    I finally asked someone if he know how Poiter supported a wife and 4 kids all those years he didn’t work. The answer was his wife Joanna supported the family. She became an interior decorator and people in the industry hired her. So she supported the 4 kid family in a style befitting a movie star family on her earnings.

    He had a few roles in his old age. Once he was an FBI agent tracking down a Russian couple who were Soviet sleeper agents . The couple were trained in Russia, smuggled into the US and created false IDs. They set up a nursery business. How sweet and innocent among the plants. They were never activated. They were perfect goody goody Americans.

    Just pro soviet propaganda when American Jews and the movies they made were anti American and pro soviet.

    Then the gay propaganda started. First one I remember was Jack Lemon was a kindly wonderful old gay man who had a single young sort of post hippy woman as a roommate. I think she had a baby.

  216. @dually

    No, it started with Deliverance.

    Those backwoods folks in DELIVERANCE are not part of the Working Class. They are utterly cut off from the mainstream economy. They have no idea of workers solidarity or unions or any such. Their consciousness is about blood, kinship, ‘good ole boy’. They make their own moonshine and go hunting. They are not even your average rural folks who work on the farm. The backwoods folks in DELIVERANCE has semi-reverted to a primitive existence.

    The film is ambivalent about them. It certainly doesn’t romanticize them but show hows foolish it is for urbanites to feel smugly superior to them.

    Same ambivalence can be found in SOUTHERN COMFORT. On the one hand, we follow a band of soldiers wandering through hostile Cajun country. At the same time, it is the soldiers who are trespassing into a world that isn’t their own. And Cajun folks are like Viet Cong guarding their own turf.

    A more empathetic portrait of local yokel folks was in BIG EASY and SHY PEOPLE, a movie about an urban sophisticate rediscovering familial links to swamp folks in Louisiana.

    Now, I will say movies like THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE and MOTEL HELL do cast a negative light on what might be called rural America. But then, it’s often been said that the Horror genre is intrinsically ‘conservative’ because the element of survival makes people focus on unity, turf, and fight.

    • Replies: @Ray P
  217. Jean says:
    @Priss Factor

    You anti-Christian twits are pathetic. Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ is about Christ’s suffering for our salvation, to absolve us of original sin. He came to Earth born as a man as the New Covenant, God’s love for us to offer us His Son as the path to salvation through His teachings. It also serves to remind us that when we sin we are as guilty
    of striking Christ with the flail, or hammering in a nail. Mel Gibson provided the facts in stark relief, the unblinking truth as to who were only to happy to demand Christ’s crucifixion, he wanted to jar us with Christ’s sufferings, to remind us of how brutal they were and how Christ died for us. It’s a painful movie to watch but it is true. That is the reason the porcine Abe Foxman and his ilk were heard screeching across the world. Not in denial of the facts, no, but that the reminder was “bad for the Jews” as they demand a veto on everyone else’s rights, speech, lives, etc

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  218. Jean says:
    @Joe Levantine

    Boy, how many attack the one true faith Catholic Church troll accounts does Ron employ?

    • Replies: @Joe Levantine
  219. Sparkon says:
    @TGD

    I never liked “The Graduate.” I was in my early 20s when it came out so I must have been one of the few “baby boomers” who weren’t impressed.

    Without the great songs by Simon & Garfunkel, The Graduate is a syrupy dog. Dustin Hoffman did not have much star appeal nor likable on screen persona. He was a schmuck.

    The Graduate not only opens with “The Sound of Silence,” but the song also appears in the film three times, and no wonder: It is one of the most memorable songs of the decade, and a masterpiece by Paul Simon.

    Great music adds zest to the schlock, and makes the mundane mystical.

    “The Sound of Silence” had already hit #1 on Billboard’s Hot 100 on January 1, 1966, well before the film’s release in Dec. 1967, meaning the classic tune was already established with many Baby Boomers as a well-loved anthem of the Sixties.

    In fact, the hit song was positioned in the movie originally only as temporary place holders by director Mike Nichols while Simon finished the three songs he’d been contracted to write, but in fact the temporary placement became permanent. What may seem now like masterful direction was in fact nothing more than random fortuity.

    When the soundtrack for The Graduate was released in January 1968, it shot to #1 on Billboard’s top albums list. On June 1, 1968 the song “Mrs. Robinson” also hit #1 on Billboard’s Hot 100.

    Another rather dreary but acclaimed movie with a great soundtrack is Un homme et une femme or A Man and a Woman from 1966. I saw the film in the original French with Japanese subtitles in a theater in Hachinohe in 1967.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  220. Jean says:
    @Anonymouse

    The Catholic Church, with the support of the Papacy, produced the institution of the university as we know it or did before the Marxist parasites took them over. From the first universities in Oxford (founded in or about 1096 BC, though legend puts it at 872), Bologna and Paris before 1200 BC. By 1500, there were about 60 of these institutions seeded around Europe, with about 30% of the curricula dedicated to the study of the natural world. The one greatest supporter and underwriter of the development of these institutions was… wait for it… the Catholic Church. Historian John Heilbron (best known for his histories of physics), wrote: The Roman Catholic Church gave more financial and social support to the study of the sciences for over six centuries, from the recovery of ancient data in the late Middle Ages to the Enlightenment, than any other, and probably all, other institutions. – The Sun in the Church, Harvard University Press, 1999. There were more than 60 Catholic created universities across Europe by 1500. About 30% of the medieval university curriculum covered inquiry into the natural world. Over those 3 centuries, hundreds of thousands of students were exposed to science in the Greco-Arabic (there was no Judaic) tradition. As the universities developed, they included more works by Latin authors extending the tradition along original lines. Medieval universities, with the Church’s active support, introduced huge numbers of students to Euclidian geometry, optics, basic astronomy, and arguments for the spherical shape of the earth. The universities generated a literate elite, most of whom never studied theology or entered holy orders. They studied logic, natural science, and mathematics. Only a minority of universities had a theology faculty, and by far the most popular advanced study was law, which was useful in civil and ecclesiastical courts. The university culture that granted considerable freedom of thought via the disputation method, which required arguments pro and con a position to be argued based on reason alone, was and remains a Catholic culture. “Between 1150 and 1500, more literate Europeans had had access to scientific materials than any of their predecessors in earlier cultures, thanks largely to the emergence, rapid growth, and naturalistic arts curricula of the medieval universities.” (Michael Shank, historian of science) The claim that the Catholic Church ignored or suppressed the study of science is a myth, perpetuated by hateful anti-Christian cult, the same ones who created and imposed Marxism, who now seem to be pushing a new revisionist history (as they have done over and over again in the past) and take credit for what they were never capable of creating refuted by the historical evidence

    • Agree: Alden
  221. @Jean

    You anti-Christian twits are pathetic. Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ is about Christ’s suffering for our salvation, to absolve us of original sin.

