I caught the post by "Riotgirl" yesterday, right before my partner and I were going to go see Watchmen. Instead, I told him about Riotgirl's review, and how I'd really not like to see it, and he agreed. So instead, we went to go see the 1972 remake titled, "The Last House on the Left."
If there are any other posts done reviewing the movie, I apologize... but I felt like the main female character (who was supposed to be 17 years old in the movie) was sexualized, from closeups on her in her underwear and bra, to a disturbing rape scene.
It may have been the audience that I was sitting with, as most of them were laughing when there was violence against the two characters, Mary and Paige... But I could not stand to finish watching the movie. Supposedly the film is about seeking revenge after what happened to Mary (her rape), but as a survivor of sexual abuse, it was painful to watch. I got up and left the theater, and sobbed... it just triggered a lot of emotions for me.
And then, after posting Riotgirl's review of Watchmen on my facebook, I just had ridiculous comments about how I was "missing the point" about the human condition, and that sex sells, and it's entertainment and all that bs.
So, for those of you who have seen the film, or have thoughts about this insane justification of exploitation of women and sexual violence in film... thoughts??
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Rape in Film as "Entertainment".
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/12507
I posted in the Watchmen thread a little bit, and lot of people wanted to defend the content in there. I felt like I was ruining their enjoyment of the movie and that my posts were being seen as attacks on the director/Alan Moore. That is not the case. The Watchmen comic book has a lot of deep and interesting twists and characters to it, and it's definitely above your average comic book. But I did have problems with it and I needed to comment on those issues (I did not see the movie).
Frankly, when I saw that you'd switched from the Watchmen to Last House on the Left because you were concerned about a rape scene, I knew exactly how your story would turn out. The original Last House on the Left, which is only famous because Wes Craven directed it, is supposedly based off Ingmar Bergman's the Virgin Spring, but in reality it is basically a pseudo snuff/porn flick. It is a LOT worse than the Watchmen. I mean, the Watchmen graphic novel has artistic redeeming value to it, as I said above. It can be debated. The original Last House on the Left has no redeeming value. You might be think it's just another '70s horror flick with violence against women that's being remade. But even I did not think they would remake this. It was truly one of the most disturbing film's I've ever seen.
I truly think the depicting of women in films have been getting worse and worse in the past 10 years or so. It's not just that there are still virtually no women directors. You see no women super heroes, except in movies like the Watchmen where there are a group of heros and some of them happen to be female. You used to see at least a lot of kick ass women protagnists on action movies (Tomb Raider, Charlie's Angel's, Resident Evil). Today the movies have gotten darker and more disturbing and the women have been pushed further into the sidelines. And there is a lot of sexism even in supposed chick flicks like 'He's Just Not That Into You'.
And the worst part is, I hate complaining about movies and art, because, well, it's just art and I really am a pretty tolerant person about what people make as art. Except when the problematic treatment of women is so ubiquitous in different ways and it goes on for years, I have to vent.
In any case, I'm sorry about your experience. If I had been there I would have warned you. I wish someone had warned me before I rented this movie from Blockbuster about 4 years ago.
The article I read said that this adaptation is worse than the 1972 version, if you can believe that.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/the_big_picture/2009/03/graphic-rape-a.html
There was a lot I disliked about Watchmen (is anyone else tired of Matrix-ish stylized fight scenes yet? Because I've been tired of them for YEARS), but the rape scene didn't strike me as egregious or sexed up. It wasn't realistic, per se, but it was brutal. I felt myself flinch when the Silk Spectre was punched, and I think the director was trying to evoke that reaction, and I can appreciate that. The attempted rape was a big plot point in the book, and pretty much had to be in the movie.
I can understand someone being upset by that-but I think the point of the comic book, and to an extent, the movie-was to be upsetting as a whole. Alan Moore has a pretty bleak vision of humanity.
I'm pretty biased here - I am a visual artist.
