"They are quite aware of what they're going through."

From a discussion going on about how John Hughes shaped a generation.  I disagree, but elaborate (somewhat):

Look at how teenagers were represented in film before this: they were always selfish brats unaware of the 'gift' given to them of an unmarked and bright future. They were always stupid and in need of a condescending adult to lead them by the nose into Adulthood. All of their concerns were stomped out or brushed aside and had to be set on the Correct Path no matter what. They were essentially emotional cyphers who didn't understand The Real World and were reminded of that fact constantly so they were dependent on an older (and hence wiser) person to guide them.

Hughes understood that was bullshiat. Teenagers are fiercely independent people who are figuring out the world. As the quote goes, 'they are quite aware what they're going through.' It's a daunting thing: they're damned by adults because adults see what they were like and often play Time Traveller in trying to 'correct' those things without taking into account how insulting it is to be told how to live by someone who claims to have known you your entire life yet is unable to grasp the changes in your psyche that make you quite different. On top of that, you're filled with all these horror stories that are told to you as instructions instead of reasoning with you. You're an adult but a child when it comes to adults talking down to you and combining this with a reach for independence and the adults' own regret creates nothing but stress. On top of that, you are expected to know exactly what you want to do in life and focus solely on that in the four short years at high school and be content in that. Not to mention learn how to work, interact with people correctly, and deal with all the social pressures like that.

Hughes understood that. You can see all of these at play in The Breakfast Club, and that's why it works so well. The comedy is a bit outdated (like the fashions), but you can see a microcosm of life that speaks true for a lot of us. You can see the adults trying to live their lives again through their children. You can see how authority comes from repressing one's own sense of doubt and retarding one's sense of growth. You can see how teenagers, aware of the world they're being pushed into, are frightened of living their life outside of the confines of their current lives because the adults in authority in their lives have never escaped that mentality. They're still hanging around the school, as a worker or a parent, stuck in the same sad holding pattern of American life: too afraid to strike out on your own but horrified of staying and becoming one of them.

Did Hughes shape a generation? No, because if he did we would probably have a better understanding of the insanity of the American way of life and the repression and regrets that shape it much more than it should. But what he did do is show that teenagers aren't just hormonal brats. They're dealing with a world they're seeing for the first time, and it's a very dark one full of pitfalls and authority figures that know just as much as they do. The illusion of adulthood is shown for its first time and the pressures to 'be somebody' are running up the lack of experience that all teenagers have. Hughes showcased it well, and while he didn't shape a generation, he at least gave cinema a reason to treat teenagers as human beings instead of retarded children usurpers of the Baby Boomer generation.

The day rock n'roll died.

You want to be depressed?  Try listening to a rock station nowadays.

All the music is basically whining about lost loves or something equally as pathetic such as nostalgia about lost loves.  There's a time and place for everything, but when did rock lose its balls?  Did it happen when some right-wing pundits started using the hardcore stuff, leaving everybody else with the pussified droppings that is now Top 40 rock?  Seriously, if I hear Kid Rock whining again to another '70s hit, I'm going to scream.

Seriously, rock is falling down that precipice of Bigotry Rock, the type of music that enforces a lifestyle instead of representing one.  A good case for this is modern-day country:  if you listen to enough of it (please do not do this without some heavy medication), you see that it enforces the nuclear family lifestyle and the idea of the unintelligent man.  Every single song is about fidelity and overly tight Rustler jeans trying to deal with disappointment.  But it doesn't reflect reality, it enforces it:  how many gay country songs do you know that are played on normal radio?  It repeats the same thing over and over again.  It's symbolic of a fable:  if you cheat, you get punished.  If you disrespect the 'American culture' of fidelity, repressed emotions, and accept the constant disappointments of life, you will be part of the American Mass, a sort of gestalt entity of disappointment and dread eased by the understanding that you're better off dead.  It's a rigid lifestyle that the music helps enforce.  I feel like I'm repeating myself here.

And Rock is going the same way.  It's not all about sex, but it assumes the relationships formed to deal with the 'taboo' of sex are sacrosact.  It's not even fun to listen to anymore.  It seems geared towards either empathizing with the pathetic or creating a gateway to the pathetic.  I would be more exact but I think I need to think about this more. 

In any case, it just irritates me that music stations are pushing this shit that depresses us.  Pop music has always been seen as the Other, but that Other seems to be more upbeat and passionate compared to the flaccidity of rock.

We don't have movie theaters anymore. We have daycares.

Well, we don't.  We just have things for children to roam around in.  Children have a place but the current American ideal is reducing things for child intake.  I think it started around PG-13 became an acceptable rating:  it was a nice way to market anything less than simplistic pastel shit to children without having parents bitch and whine about reality and their responsibilities.  Heaven forbid you 'have' to pop out a kid and then expect the rest of us to deal with it.  Use a rubber or take it up the ass.  Why should I have to deal with your shitling?

The culture reflects this:  cartoons are now geared towards consuming, not enjoyment.  This started in the 1980s as well as PG-13.  The British had it right when they refused Sesame Street for the BBC because children are very vulnerable to brainwashing.  If you market anything to them, they will take it because they do not have the ability or experience to know any better.  Their 'innocence' (romanticized palatable ignorance, if you ask me) is a perfect marketing tool to con people into buying shit.  It's another form of peer pressure that leaks out of the American carcass.  So when you go through the last three months of movie releases like I did, you see a country that isn't free but full of bullshit movies that aren't made for adults.  Sure, you get a 'Drive Angry' or some bullshit, but most of the time it's just nonsense made for children.  Because we all know if we don't make a PG-13 Saw sequel, parents might get upset that The Man is pushing down little Caitlin or Rutger because they really need to see their torture porn.  Best not upset the screaming little asshole brat you shat out of your womb.