I Spit On Your Grave
Amazon.co.uk Review
I Spit on Your Grave, writer-director Meir Zarchi’s controversial story of rape and revenge, has lost none of its ability to shock viewers since it first gained notoriety in 1978. Camille Keaton (grand-niece of Buster Keaton and, later, Zarchi’s wife) stars as a young woman who is terrorised and then brutally assaulted by four men while on vacation. After slowly pulling herself together, she methodically tracks down and butchers each of the perpetrators. Zarchi’s film has been consistently accused of celebrating violence against women, and while the rape scenes are graphic, they also lack the voyeuristic qualities that earmark other similarly plotted exploitation films. If anything, Zarchi is guilty of awkward scripting; the dialogue is leaden, and Keaton’s transformation from victim to avenger is too swift. But to label him a pornographer is wrong, and while the film is challenging–perhaps more than most audiences can bear–its depiction of the psychology of violence is undeniably powerful. –Paul Gaita
When movies first came out on video there were two legendary exploitation films I had to track down. One was “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” and the other was “I Spit on Your Grave,” which is actually the more memorable film of the pair overall (although I do grant the highest place to the “hook” scene in TCM). Director Meir Zarchi’s 1978 film has become rather infamous, since critics hated it, audiences were outraged, and the film was banned in Germany and Great Britain. The story, such as it is, finds Jennifer Hill (Camille Keaton, Buster’s grand-niece) out in the woods of Connecticut to work on a novel when she crosses the path of some local boys who decide she should be the first sexual partner for their mentally-disabled friend. When he cannot complete the rape, his friends do it for him. Then they decide that they are not done with Jennifer.
At issue are not Jennifer’s specific acts of revenge, including the infamous bathroom scene, but rather the series of brutal rapes that precede them. I do not want to meet anyone who is not disturbed by these rape scenes and I think it is fairly obvious that Zarchi intended to make audiences uncomfortable. In retrospect you have to wonder about all those movies with rape scenes that do NOT upset the audience. But Zarchi certainly pours it on thick, absolutely assuring that things go beyond the tolerance level of anyone who watches this film. So the bottom line is that this film will upset you and it is therefore effective at doing exactly what it wants to do, which is supposed to be a good thing, right? I have always considered this an “X” rated movie although I would not consider it pornographic in the traditional sense. But it is a very disturbing film and I do not think I would want my kids to see it until after they graduate college (if ever). Anyone renting this film for cheap thrills is in for a shock.
As I now understand it, this 1978 film was originally released as “Day of the Woman,” but that rather innocuous title was replaced by the well known “I Spit on Your Grave,” although the film was also screened as “I Hate Your Guts” and “The Rape and Revenge of Jennifer Hill.” All of this is interesting since it seems the producers were trying to pass off this film with both higher and lover levels of pretention. Beyond being letterboxed, this DVD offers nothing than the cheesy original theatrical trailer. But this is one film where you would certainly like to have to hear what the director has to say.
Rating: 4 / 5
New York writer Jennifer (Camille Keaton, the grand-niece of physical comedy genius Buster Keaton) retreats to a cabin in the country to write her first novel, but her peace and train of thought is interrupted by four men she meets upon arrival, who go on to gang-rape and commit savagery on her three times before leaving her for dead (one of the guys was supposed to kill her so she couldn’t grass them up but he couldn’t go through with it and faked her death instead).
However, Jennifer soon recovers from her ordeal sufficiently enough to enact some very painful revenge on each of her four attackers, one by one…
Banned in the UK until 2001, it was only finally granted an 18 certificate in that year when the BBFC ordered just over seven minutes of cuts to the rape scenes. When this newer version was resubmitted to the BBFC in 2003 with some of the previously cut footage reframed to put Jennifer off the bottom of the screen, they passed all except just 41 seconds of cuts, making this the most complete version we have ever had in the UK. While it’s still shocking, the reframed footage is noticeably blurrier and the wrongness of the screen layout is very obvious. Also, not being able to see the victim has undoubtedly muted the effect, making her vengeful attacks later seem over-the-top compared to what it might have been had the censored footage been left in its original uncut form, but I guess on this occasion the BBFC’s hands are tied and that we should think ourselves lucky that we got the film officially released at all.
Many have accused it of glorifying rape, which is not the case at all. If anything, it shows just how horrific it really is, and how damaging it is, physically and emotionally, to the victim. Meir Zarchi, the Italian director, handled a very difficult subject matter here, and it was even based on a real event.
Other complaints that even the uncut version wouldn’t cure is that the acting is a bit hammy sometimes, with dialogue sometimes sounding like it’s being barked down a hollow tube, and some of the gore isn’t quite the right shade of red, but given the time it was made it’s not miles away from the correct colour, and the bathroom scene is still a ghastly sight.
If you like shocks and scares, you’ll certainly get some in I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE, possibly one of the most complained-about and controversial movies in cinema history!
Rating: 3 / 5
Some films have a reputation that is justified – `Clockwork Orange’, for example, which still hits hard even today, for the coldness and detached objectivity with which its notorious violence erupts onscreen.
Some films gain a reputation that is inversely proportional to their actual content – `the Exorcist’ being the most obvious example I could think of. At least, until I sat down to watch this; allegedly `shocking’, `important’, `socially relevant’, `magnificent’ motion picture.
Except that it’s a dirty little sexploitation schlock number that would have deservedly sank without trace decades ago, but for the outraged bleatings of a few angry critics, and some strange individuals with clearly some perverted sense of reality who try to justify this as a `feminist’ picture. Any woman who can suffer the first hour of this turgid, talentless display of ineptitude deserves a medal, and any man who can sit to the end without howling with laughter at the pathetic male characters isn’t worthy of the name.