Although all *viewable* content is, to a certain extent controlled and censored (directors, curators, critics all control what becomes performed, published or presented; usually referred to as gatekeepers), the people involved in these practices for visual arts, writing, music, theatre, dance all tend to be more interested in pushing creative boundaries. (Which can mean a lot of things). But while edgy art (any form, excepting film right now) tends to push the boundaries of its media, or else push boundaries by questioning societal practice, or something, I find most to all films coming out of Hollywood do nothing of the sort. I don't consider them art anymore. Sure, occasionally, an amazing moving comes out, but mostly I find that movies are so ridden with advertisement, cliche and stereotyping that I find it difficult to swallow them as "art". Which is pretty sad considering movies are one of the few things that combines all other art forms together. Mainstream movies are probably the most conservative of all art forms.
Generally, what angers me most of all is the treatment of women in movies. "Edgy" in movies usually translates to "bare-breasted women" or else "women getting raped/almost raped". Of course, the lack of female writers and directors could be a large factor, but throwing misogyny into a film and hiding behind so-called creativity is not art practice.
Besides any "artist" who pretends they have the right to do something offensive just because it's "art" is usually a pretentious wad who can't get past that tired circular argument. If you're using shocking images, you really should have a damn good reason for using them...
Although I still believe that mainstream movies have the potential to be a great art form; the gatekeepers (producers, directors and studios) need to get their asses kicked out.
*I am referring here to Hollywood/mainstream movies - the stuff that generally makes the "Blockbuster" label - not all films.
I am really sorry that you, a survivor of sexual abuse, ended up in that situation watching that movie.
I have read reviews of "The Last House on the Left" and they made me want to vomit. VOMIT. It really sucks that you turned down Watchmen to see that movie, probably not knowing what you were getting into.
My understanding is that it is based on a fairy tale about some men who rape and kill a girl, and then accidentally end up taking refuge in her parent's house. There have been several adaptations. This latest one is about a bunch of kids based on the Manson family who rape and kill a girl and how her parents end up taking revenge in just as gruesome a way. I don't know the exact details and I decided not to investigate further once I understood the basic premise.
What I saw was an article blasting the fact that this movie had only gotten an "R" rating and not an "NC17" rating despite the fact that it has in it what could be the most horrific and graphic rape scene ever filmed. It is as violent and realistic as it could possibly be, apparently, but it it is only an R rating, whereas loving consensual sex often gets movies an NC17 rating.
The person who wrote it talked about how a lot of people had to leave the theatre. You are not alone. A lot of people could not watch that movie to the end. I am sure that I could not handle it and I have not had personal experience with sexual violence.
I cannot believe that people in the audience were laughing. Seriously?
... Seriously?!
Also, I am sorry about the comments on your facebook wall. I have decided to give watchmen a chance, but the reason is not because "sex sells" and "it's entertainment." The reason is because I have decided that the violence might be justified for the over all message in that case. NOT in the case of the Last House on the Left.
Ugh. Again, I am sorry you had the triggering experience of watching that movie, especially when you decided to avoid The Watchmen for similar reasons.
I think that most of them were laughing because they didn't know how to respond. That doesn't make it right but a lot of people do that (like younger people who are immature and don't know how to respond, like walking out of the theatre, etc). Though I'm sure a few of the people laughing were sickos..
I haven't seen either of those movies, so I don't have any specific comments about them. I just wanted to say that in general I think it can be a good thing to portray rape in film and TV, since it can help convey to people who haven't thought about it how serious it is. For example, I think Battlestar Galactica did a good job with the portrayal in (was it season 2?).
But if people were laughing at the portrayal of rape, then there's something really wrong with the audience or with the movie, or both.
I too think that there can be some value in it, for example, if it is done correctly. However I don't think that's been the case with the majority of the rape scenes in movies...especially in the past 10 years...I also agree with the person who said that the violence against women is getting worse, increasingly common and more and more glorified. From what I have seen, the rape/violence against women scenes seem to have little to do with the overall plot, so it appears that the majority of these scenes are done almost purely for entertainment sake. Because of this trend, to me it seems that many people also seem to be getting more and more used to this idea of violence against women as "entertainment" or something that is "harmless fun". I hear a lot of movie fans say these exact things when I mention my dislike of the violence. Comments like "it's just a movie, get over it" or "relax, it's just harmless fun/entertainment". I don't believe that movies and video games are going to turn people into murderers and rapists however it does make me nervous as to what people might think of as "harmless fun" in real life...with depictions of violence being so common, it does seem to have a "normalizing" effect on real life violence.
