Inconsistent Morality...

Well, I haven't written for quite a while so I thought I'd start up again...

Meg and I went to the Cinema tonight to see 'Due Date', starring Robert Downey, Jnr and Zach Galifianakis among others. Parts of the film were very funny, as it explores the (non) relationship between the two main characters on a long road trip from Atlanta to L.A. Robert Downey plays an expectant father (Peter), trying to get home to L.A. for the birth of his first child, while Zach Galifianakis (of 'The Hangover' fame) plays the eccentric loner (Ethan), who inadvertently becomes Downey's saviour and road-trip partner. Lot's of hilarity ensues in varying levels and situations of political in-correctness, and both the characters reveal deeper parts of themselves along the way.


The one thing I've gotta confess is this:


I found it funny, up to a certain scene, then my humour gland dried up because of that scene, then it came back again a little later.


I found myself, not for the first time in a major Hollywood release, actually being offended by the content of this scene, which I thought was totally inappropriate. Yes, I get that they are portraying Ethan as a weird, socially awkward loner, the guy who everybody avoids as soon as he opens his mouth, I get that they put scenes in the film that you laugh at and then wonder if you should be laughing at, a bit like 'Four Lions' did for terrorism; I get all that. I even mostly ignored the language because it made some of the scenes funnier, just like the language in Grand Torrino made the scenes more poignant and caught the humorous reality (sometimes) of playful language used in a racist sense. Im not really a prude when it comes to stuff like that, mostly I filter out the bad and take the scene for what it is and what it's saying.... But this particular scene?


I don't really want to describe it, other than it was very much in the style of the 'American Pie' series of films, a sexual context but made very obvioius and in a way that grosses you out.


As I said, I'm no prude, but this scene in the film grossed me and Meg out, both of us thought it was totally unnecessary, It wasn't that you saw anything explicit; ironically, as the best films do, (though definitely not in this case)  what was 'suggested' to you as the viewer by sound effects, etc, was just pure gross.


It was the same kind of disturbed feeling I got when I attempted to watch '300', that adrenaline fuelled, testosterone-filled guys film based on the epic tale of 300 Spartan warriors against the might of King Xerxes. Surprisingly, the violence in it didn't bother me, as I felt it was in accordance with the plot and scope of the film; it was a film about ancient war after all, and the brutality of it was showing the realism. What disturbed me personally about 300, (to the point, where I didn't actually finish watching it!), was the scene where the crippled, rejected Spartan turns traitor and enters the court of Xerxes to sell his fellow Spartans out. The court was depicted in such a twisted, sexual way that I found myself switching it off. Not, actually, because secretly I liked it and it brought out base feelings in me, but simply because I instantly felt disturbed by the images I saw, and simply didn't want to watch it; almost as if I heard a whisper in my own conscience saying 'don't watch it'. 


I remember being disturbed then, and it was that same level of 'disturbed-ness' (if that's a word?) that happened tonight.  Like I said, I'm not a prude and no doubt I've watched some scenes in other genres (such as horror), that would intensely disturb others. Part of my level of unease, I think about Due Date and this particular scene, was that I just didn't expect it in this film, that is generally one to have a good laugh in, an 'emotive comedy' of sorts. Although there was quite a bit of language, I didn't expect such a suggested explicit scene carried off as comedy to be laughed at.


Maybe I'm just old-fashioned, maybe there is a bit of the prudish about me. I just didn't want to be confronted with that when watching a film for entertainment with my wife...


All in all, it was a funny film, but it just really did not need that scene...


What do people think? Is the genre of film free to show any and every shocking thing for the sake of expression and reality, even in a comedy, or are there some things that we really don't need to 'see', or think about??