|Page 8 of 22:||               |
|Index||213 reviews in total|
The original "I Spit On Your Grave" (aka "Day Of The Woman")and the
original "Last House On The Left" have a lot in common; - They're both
so-called 'video-nasties' from the 70's which were often banned in
several countries. - They have both a brutal, much alike, revenge
story. - Both titles have had a recent remake.
I loved the original movies and I certainly loved the remake of "Last House". A good remake honors the original but has to expand on it. Think of the excellent "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" and "Halloween" remakes. All remakes have something in common: they're way more extreme in graphic violence as their notorious originals. That is also the case with this remake. The story is true to it's original but adds some interesting new elements to surprise the audience who's familiar with the '70's version.
The acting is very well done, the pace is high and the impact of the realistic violence is maximum. The torture- and rape scenes are extreme and hard to sit through. But it's nothing compared to what happens next. But if you don't show it, the movie will be pointless without any impact. I can understand that the Unrated version will go too far for some people. It's certainly not meant for just anyone.
People who hate this movie shouldn't have watched it in the first place. I think the title says enough ! If you're not into horror or violence, than just don't watch it. Unlike the brutal and senseless censorship of the ridiculous MPAA back in the late '80's (Friday the 13th Part VII anyone ?), today anything can be shown on screen. And after 7 Saw movies, people expect the next step. This is it.. Hard to top in the future.
'I Spit on Your Grave' is a remake of the infamous 1978 film of the
same name (or as it was originally titled 'Day of the Woman'). The
original became a cult classic for its brutality and debatable sense of
morality. Of course by the time the 2010 remake came around this type
of film was being released by the dozen every month seemingly and
audiences were pretty numb to the whole concept of revenge/torture by
then. So while it doesn't have the shock element the original had going
for it, this time around it's a much better made film and this is what
we as an audience are being upgraded to. Afterall there has to be a
reason for doing a remake other than simply making money (not that
there always is).
The biggest increase in quality was Sarah Butler in the lead role. She was cast absolutely perfectly. A strong woman who was believable in the role and really did act her butt of the entire film. The rest of the cast, while a little hard to understand at times (we'll put that down to heavy accents), were also very good and hid well the fact this was made on a very tight budget by the sound of things.
I love that these films are discussion raisers. Is she justified in her actions? Even if she was, did she go too far? What comes next? Whatever your point of view is on all these things, it's likely you have a strong one. I read that they didn't cut anything from the film and left it unrated which is a huge thumbs up in my book, and I wish more films would follow in those footsteps. Let's see the film the way the filmmaker intended to tell it. To do anything else on a film like this would have been a crime. Go in expecting a tough watch at times, but also go in expecting a thoroughly good movie.
Heading out into the woods for a relaxing retreat, a writer's encounter
with a group of locals who continually rape and demoralize her lead her
to decide to seek revenge on the group for their actions one-by-one.
Frankly this here turned out to be quite the enjoyable remake with a lot to offer it. What really stands out here is the fact that this one tends to really bring out the central advance and stalking done to her early on in preparation for the main sequence here, not only going through the early meetings in town while she's preparing for the trip up there but her general attitude and behavior while up there. From their spying on her walking around the cabin in her underwear, going out on her jogging runs trying to snap pictures of her in reveal outfits and the flirting attempts done while having them work on the cabin itself all manage to make for quite an unsettling time here in preparation for the most harrowing sequence here in the central rape sequence. Starting off in the night-before with their breaking in and physically abusing her beforehand with their taunting and sexually-demeaning antics, the main course is the truly repulsive and despicable rapes done in the woods as the entire group take turns laughing and filming the whole thing which has an even greater emphasis here on setting up the course of action to come. Not only that, but to lead into the actual revenge here makes this come off even better with these scenes coming off as a cathartic release over what had happened to her, generating plenty of graphic kills and torture here that's appropriate and comes off quite nicely. Naturally, there are some flaws here to be found in something like this, and most of it is certainly found in the set-up and execution of its central premise. The very act itself is certainly something that in principle most people would never feel comfortable viewing even if in brief segments, and to showcase it as this does in as much detail and for as long as it does is certainly tempting the limits out there for some who might not handle such an activity in the first place so focusing on it like it does here might not be very welcome. As well, the fact that it tends to really throw the group into such a despicable light in order to set-up the main revenge theme throughout here does wear a little thin throughout, concentrating more on getting sure her actions are completely justifiable and wholly welcomed that it loses a lot of reality here in making them just a little too out-there in ensuring her coming back for them happens. That does tend to lower this somewhat, but beyond all of this the ability to handle the film's main centerpiece sequence will be what determines this one.