I don’t think I’ve seen so many talentless actors together in one film, but I suppose useless, untrained wooden artistes were all that would actually wish to appear in such an effort. The leading lady, while gorgeous to look at, does her best with the “script” but ultimately shows why she spent her minimal career floundering around the plughole end of European Grade Z slasher garbage. So much for being related to the legendary Buster Keaton!
The first half of the picture succesfully exploits the idea of rape as a hardcore porn experience. Plenty of screaming, macho close-ups, submissive female poses. Which, as sexual psychology tells us, some men (and even some women) do find secretly exciting – any casual examination of the S & M scene will prove this. And clearly the director finds it exciting, too, as we have our unlucky heroine abused not once, but thrice, just in case we didn’t get the point first time around, or didn’t understand what rape actually entailed. So having put the female character through such hell for so long, do the male abusers receive an equal amount of torment before they’re slaughtered? Don’t be ridiculous!
The second half trivialises the revenge motif to a ludicrous extent, contriving ever more unbelievable situations in which the rapists can be dispatched; plot, suspense and characterization are zero to begin with, and quickly descend into negative values hereafter.
There’s no glory or sense of vengeance done, just utter disbelief in the mind of the viewer that any man with an IQ above single figures would allow himself to get into that spot in the first place. So after dehumanizing females in its first forty minutes, the film then denigrates males just as effectively – an utterly degrading, foul, and unsatisfying spectacle for all who can bear to watch this to the end. Having known several women in my life who have suffered sexual abuse, I find this all the more offensive. I can’t think of either of them finding this cathartic, satisfying, or exciting. Nor can I see any man wanting to identify with the 4 retarded neanderthals.
So why would I, for one, care to watch this in the first place? To see if it was what it was cracked up to be. To see how this important, socially relevant film would change my life, and make me consider sexual attitudes and my own views towards them, as many reviewers seem convinced it will. To challenge my own conscience, and sense of what is acceptable viewing, to push myself to my limit. To see if a film made 30 years ago still has the power to shock and offend that it is alleged to possess. To experience a little of the thrill of the transgressive, to view something which the authorities in this country have refused to be made viewable in its full form to this day – to watch an uncut, notorious `video nasty’ from end to end. They really needn’t have bothered. Most average filmgoers will be well asleep before anything even remotely controversial occurs – the rest will either be repelled, offended, or numbed. Those that aren’t will already be huge fans of `Death Wish 3′ and `Dirty Weekend’, and will get from this film exactly what they had hoped for; naked breasts, a little bit of blood, chicks with guns, and hilarious Grand Guignol overacting.
The sad thing is, it could have been a decent enough picture, had it been directed by someone with even a vaguest hint of cinematic talent. There are moments of promise in there. Some of the shots and angles are actually quite interesting, some of the camerawork effective in a raw, maverick kind of way. The lack of music and sound effects on the score is a good notion, very badly realised, as the actual soundtrack mix is so low and badly arranged it hardly seems worth playing it in stereo. In fact, the stilted dialogue and corny acting hardly makes it worth even turning up the volume. It’s not like there’s a complex, metaphysical plot unfolding which you will miss out on. In fact, do yourself a favour; ignore this boring, sordid little piece of tat and go and watch Polanski’s `Death & the Maiden’ instead. Now that has some artistic credentials, is more satisfying, and produced by people who know how to make a film. Overall I would rate this film somewhere between the best work of Ed Wood, and the `Blair Witch’ – and that’s no compliment.
Rating: 1 / 5
From start to finish this movie is a complete bloodbath. Ok, I admit, the rape scenes are a little over-the-top, and go on for too long. However they shock the viewer…..and that’s the whole point. Films which glorify rape and violence (A Clockwork Orange & Straw Dogs) often portray a picture that this kind of stuff is ‘cool’. I Spit on your grave does exactly the opposite, anyone who is aroused by this movie needs serious help and should be locked up. Seriously, there is nothing whatsoever erotic about the rape. The woman is beaten so badly while she is completly naked that you can barley see her skin colour, shes just covered in blood.
The fact that she goes and kills the four men who did this to her satisfies the viewer in the fact that they got what they deserved. Again, the murders are so over-the-top that they become almost cartoonish. The gore is so extreme that it simply doesn’t look real.
I praise the director however, because I think no other director on earth would ever dream of making such a movie, in fear of critisism and ridicule. Also, you’ve got to have a pretty sick mind in order to think up some of the stuff that goes on here. But is having a sick mind always bad?? It’s what makes us creative. And this film is creative believe me.
Ok so it’s not to everyones taste. I absolutley hate Casablanca, but that doesn’t mean it’s a bad film. But look that ot the point. The point here is that I spit o your Grave is doing the world a favour. It’s shoing the viewer what rape is like. It’s showing us it all without censoring anything. The goverment censors enough from us as it is. We are lied to everyday by the prime minister, and the director here isn’t. He’s showing us what it’s really like.
And so, any reviewers who think this is trash are entitled to their opinion. But that’s all it is. An opinion. People should open their eyes to the fact that this is not glorifying anything, it’s doing the opposite. It’s a horror film which aims to scare and disturb the viewer. That what horror films are suppose to do you idiots!
Horror fans will love it. Ignorant people won’t.
Rating: 4 / 5
I bought this film not expecting to much from it, but it is possibly one of the most conversation inciting film for women that i have ever seen! A realistic account of rape and mental torture revenged in a way i have never before seen on screen that will leave any women watching it wondering what they would do.
Although it will leave and lady viewers feeling uncomfortable it will also leave them feeling powerful and proud of who they are.
This is not the fastest paced film i have ever seen but gripping never the less, if you are a fan of old skool realistic horror this film is a must see!
Rating: 5 / 5