So today I had the pleasure of watching Coralie Fargeat's debut rape-revenge action thriller Revenge. As tends to be the case with this genre, it's a film that is by design predictable in its story, characters, and progression. For this reason, it's not a genre I particularly enjoy, as it often gets trapped by its own rules. The set up follows a simple two-act structure:
- attractive woman is headed to an isolated location populated by overly lecherous men, where she gets raped and left for dead
- woman survives and goes on a killing spree
It's an intrinsically exploitative genre (which is not necessarily a bad thing imo). In the past, films like I Spit on Your Grave have been called out specifically for this reason. Roger Ebert famously gave both the original and remake a thumbs down.
Now I haven't seen the original, but I have seen the 2010 remake, which I’m not a fan of, not because I find it morally reprehensible, but because I think it’s neither stylistically, nor narratively, nor thematically interesting. This choice is not without reason, however: its swampy-slick aesthetic is murky, desaturated, grey, and impersonal. It does not seek to be noticed, more so to provide an oppressively grim background to the events of the film. The score is sparse, the generic screechy sort, with the occasional deep drum beat to indicate you are watching an intense moment. Per low-budget grindhouse customs, the villains are poor, Southern rednecks. Even the sheriff who is meant to be a guardian of the law is corrupt. Our protagonist Jennifer has come to a place where the seclusion she desires is ultimately what enables her horrible ordeal. This is not a happy place.
By contrast, Revenge is far more cinematic, stylistically arresting, and for lack of better word: “rich”. Not simply in its cinematography, but also in it’s setting and production design. The guys wear expensive, branded clothes, Richard’s desert home is luxurious-filled with art, state-of-the-art interior design, and an enormous outdoor pool. Though the location is undisclosed, it was filmed in Morocco. This is not simply just any desert however: luscious grassy plains set against snow-capped mountains in the horizon. Sure, the desert heat plays a prominent part, but this is a beautiful natural landscape. There is lots of color in the picture: blues, pinks, greens, and plenty of flashy camera-work and editing. Going here on holiday is
... keep reading on reddit ➡
Brutal yet realistic in many aspects, I want movies with this dark sense of dread that each one gives me.
Like the title says, I just watched the 2010 remake and was very disappointed.
But I found myself pondering if there is anybody who prefers the remake of iconic horror films. For me, "The Hills Have Eyes" remake is amazing and I much prefer it to the original.
What horror remakes do you think are better than the original?
Edit: And why?
In my honest opinion I haven’t seen a movie this uncomfortable in a while, plays more on gore and kills. But the trauma this young women receives the first half of the film , in my opinion . Bypasses the first remake. This move WAS FUCKED UP. Especially towards the end when she kills the last of her attacker’s , scarring experience of a kill. anywho , WOW is all I have to say.
I do not recommend watching these in the same day. The first one is unsettling enough, and yet for some reason I couldn’t resist throwing the second one on. I made it until they started peeing on the girl, and then I had to stop. These are not what I consider to be “fun” horror films, but I’m happy I checked them out. I’ll need a break now from this type of horror. What movies really leave you feeling unsettled? What did you think of ISOYG 1 and 2?
And it takes two and a half hours. Too bad! I enjoyed all others, but this one.. ehm, no thanks.
From the article:
> Over 40 years after the controversial exploitation film I Spit On Your Grave was unleashed, director Meir Zarchi is back this year with I Spit On Your Grave: Deja Vu, being billed as the only true sequel to the 1978 rape-revenge movie. In other words, this one has nothing to do with the remake and its sequels, but instead returns to the original film’s continuity.
Hubby and I having a debate I think I Spit on Your Grave is a perfectly fine movie if you skip past the right thing cuz I don't like watching rape scenes, hubby thinks that's f***** up to like that movie only after the rape scene. Him: "A person who just likes after the f****** moral of the why she's doing it, it's like this person really f****** hates men and she probably wishes she does that to somebody or be she's really mental in the head and enjoys brutalizing people Me: or she is aware of what happened and just does not want to see it. (Considering she's been raped herself). Sorry if that's confusing. That's me and him literally talking. Input? Thoughts?
I just watched deja vu and it was disappointing. It really dragged on and wasn't as good as the others. The original really set the bar for rape revenge movies. It leaves you feeling disgusted and sad. The remakes were crazy good too except for vengeance, which was pretty plain. All gang rapists deserve to be tortured. Any other movies like it?
•if she
is she crazy? would you help and how?
After seeing over a hundred horror movies this year I've decided that It's time to tackle some of the more fucked up stuff 'the big boys' if you so will. Im really nervous to watch any of these movies, so I came here for advice for the opinion of more experienced watchers. Maybe some discussion will help me with picking what to see first or last.
If you have seen mutiple of them please rate them in your personal order.
So I just finished watching the 2010 version and quite enjoyed it. Just wondering how it compares to the original as I haven't seen that at all and if it's worth the watch?
Both films have a very satisfying ending, and the protagonists end up castrating one of the rapists, but which film had the best revenge ending? The original "I Spit on Your Grave" or the original "The Last House on the Left"?
)