    PASSION is christ-porn. Also, emphasizing Jesus’ physical suffering to make a spiritual case only goes so far. After all, tons of people all throughout history suffered as much as Jesus or even worse. So, when it comes to physical suffering, the Jesus story isn’t all that special. The white couple raped and killed by Negroes in Knoxville got it even worse.

    What makes the Jesus story special is that the God in this case acted unlike other gods. Gods are supposed to revel in their superiority over men. Pagan gods love being powerful and love lording over lowly humans. It’s like aristocrats love their wealth, power, and privilege. They don’t wanna be like a peon or serf.
    Now, imagine a king or aristocrat who feels so much for the peons that he surrenders his power, wealth, and privilege and suffers as people do, indeed even more. He sacrifices everything for the good of the people. It would be a moral and spiritual act. Having lost his power, he would be defenseless against the Power. But he would also be defenseless against the mob. After all, even the poor mobs can be vicious, cruel, violent, and sadistic. So, he suffers at the hands of the Power and at the hands of the people. Still, it’d be case of a powerful man who gave up his power for the people and suffered nobly at the hands of both the Power and people in his sacrificial offering to bridge all of humanity together on the basis of love and understanding. In pagan myths, gods sometimes take on human guises but to trick and exploit people. Zeus and Hera took on human guises for guileful reasons. So, it was about godly vanity than caring about the people.

    Now, the problem of surrendering one’s power and wealth out of a sense of bond with the People is both noble and useless. Noble in the sense that one gave up privilege to share in the suffering of the masses. But in having given up one’s power, one can’t do anything for the people either. Indeed, imagine if Jesus had come with godly power and kicked ass. Why not be like a superhero than just a man? Then, Jesus could have used godly powers to protect the people against the Power. But He came as a Man with no special powers except walking on water and making free fish and bread. Those were nice tricks but hardly useful against the Roman Empire and the wild mobs. On the other hand, if indeed Jesus was willing to suffer as mankind does, He could not have lots of godly powers to protect Himself. He had to be powerless and helpless before the Power and the mob. But being helpless, what could He do for mankind? Yet, He found a way by conceiving of a spiritual path to Salvation, not one based on kicking ass but forgiveness, redemption, and entry into Kingdom of God… at least for the believers of the myth. (In SUPERMAN II, the guy gives up his power for the girl but then regains it defend humanity from the Baddies.)

    Christianity is especially a contradiction because Jews envisioned the most powerful God of them all. Yahweh is so powerful that there is no other god. He is the ONLY God. His conception pretty much meant a spiritual holocaust of all other gods and even holocaust denial because Jews say there was always the one and only God. So, their God didn’t so much slay other gods but other gods never existed in the first place. Jewish God as conception is more powerful than all the pagan gods combined.
    And yet, and this is the zinger, He is in some ways the weakest God because clever Jews moralized Him. Unlike pagan gods who are mostly amoral, the Jewish God is said to be a Good and Perfect God. So, He must be a Good God and, as such, His reputation depends on what people think of Him. He makes a pact with Abraham. In the end, He can’t make Abraham kill Isaac because it would mean He’s a bad god, like all the pagan gods that call for human sacrifice. So, even as Abraham must be loyal to God, God must be good to Abraham and his people… as long a they are good themselves. And to forge this Covenant, there was a need for some kind of sacrifice, and it was the pud-sacrifice of circumcision. The Jewish foreskin must be ‘crucified’ for Jews to keep the Covenant. But through such pud-crucifixion, the lowly Jews gain the blessing of mighty God.

    Fast Forward to Jesus, and it’s a recycling of the story between God and Abraham. God spared Isaac on the basis of the Covenant that Abraham & Jews would ‘crucify’ their puds and God, in turn, would be good to them and offer blessing. In a way, Jesus serves as the man-pud in the Christo-myth. For there to be a new covenant, there must once again be sacrifice.
    In the Old Testament, God is so angry with humanity that He wonders if He should just wipe out all of them. Jesus is like a combo of God and Abraham. As Son of God, He too is God. But in the role of man, He’s like Abraham beseeching God. His message to God is, “Be kinder to humanity, and as offering, I will sacrifice my own body.” Thus, the suffering of Jesus like the suffering of the pud under circumcision. This is why many Jews see Jesus as a conceited walking pud than as the Messiah.

    But Gibson focuses mostly on the physical than on the psycho-mythological aspect of Christianity. In contrast, as flawed and insane as Martin Scorsese’s LAST TEMPTATION was, it came closer to delving into the psycho-sexual-mythic entanglement at the core of Christianity.

    • Replies: @Jean
  222. @Sparkon

    Without the great songs by Simon & Garfunkel, The Graduate is a syrupy dog. Dustin Hoffman did not have much star appeal nor likable on screen persona. He was a schmuck.
    The Graduate not only opens with “The Sound of Silence,” but the song also appears in the film three times, and no wonder: It is one of the most memorable songs of the decade, and a masterpiece by Paul Simon.

    No, THE GRADUATE has great film-making. As different as DOCTOR ZHIVAGO and THE GRADUATE are, they really clicked with the audience. LOVE STORY also had memorable music(pretty good schlock), but the film-making was only adequate/good, nothing more. In contrast, THE GRADUATE really is a visual and rhythmic marvel with Nichols pulling so many tricks out of the left field and without being too showy about it. (Both ZHIVAGO and GRADUATE are about discovery and struggle of True Love amidst familial concerns, personal commitment, ideological concerns, and power manipulation. Zhivago truly loves Lara but is married to a nice girl. Lara truly loves Zhivago but is also married. She married him quickly as escape from the tormented affair with an older man. But if Zhivago ultimately doesn’t get Lara and had everyone weeping in the theater, Ben does get Elaine.)

    I agree the Simon and Garfunkel songs are great, but they made the movie more ‘syrupy’ than it is really is. Suppose we take out the song “April Comes She Will” in the montage involving Ben and Mrs. Robinson. The scene would be colder. Or take out “Scarborough Fair” as Ben is driving to Berkeley or stalking Elaine as she walks to the bus stop. The songs add lyricism to Ben’s pursuit which would otherwise seem more neurotic and obsessed, even disturbingly so.

    Minus the music, the movie would seen more satirical, sardonic, and biting. It’s the music that softens the edges and provides a romantic mood, sentimental shading.

