MovieChat Forums > Straw Dogs (1971) Discussion > Few people understand this film

Few people understand this film


This is a film about weak men. Pretty much all the men in the film are weak in one way or another, but David takes center stage as the weakest of them all. The film is ostensibly about him, and his weakness.

It also goes along with the theory that David is the true villain of the film. Everything bad that happens could have been prevented by him taking the proper actions at the proper times. He could have managed the lazy workers and nothing else happens. Or he could have confronted them harshly about the dead cat, and nothing else happens. He could have acted properly around his wife, and she would not have felt the need to 'act out' and solicit attention from the other men, and the rape would have been avoided. Even the death of the little girl at the hands of the village idiot could have been prevented by David, as he was aware of the girl's inappropriate behaviour and could have taken action.

Once things spiral out of control, like a true weak man, David eventually explodes with the rage he has bottled up for so long and over-reacts, killing 5 men and beating his wife in the process. He is no hero, he has not 'saved the day' at the end. At the end he is lost and alone.

The only thing I couldn't understand about the film is how a man like David could end up with a woman like Amy in the first place - it seems absolutely impossible. But I've come to realize that Peckinpah intentionally contrived this situation in order to highlight what does happen when such forces meet (the beautiful self absorbed woman and the weakling geek). In fact the whole film could be considered a metaphor for that.

reply

I don't agree in general. Of course he showed weakness at first, but so did she. I mean come on! Someone hangs your cat in the closet and your only confrontation is to serve a saucer of milk? I would have beaten a confession out of them, at very least! And definitely would have fired them all at that point, get the cops involved, etc.
But then when they try to break in and David defends them and kills them all, that shows strength. He defended his, his wife's, and his guest's life! He defended that 'tard dude because he knew he couldn't defend himself.
But there were some logical flaws to the film of course, but in general it was well done.

reply

"The only thing I couldn't understand about the film is how a man like David could end up with a woman like Amy in the first place - it seems absolutely impossible. "

You'd be surprised. I've seen opposites attract initially then fizzle out once the novelty is gone. Amy might have initially liked David because he was so different from other, more outwardly coarse men she had known back home, and David probably saw Amy as a sexy, childlike woman who would "do as told." By the time they're married long enough, it's obvious they're ill-matched-- and that's putting it mildly.

reply

The only thing I couldn't understand about the film is how a man like David could end up with a woman like Amy in the first place - it seems absolutely impossible.


You'll see these types of relationships all the time: The brainy geek-ish guy who makes good money and the supposed "hottie" attracted to him. For instance, Sharon Tate had a thing for such guys. These kinds of couples are typical at the San Diego Comic-Con; I've met 'em and talked to 'em.

Also, you insinuate that Amy (Susan George) is this untouchable beautiful female, but she's actually barely above average in the movie. I'm not dissin' her, but I see more beautiful women practically every time I stop at the store or jog at the park.

reply