Hollywood apparently messed up when they made “A Quiet Place,” but only according to the left who find this movie to be a little too “regressive” for their taste.
This is all despite the rave reviews the movie is getting, even from critics, but as I’ve discussed before, the left takes their narrative being showcased by Hollywood for granted. When movies veer off the approved narrative path there must be outrage.
And boy was there outrage.
In an article titled “The Silently Regressive Politics of “A Quiet Place,”” The New Yorker — which has been on a complete asinine roll lately — turned its nose up at the movie due to the fact that the movie is kind on gun ownership and also supports white supremacy…I’m not making that up.
In effect, “A Quiet Place” is an oblivious, unself-conscious version of Clint Eastwood’s recent movies, such as “The 15:17 to Paris,” which bring to the fore the idealistic elements of gun culture while dramatizing the tragic implications that inevitably shadow that idealism. The one sole avowed identity of the Abbott parents is as their children’s defenders; their more obvious public identity is as a white rural family. The only other people in the film, who are more vulnerable to the marauding creatures, are white as well. In their enforced silence, these characters are a metaphorical silent—white—majority, one that doesn’t dare to speak freely for fear of being heard by the super-sensitive ears of the dark others. It’s significant that when characters—two white men—commit suicide-by-noisemaking, they do so by howling as if with rage, rather than by screeching or singing or shouting words of love to their families. (Those death bellows are the wordless equivalent of “I’m as mad as hell and I’m not going to take this anymore!”) Whether the Abbotts’ insular, armed way of life might put them into conflict with other American families of other identities is the unacknowledged question hanging over “A Quiet Place,” the silent horror to which the movie doesn’t give voice.
Allow me to translate the snootiness for you, in case that paragraph was a little too much for your non-elitist sensibilities.
“The movie has too much of a pro-gun message, the characters are too white, and the message is too racist. Within the article, he even goes into how John Krasinski’s character is too masculine. Yes, Brody surmises that the aliens in the movie are stand-ins for minorities.
They aren’t, and they’re just aliens, but elite leftists like Brody tend to live in their own world where every piece of art must follow the same rules of judging modern art. Everything has to have an underlying meaning that pertains to the real world. The art can’t just be obvious. There’s no way those aliens are just aliens, and there’s no way the white gun-toting nuclear family only totes guns to protect their nuclear family from those aliens. It has to be a commentary on how white people are racist.
Even the Economist got into the outrage game over “A Quiet Place,” by writing much in the same vein as Brody in an article titled “Hollywood needs to fix its gun message” by Nicholas Barber.
Barber begins by bashing 2018’s “Death Wish” remake, which I have reviewed on this site and found to be the movie everyone needs to see. “Death Wish” did indeed have a very pro-gun message, but a very realistic one. This was too much for Barber who called the movie something of an NRA fever dream.
He then goes into how “A Quiet Place” follows much of the same vein, and could end up as a must see movie on the NRA’s list as well.
Barber said he loves the movie, but wishes some things were different. For instance, the entire plot:
“A Quiet Place” is set just after a horde of feral alien-monsters has gobbled up most of the human race. Almost the only people we see are a married couple and their two children. I won’t reveal exactly how they survive, but it would be easy to watch this film and come away with the impression that when your country/town/home is invaded, there is nothing that the authorities will be able to do about it. Your community won’t be any help, either, and there is no way you can negotiate or co-exist peacefully with the invaders.
Why oh why can’t we just negotiate with the killer aliens instead of resorting to gun violence to save the day? It would appear that Barber would happily throw the dynamics of the movie out in order to have a boring, peaceful movie where everyone gets along and there are no problems. Whatever helps Hollywood avoid making guns seem like a great thing!
No, your only hope is to festoon your property with security cameras, learn how to hunt and prepare your own food, grow a shaggy beard (if applicable), and, most importantly, keep a shotgun handy. The couple’s other self-preservation tactics are all well and good, but in the end, it’s the ability to squeeze a trigger that makes the difference between being a responsible parent and an alien’s breakfast.
Barber doesn’t like “A Quiet Place” much in the same way Brody doesn’t. Krasinski is too manly, the family too heavily reliant on guns for their safety, and the characters have to live a rugged life of self-independence. That, according to both of our elitists here, is distasteful.
Quick note: This is just one reason why middle America rejects a lot of the left’s messaging with such ferocity. The left’s disdain for life outside of their bubble is filled with all the ignorance, prejudice, and bigotry they accuse “flyover country” residents of having.
Barber continues by noting that Krasinski has a bad habit of being too friendly to right-leaning sensibilities, and while he may not have intended to give the NRA something to enjoy, he certainly did, and that is somehow a sign that the NRA has brainwashed Hollywood:
I’m not saying that Krasinski set out to pen a love letter to right-wing gun nuts. He acted in Michael Bay’s “13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi”, so he is obviously happy to be in films which push an anti-Democratic Party agenda, but in the case of “A Quiet Place” it’s far more likely that he was intent on making a knuckle-whitening, throat-tightening creature feature – and on that score he succeeded in style. He probably didn’t think too much about the film’s unambiguous pro-gun message, nor is it a message I’ve seen discussed in reviews – again, mine included. But that’s an indication of how prevalent the NRA’s beliefs are in Hollywood thrillers and horror movies. We are so used to seeing gun ownership being celebrated that we barely notice it any more.
That couldn’t be more ridiculous of a thought if he had written it while wearing a clown nose while working within the Ministry of Silly Walks. Hollywood, while it may be turning something of an ideological corner as of late, is in no way a bastion of right-wing values. So many actors, directors, producers, etc make it very clear that they have no love for the right, and it often shows in everything from their movies to their award show speeches.
While the frequency of right-friendly movies and shows has increased, there is still a long way to go before the playing field is at all level. That said, all of this nonsense is beside the point.
Krasinski has put together something original and masterful, and he did it without following the guidelines the left had put down for Hollywood to follow. The film works because it sets out to tell a gripping story, not sell us a tired message that the majority of America just doesn’t buy.
In the grand scheme, Hollywood will succeed if its directors, actors, and producers ignore people like Barber and Brody. It should worry more about pleasing audiences than pleasing the misguided and bubbled sensibilities of coastal leftists.
My hats off to Krasinski for doing so, even if unintentionally.