Baise-moi (2000) User Reviews

a sexual and violent experience....but a very nice one

[jeroenberndsen1 · 4/10 · 14 September 2003]

Maybe it's because I live in Holland and have a very open mind to sex, drugs and well, maybe not to murder but I was not that shocked.

Of course the rape scene was a bit hard and did not leave much to your imagination, but the rest.... Me and my girlfriend were just entertained by the rest of the movie.

I just read some other 20 user comments and I was in fact shocked by those. Prudish americans and british telling you that it is shocking and garbage and so on. A 5.0 average makes also clear that most of the people are still filled with tabboos.

Big erections and mindless sex.... so what? shooting people up there arse? surely I'd prefer that compared to what happens to the guy that rapes marsellus wallace in Pulp Fiction.

Indeed this was a low budget movie and the camerawork was perhaps of poor quality but it suits the pic. As a student indeed a search for reasons and meaning and I find it hihgly irritating that some people complain about things left unexplained. What are you? Can't you think and maybe even guess for yourselves? Does everything have to be explained?

We both liked it and surely I understand this is not a movie for everyone. I think more of it as an experimental piece of work, seek your own reasons for what they are doing, enjoy this wild ride and if you persist in having a monumentuous storyline, oscar performances and so on, and you are not specifically entertained by x rated sex, lots of blood and the socalled 'holes' in this story then....

Just don't watch this movie!!!!

The backside of the DVD or VHS gives plenty of clues that this is a controversial movie and when you have an open mind and like these kind of movies, i recommend it.

We give it a 7.0

Coarse and Crude: the Film as Well as Its Subjects

[RJBose · 3/10 · 25 July 2001]

I first saw a poster advertising this film on a street in Helsinki, Finland in June of 2000. What caught my attention was the proud proclamation advising all readers that the movie, although itself French, had been "Banned in France". Upon returning home to New York, I discovered that one of the "Art House" movie theaters in the City was screening the film, and so (with my Finnish fiancee) decided to see what all the fuss was about. Boy, did we ever.

From the comments read here, and the reviews I knew the movie was violent and sexually explicit. Not necessarily offended by either of these two conditions, I went with an open mind to see what had perturbed the sensibilities of our Gallic cousins. Presumably, as anyone who is reading this will know, the story involves two women who embark on a crime and murder spree in France (the movie has English subtitles). The resemblance to "Thelma and Louise" however, ends with that; the sex is unusually graphic (and in copious supply) as is the violence (a lot of stomping to death, and a lot of blood and other organic matter splattering after bullet impact).

On an intellectual level, one could make the case that the film's very essence is the relationship of sex and violence (as manifested by the only sex these women know: one is a small-time prostitute, and the other has earned money from time to time by performing in pornographic films. When they, during their descent into crime and murder, have the upper hand over their sexual situations, they react only with the same violence and brutality that they themselves know and understand. It is important to note, however, that the victims of their rampage are not only creepy men interested in creepy sex, (of which there are several)but innocent passersby, a woman at an ATM, for example, as well.

I myself do not really understand why the repeated "porn-movie" shots were all that necessary, (except to depict the physical contact as cruel, unpassionate and debased) and the unrelenting gore did get rather tedious after the first few violent spasms.

It is a coarse and crude movie, but in fairness, it is dealing with coarse and crude people and equally unpleasant circumstances. From one point of view, the lives of the French underclasses is explored, and it's pretty grim; a travelogue for France it definitely is not- perhaps that's why the French banned it.

Simply not very good.

[El_Farmerino_Esq · 5/10 · 8 June 2006]

Amidst all the controversy about the porno-style sex scenes, random acts of violence, liberal depictions of drug use and so on it seems the central question has been lost - is Baise-moi actually any good? Well, the answer is "No - not really."

It starts well enough, nicely setting up the two main characters with some very well-acted, almost documentary-like scenes. Well, I say nicely - the word seems hardly appropriate when these scenes include Manu and another woman suffering a genuinely harrowing rape while Karen prostitutes herself, along with a liberal smattering of general sex, violence and substance abuse. Nevertheless, the opening is well-played out and directed with surprising flair (especially considering that this is the debut movie for both its directors).

However, when the plot kicks in proper and the two women end up on the run together the film's interest begins to drop fast. Oddly, the further out of control the two protagonists get the less exciting the story is - it gradually becomes a mere retread of countless other low-grade revenge/exploitation movies, simply with a slightly more porno feel. By the denouement, to be brutally honest, I was bored stiff (a stiffness which is nothing to do with the pornographic element of the movie, I assure you).

One of the main problems is the inherent lack of any kind of point. The beginning of the movie seems to be setting the film up as an analysis of our responses to violence - of how an upbringing in a cruel and violent environment can manifest those tendencies in ourselves - and also as a commentary on the parallels and links between violence and the act of fornication. However, it completely fails to deliver on either of these promises in the second and third acts and, increasingly, one gets the feeling the film's only reason for being is that it thinks it is cool. Unfortunately for Baise-moi, it isn't. It's a wasted opportunity. It's only real use is as a shock tactic, but even this is wasted on anyone who's seen a porn film - the violence side of it is no worse than is seen in any number of straight-to-video action/thriller flicks.

Ultimately, all there is to recommend Baise-moi is a couple of impressive acting performances, a few amusing lines of dialogue and a thought-provoking 20 minutes at the start. The rest, sadly, is nothing to get excited about.

