1978’s I Spit On Your Grave (Originally known as “Day of the Woman”) is a film thats name proceeds it in terms of infamy, the poster child of the rape revenge subgenre, the film has spent the better half of nearly 50 years battling with the censors, film critics and both mens AND womens movements, with accusations of misogyny, sexism and male gaze style titlation run rife across it’s history. So much so that it ultimately (and pretty inevitably) ran afoul of the video nasties list. Even to this day the most recent cut of this film to receive a release in the UK had over a minute of footage cut from the final release (a privilege thats usually only reserved for live animal cruelty) with several shots having to be reframed to make the rape scenes more acceptable for the BBFC to pass.

Most infamously, Siskel and Ebert used the film as a prime example in a series of talks on “Women in Danger” with the critics going so far as to call the work “A Vile Bag Of Garbage” Not that they were particularly on the pulse when it came to horror and exploitation but, anyway…

The film came about as a result of the films Writer and Director Meir Zarchi discovering a woman who had just been brutally beaten and raped crawling out of some bushes while he was taking his daughter to an event. After dropping his daughter off Zarchi and a friend went to the womans aid, but rather than taking her to a hospital, they instead took her to a police station, thinking that, if they could get a report filed they’d have a better chance of catching the culprit while events were still fresh.

This unfortunately turned out not to be the case and instead of being proactive in helping the poor woman, they were all instead held for hours until an officer could see them, and when an officer finally did turn up he was incredibly incompitent, adamant to do things as standard by the book in spite of the womans injuries and refusing to be helpful unless the woman could answer his questions, which was going to be difficult as she had a broken jaw.

Eventually after causing a LOT of emotional distress the cop eventually let Meir take the woman to a hospital, but the combined experience of witnessing such an evil act alongside the coldness of the system designed to protect people from incidents like this stuck with him, to the point that he penned and shot “Day of the Woman” in 1978, releasing it to a limited drive in audience. When takings were low, Meir pulled the film from circulation and sat on it until 1980 when it was picked up by exploitation distributor Jerry Gross, who retitled the film “I spit on your grave” after a 50’s film noir title, releasing it to a much larger audience.

Meir to this day hates the retitling, but in many ways, without Jerrys involvement, the film probably wouldnt be held in nearly as much infamy and notability as it is today. And i’m just gonna say this up front, I was not looking forward to checking this film out, so much so that I actually went out of my way to try and find the longest possible publicly available copy (my version clocks in at just shy of 1 hour and 42 minutes) so that I could watch it, write about it, and then forget about it. Im REALLY not a big fan of “Torture porn” style movies. Films where the whole reason the movie exists is because 20-50 minutes of the run time is just footage of women slowly being tortured to death, repeatedly raped or molested or worse. I don’t really see any entertainment in that, it’s upsetting and really isnt my scene, it makes me feel a bit uncomfortable honestly.

With this film being a nasty however, Im kind of taking one for the team with this one. So please note that im coming into this with the pre-set bias of not liking movies like this. Also; I usually try to use footage from the movie to back up my beliefs or thoughts. I cant really do that with this film though…not in the typical way… most of the cast are completely naked for most of the runtime and 25 minutes of the film is just one rape after another. so there will be points where im going to have to get a bit creative because…I don’t really wanna show that stuff, you don’t need to see that stuff and youtube sure as shit wont LET me show that stuff. So; with that out of the way…

The film follows Jennifer, a young woman from New York whos a specialist writer for women’s magazines. She largely writes steamy short stories, but this summer? Shes packing up and heading out of town to a remote cabin for the summer to work on her dream project, her first full novel. Before getting there, she stops off at a local gas station to top up before the final stretch and while there, she gets talking to the owner of the station and him and the owners friends are…maybe a little too polite, in wanting to know what shes in town for, where shes staying and whats going on, all of which Jennifer is happy to tell them.

Jennifer heads off, arrives at the cabin and puts an order in for some food while getting settled in, after a time the foods delivered by an intellectually disabled bagboy by the name of Matthew, who really takes a shine to Jennifer, she playfully asks if Matthew wants to be her boyfriend, which absolutely delights him and he heads away back to the gas station to go tell his friends about the woman on the lake, but they already know.

Some time passes and we get a rather gross sequence where the guys are night fishing, talking about hooking up, beautiful women and the fact that Matthews a virgin, when they ask what kind of girl Matthew would like to have sex with, Matthew replies that someone like Jennifer would be perfect for him. The next day Jennifer’s out in a hammock by the lake writing notes for her novel when 2 of the guys ride past her whooping and hollering and generally being as loud and intimidating as possible which distracts and unsettles Jennifer. Later that night they also surround the house making noises and generally trying to make her feel uncomfortable.

