fando Let me start off by saying the original I Spit on Your Grave (initially titled Day of the Woman, as far as I know) it's controversial, but not because of the subject matter. Last House on the Left pretty much started the market for that and, before that, there was I Drink Your Blood, in which Jerry Gross was involved as much as he was with Meir Zarchi's film. I believe the controversy spans from the hype created by "professional" reviewers like Roger Ebert and the marketing strategies employed by Gross himself. Audiences had a picture on their minds already, which in most cases is far worse than anything displayed on the screen. From there on, it was a matter of outdoing whatever was done before in terms of graphic sexual elements and violence. The Italian film industry did a great job at that with the same classic story line Wes Craven slightly modified from Ingmar Bergman's The Virgin Spring. I saw a totally different movie from what Ebert or most people saw in 1978's I Spit... It stroke me as a serious, hyper realistic, minimalist and even uncomfortably lyrical piece. The much talked about record- setting gang rape sequence, as long as it seems to be for most people who vilify this film, is such a large chunk of it because, as opposed to the two first spin offs, it focuses on the physical suffering and moral degradation of the victim. Compared to the remake and its sequel and as brutal as it is, there's no magnifying of the sadistic element through verbal exchange and games or anything else. It's a vile act because there's nothing else to call it and no need to revel on it. The second half seems rushed and unsatisfying because, 1. The market Mr. Gross aimed at would want more brutality and 2. Most of all, the real point, as it came across me, was her moral dilemma and the victim's method, which was to lure the aggressors and, most likely, the audiences into believing she was some kind of masochist. I'll even go as far as to say that the impact, besides the subject matter, was mainly achieved through genuine tension build up and even a few jump scares, much like the good horror films from the era. That being said, I think in a perfect world you would say that I Spit on Your Grave 2010 exists only as background for Vengance is Mine (which for starters, being a quote from the Bible, makes for an intriguing title) and that part 2 has no legitimate reason to exist. In reality, is the other way around. Part 1, which whatever one may call it is not hyper realistic as the original, but all the contrary, exists because of the big audience there is for the so called "torture porn" genre. Therefore, Part 2 exists only because "fans" of the first one wanted a second serving of the same (which, in all honesty, lacks the creativity of the avenging schemes and devices and the little credibility part one had to it), even though there's no connection to the "original" and, part three, straying almost completely from Craven's basic formula and leaning more towards Ms. 45 or Death Wish's, is aimed at the wrong audience and, therefore, doesn't really have a reason to exist. Therefore, except for a couple of all too brief graphic scenes which consist mostly of Jennifer's fantasizing, this film doesn't really have anything to offer to audiences of the first two. The dialogue, which is a whole lot more copious, consists more on philosophical "diatribes" on justice, forgiveness and human nature than the "take back what you said" dynamics of the rest of the franchise. There are more characters to follow than just Jennifer and more development to them and the settings seem more likely for a rape victim than those in the former entries, too. Most of all, the overall moral of the film is a whole lot bleaker: While it's true that violence is the most contagious of diseases and creates a seemingly never ending cycle, and despite how vacuous the idea of justice may seem as it is practiced the "right" way, it only gets worse and worse... I particularly liked Doug McKeon's character (whose name is deliberately mispronounced by a law enforcement agent on several occasions) a lot. It offered a radically different perspective on the issue, and it's not the only one. In that respect, Marla was also pretty remarkable. If this film borrows from any other movies, besides the "vigilante" ones, is the original Last House on the Left, Eye for an Eye, the Accused and even Taxi Driver. Overall, I see why most fans of the franchise hated it and it's no wonder. It's a similar case as Robocop 2 or The Empire Strikes Back, not being directed by the same guy and not keeping up with the "trademarks" of the "saga." It's too serious for its own good.....