Definitely not for everyone

[Reggie_Charan · 3 November 2003]

Don't be swayed by all the negative comments, Baise Moi is a worthwhile film. Yes the sex is explicit, and much of the violence simply pointless, but underneath it all remains a compelling vision of two people on a road trip to hell. Both leads may come from porn, but their acting skills are totally credible. One of the most nihilistic movies ever made.

"Requiem" for a Pornstar.

[armando_mariani · 4/10 · 7 February 2005]

I've seen "Baise-Moi" on DVD several weeks ago. The movie made also a short run in Adult Theaters here in México City as "Viólame!" but I don't think it scored high. I enjoy a "pretty strong stomach" and, with the years passing by, I became more open-minded and tolerant (thank God something good comes also with the aging process...). The movie contains a graphic rape sequence, a few more explicit sex scenes and "tons" of gore and violence, without being able to deliver a message. Perhaps it was supposed to be just a provocative movie but, the violence in particular, remains almost unexplained and gratuitous and, therefore, it can only be considered pure exploitation. Graphic depiction of violence and sex in movies absolutely don't offend me (on the contrary, if well done and essential to the plot, I surely like it), but I wasn't very impressed by this one. I mostly agreed with the comment posted on IMDb so, I didn't feel any interests in posting another comment, since there was not much else I could say. However, last week, I heard on the radio, while listening to a variety program which deals with music and movies, that on January 28th, Karen Lancaume aka Karen Bach, "Nadine", one of the two main characters of this movie, took her own life at age 31. A suicide news note is always a sad note but the suicide of a person who has gained certain notoriety, usually (and unfortunately) stirs-up a process of exploitation based on bad publicity and I wouldn't be surprised at all, if the movie would make another run in theaters and the sales of the DVD would benefit of an important boost. How sad! Poor "exploited" Karen; she surely was a pretty lady and perhaps even a fine person but, at age 31, in spite of being still a young woman, she already passed "prime-time" which for an "Adult Movie Star" (that's what she was whit 28 porn-vids and one main-stream movie, also classified as porn, in her résumé), is just about around that age. The porn industry system is allegedly very cruel and burns-up those girls, who decide to go for it, very quickly. The competition of new young "hungry" starlets perhaps became unbeatable and unbearable for her or else... We shall never know why she did it; we can only guess she was profoundly unhappy and severely depressed. I wish (and I hope I'm not the only one), she has now finally found the peace and happiness she couldn't find in life. Karen: "REQUIESCAT IN PACEM"!

Unpleasant, unnecessary.

[limette · 1/10 · 30 April 2005]

This is one of the rare movies that I did not immediately discuss with my friends after watching it. This wasn't because it had particularly entranced or impressed me. The contrary, it had given me nothing at all.

Why? Because somehow, everything was so much overdone that I couldn't take this film seriously anymore. There was so much sex and violence that I got the strong impression that the film was trying very, very hard to be offensive, as if it was aiming at superlatives in ugliness, rather than in telling a convincing tale about two women caught in a spiral of crime.

Baise-moi had been described as "Thelma & Louise with actual sex" to me. Well, it is true that the main idea is similar. There are two women traveling through the country because they've committed crimes and know that their lives are finished now, that the police are going to catch them, and they decide that now that everything's over anyway, there is no way to hold back.

Baise-moi had been described as a feminist film where women, who had suffered from male dominance in the past, exact revenge upon the men that they encounter.

This is something that I had never interpreted into this film, simply because none of these women had ever been innocent, and because they do not just kill irresponsible, violent men, but also men that they seduce themselves, men that show the sense of wanting to do protected sex. And they kill women. No, they are in no way better than the characters that they encounter and murder in hideous, brutal ways.

How easily the "heroines" decide to murder, and how much pleasure they take in it, made it absolutely impossible for me to relate to them in any way, or even take them seriously. It was just all too much. Too much sex, too much violence. I got the feeling that sex and violence were only there in order to create a superlative in ugliness, rather than in conveying a story, or making a point.

Baise-moi left me with no impression, hadn't set me thinking, because it was so far removed from any real world. So constructed, unrealistic and over the top.

There was nothing that I could do with this film, there was simply nothing about it to think about, other than "Why did they make this terrible film?" Had the intense unpleasantness going on in this film, served a purpose, I'd easily accepted it. But since I found nothing, since the film's story appeared to be not more than an excuse to squeeze as much and as ugly sex as possible into one film... I filed it away under "unnecessary torture", decided to never ever, EVER, watch this film again, and I now consider this to be the worst film I've ever seen.

Worst, not just because it really isn't my cup of tea to watch people get raped, rape, have sex in other forms and kill one another... but because whatever it was that the makers wanted to tell the world with their film... if they wanted to say anything at all... it just didn't work. And there's nothing else that could save this film, because it's also filmed in such an ugly style.

A new benchmark... in bad movies.

[Sir Didymus · 1/10 · 2 May 2003]

I've just had the misfortune of sitting through this film. That it's title translates into 'F*** Me' in English was hardly promising - but I tried to keep an open mind throughout.

Within minutes - I was left baffled by a plot that barely makes sense, acting that makes daytime tv soap operas look like Oscar material, and some of the worst directing I've ever seen.

The violence within the film is highly graphic, but nothing particularly terrible. There's much worse in several critically acclaimed films that I really enjoyed - so that in itself isn't a problem for me. What is a problem is that the film's protagonists have no reason for doing what they do - other than their graphic rape at the beginning. If this film can be compared to 'Thelma & Louise' in any way, its that Themla and Louise were both likeable people who ended up in a bad situation they couldn't escape from. The leads in this film are not exactly likeable at the start of the picture, let alone when they go on a killing spree murdering anyone and everyone that gets in their way.