I actually stopped watching movies and TV about 8 years ago in part because I couldn't stand the depictions of women, especially the violence and the sexualization of the violence that seemed to be occurring with much greater frequency (it felt like, no matter what I watched, I could not get away from it). I was also someone who was sexually assaulted a while back so it felt like everything I watched was triggering to me.
Additionally, as one person already mentioned the diminishing prominence and prestige of practically any and all female roles in film also played a role in my rejection of Hollywood/popular movies and tv.
I don't know if it's just me, but it seems as of recently there have been quite a bit of movies being pushed into the mainstream that glorify violence against women. There is Donkeypunch, This Last House on the Left, The scene in Watchmen, and a few others that if not violent, objectify women. It also seems that most movies marketed towards mainly men, have some sort of sick violent scene where a girl is getting brutalized in some way, even if it is knocking her off in revenge against the male protagnist. It really sickens me. It extracts women from a core part of humanity, and makes them merely possessions, and pawns. Ugghhh. More females in the film industry please.
Thank you all for your feedback and support. Qi, I had NO idea that this movie was based off of basically a porn flick. Wow. I think a big part of where this film got fucked up is where they tried to bring back this hippie like vibe into the movie, or perhaps the Iraq war? Who knows. I've heard that the 1972 movie was supposed to be a representation of the culture and political stuff that was going on. This one, as my partner said, was just not edgy. Rape is not edgy.
MissKittyFantastico, I see your point about the need for educating about the reality of rape. However I don't think that the right platform... a horror movie, should be the time for that. To me, this film just seemed like a hardcore depiction of rape, and seeking revenge by killing the rapists/murderers. In real life, that's not how it works. I don't know if a documentary would be the right platform, either. Do you have any thoughts? I think you're on to something.
Have any of you seen the movie "Idiocracy?" I totally feel like in a lot of facets our society has dumbed down art and entertainment. A lot of the movies I've watched recently are like, 15-20 years old, and they're so much better.
In general, I don't think things like rape should be taboo in fiction (although documentaries would also be good). And I think its ok if its part of the plot, etc-- it shouldn't be off limits as part of these stories because it *does happen* so much. I'd be more upset if movies and TV never ever showed a rape or attempted rape.
I think, if done decently well, an example of a rape or sexual assault in a movie or TV show can make people think about the real world implications. For example, the last season of Veronica Mars had a serial rapist as the main ongoing plot. Is that using it for entertainment value? Well, I mean, it is using it in a TV show that is supposed to be entertaining, but I don't think its automatically a bad thing unless its done in an offensive way. That particular season made it clear that even if a girl was drinking and partying, it didn't mean she was asking for anything. That's the sort of thing that's worth having in our fiction. (Note: I'm not saying that season was the best portrayal of rape. It had some problems, and definitely some problems with the pot. But its just an example of a case where yes, its being used as part of a show, and therefore for entertainment, but I don't think its being used as a titillation device at all.)
But the manner in which they show it is an issue. I'd rather not have it be a titillating thing in a "torture porn" type movie (which I can't watch anyway).
Maybe the problem here is that you view hollywood movies as Art? It is kind of offensive to me as an artist that you equate the status of today's art world with the quality of flicks like this. A little bit of a seperation is in order here.
Story telling isn't an art, now? Writing, character design, acting, staging, costume design, creating storyboards, etc. The people who do this aren't artists? There's a lot of crap on tv and in film, but that doesn't mean it's not an art form. That's like saying photography isn't an art because it isn't my preferred medium, and because there's so much crap photography out there. "I mean, you just point and shoot, right? It's not as meaningful as MY art!"