Rated R: Continuous and Brutal Rape scenes with plenty of degradation, demoralization and humiliation of its' main target, Full Graphic Nudity, Extreme Graphic Language, Extreme Graphic Violence, drug use.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
...that is, if you KNOW you have the right rapist, and Jennifer knows
she does. In fact there are five of them. She's out in the middle of
the woods, helpless, and assaulted by four brutes and one mentally
challenged guy, Matthew, that I don't think would have even been there
if not taunted by the other four. One of the five is a sheriff,
possibly making him the worst, because he knows how to simulate being a
decent man, but at his core he is a brute beast. Things escalate past
the point of where these five initially intended things to go with the
girl, turning into torture and gang rape, and they feel they must kill
Jennifer or they will all go to jail. However Jennifer falls into the
river before they can. The sheriff, the default lead because of his
triple digit I.Q., tells another to destroy the videotape they made of
the whole thing (Did these guys never hear of Watergate?). But he
doesn't. He loads a blank tape and keeps the tape of the entire assault
as a souvenir. Crime lesson #1 - Don't ally yourself with stupid
The sheriff has a plan of doubling back along the river until the body is found or surfaces. But it never does. So first these guys turn on each other as their panic level steadily increases. Then as souvenirs from the rape appear - one of Jennifer's sandals, the rope they used, the (a copy of???) the videotape of the rape mailed to the sheriff's house, their panic turns to paranoia. All along four of the five show no remorse, just fear of being caught. They collectively turn on Matthew thinking he must be doing all of this because he is the only one not concerned with being caught and full of remorse.
The four go looking for him, probably to kill him, but they find something else. Watch and find out what they find. Caution if you have hypertension or a bad heart because this film is intense.
There is lots of debate as to whether this is a waste of celluloid or not. I certainly believe the second half of the film is just gore without the first half, and unfortunately incidents like the first half of the film happen all of the time. Google "home invasion rape" and see what floats to the surface. The thing is we the people are tired of this sort of thing. We are tired of rapists being treated with kid gloves. Tired of rape victims being told they need to forgive, go to therapy, write feminist poetry and behave like good little victims. Many people, including me, believe rape is worse than murder because there can be a million explanations - not necessarily excuses - for murder, but there is none for rape other than the rapist being a base brute who wants to take the supreme act of intimacy between two human beings and twist it into an act of cruelty. Almost like murdering someone and then magically bringing them back to life to forever remember their own violent death. Since rape is worse than murder, murder is the least rapists should receive in return.
As long as the U.S. continues to go down the failed path of Europe of believing everybody is redeemable, expect to see more of these films. I think that is why The Walking Dead is so popular. In a world without law, sure, there would be more lawlessness, but at least we would know who the bad guys are and be able to dispense with them quickly. And let me tell you quick justice like in the days of the old west, does give criminals pause. What does not give them pause is the system we have now.
Too late to make a long review short, this movie touches on a couple of interesting ideas. The first is not an idea, it's a reality. Crimes involving multiple offenders are usually much more violent than those involving one because multiple people will meld into one violent whole...until the crime is over and then they turn on each other almost invariably. The second is the idea that what if what/who returns is not Jennifer, but some "angel of revenge" that just takes her physical form since some of the things she does involve almost super human strength or speed? The third idea is...did the last half of the movie happen at all? Maybe it is Jennifer's hallucination as she lays dying on the river bank. There is lots to explore here if you have the stomach for it.