The rape sequence is very graphic - and certainly more realistic than your average Hollywood attempts. But there is no real explanation as to why it causes the characters to lose control - it just does. Obviously, rape is a tramuatic experience - but this film seems to just trivilise their order in an attempt to score cheap 'shock points'.

The explicit nature continues with sex scene after sex scene. Blow jobs, sex from both front and behind, standing up, lying down, on all fours - whatever your dirty favourite - chances are its in here... and seemingly for little reason other than titilation.

Chances of the film being saved by feminist undertones are not taken. Thelma and Louise took revenge on the kind of men who raped them, this women just kill whoever they feel like. Not even 'Ms 45' killed everyone she could - only men who she had an understandable fear of following her ordeal.

Certainly not a film for the faint of heart, I thought I could stomach almost anything - but watching them murder yet another person unjustly whilst having sex with yet another person who they later murder - it all became a bit too much. I didn't so much find it shocking, as entirely boring after a while. That the potentially enjoyable scenes were scuppered by violence seconds before they could've gotten interesting didn't help either!

To conclude - I learned nothing from this film. It's appalling direction and somewhat hammy subtitles (in English, possibly identical to the French - but I couldn't tell you for certain), as well as some dreadful acting from its leads... and worst of all - a jumpy nature that effectively ruined every murder - simply left me unable to find any merits within this picture. I may have seen a worse film... but I'd be hard pressed to name one!

Avoid like the plague!

useful perhaps in looking at the issues it raises

[Chris_Docker · 7/10 · 23 September 2007]

I'm not exactly a Francophile. I love the cooking but hate the restaurants. French is one of the great languages of the world, but I find the French attitude to it xenophobic. Yet there is one thing that always stirs my passion. I admire them for it. I wish we had an ounce of it in Britain.

The best known examples of course are the film protests in 1968 – a time when everyone was protesting about everything. But they helped, indirectly, to restore the international prestige of French cinema. When Baise-Moi was banned shortly after release in 2000, there were spontaneous street protests. Now this is a bit different – the film's artistic merits or lack of them are still a matter of debate. But I take my hats off to the French. I would love to see the British protest in the name of cinematic freedom. (The ban was eventually lifted after separate protests signed by Parisian intellectuals.)

As you will already have guessed, the issues around this film are complicated. And they get worse. There is a tendency to react emotively to any highly charged sexual issues. This tendency can maybe blind us somewhat when it comes to analysing more important ones.

This is a film made by women, about women living on the fringes of society. I was once importunate enough to argue with acclaimed filmmaker Gaspar Noé (after a public screening of Irreversible) that his film didn't address the issue of rape as well as Baise Moi. I still believe that, although Irreversible is a landmark film for other reasons entirely. Most films about rape follow male-orientated story lines. They often emphasise the purely physical, violence-aspect (as in Irreversible) or have a strong woman seeking and finding redress (as in The Accused). The reality is that most rape victims are traumatised mentally and emotionally. Physical hurt as a result of violence is no less an issue, but a separate one. Although The Accused looks at some of the metal trauma, it ultimately plays out as a success story. Few rape victims take on such a masculinised determination to succeed against the odds. Odds which are still stacked against the victim.

What I liked about Baise-Moi is that it eschews the woman-survivor scenario for a more realistic picture of lasting psychological damage. Films that show the real horror of rape may discourage it more than ones that show women 'getting over it.' One of the victims of rape in Baise-Moi actually 'lets' her assailants get on with it, commenting to her friend afterwards that at least they didn't wind up dead. The rape (and the violence) of Baise-Moi convinced me that she probably hedged her bets wisely. Her lack of struggle didn't, in my mind, make her any the less a victim. And neither did the unpleasant fact that she was a part-time prostitute make her any more 'deserving.' This is something that it is not easy to live with. As a society, we have moved past the point where a girl in a short skirt acting flirtatiously (The Accused) is 'asking for it' or 'deserving of rape.' But where is our cut-off point? The marginals in society are often seen as dispensable. No-one wants to acknowledge them – least of all mainstream filmmakers. Yet they can be just as much victims.

Another thing I like about Baise-Moi is that the two girls that form a bond and go on a road trip are fully developed as characters. Like most young women, they enjoy having a good time and going after boys. But they have been mentally scarred. One of them has been brutally gang-raped and the other has watched her only friend being killed. They are not 'good girls gone bad'. They are fairly 'bad' already. But they are still victims. Beneath their bravado their mental deterioration is apparent. In Black Snake Moan, the horrific effects of a redneck woman's history of sexual abuse and rape are given some time through Christina Ricci's great acting, but the plot is driven by male characters towards a stupid and not very believable conclusion. In Baise-Moi, it is the trauma that the women went through that drives the plot. (Sadly one of the main actresses, Karen Bach committed suicide in 2005.) The film is arguably weakened by a change of style. The initial scenes are very realistic, including the horrific rape. But then the main protagonists go on a killing spree reminiscent of Natural Born Killers on trash aesthetic. Perhaps this is appropriate – they live in la-la land as long as they can. But it will confuse some viewers.

