I Spit on Your Grave 4K 1978 Ultra HD 2160p

Story Movie

Young writer Jennifer rents a house in a deep forest to write a novel in solitude. But the publisher will not wait for the new bestseller ... Four local thugs brutally rape the girl and doom her to a painful death. But Jennifer managed to survive and now her only goal is revenge. And this revenge will be so terrible that the former rapists will curse the day they met her for the first time ...

Review 4K Movie

Indeed, everything is cognized by comparison. So, just look at the original to understand how successful the remake was. Although, of course, the new version should always be considered as an independent work, as if there was no primary source. And it's really bad when the updated version failed neither from the standpoint of rethinking the old cinema, nor from the standpoint of a stand-alone work. With Stephen Monroe's film "I Spit On Your Graves", alas, that's what happened.

Let me briefly recall the essence of both the old and the new film, because there is no special intrigue in history and everything is extremely simple. Young writer Jennifer comes to the American countryside to get away from the hustle and bustle of the big city and write a novel in peace and quiet. But a secluded sabbatical does not work, as the girl is brutally raped and beaten by several local lustful thugs. And by a miracle the surviving Jennifer begins to brutally take revenge ...

The original 1978 Woman's Day was a brutal thriller in which sex teetered on the brink of porn and violence seemed like a documentary crime chronicle. However, director Meir Zarki filmed an honest thrash-shocker, which was needed only to excite the viewer with frank "nudity" and "horrify" with bestial cruelty. And leaving aside the lack of any highly artistic merit in the picture, it is worth recognizing that at the exit "Woman's Day" fully fulfilled the set production and commercial task. The viewer paid money for "porn" and "meat", and that is what he received ...

But the modern thrashmaker Stephen R. Monroe seems to have not figured out for himself why he undertook to make a remake. On the one hand, it is clear that Monroe was eager to make a "brutal film" to match the original, but during the filming he was "ashamed" to demonstrate real sex and violence, and softened them as much as possible. In addition, Monroe complicated the types of characters, but at the same time "duped" the story, giving it a bunch of semantic inconsistencies. However, first things first.

In the old film, the title character, Jennifer, was not dramatized from the outset, and this was only good for the story. That is, the viewer at the beginning of the tape saw a certain "abstract" girl in character, who came to the wilderness of the countryside to write a book. And it seems like in opposition to the scum who later rape her, Jennifer was "kind and fluffy", but the viewer probably did not know anything about this. And the subsequent "super-harsh" and deliberate actions of the victim in relation to their offenders indicated that Jennifer must have always had a craving for violence, and rape served as a catalyst for the outburst of this mental potential anger outward. Therefore, the girl's transformation into a monster looked quite plausible.

In the new film, the director initially draws a certain psychological type of Jennifer. The viewer initially clearly sees the main character as an "awkward" girl who will pour a bucket at the gas station, then knock a glass of wine over herself, then drop the phone down the toilet. On the one hand, these touches work well for the image of a creative person who is deeply immersed in literary images and, at the same time, is not well adapted to real life. But this circumstance absolutely does not fit with the subsequent transformation into a calculating, unmistakable "death machine" that easily creates, albeit simple, but "technical" traps and instruments of torture, with the help of which it carries out its revenge. Many will say that this is nonsense, but from my point of view, this is a significant semantic error that destroys the "veracity" of Jennifer's image.

The next moment of reflection is the rape scene, key in the original tape. I don’t want to sound like a “pornophile” and a fan of perversions, but I think that in the context of this story, which consists of two simple components, “crime” and “punishment”, both halves should be filmed equally cruel and naturalistic, in order to balance the viewer's perception. That is, if the punishment is visually "brutal", then the crime should be shown in the same way. In the original film, in terms of cruelty and naturalism, the reprisal against the rapists was similar to the rape itself. And in the remake, director Monroe replaced the lengthy scene of sexual abuse with an endless episode of bullying the main character. Well, Monroe's sex, of course, also showed, but somehow very quickly, crumpled, bashful, in fact, leaving gang rape behind the scenes altogether. But at the same time, the director devoted a lot of time to the psychological bullying of Jennifer. And the whole point is that it is dumb to shoot "explicit sex" now, suddenly the film will receive the highest age rating of NC-17 and will not be released in wide theater distribution, which means that it will not collect any "attendants". But on the other hand, for an infinitely long time to show how geeks humiliate a girl in various ways - this is please! Indeed, in this scene there is no "physiological sex", which means that the episode is "visually harmless", although personally for me it is extremely disgusting and almost unattainable because of its duration.

Another critical attack is the "miraculous" survival of the crime victim. In the original tape within the framework of the movie, it was shown believable, in the sense that the girl stayed in the house after the rape, recovered over time mentally and physically, and already with a "cold head" began to take revenge. In the remake, Jennifer, in a dire physical condition, throws herself off the bridge into the river. Why the rapists, having combed the entire coast, did not find her, and Jennifer herself somehow swam out, lay down somewhere in the forest, was somehow treated, something ate - remains a mystery covered in darkness. And then she turns into a "soulless terminator" with great physical strength, sophisticated mind and design skills in the spirit of John "Saw" Kramer! (?). All this is so sewn with "white threads" that it never convinces! Well, should there be at least some slightest realism in the plot twists?

Well, the final part of the picture is revenge. Here Monroe slightly "released the brakes" and pulled back on the part of visual violence. But at the same time, the director still did not reach the level of "Saw" or "Hostel". And even in the 1978 original, the murder scenes looked less sophisticated, but "beat on the nerves" much harder. Suffice it to compare the psychological perception of the scenes of amputation of the genital organ in both films. In the original, this scene was shown in such a way that "the tower was demolished" and one wanted to turn away from the screen. And in the remake, you just frown slightly, but take the episode for granted. In general, the torture scenes in the new film can impress and even scare those viewers who have seen few "horror films", but fans of the genre will not find them as something special ...

In the end, we have a senseless, implausible, stupid and catastrophically unbalanced movie that can be tried to watch passionate lovers of savage torture, but even then it is unlikely to give them real pleasure. Just on the example of comparing the new “I spit on your graves” and the old “Woman's Day”, one can realize that trash can also be of high quality and careless within its framework.