This all leads to the most infamous part of the movie, While out on the lake relaxing, the guys turn up again in their boat, grab onto the shoring rope from Jennifer’s Canoe, and drag her miles away from the cabin and force her boat to the shore. What follows is a grizzly, horrific and unflinching 25 minute sequence in which Jennifer is chased through the woods, stripped, beaten and raped repeatedly while the guys try to make out all this raping is so that Matthew can have sex with the woman he wants as his “First time”. All the while, while this is going on, Jennifer desperately tries to make it back to her cabin. After a while the guys leave her to make her way back, only for it to turn out that, instead of leaving her alone, they’ve instead gone back to her cabin. When she returns they rape her again twice more beat her severely all while mocking and ridiculing her, and as a final act of degradation they read her “Steamy novel” out loud in the most patronising voice possible, ridicule it before destroying it and showering the ripped remains all over Jennifers semi conscious body.

They then leave, but not before telling Matthew that he needs to go back into the cabin and kill Jennifer. Matthew REALLY doesnt want to, but the guys make him do it, so he heads inside. But rather than killing her, he instead coats the knife in her blood before running out to tell the guys he’s done it.

Two weeks pass. Jennifer manages to survive and slowly begins recovery, she starts to piece her novel back together but is fundamentally changed by the events that happened to her. Meanwhile the guys begin to get a bit nervous about getting caught for what they did to her, their main concern is that noones been to check the house in a couple of weeks and by this point, given its summertime, the body is going to start reeking which’ll draw the attention of anyone and everyone for miles around. Matthew tries to reassure the group that he DEFINITELY killed her and that he put the body in the basement to keep it cool and to reduce decomposition. But to be safe, the guys organise a recon mission to just…make sure she’s definitely dead and to properly get rid of the body. When they ride the boat past the house though…who do they see sitting in a hammock outside the house clear as day? Jennifer.

They immediately go back and kick Mattews arse and basically disown him, while they begin to plan how best to take out Jennifer for good this time. Jennifer meanwhile visits a church to ask forgiveness for what shes about to do. And what shes about to do is 40 minutes or so of ruthless vengeance on these men, we’re talking mutilations, hangings and full blown cock removals. In a fiery 3rd act that…well I both can’t spoil it here BECAUSE its so graphic, nor do I want to spoil it here because it’s kind of the main thrust of the movie. But if you are curious, you may want to check out, I spit on your Grave.

And I’ve got to say, while Im really not a big fan of movies like this, I Spit On Your Grave is probably the film i’ve most been able to tolerate out of these kinds of movie. Films like “The New York Ripper” are much too senseless and rely solely on the shock, gore and misogyny to sell the movie. This film is simplistic in it’s delivery (almost to it’s detriment) but it at least gives us Jennifer, a character to side with and someone we’re supposed to root for through the movies runtime as she gets her revenge on the people who’ve destroyed her.

Meir has gone on record as saying he wanted to make a film where, regardless of gender, you could side with Jennifer, and that he really wanted to try and create a story where the male characters in NO way could be seen as redeemable. He really wanted to make certain the rapists couldn’t be idolised or sided with. The men in this are pigs, and he absolutely wanted to make sure that there was NO doubt as to just how barbaric and savage they are.

Which makes the broader “This is an attack on women” comments made by Ebert and some of the censorship advocates of the day all the more ridiculous. One can only assume they sat through the first 50 minutes and left before the revenge portion of this rape/revenge film. Now…I suppose it could be argued that killing the men makes Jennifer no better than the rapists…an eye for an eye leaves the world blind and all that…but here Jennifer’s actions I feel are justified. She’s isolated, alone and being terrorised by men who have brutalised and abused her, the police cant help her, the town cant help her. Shes alone, and decides to take the law into her own hands. Thats my own standpoint though and I do see a valid argument to be made against that…but…I’d struggle really to see how that would A: make the movie better and B: be a hill you’d want to die on.

When it comes to the depictions of rape in this film (given it’s LITERALLY 25 minutes of the runtime) im conflicted. On the one hand I firmly believe that showing this IS important for the film. It needs to be graphic, grizzly and in your face because thats the thrust of this script. To shy away from it does a great discourtesy to anyone who’s ever experienced these kinds of events. And while I appreciate that some victims of sexual abuse will absolutely not want to see their worst moments translated onto screen in pixel perfect clarity. There will also be SA victims for whom this kind of movie will be incredibly cathartic. An acknowledgement of their pain or suffering in a society that would rather hush it away. So to me? While I personally don’t want to see something like that, I do firmly believe in it’s right to exist as a work. Especially given the more taboo nature of it’s subject. I feel like, while it may not help everyone, it may just help some people open up about their own experiences.