"To reclaim women's rights over their true sexuality, to seize it back from the male gaze. It's always men who have a problem with a woman's sex: that's their problem, not ours." A noble aim by the filmmakers. But will feminists baulk when they realise that one of the directors and two of the stars have previously worked in hard-core pornography? "There's no logical reason why sex scenes should only be in porn," says Trinh Thi. Indeed, Hollywood agrees. I am sure there are convincing psychological arguments, but realistic sex still upsets many audiences (personally I have more of a problem with overly-realistic violence).

This analysis has outstayed its welcome. I have laboured the good points of the film and rated it accordingly. On a technical level, the idea of using only natural lighting also works well. But apart from its stand against censorship and the way it deals with rape, the film is lacking in many respects. It was made on a very small budget and it shows. The acting is acceptable but not much is demanded from actors in terms of interiorisation and so on. There's a good soundtrack. But the main reason to see the film may probably be to argue over the issues it raises.

Who said porn stars can't make a film

[dolarhydecb · 1/10 · 29 April 2006]

Interestingly enough, THEY CAN'T.

This movie tried it's best to rank with other video-nasties. In remembrance of Thriller-A Cruel Picture mixed with the plot of Thelma and Louise, this movie fails to offer any original style at all. Many women state that men can't openly watch this film and that men are closed minded to films like this. Others conclude people don't like this film because it's too explicit. Well let me be the first to say that, unlike the film makers, most human beings are intelligent people, specifically those commenting on this board(other than those that even consider this movie worthwhile). If you don't like explicit material, than most people naturally don't watch it. And if you are new to the genre, you're probably not starting with this film. Therefore we can conclude logically that most people seeing this film have experience with films by Lucio Fulci, Pier Paolo Pasolini, Gasper Noe, Alejandro Jodorosky... The difference, however between the above filmmakers and the makers of this film is that they offer intelligent, thought-out pieces that often work as metaphors of particular events. To say that this film is a metaphor of the way women feel towards a male dominated society is just ignorant.

Some people say this film does not have a story, unfortunately this is not true. The film does have a story, a very simple revenge story that seemed to be written by aggrevated 8th graders. The directing in the film is insulting and it insults the other great film makers who spend long hours writing brilliant allegories and then translating through the film medium. This film, if anything, resembles that of a Troma film with explicit sex. The movie is almost laughably bad, trying to achieve a high status through publicity. The violence is, however, well done, and that does give the film some merits. But the inclusion of completely unthought sexual scenes ruins this immediately. It's not like people watching this film have not seen the act of sex before.

When a movie goer goes to see a film, specifically one calling itself an art film, they expect to see fresh, thought-provoking material. What we have here is a mess. Unfortunately this movie clarifies that not everyone can make movies. Women who like this film and argue it to be revolutionary are missing the fact that there are good writer/directors out there that touch on women rights much more thoughtfully. Apparently this film is supposed to deliver some sort of message, but in order to voice such a message, you must first demonstrate a level of respectable intelligence that would allow a viewer to value the opinion of the writer/director. This film never comes close to accomplishing any level of respect and clearly the filmmakers lack any knowledge AT ALL in film-making(Other than the effects). If you're going to make a film that is controversial with a message be inventive with your film making, be inventive with your story line, be inventive with your characters, be inventive with your camera shots. DO NOT THINK THAT JUST BECAUSE YOU SHOW TWO PEOPLE REALLY HAVING SEX THAT YOUR FILM DESERVES RESPECT. The message in this film is so ineffectively delivered that I think I have scene porn films that offer more insight into life than this film.

Anyways, the only reason I felt compelled to comment on this film is due to the lack of people intelligently commenting on this film as a film. Nobody wants to hear that this film is bad because of the explicit nature and nobody wants to hear it is good on that account either. The moral of the story here is, just because of a film is cutting edge doesn't make it good. Hey look at Island of Death for example, that film was banned all over the place. Or even Cannibal Ferox, which offers nothing but gore. The only problem is, those films are designed to shock and entertain through the shocks, this movie tries to offer a deep message embeded in worthless shocks, just like IOD and CF. What this film is is a PORNO made by ACTRESSES IN THE PORN INDUSTRY with BLOOD, no more, no less. Anymore analysis gives the writers too much credit in life. Pretty much they picked up a camera one day and said, instead of just having sex today, lets simulate rape and call it art. WHO DOES THAT?

My review (contains spoilers):

[SanderStrijbos · 6/10 · 22 May 2002]

Controversial. Explicit. Uncut. All true? Big yes. But does it live up the hype? I rented the tape in the same week as it was banned in Australia and for the same reasons the people there went to see it, I rented it: I just wanted to know what kinda film created all the buzz.

Two women kill - separately - two people and they decide to run. They meet at the train station and find out there are no trains going anywhere at that time of the night. They go together with a car and leave a trail of destruction behind them.

Combine this with explicit sex (even porn), lots of ultra violence and you've got a clear picture of Baise-Moi. The most controversial thing about this film are the sex-scenes, which are - at times - hardcore. I admire the fact the makers had the guts to film them and even let it pass in the editing room, but I have a suspicious feeling they did it just for the effect.

The violence is also explicit and sometimes gory. But ladies, nouvelle violence died about seven years ago. They also discuss the fact they should say something cool whenever they kill people. But somehow they never manage to really say anything important, to make a statement. Okay, they are both on the run and one of them was raped earlier in the film, but they never give a clear motivation for the killing. Is it they want to have revenge on "all the men"? Well, later in the film, in a sex-club, they also kill women.