What do you view as art? Yes, it's disappointing and offensive, but isn't art subjective? I'm an artist too. Think about it... the paintings from the Renaissance and the nudes that were depicted. Wasn't this like early pornography? Considering the fact that these women were depicted as thoughtless, yet pure, sexual objects? That's considered art. Do I think it's right? No.
Yeah, I would have to disagree that if a film is too "Hollywood," it has no artistic merit.
The whole controversial "viewing certain movies as art" thing I feel is irrelevant to the point I was trying to make. To sum it up, I rejected finishing watching the movie because I didn't think it was artistic... it was shit. What I was hoping to be discussed was this trend in sexual violence against women in film. Not what merits something as art.
Wait, I'm confused, I agreed with your post, I was just replying to Craftyrei that I don't think you can say something isn't art because it's too mainstream/you don't like the material.
I also think "what is art" is irrelevant to the discussion...
Okay Raspberrying... I apologize! Carry on
The nudes in the Renaissance (and the 19th century Romantics especially) were pornography - but the world of visual arts has changed drastically. It's still got some pretty ingrained problems - but nothing, nothing like Hollywood has now. I have no problem comparing something like the Last House on the Left to the numerous (practically hundreds) copies of "The Rape of the Sabine Women" or the Romanticist brothel fascination with orientalist twists - but visual arts has changed drastically. If this was the renaissance, maybe renaissance style misogyny would have a place in our artistic practice.
It's not that the people making the movies aren't artists, it's more to say that the movies that are currently getting made with the largest budgets for production and advertising are really crappy pieces of art. As an artist you can't hide behind the word "art" to justify your choices of subject matter. You have to have a reason to make those particular choices. "Art for art's sake" is a cop-out.
The original is better. As a fellow survivor of sexual trauma I have to say kudos to you for coming out as a better, and stronger individual on the other side.
I actually really, really liked this movie. But then again, I also like horror movies. I also felt a little sick in the rape scene, but I'm a very desensitised girl.
As a survivor of rape, I tend to enjoy "rape-revenge" genre films (though I admit I skip ahead in "I Spit On Your Grave" to where she starts brutally killing rapists.) I guess for me though "Last House" is a bit unsatisfying because it is the family that exacts revenge, and I prefer watching the rape survivor herself do it.
I'm curious though, before you went to see "Last House On The Left" had you read any reviews or had any idea what it was about?
I watched the Trailer before I went to see the movie. And from watching the Trailer, I thought it looked pretty decent. Maybe I was too quick to decide, but I probably overlooked that there was a rape scene (my brother told me that it said something about a rape scene by the "rated R").
I think a lot of the way we interpret a film has to do with the setting we are in when we view it. I watched "I Spit On Your Grave" in a transgressive cinema class with a group of art students, but Roger Ebert watched it in a crowded theater while people shouted support to the rapists, and HATED it, which says a lot. What's interesting about Ebert's review is just how much he talks about the audience:
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19800716/REVIEWS/7160301/1023
From his review:
"How did the audience react to all of this? Those who were vocal seemed to be eating it up. The middle-aged, white-haired man two seats down from me, for example, talked aloud, After the first rape: 'That was a good one!' After the second: 'That'll show her!' After the third: 'I've seen some good ones, but this is the best.'"
I don't plan on seeing the "Last House on the Left" remake... I enjoyed the original only because of the revenge scene, but I don't think movies like this should be remade. The girls in the new one do seem oversexualized, probably because of the climate of today's media...It's difficult to separate the film from the fact that women in the media are highly objectified and horror movies in general tend to champion violence against women. The fact that it seems a great deal more realistic than the original because of production quality also changes the way its received.
Oops, that wasn't supposed to be in response to rustyspoons, but either way!
Me too. For some reason I find them oddly.. comforting?
The "right format to educate about the reality of rape" would not be a horror flick, though 28 Days Later comes close. Scary movies are already rife with sensationalism and *easy* thrills...that's what they do. Documentaries, books, interviews, and movies with REALISTIC portrayals, showing how ugly the act is, how it is an exchange of power rather than sex...this would be a start.