    When the image and sound really click together, it makes no sense to discuss them apart. It’s like the alchemy of Leone and Morricone, Hitchcock and Hermann, Teshigahara and Takemitsu. Nichols and Simon hit it off like Ben and Elaine. Nichols and Simon clicked not so much because they saw eye-to-eye but because the music served as counterpoint as much as layering. “Sounds of Silence”, “Scarborough Fair”, and “April Comes She Will” add something missing in Nichol’s comic-cynical style. The song in which the two sensibilities finally converge is “Mrs. Robinson”, a tongue-in-cheek rendition of Middle Class Americana comparable to Rolling Stone’s “Mother’s Little Helper”.

    I can understand why many people are off-put by Hoffman’s presence or personality, but it is brilliant acting. Also, his voice, being both throaty and nasal, perfectly convey’s Ben state of mind and stage in life. He’s both man surging with testosterone and boy who wants to run back home. Also, his use of deadpan demeanor and nervous intonation is for the ages. With Anne Bancroft, he’s like a shy dog being played by an experienced feline. It’s both cartoony enough for laughs and human enough for tension.

    Genuine mood is really hard to do. There are cheap ways to create mood with filters and lighting, but Nichols sustains a consistent mood on simmer throughout the film, through light and heavier scenes.

    And the camera is always in the perfect place and the movements are all to the point. The tricks of timing Nichols got from comedy and sense of positioning he got from theater did wonders. Welles also specialized in Audio Entertainment(radio) and theater before entering cinema. Nichols also borrowed various styles but matched them seamlessly. The hand-held camera is reminiscent of Cassavates and Godard but used pointedly and blend with other styles.
    And he went for unconventional perspectives. For instance, when Ben is walking to the right through the guests at the graduation party to head for the stairs, the camera is faces away from the stairway that goes up the other way Ben is walking. As such, Nichols has to ‘awkwardly’ jerk the camera leftward to show the stairway except it’s done so deftly that this breaking of rules seems natural than false or gratuitous. The timing is perfect.
    Later, when Ben and Elaine are running from the church, can anyone think of a better way to show the bus than by tilting from top to bottom, creating an impression of a bus dropped from the sky? Heaven-sent. And the cut from a telephoto shot of Ben and Elaine running from the church that grows blurry to long shot conveys the sudden shifts in mood and momentum in that charged moments. Nichols was so very keen to every moment, something generally missing in Old Hollywood and even most European cinema, albeit exceptions like JULES AND JIM, a work that is both classic and experimental.

    • Thanks: hhsiii
  223. Jewish Hoffman played a Wasp in THE GRADUATE, and David Lean chose Egyptian Omar Sharif to play a Russian in DOCTOR ZHIVAGO. Sharif also played Genghis Khan, and so did John Wayne.
    Brando as Okinawan in TEA HOUSE OF AUGUST MOON was funny as hell, but Rooney as Japanese in BREAKFAST was even funnier. Quinn as Greek in ZORBA really did work.

    Italians often got Anglo or Northern European actors to play Italians. They were into dubbing.

  224. @Alden

    When Pacino was dancing with Appolonia I bet he had a lift in his PANTS!

  225. TIGER MAKES OUT, also released in 1967, was Hoffman’s first film. A small role. He shows up at 5;20 in the video below. The movie seems a more raw expression of Jewish hang-ups.

    PRESIDENT’S ANALYST, also a 1967 movie, puahed the satirical tone of THE GRADUATE to the hilt.
    It was both written and directed by Theodore Flicker, Jewish. As such, it is a more personal work than THE GRADUATE. The Liberal father is the guy who played Ben’s father. (He also played a Liberal parent in TWO FOR THE ROAD, another 1967 movie that was hip to new trends. Written by Frederic Raphael, a Jew with massive chip on his shoulder.)

    Robert Redford did take on a romantic comedy role in another 1967 movie BAREFOOT IN THE PARK. 1967 was quite a year.

  226. Part of what makes The Graduate great is its ambiguity. Benjamin isn’t a hero, and in the final scene it’s not clear he or the girl have made the right decision running off together.

    It’s also, as Priss Factor suggests, heavily dependent on a great soundtrack, as was 2001. Ligeti‘s compositions in particular took 2001 to another level.

  227. Ray P says:
    @Priss Factor

    “But are degenerate backwoods hillbillies really part of the proletariat? Can we unionize them?”

    Norma Rae meets Deliverance.

  228. Trinity says:

    The listed heights of athletes and actors are nearly always boosted an inch or two. Most of our celebritards are shorter than you think and many of them even wear lifts. The only celebritards that I have met up close were three actresses, one actor, two football players, and a few retired boxers.

    Ray Lewis of the Baltimore Ravens was shorter than I would have imagined.

    Steve Bartkowski of the Atlanta Falcons ( the guy played long ago in the 70’s and 80’s) saw him in the late 80’s. This guy was listed at 6’4″ and he looked every bit of it, even a little taller, and he looked broader than I would have imagined as well. Probably one of the few times that the height isn’t lied about.

    Mike Weaver, former heavyweight boxing champion, looked his listed height of 6’1 1/2 and looked in great shape still. This was around 2005-2006.

    The Spinks brothers, Michael and Leon. Both looked about their listed heights. Marvin Hagler wasn’t that tall but then again he was only a middleweight and was always listed at about 5’9″ or so. There again, I would guess that to be right. Rosie Perez, a huge boxing fan was at this event and she was pretty short. Very nice lady, though.

    Kim Bassinger, I met during her prime years in the mid eighties. GORGEOUS. Didn’t care about the height. Saw Elizabeth Taylor close up at the 100th anniversary celebration of the Statue of Liberty held on Governors Island in July of 1986. Even at this stage of her life, she was a GORGEOUS lady, not too tall, but very attractive.

    Oops, I forgot about Richard Crenna, I think I have the spelling right, the guy who played in those Rambo movies. Shorter than I imagined. He was drunk and my buddy had to help him unlock his motel room, The Merry Acres Motel in Albany, Ga.

  229. Durruti says:
    @GMC

    GMC

    but the Americans got backstabbed by their own and some – not their own. After the Graduate, the jews led the recon, for the Zionists, that kept up the propaganda movies and sucker punched the American Dream with their lobbyists, corporate takeovers, 65 open/unlimited immigration law, government takeovers and International crime syndicate. Americans will have to fight like Hell , in order to get back their country.

    Nice overall comment.

    You must not leave out the most important crime of the era you write about. The Crime date: November 22, 1963. Chronology is key.

    That was the day our Republic was overthrown & our last constitutional President, J F Kennedy, was assassinated.