If you look beside the controversy you can see that this could be a good movie, an evil Thelma and Louise, but the makers are too much focused on the sex and the violence and that makes it nothing more than an exploitation flick. The ending was good, though.

tries to impress

[dragokin · 2/10 · 19 May 2013]

If you like non-mainstream cinema, this might be interesting for you, since it is a crossbreed of crime thriller and porn. The issue, however, is not the movie itself, but ridiculous attempts to portray it as socio-political commentary. The country of origin is France and has a long artistic and revolutionary tradition, which made this movie suitable for such kind of promotion.

As far as philosophy and broader context are concerned, there is only one question about this movie: Is there artistic merit in non-simulated sex and violence scenes. With affirmative answer, we imply that in the future even the Hollywood blockbusters should prepare the actors for new artistic challenges. Presumably this would make porn industry obsolete by integrating it in mainstream movie making. I guess i should stop daydreaming here...

This is a raw movie or, as the trailer put it, "the most extreme thriller you'll ever see legally".

No Closing Your Eyes to Society's Injustice

[Nodriesrespect · 8/10 · 28 September 2007]

Why are people so outraged by BAISE-MOI (which literally means F**K ME, the English language title is a travesty) ? Is it because of the explicit sex (far more fleeting than that shown in any porno tape freely available at most corner video shops), the stylized ultra-violence or the combination of the two ? Unlike some films, this one doesn't in any way glorify violence though, it merely shows the sad inevitability of it as far as its two main characters are concerned.

Both Nadine (Karen Lancaume aka Karen Bach) and Manu (Raffaella Anderson) routinely endure violation both in word and deed on an almost daily basis as sex workers, prostitute and part-time porno performer respectively. The gang rape of Manu and her drug-addicted friend shown here is totally different from the clichéd they-may-protest-at-first type of rape scene encountered in some adults only features. While the other girl cries and screams throughout (and is ever more horribly abused because of it), Manu adopts a facade of indifferent resignation, cleverly robbing her rapists of their sadistic thrill. Rest assured that the scene goes on a lot longer than anyone would want it to and that it is very painful to watch, which is the whole point of it.

When Manu and Nadine meet and embark on their violent road trip, fully aware that they ultimately can't 'get away with it', sex becomes a source of liberation to them. Like so many guys on the lam in any criminal buddy movie you can think of, they take what they want, when and how they want it, casually discarding (not always violently) their casual partners post-orgasm. One of the most common accusations at porn's address is that the explicit sex scenes dehumanize the people performing them, but here that could not be further from the truth.

Former hardcore actresses Lancaume and Anderson are both terrific in their parts and the sex they have (and, yes, it is 'real' sex) enhances their characterizations, rendering them more complete. The 'cinema vérité' rawness of the digital video format in which it was shot, interrupted by sudden flashes of style when violence erupts (an artistic decision to give the viewer a feel for the power and pleasure the women derive from their acts as an escape route from their drab lives), draws the viewer uncomfortably close to the action. Again, that seems to be the point.

So don't let the negative publicity fool you. BAISE-MOI is a rare film that utterly achieves what it sets out to do and it bodes well for debut cinéastes Despentes (author of the sulfurous source novel) and ex-porn star Coralie. You may love it (as I obviously did) or you may hate it, but this is an important film that no one is likely to ever forget, no matter how hard they might try.

Could have been better if it were a Tv/web Series

[srinoyslash · 6/10 · 7 August 2019]

The biggest problem of this film was it's short 1 hour 30 minutes time which possibly couldn't cover all the themes involving : class struggle, platonic friendship, class based violence, hostility of lower strata of society towards the middle class who are wrongly held responsible for all their miseries, Vigilantism and most importantly how violent psychopath serial killers are created, that this film wanted to explore . The film is about two Psychopaths , Nadine and Manu , who are going on a downward morale spiral. Set in the era of late 90s , the era of New French Extremity, both the protagonists a part time hooker Nadine and a part time B grade film actress Manu belongs to the lower strata of the economic class who are often subjected to sexual violence or humilition. Battered and bruised by the injustices of the world, both a found a comrade in each other. The film explores then how from weak victims, these women becomes the perpatrators of all those crimes themselves; a concept which requires at least an 8 episode 1 hour run showtime. The excellent performance Karen Lancuame ( Nadine in movie) was marred by by quick cut edits and sloppy cinematography . The film does features some graphic scenes , but isn't as bad as projected by media. The film can certainly be refined and remade in future because the script had a lot of potential . Due to its short run time , the film fails to evoke genuine emotions from the viewers for its two lead females. Though the pacing of the film was good , the wide spectrum of themes and sub themes needed a really expert director to turn it into an art.

Disappointed...

[Captain_Couth · 2/10 · 30 September 2003]

I was very disappointed with this movie. The "movie" was nothing more than an over-hyped porno flick. Baise-Moi had potential but the filmmakers frittered it away, focusing on boring porno set pieces that had no real pay off. The gore effects weren't very good and the direction and pace of the movie were tepid at best. With a lack of a theme and the feeling of a"padded running time", I was very frustrated and unimpressed with the end results. The only reason I've kept this movie in my collection is the novelty of owning it. Other than that, don't waste your time, effort and money trying to obtain a copy. Stick with I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE.

No redeeming qualities, F.

A thought provoking shocker...

