There is a very interesting article in The Economist about the effect of digital technology on the motion picture industry, at the distribution/exhibition end, rather than the more commonly discussed production end. It is well worth a read, but I suspect you will agree that the author has obviously tried too hard in his opening paragraph to articulate a broadly meaningful thesis:
THERE is a scene in “Transformers”, a blockbuster that came out last week, in which a mobile phone turns into a homicidal robot. In its astonishingly loud way, the film is a meditation on the dangers posed by advanced technology.
Transformers? The two hour and twenty-three minute montage of stuff getting blowed up by homicidal robots? A “meditation” on anything? Puh-lease. This like suggesting that “King Ralph” is a “Swiftian satire about the democratization of the monarchy”.
Many lessons can perhaps be learned here, chief among them being “Don’t rely on magazines about economics to provide you with insightful film criticism.” I rather suspect that the thesis in question is a poorly-veiled and badly executed attempt to rationalize, for an inquisitive editor, why the author was apparently busy attending a screening of this summer’s big-budget blockbuster rather than churning out 1000 words on the Chinese widget industry.