yes, one can be amused with commy teeve from time to time. for a good larf check the god gobbler gigi entry here:
http://blogs.brisbanetimes.com.au/bluntinstrument/
cheers v

Californication is just another of those

-We want money...
-How do we get money...?
-SEX sells.....
-People are stupid and able to be led down the path of least resistance..i.e. sex...
-So, we make a show about SEX..and we become rich at the expense of the stupid public who have deluded themselves into thinking that to view such material is 'artistic liberation' and 'freedom of choice'...

COMMENT. What a joke!
Are we REALLLLLY that shallow and morally vacuous ? Are we simply little pieces of biological plasticine which can be prompted and moulded by money hungry sleazebags who couldn't give a damn about the impact on the community or our values of such material?

Have we allowed ourselves to be beyond deceived to the point where we actually believe that such portrayals of human interaction are in any way helpful to our moral and social health ?

The 'Bible Bashers' claim such things are not beneficial, and those who value some cheap empty tittilation cry out against the 'wowsers'.. and 'censorship' and they wax eloquent and long about 'Adults should be free to view whatever they like' and they add the rider "As long as it is not violent" HAH! is violence the ONLY way a community and value system is undermined and destroyed ?
NO! of course it isnt..

INDIGENOUS communities have been hit with the double barrelled shotgun of alchoholism and pornography and some communities have surcumbed to this to the point of self destruction on a genocidal scale.

WAKE UP AUSTRALIANS.! grasp the nettle...and say "We don't NEED or WANT this crap, filth and entertaiment garbage produced by bottom feeding low lifes who care only about the almighty DOLLLARRRR"
i.e. YOUR dollars going to THEM.

VICTIMS IN WINNERS CLOTHES. We bleat about 'freedom of choice' only to cloak weak wills and lack of moral clarity, lack of commitment wholesome values and a desire for a cheap nasty dirty 'short time' thrill.

Boaz... did you actually watch Californication?

The point of the piece was that behind the sex, there was a plot, and a message that actually endorsed family values.

Your post criticises the program because it is merely using sex as a tool to gain viewers, thereby commodifying sex, am I right?

My question to you is - if there were to be a brilliant, insightful theatre performance/movie/television program, with shakespearian wit and culture that dealt with many philosophical quandaries and was an unquestionably brilliant piece.... but used sex frequently to get a message across - would you accept it as an insightful work of art, or would the simple presence of sex mean it was merely pandering to the base desires of the masses?

Hi Boaz_David,

COMMENT. What a joke!
Are we REALLLLLY that shallow and morally vacuous ? Are we simply little pieces of biological plasticine which can be prompted and moulded by money hungry sleazebags who couldn't give a damn about the impact on the community or our values of such material?

Unfortunately despite the facade of depth and morality we would like to present we really are everything you point out and more.

How else do you explain the popularity of TV programs like 'Big Brother' and those American mid-day soapies that populate Australian TV screens?

More worrying though was the lack of depth and morals in the aftermath of 'Tampa' and the 'Hanieef' affairs when the architects of the lies and innuendo were re-elected to the highest office in the Australian Parliament and may just possibly do so once again.

As I see it intellectual depth and morallity has always taken a back seat to the impact of the mighty dollar on most citizens hip-pockets.

The show leans on an old theme, almost plagiarises it in fact, from the movie 'Skin Deep', written and produced by Blake Edwards all the way back in 1989, staring John Ritter as a writer (sounds familiar?) who has writers' block (sounds familiar?) who is splitting from his wife (sounds familiar?) and who seeks refuge and solace unsuccessfully in alcohol and sex (sounds familiar?).

The sex scenes in 'Skin Deep' were no better or worse than in Californication.

You get a sense of that movie from the Wiki article at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skin_Deep_(1989_film)

I don't know the future trajectory of the plot in Californication, but if it follows a similar line to "Skin Deep' boaz-david will be pleased, as the main character finds that sex, alcohol and licentiousness do not lead to happiness. It is a story of redemption. You can even see the parallels in the story of King David.

What I sense at the end of each episode so far of Californication is indeed the idea that happiness and creativity are not helped by extramarital sex, drugs and alcohol. It is just that the main character hasn't worked that out yet.