[murphmeister75 · 13 January 2004]

I've read a lot of the comments for this movie and think that many of you have missed the point. The directors claim this to be a movie about friendship - and that the bonds of that relationship have nothing to do with the circumstances from which they are born. I'm somewhat sceptical about that. If you just wanted to make a movie about friendship, it could be about nuns. Or puppies. Or just about anything. But Baise-moi (which translates as Shag Me, not F**k Me) serves to highlight very clearly the moral hypocrisy that surrounds cinema, and has done ever since the days of the Hayes Code. The irony here lies in the fact that it is the explicit sex that caused the film to be banned in so many territories. No one has a problem with the violence. Sure, the violence might be simulated, and the sex isn't - but they both occupy the same space on the screen. And while it's legal to have sex in the privacy of your home, the violence depicted could never be legal. After all, you can see worse violence in Freddy vs. Jason, and more explicit sex on any porn video you might choose, so what is it about the combination that riles people so? I'll concede that the film is flawed, and demonstrates the debutant directors lack of experience, but for the challenge it sets to our jaded set of morals in the west, it should be applauded.

Puh-lease

[SheBear · 1/10 · 17 May 2004]

Made by juveniles. Made for juveniles. A one trick pony of graphic sex and violence for its own sake.

Not shocking, just stupid.

Not worth the time I've spent to type this, actually.

Oooops. I've been told to add six more lines to my review. More time wasted on this shlock. Ok, here goes.... The actresses are ugly and untalented. The film is amateurish and pointless and everyone involved is in need of psychiatric counseling as they have obvious anger and exhibitionism issues.

Is that enough?

Unbelievably bad

[Antagonisten · 2/10 · 31 January 2005]

When i first heard of this movie it sounded like it was a protest against the exploitation of women and of the sexualisation of society. Why this would require explicit sexual scenes was beyond me, but since such things have been done before in a way that was not a total catastrophe (thinking mostly of Irréversible) i decided to give it a chance.

I found this movie to be utter garbage. First of all it's not a protest against exploitation, it IS exploitation. Second the movie lacks all kinds of production values. Rather it looks like what it is, like cheap porn. The violence is explicit and unnecessary. The plot is a joke and the acting bad beyond words. But i guess that is what you get when you make a movie like this one, a movie that requires porn actors in most parts. The point of the movie, if there ever was one, disappears somewhere in the beginning never to be seen again.

Personally i find this trend of more and more sexually explicit movies to be tiring more than anything. It contributes nothing to the development of the media and it's most of all just boring and silly to watch. If i want to watch people have sex there is porn available. And if a movie has something to say, it's always managed to say that without using full frontal nudity and explicit sex scenes before. Are directors so depraved of inspiration that they have to use cheap shock-effects like explicit sex-scenes? In that case i think they should rather reevaluate their career than continue to make garbage like this movie.

Waste of time

[vandelaygoods · 1/10 · 11 June 2005]

The most overrated, and under-delivering movie that I have seen. If gratuitous violence, and bland character development is OK by you, then this is great.

Boring, predictable delivery.

The film could have been so much more, but the producers have obviously gone for shock value over quality.

If only the director had focused on the real problems facing those in the movie, instead of glorifying pure hatred, then the film would have broken some real ground.

Poor cinema, poor movie making........

Unless you are French speaking, and very open to "art" type movies, this movie will be a joke.

Bravo, Bravo!

[rjcook47 · 7/10 · 16 October 2005]

I wasn't fortunate enough to find this film at the local multiplex and instead had to wait for the DVD release, shame, because it is simply brilliant! Instead of shying around the topics of prostitution and rape like so many Hollywood productions, this film shoves it right in your face to deconstruct any imagined 'glamour', leaving a nasty taste in the mouth. The initial sex scenes are mundane, devoid of any eroticism, and the gang rape scene creates a genuine sense of menace that is hard to watch.

This film sets out to distress the viewer and is able to use this to create real empathy with the female characters despite their actions later in the film. Put simply, Baise Moi does what it says on the tin and tests the boundaries of audiences taste but I would recommend it to anyone looking for a genuine gritty modern classic. Bravo!

Dreadful film that only obtained popularity through controversy

[mattrochman · 2/10 · 9 July 2006]

First, let me just give a quick hello to all the perverts out there who have "heard about it" and are now doing some internet research. A quick answer: NO - don't bother.

This film contains explicit sexual violence. The scene which really created all the controversy was a rape scene that shows the intercourse in the same...... 'detail' that you would get in an x-rated porn film. From a cinematic point of view, the rape scene invariably creates a feeling which is a mixture of hollowness and horror. Unless you are completely depraved, I doubt you will regard this scene as stimulating or "a turn on" if you get my drift.

Beyond this controversial start, there's nothing much there. The story is weak - kinda Thelma and Louise type thing - but delivers no dramatic punches. Instead, there are simply periodic spouts of sexual violence, humiliation and depravity to make up for drab story and absence of character insight. That said, there is one hilarious scene where a guy gets a bullet in his butt!!! This does give the film the shock value it seeks, but strip it back to its bare bones and disregard the overt sexual violence and there's really nothing much worthy left to speak over - story, plot devices, character development, etc... all missing or minimal.

All in all, don't bother. Even the 'shocking' aspects of this film do little to actually improve my opinion of it. It's almost like a horror, in that the story is meaningless or pathetic and characters are either type-cast or undeveloped; but it doesn't matter because all you're really seeing the film for is the intermittent gross-out!

To those who feel that this film is actually worthy of praise or analysis, "get a hair cut and get a real job." This film has virtually no depth, no underlying themes of note and no subtle cinematic devices to dissect and reflect upon.

It's just downright.... LOW!

