NEW QUESTION:
As someone who watches a lot of movies, is there a particular moral area (excessive language, violence, nudity etc.) you still find difficult to sit through? (Not looking for taboo busting, but stuff that's likely in a mainstream film.)
Ebert's answer was about Hollywood playing these elements for entertaining thrills rather than taking such material seriously. He singled out Basic Instinct, marketed on its sexual content even though it's attitude towards sex and lesbianism pandered towards people too young for the R Rating.
As for me, I'm uneasy about rape, no matter how it's treated. It was a major plot point during (I think Season 2) of "The Sopranos" and even though it was handled with the upmost care I didn't like the scene and I really hated the ultimate resolution of that story.
The worst example from the last 20 years was 1995's Strange Days, which not only adds an extra layer of creepy to the rape through the film's recording device but it's plopped into the middle of a popcorn thriller. I question the inclusion of this scene, the way it lingers on the victim's ample chest and most of all, the fact that it was directed by Kathryn Bigelow. We have a lot of interesting gender discussions on these boards, even asking if we would hold men to the same line of questioning. I'm usually gender blind, but the scene (from a movie I really like overall) brings up some big questions, such as was it supposed to be easier to accept because the director was a female and not Michael Bay or Tony Scott? Should Bigelow take responsibility in her depiction and necessity of the scene, not just as a filmmaker but as a woman? Did the studio release the film with no objection to such a depressing plot point because they figured if there was a problem the female director would have brought it up?
I'll end my part of this with one last example that must be mentioned, Irreversible. Gaspar Noe is a provocative filmmaker, but here he depicts the act in all its horror. Filmed in real time with no edits. This is not done for lingering exploitation - the camera is far back - but to get across with no ambiguity the horror of the act. I was still very uneasy, but at least Noe prepared me for what was to come though his reverse time approach. He treats the scene with a responsibility that Bigelow does not and the worst part is actually the reaction by a pedestrian who walk into the scene.