How much sex is too much? If you tune into Underbelly: the golden mile, the third instalment in the hugely successful Underbelly series, you're bound to see a sex scene and 'elements' of nudity - usually the basketball-proportioned tits of some triple-jointed pole dancer being ogled by a gaggle of corrupt coppers.
But last night was 'ruly truly' OTT. There was a fast and hard sex scene in an underground car park (a dirty and grimy place at the best of times) against a car (it was standing-up sex). This was spliced in with a rape scene in a pool room at some seedy Kings Cross beer den. The perpetrators were those horrible cops, who handcuffed and gang-banged a young police woman.
If that wasn't awful enough, the alleged liaison between Kings Cross identity John Ibrahim and a policewoman went on and on - for at least three minutes of TV time. They were seriously humping like rabbits - fast and furious. It was relentless.
My question is, how much of this is necessary and how much is just sensational filler?
I didn't expect to see a romantic, soft focus sex scene between the actors who played Ibrahim and the policewoman. But I did expect something more creative. Instead, every camera angle was used to film the pair (this time it was sitting-up sex) doing the same boring stuff. Back view of rabbits at it, side view of rabbits still at it, front view of rabbits still going hard at it. The sex was more vigorous than a bar tender shaking an orgasm cocktail. But not as refreshing.
During a momentary pause in the humping, the actor who plays Ibrahim says, 'Put your uniform back on'. And the chick cop asks, 'Why?' to which he replies, 'So, I can watch you take it off again.'
The script had to be written by a man - make that a group of men.
I swear to god that if you timed the sex-and-chicks-with-mammoth-boob scenes, half the episode would be over.
I can live without such cheap thrills. From now on, I'll get my kicks from MasterChef 2. Gotta love the Matt!