Absolutely, definitely Porn

[JoshuaDysart · 6/10 · 29 August 2011]

Everyone who defends this (needlessly) controversial film likes to say that it's absolutely, definitely not porn. They say this because "the film is not meant for masturbation" or some other legally defining excuse. Even the filmmakers have cried out, "This is not porn!" in their own defense.

But the thing is… this movie is totally porn. It gleefully fetishisizes violence, rape, drug use, lesbianism, domestic abuse, sodomy, robbery, gambling, blow jobs, punk-music, revenge, menstruation, patriarchal oppression, suicide and your good old fashioned non-simulated sex. Most of the time the script feels like it's just ticking off boxes on some all inclusive list of kinks. And it's all done for the money shot, baby… every time. You know why it's porn? It's porn because it shows all of those things in detailed close ups… but it has nothing to say about any of them.

Directed in a classic DIY style and squarely falling into the "New French Extremism" movement, it was made by two-women. One a former punk turned massage-parlour hostess and the other an ex-porn star. It features two other female porn actresses mass-murdering and fornicating (imdb won't let me use the word I want to use) across France, all in "trash" aesthetic video and shot in available light. It's a female power fantasy. An act of sexual reclamation that reverses the conversation on gender violence and it's created by actual sex-workers. So that, in and of itself, is interesting… the actual film, however, is tedious and artificial.

At times the movie does seem to show a passing interest in addressing genuine gender-war rage, but that's all thoroughly lost in its own appetite for shock imagery and its desperate need to be offensive. I've read interviews where the filmmakers claim the movie speaks to all kinds of social injustices, from class separation to racism, and I suppose those ingredients are there in the mix, but in the end this movie is really only concerned with being more pornography in a porn saturated world.

Although the fact that the movie has been banned in several countries, including France, suggests that it's just the sort of artistic exercise society needs. Sadly. So there's that.

If you're into camp, actual on camera sex (Raffaela Anderson is pretty hot) and you don't mind a very intense rape scene (why is the sex so real and the violence so cartoonish in this movie?), I guess it's a pretty intriguing thing to watch.

How this junk got onto the festival circuit is a mystery to me!

[dragoness · 1/10 · 9 February 2005]

You know how bad porn movie acting is? Well, this is porn movie acting, minus the lighting, and I should say minus the plot too.

At least in a porn movie you know what motivates the characters. Here even that is missing. I am baffled how they managed to get into film festivals with this piece of junk. If you think porn is groundbreaking then this movie is groundbreaking.

And I should add that I am not faint of heart, and in fact will take a thought-provoking, even harrowing film any day over mainstream Hollywood pap (that's why I picked this at the video store in the first place), but trust me, you don't want to see this. There is simply nothing worth watching in this movie.

Such a shame

[winkimation · 8/10 · 3 March 2005]

It always interests me that anyone can really call this porn. This is an interesting film, even if you think it's 'crap'. Why is it that all the men I know who've watched it, think it's crap? I teach this film as part of a course and without fail all male students thus far have said it's 'not porn' and the thing they most objected to was seeing 'grannies doin' it'. Could it be the fact that for once we actually see men's faces when they come that disturbs so much? What we never or rarely see in porn, is a male appearing vulnerable. In Baise-Moi this is explored. As is said above, yes the 'plot' may be virtually non-existent, but isn't that the case with most regurgitated mainstream films anyway? This film isn't about stimulating an audience sexually, be they male or female, indeed it is just as objectionable to women as it is to men. But I do believe that the reasons are different. The feedback I've received is that men are expecting to be aroused either through plot, character or scenes of a blatant sexual nature. Women are generally just intrigued and then often put off by the violence - by the women - that is often apparently unmotivated. We don't really see films where women are violent without 'good' cause, it's too disturbing and dispels too many myths that potentially undermine society, supposedly. Only just over a decade ago a film, which by comparison views like Bambi, was almost not made because it depicted 'female violence'. Thelma and Louise was viewed as a rather risky production.

So I'm not surprised that Baise-Moi gets a slating. It may well be all those things that the above reviewer suggests, and indeed there are elements I agree with. But this is an important film, even if you watch it just to hate it. If you do hate it, all I ask is that you really think about why you hate it. If you want CGI, predictable narrative structure, drip-feed invisible editing, and to feel absorbed and immersed (I knock none of these things), then don't bother. If you're a thinking person who has an inquiring mind, give it a go.

nasty and cheap, but strangely compelling

[fog-9 · 6/10 · 11 February 2006]

BM will polarise viewers... it is not a pleasant movie, and has unlikeable characters... it may be compared to recent "shockers" like "romance" and "9 songs", but differs vastly in approach and intention...

i admit that i may ascribe more importance to scenes that were never intended as anything more than controversial... BM presents an unlikely but acceptable scenario which allows you to draw out what you like... possibly nothing...

instead of having careful moments in which characters expound and reflect, BM flings an act in your face, and coolly dismisses it to present the next one...

flaw wise, BM has many... the plot is simple, characters have little depth, the acting could justifiably be deemed lacking... the actresses are apparently porn stars... if you feel that automatically disqualifies them from being able to act, the acting will leave you cold... at times it is amateurish, at others organic...

the camera work and cinematography is unpolished, at times below TV movie standard... i'm unsure if this was done consciously... accept that this not a work of art visually... some of the scenes are still memorable, however vile... there is plenty of over the top violence and unsimulated sex, which may offend many...

some of the film could be typical porn... however, during the sex, the camera does not linger, and shots are brief... the rape scene is grotesque, and the mix of violence and sex is not treated as a fantasy... they simply "are" and response is your prerogative...

another point of contention is whether it is a misguided attempt at feminism... i'm no expert but i didn't think it was about feminism or empowerment at all...