This review comes from someone who has not seen the original, so it
will be reviewed as a stand alone horror movie.
For the past ten years a new sub-genre of horror has emerged, which can be best called "Extreme horror." The "Saw" series unofficially started the genre, roughly ten years ago, then came the "Hostel" series and the Rob Zombie Halloween remakes could also be considered extreme horror. Some of the "Final Destination" movies also fall under the category. They give otherwise sane people a chance to delve into the ultra macabre for ninety minutes to two hours, the way a theme park mega coaster gives a thrill to otherwise safety conscious and down to earth people.
"I spit on your grave" succeeds as the type of entry extreme horror enthusiasts will enjoy. The movie was impeccably cast and the acting is first rate. Sarah Butler as Jennifer Hills projects the right amounts of beauty, innocence, and vulnerability that help make the rape scenes especially harrowing. Lots of thought was given to the character and look of her rapists. They all have separate and distinct personalities and they all perform various "jobs" during the rapes.
The revenge Jennifer enacts on all her rapists is shriek worthy and probably got cheers in crowded theaters. Without giving too much away, a can of lye is shown early on in the movie and it turns out to be a deft foreshadowing of one of the revenge plots. All of the rapists receive wickedly horrible retribution that's painful to watch.
As many other reviewers have pointed out, the movie falls short from a plot standpoint. Again, without giving too much away, would it have helped matters to show how Jennifer recovered and later, how she was able to overcome guys twice her size in some cases and maneuver them into the torture contraptions? To flesh out those details would have resulted in a different kind of movie. Some scenes show her looking ghostly in the revenge scenes, so maybe that would explain the supernatural powers.
Is it great cinema or even a great horror movie? No. It is, however a well-done and satisfying entry in the extreme horror genre and a better- than-average horror remake.
I want to make clear that I have not seen the original movie only this
one.Maybe it's better cause I can review this film without being
Well this movie I think is pretty good and gets the point right.A woman that gets raped and gets revenge on the guys that raped her.The major flaw of this movie is that we never get to learn how she survives after she escapes from the rapists.But then again this movie isn't about survival.It's about what a monster you may become after something like that happens to you.This woman has nothing else on her mind than taking revenge and only that.It's perfect for this reason.Wastes no time on anything else than it's point.
Overall it's nice to watch to get the message about how horrible rape can be for a woman.I rated this movie 6 out of 10 and only reason is too many flaws which could be missing either with better directing or just a few more about her survival skills.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I think I should give the movie some points for being different and
making you conflicted about what you see.
This is is subjective, but for me personally violence against the protagonist in the beginning seems like nothing compared to her surreal revenge. So it elicits very mixed feelings in you, you almost start to sympathize with the villains in the second half of the movie.
The biggest problem for me is I didn't find the protagonist's transformation believable.
She becomes some kind of slasher sadist, sure it is only toward people who wronged her, but still I don't get how such character could change so much. From the way she is portrayed in the beginning I would expect some other kind of transformation after a traumatic event. I would at least expect to see more conflicted emotions and less comfort while torturing people from a character, who is not a serial killer with 30 years of experience but just a friendly girl next door.
Maybe the director didn't sell the transformation enough (I won't blame the actress, she seems to be quite good if you look at the scenes by themselves), or maybe it can't be sold.
Anyway, for me the protagonists becomes a completely different character after the traumatic event.
The violence is quite hardcore, I was surprised. I've seen most of the modern gory horror and felt comfortable with it, but some scenes in this film were too much for me, I even activated "chick vision" and couldn't look at the screen, which was very surprising and probably deserves some points, but also makes it harder to objectively judge this film.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I haven't seen the original and I'm not that much into modern "horror"
movies. I decided to give this a chance anyway, because this had such a
good score and it was on in the movie channel. I was prepared to stop
watching at some point, because lately I've found so many "horror"
movies to go into the "torture porn" territory that I don't want to
The ratings weren't really wrong, this was a pretty good movie compared to quite a few I've seen. I'm just not 100 % sure I'm giving it credit for the same reasons as everyone else. Reading the reviews here it seems as if most think the revenge part is what makes this movie. I on the other hand think the finale, or the last act, was a let down.
