I am a bit conflicted; I saw Role Models with my wife the other day, and, while I want to say it was funny, I equally feel guilty for paying money to see a movie that exploits little kids.
I knew what I was getting into when I saw why it was rated R; rauchy humor doesn't really bug me. My problem in the movie isn't why it was rated R, it was who was making it R--often it was kids--mostly it was Ronnie, the little boy who played Seann William Scott's little buddy. The only thing he liked more then saying the F word was talking about how much he liked "bubbies" (something that he saw later in the movie, which was another thing that really bothered me--what parent let's there child act in a movie that requires them to see nudity?); it's bad enough to put a little kid in a movie that has adult's swearing left and right, but when it's the kids doing the swearing it's even worse.
The reason Ronnie sweared was completely uncalled for; it was shocking for the sake of shocking. Would the movie have been funny without it? Yes.
I have a feeling somewhere in Hollywood parents were sat down and they had to sign a contract saying it was okay for their little kid to do this.
People used to drop f-bombs with a little more class; when they said it, it truly was shocking and even funny. Now it's purely shock, and shock carries no lasting value. It's actually become just sad.
I'm not for censoring...except for kids; if that violates their rights, so be it--they're kids, their rights are supposed to be violated. Whoever Ronnie is in real life, his right to be a innocent child was taken away by some producer who said he could make him a star--and I paid ten bucks to support that.