And yet, it is a film, not a depiction of actual events and not a recommendation for people to go do these things. Just like with the ridiculous Grand Theft Auto controversy, people do not target the real fault, which is inside the people who commit horrible acts; they prefer to make a scapegoat out of popular entertainment.
Words escape me. Although the word **Depraved ** keeps running through my head! 
Not yet anyway…who would have believed 40 years ago when a married couple was never shown sleeping in the same bed together on TV and “pregnant” was a term not even whispered over the airwaves, that we’d have network TV broadcasting fairly explicit depictions and descriptions of gay relationships and sex, depictions of oral sex, group sex, rape, incest, etc. I have no doubt that someday the thrill seeking element may just cross the line and these hideous fantasies could become real “adventures.” The sex trade is alive and well destroying vulnerable women and children every day, why not human torture, hunting, etc. for profit?!
Yes, and apparently a film that degrades human dignity. Oh well, I guess Big Hollywood, like Big Tobacco, will never let any sense of decency come between it and making millions of $$$$.
Dont forget the Darwin Awards either.
I think you misapprehend the above. This is actually a very humerous undertaking that finds a little dark humor in some incredibly foolish human antics that result in the profoundly stupid removing themselves from the gene pool.
Now that’s just silly. There’s nothing wrong with depicting things that happen in real life. They aren’t glorified, only depicted by actors. I rue the day, hopefully never coming, where real life things can not be acted out because our single group finds them offensive.
I really wasn’t advocating censorship…but just out of curiosity where do your draw you line in the sand? Is broadcasting a video over the net/on cable of a child/or/woman being raped OK because its “depicting things that happen in real life?” How about an execution–real, not acted out–whether judicially imposed or say one captured on tape by a journalist or recorded by a terrorist. Would that be an acceptable form of entertainment because it happens in real life? How about a broadcast of an abortion procedure?
Yup, shows like *Sex in the City *certainly don’t glorify sex.
I certainly wouldn’t date any of those women…frightening. Except maybe Cattral’s character…the firehouse scene was intriging.Yup, shows like *Sex in the City *certainly don’t glorify sex.
Videos of things like rape and murder are not okay because the things themselves are not okay. But acting out a rape or murder in which nothing is actually done is a whole different story.
What… you’re really weird… I mean… wouldn’t the world be a happier place without these kinds of too descriptive and immoral media? Haven’t you read about media influence nowadays…
Oh that clears things up! :whacky: Talk about a difference without a distinction…
I can safely say that I’ve never seen an “explicit depiction” of any of those things on broadcast TV. Could you give some examples, please?
Try network re-broadcasts of any number of originally R- rated movies–they’re not completely cleaned up; Oprah Winfrey, Dr. Phil, Tyra Banks, Jerry Springer, the soaps, news “magazines,” the list goes on and on. If you add the offerings of cable TV that come right into your living room (not even an option a generation ago) the sky’s the limit on violence and sexually explicit content.
You confuddle me. Are you saying an actor portraying a murder is as bad as a video of an actual murder?
Not at all. As long as these things happen in the world, they should be free to depict them as storytellers.