Two thirds of this movie is quite good. What makes this movie special in my eyes, is that the so called bad guys are given proper screen time, actually even more than the woman. After the bad guys have done what they did, the focus turns to them completely. How do they get away with it? You see the story evolve from their perspective. Despite the fact that there is a prolonged rape scene and some seriously disturbing gore images, the most striking scene is probably when the sheriff goes home for the first time. You realize he has a lovely daughter, a pregnant wife and a cozy home and since the acting is really good thru out, you really feel it.
Did the "baddies" just get carried away or are they complete psychos, this is something that the movie couldn't necessarily take it's side with. It portrays the bad guys as both, on the other hand they are harmless slackers and a seemingly respectable family man, but on the other hand they are capable of horrible deeds. You don't really know if they had a history of violence and abuse, at least it wasn't emphasized.
I just watched a Swedish movie Jägarna 2, which deals with a similar theme. Rural cop is put between backing up his local boys and big city copper defending the law. It also had the local sheriff being involved in a horrific event with a girl. This movie wasn't a horror movie, it was a crime thriller drama. I Spit On Your Grave could've been similar strong on drama and not so strong on gore and shock factor.
The finale put me off, it's horrible stuff and somewhat waters down the rest of the rather good movie. You get your revenge, cheap revenge by horrific gore and disturbing images, those which some call "imaginative death scenes" in horror movie jargon. I decided not to watch them all, but rather covered the screen at times, I could say what was going on, but didn't like watching .. at all.
Nobody here is better than the other, there's no winners in this movie.
I have to say that watching this newer, grimmer remake made me
appreciate the humanity that informed the original film, flawed though
that was. In the '78 version we had a heroine who was defiled yet not
destroyed, a protagonist who reasserts her autonomy, and femininity,
and, yes, humanity by taking revenge over her id-driven attackers. Here
we have an innocent, naive girl, effectively eradicated by a more
menacing, calculating crew of assailants, returning as something of a
wraith (complete with visual nods to The Ring) to drag her rapists to
Hell with her.
Far from regaining her autonomy, femininity, and humanity, this 2010 version of Jennifer Hills re-emerges from her ordeal as half-spectre, half-Frankenstein's gestalt, poetically mirroring the calculated cruelty and sadism of her torturers. Her victims being utterly reprehensible fu cks, the fitting punishments she inflicts on them prove both amusing and satisfying to watch; yet that haunting, final shot of her, staring blank-eyed at the camera, hammers home her reduction to a patchwork of a person, effectively recreated in the image of the same elements she set out to destroy. (A more cynical take on feminism, I wonder?) In short, this remake is a case of 'same song, different tenor' in more than just aesthetics. I recommend watching it side-by-side with the original to truly appreciate the contrasts.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
When the original I Spit On Your Grave came out in 1978, it was so graphic and violent that it was banned from theaters and television. 32 years later and the remake is ten times as horrific and much more interesting. They'd planned to release this one in theaters but due to its NC-17 rating, they decided to go with the unrated direct-to-video method. This brutal and horrific story is about a writer who goes to a cabin in the woods to write her next book, when she becomes the victim of a horrible crime. She survives, but decided it's not justice she wants, it's revenge. I loved this film, because it's something that could actually happen, and when it's a realistic film, no matter how graphic, I find it to be that much more terrifying. If you have a weak stomach, avoid this one, because when I say it's graphic, it is ridiculously so! There is no way they ever would have been able to trim this down to an R rating for theaters, it's that brutal. Personally, I love films like this, the more graphic and realistic, the better, however many others don't agree and most critics claim the film made them physically ill. My suggestion, check it out and decide for yourself!
|Page 8 of 22:||               |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||External reviews||Parents Guide|
|Plot keywords||Main details||Your user reviews|
|Your vote history|