I Spit on Your Grave

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

This film has been around for a few decades but it has not become a classic, perhaps, because it's as shocking as it is. In fact, the film is quite difficult to watch and totally inadvisable for children, young teenagers or even more impressionable adults! The film's theme is the **** of a young woman on vacation in a rural place, as well as her revenge on whoever **** her. It seems to me to be very much in line with the thinking and fashions of the Seventies, fertile in films with nudity and sexuality related themes. But this nudity wasn't meant to excite or look sexy: is brutal. The film has a long (the longest ever in a regular movie) **** sequence in which four men, one after the other, ****, insult and brutalize that young girl until she is unable to walk or to stand. Finally, they have the idea of killing her, but the guy who should have done it was not able to actually do it, and pretended to commit the crime. Controversial, the film was so harsh that even when it went to the theaters it received harsh criticism and some boycotts, even being withdrawn from theaters. However, it worked out in its purpose: it shows in a harsh way the effects of a **** from the victim's perspective, and we can feel sorry for her and pity for the situation she is in. The worst, however, is the way these guys died in the film: their deaths never sound credible and it is perfectly clear that it is all pretending. From the cast, I don't think it's worth talking. Being a brutal film and made on a very low budget, it used unknown actors. But I liked the performance of Camille Keaton, I think she was very faithful to the character and gives her a very pleasant dose of verisimilitude and realism. I also liked the work of Richard Pace, who gave life to the most human of aggressors, a mentally **** person influenced by all the others. Technically, its a film that does not stand out nor has much to present. Not having a high budget, it used what it had. There is a lot of fake blood, vivid and so bright that you can tell from the distance that its fake. The makeup work was very well done, with a very well-designed scar on the actress's face and all the dirt and blood on the bodies to be very realistic. The film intentionally chooses not to use a soundtrack with the exception of some opera notes. Cinematography does not stand out, nor do the sets and costumes, where the cast's frontal nudity is recurrent and ordinary. I liked, however, the way the lead actress changes her clothing after being attacked: if she used to like wearing few light clothes, there is much more fabric after the ****, with the church scenes standing out, portraying her almost totally covered in what would have been, according to the story, a very hot Summer. Psychological consequences of the attack?

I’m sorry: I have to gravitate closer to Roger Ebert’s assessment of this movie. It’s shock-value without much theatrical takeaway besides being the ‘proverbial’ **** film of the 1970s. The story is as depraved as the men **** the girl, the story logic is worse than an abused public toilet, and when the revenge DOES happen, it feels like it’s too little too late for all the horribleness that played out on screen. It’s just an ugly film that basically got popular for being soft-core pornography cashing in on The Texas Chainsaw Massacre’s big-bang-like influence on horror cinema. Maybe it’s because revenge is already such a tried-and-true formula for cinema there’s no wonder some of us would recommend better revenge films that came out since, and before, this one did. I Spit on Your Grave is pretty vial and even for torture-porn nuts, and it’s period-appropriate limitations, it’s a challenge to watch unaffected by everything playing before your eyes.

Les intentions sont louables, justifiées et le féminisme revendiqué de cette vengeance pour le moins brutale (ou plutôt ces vengeances...) est lui aussi tout-à-fait justifié : si on faisait ça à quelques violeurs -au moins à titre d'exemples...- ça en ferait réfléchir plus d'un, je suppose ! Malheureusement, cette "justice sauvage" est fort mal présentée, je veux dire en cela qu'elle n'est pas crédible une seconde et qu'elle nous prend carrément pour des jambons, à moins que ce ne soit le fruit d'un scénariste stagiaire complètement à côté de ses pompes ou une sorte de plaisanterie qui a tourné au ridicule...! Secondement, l'affiche n'est pas représentative ou comment dit-on, pas contractuelle... c'est sans doute une remarque de macho (ou carrément de pervers, tant pis si les **** me sautent dessus avec leurs paires de ciseaux) mais ce beau cul sur l'affiche, ce magnifique cul, on ne le voit pas dans le putain de film ! alors où est-il passé, je ne sais pas... toujours est-il que la jolie jambonneuse légitimement vindicative, bien que très jolie (je l'ai déjà dit une fois, attention au harcèlement, merde) a les fesses désespérément plates ; alors, remboursement ou bon d'achat...? Bon je sais, le sujet est grave (et sérieux) mais le film n'en reste pas moins presque totalement... raté. Très plat, on n'y ressent rien, tous les comédiens sont universellement mauvais, la mise en scène est lente et apathique et les vengeances (invraisemblables) sont vite expédiées tout à la fin... je mets 2 quand même. Pour l'affiche.