    The assassination of our Nation did not begin then, the criminals emanate from the same portion of Mordor, (since the 1st Holocaust – at Jericho), but the destruction, 9/11, Epstein, Maxwell, Barak, et. al., has only accelerated. Our French Brothers are under great stress, Dieudonné, Soral, Gilets Jaunes.

    Combine the Political with the Social & economic, and you have a History.

    Durruti

  230. Some other interesting ethno-swapping.

    The TV movie GETTING MARRIED has an ending not unlike that of THE GRADUATE. In it, Richard Thomas plays an Italian-American.

    In BREAKING AWAY, some guy in Indiana pretends to be an Italian-American, as if that will make him appear more romantic and exotic to an All-American Girl. Oddly enough, its Waspy snobby character was actually played by Jewish Hart Bochner. And Robert Redford was one of the leading contenders for the role of Michael Corleone.

    Maybe the most vicious and disturbing scene about Wasp-Ethnic tension is the wedding scene in FOUR FRIENDS, written by the guy who wrote BREAKING AWAY and directed by Arthur Penn of BONNIE & CLYDE fame.

    THE GRADUATE seems to draw certain strains from THE GREAT GATSBY via CATCHER IN THE RYE. Later, when movies like BRIGHT LIGHTS BIG CITY came around, they seem to be riffing GATSBY and GRADUATE, both of which have come to shape American cultural consciousness and love and class. (Michael J. Fox, another shorty, like Davey Jones of THE MONKEES, which also had half-Italian Mickey Dolenz who looked racially so ambiguous. I wonder if Charles Webb was influenced by Kingsley Amis’ LUCKY JIM.)

    https://theimaginativeconservative.org/2020/07/oaf-magnificat-kingsley-amis-lucky-jim-thomas-banks.html

    Despite THE GRADUATE looking very mod, I wonder if people can relate to its technology. If the story were to take place today, Ben would be looking on the internet to find info than driving back and forth between L.A. and Berkeley. And the dial phone at the gas station. They had still had those back then. Now, even poor people have ‘smart phones’, something unimaginable to even billionaires in the 80s, even the 90s. Many young people could relate to BOURNE movies because the guy was so ‘wired’ psychologically and technologically. Very tech-savvy young man. outwitting all the institutions that made him what he is.

    THE PRESIDENT’S ANALYST was prescient about the future of technology and mankind. Big Tech taking over everything.

  231. Derer says:
    @fitzhamilton

    You’ll rarely find a crucifix

    More importantly, you will rarely find in Hollywood “art” Christian wedding or funeral. Statistics indicates 80% of Hollywood movies weddings or funerals are Jewish, distinguish by kipa. Christians need affirmative action to break the Hollywood Jewish nepotism.

  232. anon[160] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz

    When Robert Conrad died there was discussion here about his real height, which was at least 3 inches less than his official height.
    According to Robert Mitchum, John Wayne wore 4 inch lifts.
    Barbara Feldon worked barefoot in Get Smart and slouched as well.
    She also won the $64,000 Question in 1957.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_Feldon

  233. robwin says:

    The motto of the New Left in the 60s was “We sec Marx as the prophet, Marcuse as his interpreter, and Mao as the sword.”

    Hoffman made an even more anti-Christian, anti-white film a few years after the Graduate, Little Big Man. There was no subtle message in that one. It was blatant.

    I also thought the end of the Graduate showed the Hoffman character as wondering just what he has done. Sure, he got the girl, but the look on his face registers uncertainty, as does the Simon and Garfunkel song overlaying the scene. My memory serves that it was The Sound of Silence though I may be wrong as it has been many a year since I viewed the movie.

    The reason so many people think the Graduate is a classic is because we are constantly told it is one. It isn’t.

  234. Was this really necessary? A play into movie, I understand. But a movie into a play?

    But sheeeeeiiiit, this looks more like Mrs. Jones than Mrs. Robinson.

    Looks like THE GRADUATE has found second life as Broadway play and high school repertoire.

  235. Dube says:

    Priss, a movie that generates so much good language must be better than it was.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  236. @Priss Factor

    No, he is of Swedish ancestry, just one of many errors in an article that contains some factually correct information but is insanely anti-Semitic, like so many articles on this site. (I really only come here for Sailer, Buchanan, and Derbyshire.) Yes, The Graduate is a heavily Jewish-inflected movie – so what?

  237. Jean says:
    @Priss Factor

    So say those who so hate the Messiah, Jesus the Christ, the New Covenant, they are still soiling themselves over His teachings, His birth, life, crucifixion (the one the pharisees demanded), resurrection, and ascension into Heaven, that His Apostles didn’t end up being terrorized into anonymity, that His teachings created the one true faith, that despite their their hateful revenge porn in their talmud, their attacks, their activist plots seeking to corrupt and pervert the Catholic Church, faithful Catholics inspired by His love for us, His sufferings for our salvation have stood in their path. The fact is God and He is the one God, the God of ALL mankind, will not bow to them, they will never be forgiven by Him, until they kneel in true forgiveness, repent and make reparation to Him for their sins. To understand this read Matthew 18:6. He won’t be deceived by words, He can never be bought, there is no price tag. God can see into their hearts and minds. You can try to obfuscate all you like it doesn’t change the truth. Were what you attack so dismissible you wouldn’t waste your time.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  238. Jean says:
    @mark green

    Frankly, I see no sign the public as a whole were captivated. What I see are the same ilk beating their dead meat over their over rated film. When I saw the film decades later on tv, I saw a creepy guy, a void. I saw no reason for anyone to be interested in him. He wasn’t intelligent, not even remotely attractive. If memory serves, the daughter didn’t even seem interested in him when they met. What I saw was Hollyweird’s contempt, reducing life to the cheapest common denominator.

    • Replies: @mark green
  239. Mike Nichols is quoted as saying “I didn’t get it until I saw this hilarious issue of MAD magazine after the movie came out, in which the character of Dustin says to the character of Elizabeth Wilson, ‘Mom, how come I’m Jewish and you and Dad aren’t?’” Apparently, Nichols made it up. Mad never did a full-length parody of The Graduate. They did a brief 2-page parody (called “The Post-Graduate”) as part of an article called “Mad Mini-Movies” in issue # 122 (Oct. 1968). I don’t have that issue, but here’s a video of, I think, the entire mini-parody, and that line isn’t in it.

    By the way, the great Mort Drucker died back on April 9. He was 91.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  240. @Dube

    a movie that generates so much good language must be better than it was.