BM centres on two unrelated women, both seemingly trapped in poor, sleazy lives and surroundings... manu is bullied by males, and together with a casual friend, she is raped by some men... this scene illustrates, literally, the means with which some men express violence towards women... sex as a weapon... manu takes it "like a man" and stoically resigns herself, while harbouring her anger at their vile actions... she robs them of their satisfaction...

her friend reacts in a way that may be considered "typical"... she cries, she is beaten (her reaction excites her attackers, although it is not acceptable to say she justifies their actions), she feels shame and violation... she even transfers guilt to her friend, because of manu's blank reaction... this illustrates, to me anyway, the condemnation of women by some fellow women...

manu informs her brother of the rape, and without pausing to show concern, he calls for blood... manu is confronted with an immature show of power... this scene is particularly striking as it leads to manu killing her brother... and highlights the cycles of violence and inappropriate reactions...

nadine is a prostitute... her character is easier to despise, it seems, because nothing "happens" to her... she loves a desperate junkie, and lives with a flatmate who judges her, however subtly... this is another interesting example of destructive relationships...

nadine is shown with a client... the standard porno action unfolds, but slipped in are shots of nadine looking at the television, showing a sausage being sliced... at the end of scene, her client's face is shown, not the standard "money shot"... once again the movie uses sex to say some things about porn, and male fragility...

in a fit of rage, nadine murders her flatmate... many would say this is unforgivable, and it is an immoral and terrible act... however, one does understand that she has lived through much assumption and moral grandstanding... her fury makes sense in the movie's context...

nadine and manu meet and bond in a strange dancing scene... one gets the feeling of girls, not battered women... this moment has been called superfluous, but i disagree... instead of ending in lesbian orgy, it is the only expression of innocence...

after manu and nadine kill a random woman for money, all audience sympathy is lost... manu and nadine are "baptised in sin"... they are locusts, and dispense death or pleasure with indifference...

nadine and manu also demonstrate female domination and abuse towards what is perceived as a weak man... they encounter the perennial object of some female scorn, a man who is not confident, sexy or rich... they take him back to their room and he cannot deal with the situation... they kill him for his lack of performance and "bad boy" attributes... the shallow desires of some (not the majority, but some) women are on display here too...

finally they exact a bloody, violent retribution in a sex club, against those who feel excess is a mark of "coolness"... are these people excited by sex, or by the idea that engaging in unconventional practices makes them somehow special?... manu and nadine seem comfortable with the idea that sex is what it is, and they find the people in the club to be repugnant posers...

i never felt like men were on trial on this movie, just attitudes and violence as a whole were being put on display...

this is not an easy movie to swallow... i do feel it is more effective then others, like the sentimental, thrill-chasing (BM is rarely sentimental) "battle royale" or the pretentious "romance"... i think it's brave for strange reasons, not concerned with feminism, craft, or much else... just being horrible and punk to make us think, if we choose to...

i won't claim that BM would be acceptable to everyone's taste, and could certainly understand if it does nothing for you... if i criticised it beyond its technical and script limitations, i would say this...

do all sexually explicit movies have to be porn, or present sex in a sad or unhealthy way?... why can't sex on screen ever be healthy, enjoyable and explicit, without degradation?...

Base

[captain_bungle · 2/10 · 13 April 2005]

Baise Moi is the story of two women, Manu and Nadine (played by porn stars) who hit the road to take out their aggression on unsuspecting men (and sometimes women), in what could be described as Thelma and Louise with hardcore sex scenes. Okay, this could be an appealing combination for many audiences but what really strikes you about Baise Moi is its utter ineptitude and ugliness.

Directed by two women; Virginie Despentes and Coralie Trinh Thi (based on ex-prostitute Despente's novel), the film does evoke a substantial feel of female rage and bitterness towards men, although having the two leads kill innocents does leave a nasty taste in the mouth and detracts from the film's message. The director's have tried hard to make a shocking and provocative film here, but the use of hardcore acts merely as a distraction from what is trying to be said. Men will see this film because of the sex, not because of any feminist issues that may arise through the narrative. But maybe that's the whole point of Baise Moi - to feed men's weakness for sex whilst simultaneously castrating them with images of mutilation and death. I'm sure Freud would have had a field day with it, but he probably would have had better things to do.

Porn stars Raffaela Anderson and Karen Bach act to the best of their ability, pulling off (excuse the pun) some of the more emotional scenes satisfactorily, but you just can't help thinking that they are just playing at being 'proper' actresses. But it is also this element of amateurism that gives the film a well-needed dose of charm, something it is severely lacking. For all its good intentions and bravery, Baise Moi manages to alienate the viewer with its slap-dash style and repulsive characters whilst also being just brave enough to earn itself a few merit points.

With all the controversy that surrounds it, Baise Moi does indeed live up to its shocking nature. There is a close-up penetration shot during the opening rape scene (cut from UK prints), several blow jobs, a gun being inserted in a man's arse and fired and hardcore sex aplenty, but most shocking of all is the fact that a film so poorly made has been merited as such a classic in some quarters. Okay, so it's 'cutting edge' to incorporate sexual penetration into a mainstream film, but Baise Moi is about as mainstream as your holiday videos, and shot on the same format. Stick with Thelma and Louise - if you also want hardcore sex - go and get some, the two don't mix.