A Great Debate

[novakru]

I say at least have a warning.
I know they do that sometimes now.
When I went to see Joan of Arc with Mila Jojanovich(sp?) years ago-
I was fucked up for months.

If there is a warning at least I could choose NOT to watch that movie.

People who have been through it, makes them relive it in all it's horrible detailed trauma right over again and then there goes thousands of dollars worth of therapy/medication right down the toilet.

[milktoaste]

I recently changed my mind and decided to go ahead with this, purely out of respect for my 9th grade teacher who taught me the importance of arguing for unpopular opinions. I realise it's a completely redundant thread and I could just post a new thread every couple days and more people would read it. So I'm just gonna go ahead and get this out of the way so I can atleast do what I said I was going to-even if I am a little late.

I'd like to start by pointing out that rape scenes don't fly in my house. I'm guilty of watching and at one time owning movies with such scenes in the past, today they're not even allowed in my house. I think more often than not they're used as a replacement for good writing, and are the equivalent of a cheap shot or a low blow. I have no problem watching people beheading one another overseas, but a make believe scene in a movie will turn my stomach, strange.

Historically based or based on true event movies seem like a respectable door way for some form of rape scene. The reality of a disgusting act can also help show the importance/impact that act can have.

I couldn't agree more with ample warning of any kind of sexual assault in a movie, I too will never watch another movie with one in it(neither will my children if I can manage to raise them right) However rape scenes will, and should, stay a part of cinema the same as any other tasteless act(ref. porno). It is one of the last taboo's in cinema.

[Leprucky Cougar]

Good thread milk. I also feel the same about scenes portraying sexual molestation encounters with minors...extremely distasteful. But perhaps writers continuously put them on the screen (movies and televison) not so much to create heightened trauma to past victims (Though I imagine it's hard not to feel upset for a victim to view such a thing) but to show us how devastating but also how real such an unimaginable thing can be--even if those who are guilty of such heinous behavior are close to us--after lots of scandals/reports of children confessing to being harmed by teachers, ministers, etc--it has really opened people up to be more cognizant and critical of the adults we have around our young people--and has taught us to never completely turn down skepticism of some adults (whom were thought upon as well-trusted individuals) If that is their intention for incorporating these scenes in, then that is a relatively understandable one.

[scouse mac]

Like with most things, its all in the context. Scenes of sexual violence are, in most cases, completely unnecessary and are in films merely as a cheap way to add shock value. Implied violence can be just as powerful, a good example being the implied rape of the girl in the recent Hills Have Eyes remake.

Having said that, there will always be times when showing the assaults take place are justifiable, like in The Accused.