    It amazes me how so many people ignore everything but the plot and characters. They respond as if they’re reading some second-rate novel. It’s like judging a song by its meaning. Most songs are trite or banal in meaning. It’s the same old story about love, heartache, and etc. “Yesterday” offers no greater meaning about love or sadness than million other songs. Then, why is it special? The words, even if banal, are just right. And the melody and delivery create a certain mood that is unlike any other song. (Same goes for “Norwegian Wood” and “God Only Knows”.) So, we don’t listen to a song mainly for meaning but feeling and mood created by tonal shades and personal brilliance. Take “Drive” by Cars and “Every Breath You Take” by the Police. In terms of meaning, we’ve heard countless songs about broken hearts and romantic obsession many times. But the style and expressions of those songs are so unique and powerful that they make conventional or ‘tired’ themes exciting and edgy again. Take the song “Brandy” by Looking Glass, a one-hit-wonder band. The story it tells is one found in a thousand dime store novels, but the melody is infectious, the rhythm is groovy, and the performance is inspired. As such, it is a one-of-a-kind song, as is “If You Could Read My Mind”.

    The fact that so many people just see the themes or spot-the-Jew in THE GRADUATE means they are cine-illiterate. It’s like reading poetry as if it is prose and focusing mainly on meaning. While some poems do have meaning, what saves most poems is the brilliance that fuses beauty and economy.

    Anyone can make pizza. The basic ingredients are well-known, and it’s not that difficult. But why can’t most pizzas hold a candle to a handful of pizzas at certain joints? In basic ingredients, the great pizzas are 95% like all the other pizzas, even frozen ones, but they have something extra, subtle but crucial that differentiates greatness from mere goodness or acceptableness. TO LIVE AND DIE IN LA has many of the elements of countless other action movies, but why does it tower over the rest? Friedkin was on fire, got hold of promising material and fine talent, and everything just clicked. Same goes for MIDNIGHT RUN. Everything just came together beautifully.

    Nichols got just the right ingredients and the preparation, timing, and delivery were near-flawless as balance of comedy, drama, romance, and near-tragedy. It made a difference upon release because it was the bridge between Art Film and Hollywood, between Old and Young, and between Sunlight and Rain. There’s a scene in THE WILD BUNCH where the Gorch brothers look across the river at Mexico and says, “It looks like more of Texas as far as I’m concerned”, and Angel says, “Ah, you have no eyes.” Many people have no eyes.

    For the blind, there is no difference between Welles tremendous MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS and the lame one directed by Alfonso Arau. After all, they tell the same story with the same characters. But comparing those two movies illustrates what a difference a directorial vision can make.

    • Thanks: Happy Tapir
    • Replies: @Gast
  241. @the one they call Desanex

    Mike Nichols is quoted as saying “I didn’t get it until I saw this hilarious issue of MAD magazine after the movie came out, in which the character of Dustin says to the character of Elizabeth Wilson, ‘Mom, how come I’m Jewish and you and Dad aren’t?’”

    I don’t believe him. He knew what he was doing all along and was just being disingenuous. There’s no way a man as witty, savvy, and worldly as Nichols didn’t know what he was doing.

    But the thing is he made the right choice. Because what Ben does in the last third of the movie is so loony and outrageous, it needed someone like Hoffman who could come across as zany and neurotic. It simply wouldn’t have worked with a Troy-Donahue-like figure. When Hoffman-as-Ben does it, we know why. Instead of Cyrano using another man, he took charge himself.

    But then, even Webb’s story was not about a normal and well-adjusted wasp but a closet-misfit who wanted to be ‘different’.

  242. @Jean

    Frankly, I see no sign the public as a whole were captivated [by The Graduate].

    You are largely correct. Hollywood’s ‘applause track’ was just simply ON continuously during this era for films that mocked middle America. For this reason, it did seem as if America’s disposition about itself (traditional family values) had reversed. But this was part illusion, cooked up by the usual suspects.

    Another toxic film of this era that was taken far too seriously was ‘Easy Rider’. Left-leaning establishment critics during the Sixties tended to praise everything that laid waste to traditional norms, values, and icons. The Sixties was a paradigm shift. Our nation has never been the same. And now it’s getting worse. Today, the target is White identity itself. This is a bridge too far.

  243. @Jean

    But what about the Greeks?

    Anne Bancroft looks like Maria Callas, lending a classic greco motif to the story.

    Oedipus shad sex with his mother. and there is an oedipal quality to the movie.

    THE GRADUATE is like an experiment of what-if Greek comedy was blended with Greek tragedy.

  244. artichoke says:
    @Hibernian

    The particular juxtaposition of “Jesus” with “God” would be particularly unlikely in someone who thinks the former was at best a flawed rabbi, and that to mistake the former with God amounts to idol worship, a very big sin. And so I think the whole thing is intentional.

    This movie was as much anti-Jewish propaganda as anything else. It takes some energy to keep and grow the very twisted leftists sects that seem to try to violate every rule in the Tanach as much as possible. They could not have accomplished this with Robert Redford in the lead role.

  245. Just watched BILOXI BLUES directed by Mike Nichols based on Neil Simon play. Fun movie, equally irreverent and nostalgic. Nichols did’t go for greatness after CARNAL KNOWLEDGE(with the possible exception of SILKWOOD), but he made some solid entertainment and drama, like HEARTBURN and WORKING GIRL.

    Oldies but goodies: The Critics:

    http://sarcasmalley.com/gradkael.htm

    http://sarcasmalley.com/gradsarr.htm

    http://sarcasmalley.com/gradfilm.htm

    https://newrepublic.com/article/120348/mike-nichols-the-graduate-changed-american-movies-forever

    • Replies: @Happy Tapir
  246. Gast says:
    @Priss Factor

    Sure, movies are complex artefacts with several layers, but in the end most movies are just evil tools of degradation, and all complexity is only a means to hide harmful ideas (the movie “Inception” is a good allegory of film-making). And since Hollywood has been jewish from day one, it is fair to be very suspicious. So spot the jewish angle and dump it, is a legitimate approach, if you want to survive in a hostile world.

    “Cineasts” like you have been duped and don’t want to cut their losses. Most commenters here are just a bit nostalgic about films, that seemed promising, when they were young and dumb. Nostalgia is a very powerful, but also dangerous feeling.

    So, I want watch this movie, since I am almost certain that I wouldn’t like it.

    • Replies: @Gast
    , @Priss Factor
  247. Gast says:
    @Gast

    A negation is missing in the last sentence, obviously: “I DON’T want to watch…”

  248. @Jean

    The story is too long. If you are really interested in the true history of the Catholic Church I would recommend Michael Hoffman’s “ The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome”. Truly enlightening.