In terms of structuring, im kind of in two minds, on the one hand the broad plot of the film is INCREDIBLY simple. We have a 25(ish) minute set up to the rape scenes, a 25 minute rape scene and a roughly 40 minute revenge 3rd act. On the one hand the simplicity means this is a VERY easily digestible film. It’s not something that necessarily NEEDS a hyper detailed analysis. Because the morality of the film is so strongly coded into the script that even on an instinctual innate level you KNOW who the bad people are, who the good people are and exactly what is right and wrong. It’s so basic, that honestly I would worry if you watched this film and came away thinking “Well, BOTH sides here had an argument to make”

But because the scripts so simple and because so much time is given to the actual rape and revenge plotlines, it did rather leave me feeling like a middle step had been left out. Jennifer doesnt really have a “Snap” moment, there isnt a point where the film lets us as viewers know that shes taking the law into her own hands other than the church scene, but by that point her minds already made up. Instead we see her beaten and bruised, we see her healing up, we see her healed, we see her at the church asking for forgiveness and then she just goes out massacring. I feel like just a little bit more character development in that 10 or so minute window to really drive home to the viewer that Jennifer has hardened up as a persona and that shit is about to get nasty would have really given the film a strong jumping off point from the 2nd act into the 3rd.

But, other than that. I don’t really have anything negative to say about the script honestly, dialogue is kept to a minimum, plot is largely driven through showing rather than telling, what dialogue there is, is incredibly well handled, fluid and mostly sounds believable Meir does a fantastic job of writing believable characters and incredibly harrowing situations that, even in the year 2022 left me flinching at just how graphic and unpleasant it could be in places. There isnt honestly much more to say, he’s crafted a story from his own personal experiences that are beyond eye opening, and for some people thats too much…which I completely understand. Banning or censoring it is a bit much mind…but I can certainly see how someone could watch this and want to shy away from it.

As mentioned the script was written and directed by Meir Zarchi he has 3 directing credits and 5 writing credits with his last credit for both being in 2019 when he stepped in to write a sequel to this movie “I spit on your grave Deja Vu” with his only other notable credit being a movie called “Don’t Mess with My Sister” made in 1985.

From a direction front, Id say it was *mostly* solid. When Meir is working to his strengths he produces some downright terrifying work, with the rape scenes in particular being very intensly directed and as a result creating some of the most powerful visuals of that decade. It’s honestly horrifying to sit through and the fact so much of it is unbroken for that 25 minute window and SO unflinching, it’s definitely uncomfortable viewing. Contrasting that though there are points in this that just don’t quite hold up as well as they could, prolonged sequences of Jennifer settling into the cabin or driving arnt exactly conducive to the story and do drag a little bit.

Equally direction of the cast is a bit of a split problem too with some parts being incredibly well stage managed in terms of guiding the cast through the scene (again, Jennifers performance through the rape sequence and how she was guided through the revenge portions of the film are definite highlights) where I think the direction falls down is with how the cast were guided to perform during the rape scenes themselves.

Now I need to make it clear the cine isnt at fault here (more on that later) but in terms of how Mier has instructed the actors in this on how to perform during the fake sex scenes, well…I found it kind of rediculous. You’ve got Camille Keaton there acting her absolute heart out to really communicate the savagery of whats happening to her, and then you’ve got one of two performances from the men, either literally lying on top of her just kind of…wiggling about and pulling the goofiest faces i’ve ever seen. OR they’re full on violently lunging from left to right screaming, not moaning or grunting or even seemingly enjoying it, but SCREAMING at the top of their lungs in such a way that sounded more like a pained dying animal than anything else. They’re way too over the top and it did throw me a bit because these are some of the most gutwrentching scenes the film can throw at the audience and witht the male actors throwing out a physical performance like that, well…it really did pull me out of it somewhat in places.

Outside of that though, I think Meir mostly does a good job, characters use the set space well, theres plenty of room for a little improvisation and he seems to have gotten out of the film exactly what he was looking for, so in that regard i’d mark it as a well handled, but imperfect piece.

The cine is about the same, for the most part it’s nothing short of extraordinary with the rape scenes in particular getting up close with quick cuts, fast editing and a real sense of loss of control being shown through the cine and editing. The slower moments are given room to breath and the location work is fantastic with plenty of wides and mid wides to help sell just how isolated Jennifer is from the city she knows so well.

Theres some nice subtleties in the cine that I thought was solid, the one that jumped out to me was probably the murder of Matthew, in the sequence Jennifer tries to seduce matthew by leading him down to the river, making love to him and mid sex throwing a noose around his neck and hanging him. At the start of the scene her gown is white and clean symbolism for a clean conscience and good intent. But after the murder we see her in the same gown now spattered with mud. A symbolic gesture of the crime she committed and a nice subliminal visual cue to the audience that this is not the same free thinking easygoing author from New York that we were introduced to. And there are loads of these little micro symbolic moments dotted throughout the film to help the audience visually realise whats going on without just flat out telling us.