quintviskup-60177 I will certainly try to avoid spoilers in my review but have made sure to enter the spoiler warning just in case.I put off watching this series for a long time, I had read previous reviews both good and bad, I decided it was finally time to watch the trilogy. Knowing the first of the films was a remake I didn't have my hopes set too high (however I have not seen the original).I was impressed, I was disturbed, I felt for the character Jennifer Hills, I expected revenge and gore and the film delivered... by no means was it particularly innovative but I sparked emotion and that is important in a revenge/horror/gore flick.Part 2 was disappointing considering it was the same as the first film in a different location ... also I didn't feel as compelled to cheer for the victim character (I've already forgotten her name if that shows how well the movie was executed).I had about given up on the trilogy when I read the synopsis ... Oh what do we have hear? The return of Jennifer Hills, a character I enjoyed. Well heck, now I want o see it. I knew she couldn't possibly end up in the same situation as before so there as hope it wasn't going to simply be a rehash of the previous 2 films. I was excited, still felt some sadness for the Jennifer character, I really hoped we would see her struggle with the aftermath, maybe she would act as a counselor for other victims of abuse and rape, relive her story etc... but that doesn't make for an exciting revenge flick now does it ... I knew there had to be a vigilante angle... now I could only hope that she simply lost her mind and was to become a raving lunatic (Spoiler** Ya that's kinda what happened). Where this film missed the mark for me was from the get go every male character was played out to be the bad guy, even the good guys ... yes I get it, trust issues that makes sense and I really would have bought into it by the end had the Jennifer character met justice of her own ... The ending feels as though it can be interpreted a few ways, the entire story was just her fantasy and she will be set free into society to live out those fantasies (which is how I read it, and it certainly gives room for a 4th film)or that what we did watch actually happened and was now being recounted in therapy (because we do not know what happened with the officer in the park)... This is where I have the problem, to me she got away with it (either having served her time or having only had fantasies which she was about to pursue). They took an innocent character from the first film and made her the villain (which I fully support)but left her as the hero... I know this is all open for debate but I personally feel it would have been nice to see her go over the top, become what she once fought and paid the ultimate price.

Domino Petachi How is this possible?! I have seen WAY better movies with a lower rating = proof that the IMDb system is severely flawed and there are clearly people being paid to write positive reviews and give more stars than the film deserves but I guess we all already knew that.The only thing interesting about this movie were the flashbacks to the original which was actually really good. Everything was just bad in this one. The direction, the script, the acting. Woof. Would not recommend. Do NOT, I repeat, do NOT pay to watch this. Wait for it to come out on whatever streaming service you're already subscribed to and watch only if you literally have nothing better to do which should be never. If you never get to see this film, you will not have missed anything. I promise you that.

videorama-759-859391 It's quite amazing to think how far this franchise has come, since that 1974 original white trash pic, with bad sound and acting. It's a great franchise, where this third installment is a refreshing one, in the fact, it doesn't follow the path of plot to the others, with just the victim killing her rapists, one by one in a frenzy of bloody violence and madness, and the movie ends. Noted this one's much gorier than it's predecessors, and really has a lot going for it. Sarah Butler returns from the original, and it's much appreciated. This good actress is even better here, than in the first. She's changed cities and names, and still the memory of all that terror, has made her man phobic. She has murderous fantasies, like just going radge with a knife on anyone who hacks her off, in that moment, where instead she represses it, instead, so you know what this can can lead to. Hey, a lot of us have the same thing, but it's after the moment, where we visualize violent and punishing retribution, on people who have done us wrong. Now known as Angela (Butler), not Jennifer Hills, she joins a rapists support group, one, a father (Doug Mckeon, would you believe? yeah the cute boy from Golden Pond, all grown up now) who lost her daughter who suicided, where she was raped, prior by a beefcake of a sh..ty gym owner, who of course got off. Why? Cliché answer here-no physical evidence. So we need someone out there who must become female judge and jury. Forming a friendship with a young uninhibited woman victim in the group, where obviously her attack, has really changed her view on things, this is cut short, weeks later, when she is killed, by the guy who put her here, so its up to, you know who, the beautiful woman with the knife and the long fixed angry glare to take matters into own hands. And when authorities step in, that really messes with Butler's plans, while putting her in a pickle. The head of the councelling session, really got on my nerves, I really wish Butler's violent fantasy or pouncing on her was real. ISOYG3, was quite a welcoming surprise, where in it's opening, with a couple of scenes together, I was deeply worried with "Are you f..kin kidding me?", but no kidding, this is probably the best out of the franchise. It's offers real messages, and truths about rape victims, where one line, about forgiveness, cut deep. The movie has good acting by Butler, and her late rape victim friend, who's even better while, Mckeon was just fantastic as the grieving father. The other strong performance is that of the pastry faced Harley Jane Kojak (remember her?) as the soft spoken therapist. There are two twists, near the end, the first, a stupid one, I didn't buy, but does makes sense, if you think about it. The second is right near the end, on the couch, which is a beauty, and funny too. Gore hounds will lap in up, with more castrations, and squirting blood, one scene on an old guy who can't be reformed, involving vaso and a pipe + a sledgehammer. A really fun horror offering in this first one, you shouldn't pass up, especially if a fan of this rape franchise.