  249. @Gast

    but in the end most movies are just evil tools of degradation, and all complexity is only a means to hide harmful ideas (the movie “Inception” is a good allegory of film-making).

    MOST MOVIES are pretty bad, but movie itself can be a great art form and entertainment. If your side won’t touch it, the other side will. Many Christians forbade their kids from watching movies through much of 20th century, and the result was the Other Side took over.

  250. https://www.jonathanrosenbaum.net/2020/05/bridge-over-troubled-water-2/

    The Graduate, Nichols’s main ticket to mainstream success, replays various aspects of the Nichols-May partnership in telling ways –- as does The Heartbreak Kid (1972), May’s own second feature, which can be read in many ways as a response to The Graduate.
    The two movies take notably different approaches toward ethnicity: Nichols pretends it isn’t there and May flaunts it.

    But could Nichols flaunt it when it was based on a Webb novel with a wasp character?

    Rosenbaum’s gripe sounds like Tony Kushner ragging on Arthur Miller for not making Willy Loman in DEATH OF A SALESMAN explicitly Jewish.

    Hoffman played Loman to perfection in the 1985 movie.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  251. pecosbill says:
    @Hibernian

    There were only 300 of them when he passed the baton to Kennedy. Still, he was the one who got our foot in the door.

    Truman also made commitments to Vietnam but don’t know if he sent military “advisors” but I suspect he did and at a time when the French still sort of controlled the country.

    No defender of IKE, but he knew a couple of things about war. We don’t know of course but it’s doubtful he’d have sent in combat troops except for perhaps a rescue of one type or another. He knew the strengths and weakness of the American military and nasty jungle warfare was not it’s forte. Take IKE’s word, he would have been very reluctant to escalate into a full scale war like happened under JFK and LBJ, especially LBJ.

    MACV was established under JFK , however American military advise groups were inserted in country in the mid 50s.

    According to the book Street Without Joy, Bernard B. Fall, Americans were fighting and dying in uniform since 1961 in Vietnam.

    We should remember it was JFK who established the Green Beret as a response to the need for the Army to learn to fight guerrilla campaigns. He had things in mind it seems.

    It was JFK who formulated the slogan; “Ask not to die for your own country, ask to die for someone else’s country”, or some nonsense like that.

    My assessment still stands, there is a difference between providing material and training and sending actual combat troops. IKE and Truman were smart enough to leave themselves an out. JFK and LBJ were simply too stupid.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  252. Sparkon says:
    @pecosbill

    …escalate into a full scale war like happened under JFK and LBJ, especially LBJ. …My assessment still stands, there is a difference between providing material and training and sending actual combat troops. IKE and Truman were smart enough to leave themselves an out. JFK and LBJ were simply too stupid.

    Your assessment is a stinking heap of garbage.

    After McNamara and Taylor returned from their fact-finding mission to Vietnam in early 1963, Kennedy’s gloomy prognosis was confirmed: “We don’t have a prayer.”

    Strictly speaking, there were no U.S. combat troops or units in Vietnam under Pres. Kennedy, who had throughout his administration continually rejected recommendations to introduce U.S. combat troops.

    1961 in the Vietnam War

    22 November

    President Kennedy approved National Security Action Memorandum, No. 111 which authorized the U.S. to provide additional equipment and support to South Vietnam […] Thus, Kennedy stopped short of what many of his advisers, including General Taylor, had advised: the introduction of U.S. combat soldiers into South Vietnam.

    Additionally, there is rock-solid evidence that JFK had approved the recommendations of Sec. of Defense Robert McNamara and Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Maxwell Taylor to withdraw all U.S. forces from Vietnam by the end of 1965, a position the two top U.S. military leaders had taken after their fact finding mission to Vietnam in early 1963. Gen. Taylor had been recalled to active duty by JFK, after the Bay of Pigs invasion, when Kennedy felt the Joint Chiefs had let him down.

    “The precise instructions for withdrawal delivered by Maxwell Taylor, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to his fellow Chiefs on October 4, 1963, in a memorandum that remained classified until 1997.

    [Gen. Maxwell] Taylor wrote:

    “On 2 October the President approved recommendations on military matters contained in the report of the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The following actions derived from these recommendations are directed: … all planning will be directed toward preparing RVN forces for the withdrawal of all US special assistance units and personnel by the end of calendar year 1965. The US Comprehensive Plan, Vietnam, will be revised to bring it into consonance with these objectives, and to reduce planned residual (post-1965) MAAG strengths to approximately pre-insurgency levels… Execute the plan to withdraw 1,000 US military personnel by the end of 1963…”

    https://whowhatwhy.org/2017/09/26/jfk-ordered-full-withdrawal-vietnam-solid-evidence/

    [my bold]

  253. @Priss Factor

    How many movies do you watch a day priss? I remember BB being good, though I saw it when little. “sodomy on the orient express” lol. I comprehended the adult subject matter pretty well in retrospect.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  254. @Happy Tapir

    How many movies do you watch a day priss?

    I try to watch one movie a night but I usually end up watching about 3 or 4 a week. Often, it’s old stuff I like. Beginning few yrs back, Hollywood decided to add jungle fever to tons of movies, and I don’t wanna see that stuff. French movies are being Negroic too. There was a film called LET THE SUNSHINE IN about a stupid French skank who has sex with a bunch of men. That was BAD ENOUGH, but it ended her with kissing a Negro, on the lips too. It was the most gross thing from FAR FROM HEAVEN, aka Fart from Hell.
    And then, there are homo movies. I loved KINGS OF SUMMER, but the kid in it was soon in a homo movie as someone who takes it up the bung from a Negro. Who needs that? I don’t even like Milo.

    I’ve heard that TV is where the really good stuff is nowadays, but I haven’t watched TV in over a decade. I use the TV only for video-watching.

    Last night I saw INVISIBLE MAN(or fast-forwarded through most of that trash), and it comes close to eliminationist propaganda. It’s far more odious than JEW SUSS. Hollywood makes garbage like that, but whites are sucking up to Jewish Power more than ever.

    But I think the attempt to link THE GRADUATE with the current rot is a stretch. Speaking of naughty-naughty, that’s been the staple of English and American literature for a long time. Lots of hanky panky funny stuff in Huxley’s POINT COUNTER POINT.

    • Replies: @Happy Tapir
  255. @Priss Factor

    Wow, thanks for the reply. Same here; I try to watch a movie every other night. Last night I watched Snowpiercer, by the same guy who did Parasite. It was ok. Very antinork.