The only places I can say it kind of does fall down is largely singular instances where the framing isn’t quite right, they’ve maybe tried to experiment with a shot and not quite pulled it off. It’s just little things that do somewhat take the polish off it, theres the occasional SFX shot that doesn’t quite land as intended, on their own, they’d be negligible, but quite a few of these “One off” moments where things just aren’t quite right do crop up across the runtime and it did somewhat take it down a peg or two for me. For the most part it’s a solid work, but I think it just needed a little bit more polish to well and truly get it over the line.

Performance wise. The whole film lives and dies by Camille Keaton, had she even been an IOTA less than she gives the whole thing would have completely failed to land and fallen apart within the hour. And she does a BEYOND stunning job in the role of Jennifer, showing a wide range of acting talent that really is a step above most of the schlock i’ve covered on this channel. Her talents simply weren’t recognised by the academy, but what she does in this films 100 or so minute runtime is nothing short of extraordinary and I really feel she hasn’t been valued enough for that. She’s sublime.

Credit also has to go to Eron Tabor, Anthony Nichols and Gunter Kleemen as Andy, Stanley and Johnny the antagonists through this films runtime. Who give performances that are lechy, uncomfortable, gross, repugnant, vile, cold and manipulative. They go above and beyond to make their characters as unpleasant and upsetting as possible. The scenes where they’re confronted by Jennifer and almost immediately try to sell their friends out to save their own skins are wonderfully handled and they really made me hate them, so they must have been doing something right. I also appreciate their solidarity with Camille in that they all mutually agreed to also perform naked in the film alongside her when they originally were not scripted to in order to save embarrassment

In fact the only performance I didn’t really get on with is Richard Pace as Matthew…a big chunk of it can be down to the writing, Matthews character is intellectually disabled and as such Richard chooses to play it a very particular way, the director maybe could have tried to shape the performance a bit better, but it contrasts against the other guys in a way that I didnt really get on with, it left an unpleasant taste in my mouth and the fact he looks a bit like a young chevy chase only made the scenes he was in even more bizarre to me. I cant really see how he could have played that role any differently…but honestly…I don’t even really think the role needed to exist in the first place.

And finally, the soundtrack! There is none! Meir listened to several scores while editing the film but ultimately decided that non would be suitable and that. Was. PERFECT. The entire film is just ambient noise, what you WOULD hear if you were there and it absolutely helps take this film to the next level as the film opens with the noise and hustle of the city before settling into a terrifically unsettling silence with only nature filling in the blanks. It creates a terrific sense of isolation, that noones coming to help Jennifer and that she’s effectively on her own. It makes the rape scene even more powerful as you hear every slap, kick smack and whimper. And it makes the revenge sequences all the more intense as you feel the tensions rising without an artificial musical accompaniment trying to sell the film to you. I think with a score this would have been ruined. It’d have ruined the pressure cooker atmosphere and made a lot of the film just feel corny. The silence sells this thing. And I love it for that.

As mentioned I spit on your grave was initially released in 1978 under the title “Day of the woman” before being pulled due to low returns. It would be retitled “I spit on your grave” and re-released to a wider audience in 1980 where it finally found it’s cult following. A VHS release followed in the early 1980s under Astra Video after the BBFC refused to grant it a theatrical certificate, at the time a film would need a theatrical certification to play in theatres, but anyone could put it out on tape with no requirement to consult the BBFC. Inevitably it ended up as a section 1 video nasty due to it’s grim and unflinching brutalisation and sexual assault content. Which for the BBFC was pretty much a cardinal sin, they could be lenient on most things. But Animal cruelty and torture or abuse of women are two things that, even to this day they’re still VERY uncomfortable with.

So! The film remained banned in the UK until 2001 when a heavily cut version removing approximately 7 minutes of footage and reframing some of the rape scenes was released by anchor bay, in the time since then the last release this film had was a bluray in 2020 which reduced the amounts of cuts from 7 minutes to 1 minute and 41 seconds. Yes even in 2020 they’re STILL not happy for this film to be seen uncut. That being said, in 2020 they still outright banned “Love Camp 7”…so…ugh.

I went into “I Spit on Your Grave” not exactly expecting a good time, I was envisioning some kind of mindless and gross hour and 40 fetishistic look at sexual assault that really wouldnt be my cup of tea. But what I found was a simplistic but meaningful film that absolutely didn’t take it’s subject matter on face value and really tried to instil just how cold and purposefully malicious the worst of toxic masculinity can be. As we witness, 4 men effectively degrade a woman to the state of nothing more than an object to be used and then pay with their lives for their inhumanity. It’s a difficult watch even in 2022, a mostly well made film that I cant outright recommend, purely because of how harrowing it really can be in places. If you have a strong constitution i’d say check it out but just bear in mind this isn’t quite the “shock and awe” exploitation fare that this film gets chalked up as. So do be prepared.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/i-spit-on-your-grave/