TRTL... I did expect that retort :) NO.. I didn't watch it... but.. I discussed it with a friend at gym who told me enough to 'get' the idea.

I also read the description of the pilot, visited the web site etc.

The point I'm making is that we don't NEED to show 'explicit' simulated sex in order to get alllll those points across that you mentioned. That was done very adequately in 30s and 40 movies where it was 'implied'....

I have a simple principle on this. "Why show on the big screen, things which you would not show yourself doing ..such as having sex on a stage- before the whole nation" The things all of us do in PRIVATE should not be made PUBLIC for modesty reasons.

But I'll go further, I asked my friend who is not a Christian "S, did you see that show Californication".. "Yep, it has some good sex scenes"... now..he is a responsible father of one, married.. then.. I pushed his mental envelope a bit.. and pointed out that this is symptomatic of a TREND.. and he agreed.. and shared with me something I was not aware of..(due to my sheltered 'Church' life :).. that young plumbing apprentices are now quite boldly showing off porn video's they have downloaded to their mobile phones..not of men with women..but women with ANIMALS! (I wish OLO would let me repeat the exclamation mark about a 100 times here)

As we delved further into just how disgusting the 'norm' has become... without me 'preaching' to him.. just two blokes sharing... finally he had to change the subject to something positive..(at my prompting I hasten to add) "Hey.. Collingwood is in the final"... and this little turn in the convo was so telling of our situation...

When confronted with our true condition... we flee.. run...deny.. seek refuge in something neutral.. comforting...to assure ourselves that "things aren't really that bad"....

but they are.

Here is an interesting idea,
Muslims want integration,(see Embracing a Moderate Islam Forum)
They could install a flat screen TV in the mens section of the local Mosque, and they could all watch Californication, and Desperate Houswives, and Dr Who, and Big Brother, and Miss Teen USA, etc etc
Invite the neighbours, have a bar-b-que out the back, or a sausage sizzle, they wouldn't have to marry anybody.
Now THAT's integration.!

More food for the child molesters to feed on. And yea of course many will defend the right to gratify themselves watching this garbage knowing full well that it leads to all sorts of crimes against kids. In a few decades some smart cookie will get his or her phd on the links between porn and child abuse. It is not rocket science!

Runner wrote:

"More food for the child molesters to feed on. And yea of course many will defend the right to gratify themselves watching this garbage knowing full well that it leads to all sorts of crimes against kids."

And just how old were Romeo and Juliet? Hamlet and Ophelia?

I agree that porn is conducive to all sorts of sex crimes, BUT anyone who has stood in line at K-Mart and watched a mother buy a g-string or 'bralet' or similar sexualising clothes for their 8 year old cannot but question who is more of a risk to children: the mother or father who sexualises their children too early, the department stores who 'push' these 'fashions', or the stranger, who everyone warns kids to be wary of?

Perhaps Runner you are not aware of the fact that prisoners in gaol use K-Mart catalogues and the like, showing children modelling underwear, sleepwear and swimwear as child porn. At beaches girls under the age of consent are free to go topless and to wear g-string swimming costumes: this is legal, however anyone who takes a photo of them is liable to be charged with child porn offences. Why aren't the girls charged or at least formally counselled?

So get real, if you are going to campaign against TV show, why not start by campaigning against the sexualising of children by 'respectable' institutions?

Hamlet in case you did not know this is a forum where people can give their opinion. I am not campaigning. I happen to totally agree with your assessment of the sexualising of young children in KMART catalogues and the like. However this article was on the latest TV porn show. Perversion is progressive and this show just shows how low our society has sunk when hearts are sick enough to feed on it.

Californication starts on Commercial Australian TV and the moralists go into a frenzy, but a few nights ago the 'art' movie "The Piano Teacher" was on SBS. This was a movie with dark themes of sexual abuse, violence and control. But because it was on SBS (Sex Between Soccer) no-one gave a toss.

I am not saying that Californication has any redeeming features, but it doesn't need any. It does not cause anyone to see the world differently, it is entertainment.

From Bollywood movies where sex is replaced with frenetic song and dance scenes, that everyone knows what is implied all the way to comedy as Monty Python and even the Goon Show with its inuendo. Sex is out there.

Californication is no better or worse than thousands of hours of other TV shown in Australia each year.