    TV, I think what they mean is cable tv, particularly HBO’s series like Sopranos, Game of Thrones, Boardwalk Empire. You would love the new Watchman(not), full of black on white gay sex! Avoid that except as a sociological window into the darkest cauldron of wokeism!

    Keep up the good work! You do wonders for my Netflix queue!

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  256. @Happy Tapir

    Last night I watched Snowpiercer, by the same guy who did Parasite.

    I saw the trailer, and it looks like total crap. It seems like Bong in Del Toro mode, and I can’t stand Toro who, unlike Cuaron and Inarritu, totally sucks as film-maker. Foreign directors would do best to stick with what they know and do best. Working on international projects based on junky material almost never works. Whereas Bong surely knows a lot about his nation and culture, what he knows of the outside world is from globalist media dominated by Jews. SNOWPIERCER looks like vile anti-white screed.

    TV, I think what they mean is cable tv, particularly HBO’s series like Sopranos, Game of Thrones, Boardwalk Empire.

    If that’s best of TV, I’ll pass. I watched 4 episodes of SOPRANOS and it was fat goombas acting dumb and slaughtering each other like pigs. Who needs that for 5 seasons? GAME OF THRONES is about some dwarf lording over idiots. BOARDWALK EMPIRE has fabulous first two episodes but grinds down afterward. I also heard LOST, MAD MEN, and BREAKING BAD are supposed to be good. LOST is about a fatso on an island, MAD MEN is trashy sleaze, and BREAKING BAD is run-of-the-mill family drama spiced up with drug trade. Half of one episode was enough. WIRE should be called TIRE.

    You would love the new Watchman(not), full of black on white gay sex!

    I watched the pilot of SIX FOOT UNDER years ago, and some white homo was kissing a black homo. Yuck.

    Last night I finally forced myself to watch ROMA, something I didn’t wanna see. Not bad but dogshit made me wanna puke. It was almost as bad as watching Juliette Binoche kiss a Negro. Why don’t Mexicans, white or brown, clean up the dog shit? What kind of man drives a car into a ‘garage’ with dog feces all over? If it were an Mexican slum, I get it. But in an upper class family?
    It may make for interesting comparison with PARASITE and JOKER(utterly worthless) on the matter of class. A SEPARATION(which proves Iranians are impossible) is also an interesting movie about class and culture, as is CARNAGE by Polanski.

    AVENGERS INFINITY and ENDGAME were superduper hits, so I checked them out recently, and they are utterly retarded. FF-ed through most of the nonsense. Btw, what was the point of putting a talking raccoon and superheroes in the same universe? It’s like making Underdog and Superman share a storyline. I guess, straight or parody, none of it makes any difference in a videogame movie.

    And then, there’s MIDWAY. This movie is so video-gamey that I never felt like I was watching WWII but more of AVENGERS nonsense. Cheap postcard nostalgia and endless videogame explosions. Pretty awful though not as disgraceful as Bay’s PEARL HARBOR.

    FORD V FERRARI is terrific. With its macho heroes and Italian connection and length(and setting in the 60s), it makes for interesting comparison with ONCE UPON IN HOLLYWOOD. But whereas Tarantino’s movie is stamped with personal style, F v F is very impersonal film-making much like THE RIGHT STUFF, but that’s okay as it allows the story to focus on the characters than the ‘auteur’. A real winner, like RUSH by Ron Howard.

    • Replies: @Happy Tapir
  257. @Priss Factor

    You’re basically right about everything. I thought game of thrones was good, with definite flaws, but it goes off the rails a bit when they get past the part where the books had already been written. I have a soft spot for fantasy.

    Snowpiercer is anti white or anti colonialist but better than anything by del toro. 1917 was pretty good I thought from this year. Also Uncut Gems, maybe.

    Roma I didn’t think exceptional. It falls, together with The help and Mid nineties, into the new anti white genre of “white families suck And are abusive therefore we should adopt nonwhites as families.” The truth: black and Hispanics have much higher rates of domestic violence than whites.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  258. @Happy Tapir

    I thought game of thrones was good, with definite flaws

    I watched about 20 min of GOT and couldn’t stop giggling at the sight of the dwarf. It struck me as a gimmick. That said, it’s nice that he found fame and fortune. It must be awful to be a dwarf.

    Snowpiercer is anti white or anti colonialist but better than anything by del toro.

    Del Toro really is a bad film-maker, and the ONLY reason he’s been lauded is his politics. I will give credit where it’s due and praise the talent of a film-maker whose politics I disagree with, but Del Toro relies on the cheapest tricks. Everything about him is mawkish and crude, and crudeness putting on arty airs is sickening. He should stick to cheapie basement horror.

    Roma I didn’t think exceptional. It falls, together with The help and Mid nineties, into the new anti white genre of “white families suck And are abusive therefore we should adopt nonwhites as families.”

    I didn’t see THE HEP, but I didn’t find ROMA to be anti-white. It’s not pro-white but it’s not pro-anything but for the affection it has for the brown maid, a docile creature. It’s no wonder white Californians regard browns as beta-folks like the alphas in BRAVE NEW WORLD rely on the labor force of the lesser ‘breeds’.
    It’s a work of contradictions. Though the main character is like a character from Neo-Realist films(especially the young maid who becomes pregnant in UMBERTO D.), the style is stately and detached, almost like later Visconti(or Edward Yang). Neo-realism had a gritty, documentary, you-are-there feel. Y TU MAMA TAMBIEN and CHILDREN OF MEN, though not exactly neo-realist, captured some of that spirit. In contrast, the camera in ROMA seem almost indifferent, detached, possessed of zen perspective. The forest is burning and people are running around, but the camera remains focused on something in the foreground. Violence erupts in the streets, but the camera remains at a distance and never gets close to it or moves at glacial pace. We see the violence up close ONLY when the thugs enter the building and shoot someone(but we don’t see who is shot).
    It creates a sense of a world most unperturbed by poverty and political events. A world in its own bubble, a kind of womb. A quiet stable world, like an oasis of American Middle Class life or European affluence amidst the general poverty of Mexico. And the brown maid has a place in this world but isn’t part of it.