I think the primary problem (as someone stated above) is that these movies are made by men, for men. More women writers, producers, directors, women who actually care about telling our stories to men and women (not just about making it in the boys' game)would be a start.
And as a person who grew up on comic books (Teen Titans, X-Men, Avengers) I too have noticed the watering-down of female characters in these comics-to-screen adaptions. I remember reading the X-Men at a time when Storm, an African woman with a mohawk and no superhero powers (she temporarily lost them) duked it out with Cyclops for leadership of the X-Men -- and won. Ah, those were the days. Now we get an X-Men movie with women whose powers are indicated by colored contact lenses (ie. no physical prowess at all). Sheesh.
Exchange of power? Well, I've never heard of a one-way exchange before.
I liked 28 Days Later. The rape plot surprised me, but it was a good twist-- in a movie about violent zombie attacks, it turns out to be the average human men who are the real bad guys.
Yeah I liked that movie as well. I remember the first time watching it being all "fuck yeah" at the zombies and then I saw that and I was like "oh" because I'm pretty sure Boyle wanted that movie to be more of a drama than a horror? Idk.
I watched it with a friend who had already seen it, and when they got to the place with the soldiers I said "are they the only women left?" and I was suspicious for a moment that something bad might happen, but then the movie seemed to be sticking with the humans vs zombies theme for awhile so I forgot about it. It was pretty creepy the way the head soldier justified their planned gang rape. I also liked that at least one soldier was seriously against it, to the point that they had to lock hi up/ kill him to go on with the plan. Honestly the only part I found unbelievable was that they would all wait around for so long for their leader before starting the attack, but they needed the time-kill for the rest of the plot to work.
There are movies I've seen over the years where there was a rape and it seemed completely inappropriate in the way it was presented. When it's minimized (Superbad, which was suck BTW) there's a serious problem. But in circumstances where rape is portrayed as horrible, and is meant to make you hate the rapist character, I think it's acceptable.
I think there should be something on the posters to warn people about it. "This movie contains scenes of rape." or something similar.
You should really actually read the comments to Riot's review. Riot's review was poorly informed and had a lot of knee jerk reactions to the scenes of the film. It also helps if you have read the comic before seeing the movie. You get a less rushed feel of what the story's about.
The attempted rape scene in Watchmen was not about glorifying sexual violence or about giving the movie a sexy scene--we have an actual sex scene later for that. The scene was brutal with kicking, punching, and a very clear "NO" from the woman. The audience in my theater were gasping and cringing at the horrific brutalization of the woman. It really drove the point home that the Comedian was a sadistic asshole, and that rape is a terrible thing. And really, we need the media to show that rape is out there and that it's terrible.
Destra, good point. I think I latched onto a subjective review as the reality instead of looking for an objective one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIyPRj3qkx8 spoken word piece by Kelly Zen-Yie Tsai about what it's like to watch a rape scene on TV with your friends present.
Also, have you seen this video? It's really powerful.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOv47njeLHQ
Nettle Syrup, that's a great video, thanks.
I was incredibly disturbed by the rape scene in "Last House on the Left" as well and almost had to leave the theater because I couldn't bear to watch such a horrific display of "entertainment." Although no one was laughing in the theater I was in, I found it very upsetting and shocking that no one else appeared to be as upset and uncomfortable as I was. Movies like this further objectify women--to me the scene was completely unnessary. It frightens me that we have become so desensitized to violence against women or any human being for that matter.
I don't know that everyone has become desensitized, but I can only draw on my own feelings here, so YMMV.
I can watch gory, violent disturbing things in movies just fine. I don't like movies with pointless violence (hello, torture porn "horror" movies, I'm talking to you), but that's mainly because they're so boring, story-wise. I like to be able to sink my teeth into plots.
However, real life violence? There's just no way in hell I could ever watch real violence on tape because that would disturb the fuck out of me. My mind knows the difference between the two, and it knows what it can and can't handle. I don't know if that's being desensitized or if that's compartmentalizing, or what.
its not at all entertainment