My wife and I look at the overall point of the film (or TV show) rather than certain objectionable content within the film. For example, one of my favorite recent movies is Gran Torino, with Clint Eastwood. Now, the movie is filled with profanity and racial slurs, but anyone who has seen the film knows its moral is anything but racist, and Eastwood's character is simply a mean guy with a bad mouth - he's not to be praised so much as pitied.
I could have avoided the film because of the language, but I hear as bad or worse walking down the streets of Manhattan going to the theater. Should I missed out on a moving film simply because the language is what I hear on the street every single day? I didn't pay to hear the language, I paid to see a great movie with a touching story - the language was incidental.
The same applies to any other objectionable content, in my opinion. This where conscience and Christian liberty come into play in many cases. Should we not read Hamlet because of the violence and sexual innuendo? Or Crime and Punishment because it features an ax murder and a prostitute? Or C.S. Lewis' Till We Have Faces because of the fornication (not explicit) and violence? We would be missing out on a lot of God-given talent and edifying art if we skipped on everything with an iota of objectionable content. I don't know that there's an absolute place where we draw the line - I suppose it's up to the individual to decide.
Mason makes some good points here - though I haven't seen Gran Torino. But I think you could make a similar point with Changeling. There is a scene in that movie it would be nice to perpetually forget. But while the horror there may be too much for some (and I mean no disrespect by that; some people are more sensitive to certain things than others), I am not sorry I saw it, any more than I'm sorry that I read reports about a man who killed his wife and son, or about a German cannibal. While we need to be careful about tolerating moral ugliness on the grounds that it's "authentic" or "artistic" or "profound" or whatever (because we have an appetite for certain kinds of moral ugliness already, and because new appetites can be cultivated), we also need to remember that telling a tale that involves moral ugliness is not necessarily a morally ugly thing to do.