    In a way, the film is essentially about an upper-middle class Mexican family. It’s more about a time and place than any character. The style is more suited to presenting this world of relative affluence than the grungy reality of brown lumpen folks. Indeed, the more natural thing would have been for Cuaron to focus on the family than on the maid. And yet, even as he uses a more stately style appropriate for the privileged, he put the maid at the center of the story. It’s like making a film about a garden but centering the camera around a bug.
    Also, the film is at once very intimate and close up with the character and distanced from her. This is problematic in some ways, but sort of makes sense. It is more honest than an attempt on Cuaron’s part to pretend to know much about the brown world. It seems a confession on his part that even as he feels a great affection for the brown maid of his youth, he really doesn’t know her and won’t pretend to. We see her externalities but her internal life is respected, kept private. (This may have been inspired by Sembene’s BLACK GIRL who remains a cipher.) It’s a pretty good film, but the dogshit… that was disgusting. In some ways, maybe it’s justified. After all, the film is about both the good life(of affluence and sterility) and the hard facts of reality(life and pain), and shit is real. Still, the image of car wheels squishing the dog crap and the family going to bed knowing there’s dog shit all over the garage. That is stomach-churning. Ruined my appetite for the whole day.

    • Replies: @Happy Tapir
  259. Hibernian says:
    @Priss Factor

    Forty eight year old actor playing a 70 year old character. Hoffman reached the age of the character in 2008.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  260. @Priss Factor

    The dwarf in game of thrones is from the book. Dwarfs, either genetic midgets or mythological dwarves, represent Jews in fantasy literature. It’s important to watch with whom he is grouped, although the character of Tyrion develops his own wings in the series. It’s a commentary that goes back to the old curiosity shop by dickens.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  261. @Hibernian

    Forty eight year old actor playing a 70 year old character. Hoffman reached the age of the character in 2008.

    Yup, talent goes a long way.

    Welles was 26 when he played the old Kane.

    Brando was still in his forties when he played the elderly Vito Corleone.

    Btw, wasn’t Willy supposed to be 65?

  262. @Happy Tapir

    The dwarf in game of thrones is from the book.

    People seem to take the book and TV show pretty seriously. But then, some of the biggest sellers(even among adult readers)have been stuff like HUNGER GAMES. And FIFTY SHADES is an ‘adult’ spinoff of TWILIGHT. Walter Russell Meade alluded to GOT many times(and Francis Fukuyama seems to think THE WIRE is art, and there’s dufus Jonah Goldberg who takes BREAKING BAD very seriously).
    By the look of it, GOT seems pretty silly. Or is the book genuinely good stuff? There’s only a handful of movies set in the dark ages of myth and legend that I like: EXCALIBUR and 13th WARRIOR and maybe few others. TRISTAN AND ISOLDE by Kevin Reynolds was pretty good. (His RISEN was top-notch too.)

    Not long ago, I watched(FF-ed through most of it) the new TERMINATOR movie, and it follows a pattern I’ve noticed recently. They are trying to turn pop into art. They are going for serious-serious than merely serious-within-context. In the original TERMINATOR movie, we suspended disbelief and got into the suspense of the story. Serious-within-context. But we never took anything in it seriously as anything other than good entertainment. And as solemn and artistic as Nolan’s BATMAN movies are, I think the same applies. They are serious within its own universe.

    But what to make of movies like BLADE RUNNER 2046 where replicants give miracle birth and form a society like the Early Christians did? The material in the movie is being used as basis for spiritual message. The movie is fantastic to look at and impressive in many ways, but the whole spiritual angle was utterly nonsensical. And then, there’s JOKER. Unlike BATMAN movies that were overly arty and solemn but still worked within the comic book universe, JOKER was meant to be taken as a bona fide art film. Some character out of a comic book as basis for psychological study?
    But you ain’t seen nothing yet. The new TERMINATOR movie would have us believe, ROTFL and LOL X 1000, that a Terminator somehow gained moral consciousness, gave up the violent life, settled down with a Mexican-American woman with son, changed the kid’s diapers, and devoted his life to redemption by helping out the humans. (The Onion couldn’t have come up with this.) The Psychology and Ethics of the Terminator? This is beyond belief and the funniest thing since the little dino became friends with T-rex in JURASSIC WORLD. I mean, the writers actually came up with this stuff? It’s one thing make pop with arty touches. But to imbue pop with ‘complexity’ of art? Utterly ludicrous in our inversionary world.

    Also, the texture of the movie feels different. The original TERMINATOR had a look of its own, a bubble-world of sci-fi pop fantasy. But the new movie begins in a world that looks like something out of Alejandro González Iñárritu’s movie. It’s as if sci-fi fantasy has intruded into the textural world of the art movie.

    • Replies: @Happy Tapir
  263. @Priss Factor

    The books are not that good. The show is ok. I don’t like any of the new reboots or whatever. The only one I thought a quarter way decent was the mad max one, fury road. In general I agree with you about tv; they drag and tend to be very derivative of movies. I added risen to my queue. Keep up the good work. You are the smartest film critic I know of. Would it be too much to ask what part of the country you reside in and your approximate age?

    • Replies: @Presocratic
  264. @mark tapley

    Wow calm down! My point was that “they” are destroyers of nations and life regardless of religion, skin tone or continent. Geo politics isn’t ideology.

  265. I wasn’t launching an attack. Just stating the consequences of Zionism. During the first Zionist Congress of 1897 Dr. Mendelstein, Professor of The University of Kiev stated during this speech opening the conference that “the Jews will use all their influence and power to prevent then rise and prosperity of all other nations and are resolved to adhere to their historic hopes, i.e. to the conquest of world power.”

    The Zionists are now close to achieving their objective. They now have financial control through the central bank cartel of all countries of any consequence. Now they just need to consolidate the different regions into a global totalitarian system.

  266. @Happy Tapir

    Yes, Priss Factor is a great student of the cinema who excels at movie criticism and displays many flashes of brilliance and profound and original insights in that medium. His political commentary is remarkable for the multitude of arresting angles and perspectives it uses to illuminate a more or less single theme. I read much of it. But to me it is ultimately less satisfying than his movie criticism and more tendentious. Among other things, it exaggerates the extent to which the public at large has really embraced the narratives he deplores. Most of Middle America and, I believe, most of the political leaders who serve it, reject those narratives, even if they don’t say so directly, just as most East Germans came to disbelieve the propaganda spewed by their government long before the Berlin Wall fell. For that reason, I wish Priss would put more of his prodigious talents for writing and analysis– including his unique abilities for a kind of psychoanalysis of society and culture — into film and literary criticism, and history.

    • Replies: @Happy Tapir
  267. @Presocratic

    I basically agree with you. I think however, regarding his political commentary, that maybe we haven’t risen to a point where we realize how pervasive certain factors are. He has filled my Netflix queue for the next half year at least! He seems foreign to me, I mean, I think I detect subtly that he is not a native English speaker. Perhaps a middle easterner or an Israeli?

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Brenton Sanderson Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
Our Reigning Political Puppets, Dancing to Invisible Strings