At some point, it becomes unclear which side started it.
Hollywood and degraded culture feed off each other. The sleazier the country gets, the sleazier Hollywood gets. Or is it the other way around?
I remember some years ago there was some controversy over the teen TV character Doogie Houser losing his virginity. There was a poll in which about half the country said it would ruin the character's wholesomeness, but the other half said "all the kids are doing it" so it would reflect reality if he spent the night with some girl he wasn't married to.
In the end, the liberals won as they almost always do, and the kid had a fling with a teen girl.
I'm not someone who expects every film to reflect the Moral Majority view of the world. But there is a case to be made that Hollywood is irresponsible. Millions of people still smoke, but Hollywood has made an effort to curtail smoking in films, particularly by the characters we're supposed to empathize with. But that's because smoking is no longer PC. I can't count the number of films I've seen where there was not only illicit sex, but it was totally pointless to the plot. It was just thrown in because the writer or director said, "Hey, we need a sex scene or the film will look old fashioned."
Asia has its share of films that depict depravity, but it's much smaller than in the the West. I re-watched two great Japanese films yesterday: The Twilight Samurai and The Hidden Blade. Both feature main characters who are highly moral and are the type of people you can respect. There's a little violence, but it's on about the level of a 1940s U.S. western. There's no cursing or glorification of deviancy. Again, there are movies from Asia that are as over-the-top as many Hollywood films, but it's just that there seems to be more of a balance.
I think Ang Lee is a good example. He was a fine director, but he came to America and before you know it he was "pushing the envelope" with a homosexual sheep herder film, and he's now creating controversy in Asia with a film called Lust, Caution which depicts shockingly explicit sex scenes, and he's going around spreading the rumor that the performers were actually having sex to try to drum up controversy and ticket sales. A few years in Hollywood and his whole attitude now is to see how much he can get away with.
Again, I'm not in total agreement with everything Don Feder said. You have to depict bad behavior sometimes to show its consequences. There are films that would deeply offend Feder that I enjoy and respect as quality cinematic material. But I don't think it's too much to ask for a little more balance.
You can bet it's the former. Things were never as sweet and innocent as portrayed in film and television in days of yore. If it weren't for an active censor board wielding near dictatorial powers, that stuff wouldn't have been made either.
I remember some years ago there was some controversy over the teen TV character Doogie Houser losing his virginity. There was a poll in which about half the country said it would ruin the character's wholesomeness, but the other half said "all the kids are doing it" so it would reflect reality if he spent the night with some girl he wasn't married to.
I remember that as well. At the time, I was all for Doogie loosing it. I remember a similar controversy over Lance Kirwin (sp?) in some TV show along the same lines. He lost it as well.
As much as I'd like to say otherwise, that's closer to reality than not. From 14 on, all my buds and I did was plot, scheme and spend a lot of time wishing about losing our virginity.
can't count the number of films I've seen where there was not only illicit sex, but it was totally pointless to the plot.
Agreed. I could name dozens right off the top of my head. Thinking about it, I can only name one that didn't go far enough and that would be "The Human Stain." The book was much more graphic and as a result, you had a much better grasp of the hold this seductive young woman had on this aging professor.