MovieChat Forums > Thriller - En grym film (1974) Discussion > Question about the beginning! *Spoilers*

Question about the beginning! Spoilers

posted 19 years ago by LnineB
18 replies | jump to latest

I know I've seen the uncut version because it had the porn shots in it. But the beginning of the movie I saw seemed to either but cut or really poorly done.

Apparantly the old man rapes the little girl, but in the movie I saw they show nothing even close to him raping her. One scene he is holding her by the shoulders and the next he falls over with blood streaming from his mouth. Her clothes are still on and everything. I didn't understand how he could';ve raped her. DID they arrest him for nothing? And the reason she goes mute is because of the guilt?

Regan: What an excellent day for an exorcism

[–] SixteenHorsepower 19 years ago

its been a while since Ive watched this, but my understanding was simply that showing a 11 or 12(??) year old being molested on screen was a bit edgy, even considering the cadaver being used and the fairly hardcore prostotution scenes.

[–] Studman_Productions 19 years ago

Do you recommend this film?

Formerly *IMDatabase-1*

[–] LnineB 19 years ago

I'm not suggesting they show the 12 year old being rape. I think that would've been too much also, But the scene makes no sense at all. He's holding her ( not even agressively) and then next scene he falls over with blood coming out of his mouth.the next scene they are arresting him. Did she hit him?

I guess I'm question whether we ( the audience) knows for sure that the writers was trying to say that she was raped or was the budget so low they couldn't do that scene correctly without showing any graphic violence?
Regan: What an excellent day for an exorcism

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] aachooo 19 years ago

Noo! you all got it wrong!

I watch this film yesterday so my memory is fresh hehe, so, this is what happend:

The Old Man is playing with little Madaleine, like an uncle or a dad with his daughter) suddendly the oldman face changes, you begin to see LUST in his eyes, the now lusty old fart gets veery very excited, as excited that he bites his lip (like if he has pictured in his mind the girl naked, and it's fully excited in anticipation).

You can see his face, and the blood starting to drip from his mouth/lip. Then he takes action and grab the girl, and the next shot is he supposedly on top of little Madeleine.

Try a second watch now and you'll agree with me! :)

ps. Too much antcipation of this moviee , and it wasnt all i expected :/

[]𺰘¨˜°ºð[] (ADIDAS) []𺰘¨˜°ºð[]

[–] LnineB 19 years ago

Well my original assesment seems to be correct, that the shot was done really really poorly.

If he bit his lip in excitement then that's waaay too much blood coming out of his mouth. Plus the fact that he falls over as if something or someone hits him. but we see nothing.

I don't want to see a rape of a little girl but they have to show something,,, like her hitting him or something. they just really screwed up the shot that is supposedly the catalyst of the the whole story.

I liked the film but like with most grindhouse films the poorly done directing and editing just ruins it for me.

Regan: What an excellent day for an exorcism

[–] aachooo 19 years ago

"If he bit his lip in excitement then that's waaay too much blood coming out of his mouth"
yeaap! you got that right! there is more blood in that escene than in the scenes of Revenge with the shotgun hehe

". Plus the fact that he falls over as if something or someone hits him. but we see nothing. "
HE didnt fall over because of a Hit, he fall on his fours because HE IS ACTUALLY HAVING SEX with thhe girl!
You got to pay attention to the sound of a movie, a movie is not only images!
The old man is groanning, I suppose because having sex with a 12 year-old most be pretty difficult and her anatomy is not prepared for such thing!, after the shot of the man, cuts to a shot of his hands, grabbing hard the ground, this Must be interpreted as HE IS HAVING AN ORGASM, the cuts back to the man who finally lets go and finish with a last SATISFACTION Groan

[]𺰘¨˜°ºð[] (ADIDAS) []𺰘¨˜°ºð[]

[–] LnineB 19 years ago

This is exactly what I was thinking the first time I posted this. Apparently the version I watched was edited differently, because he is never on all four on the one I saw.
What I saw was that the old man falls down on his knees in front of the girl that is STANDING in front of him. He then grabs her by the shoulders. The next scene he falls over on his side with blood coming out of his mouth.

I never see him on all fours, never hear any moaning,,,definetly don't see his hands grabbing the ground.

I think a frame was missing or skipped because of a scratch on the DVD i watched. it wasn't the cut version because all the porn segments and the eye scene was in it.

Regan: What an excellent day for an exorcism

[–] betty_88_88 19 years ago

"If he bit his lip in excitement then that's waaay too much blood coming out of his mouth"
Its NOT blood!!!! !!!
I think its SNUS! Its a tobacco that you put under your lip and its BROWn/darkish!
If you dont live in Finland ore Sweden you probably dont know what Im talking about!

[–] d-t-one 19 years ago

The shot of him on the floor looking up at his face is a POV shot from her point of view as he is raping her.

Watch this again.

I personally found that shot alone worse than the porn inserts although they are dirty and brutal.

[–] Falconeer 18 years ago

The problem with todays films is that they show everything, in your face, as if we are too stupid to know what is going on. It is obvious the old man is raping the little girl. Vibenius is showing us this scene through the eyes of the girl, so we see exactly what the child sees, and how terrifying an experience it is. This old man hovering over the girl/the camera and panting and writhing. and yes, that stuff coming out of his mouth is not blood; it is tobacco. I think that scene is there simply to make the image even more disturbing and terrifying to the child. To the poster who said the film was poorly directed and cut; Wrong, this is an extremely stylish, well-made and tightly edited film. It is only low budget. Maybe you should avoid arthouse and foreign films, and stick with the Hollywood offerings; I think the latest "Mission Impossible" dvd is available now. Those movies have to be good, because they cost so many millions of dollars to make, right...?

[–] betty_88_88 19 years ago

Iys NOT blood !!!! It IS SNUS ! :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snus
Iys stronger then cigaretts and it tastes like *beep* like if you accidently taste it you will throw up!
Even seeing that pic in the link makes me REALLY SICK! !!! GROSS!!!!

[–] meikorevolver 18 years ago

Its not snus you fraggin idiots

[–] ArkadyRenko 19 years ago

lanah, from the version i have, you get a subjective shot of the little girl and she sees the old man's face above her and doing, well, nothing that leaves to the imagination. Maybe your vesion doesn't have that added shot, but in the version i have, there's mo mistake the old man did raped her.

"A good movie is three good scenes and no bad scenes" Howard Hawks

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] spookykid777 18 years ago

The scene with the greasy derelict is totally subjective. The scene right before you see the police carrying off the child molestor shows Friggas yellow dress lying in a pile of leaves, meaning shes naked, and sadly, being hurt horribly.

I always believed the man was bloody because the cops beat the living *beep* out of the guy, which was deserved. Through this scene, Friggas Mom is holding her consolingly.

What i always wondered, is where was the Mom when Frigga was being so sickingly abused?

[–] mgurgun 18 years ago

There is nothing subjective.
The blurb (writing at the back cover) CLEARLY says it was a rape:
"Growing up mute after a childhood sexual assault..."

The man tears the dress right at 02:34. (02:33-02:36 into the movie we see the girl WITH the dress running away and man makes a move to catch her. Piece of her dress is thorn and drops near the mans feet. After the POV rape scene we see the thorn dress on the floor again.
And at the scene the policemen brings the man towards the girl in her mothers arms the thorn part of the dress on her is seen again.

The only thing i dont understand is the blood in the mouth. Because as the man lowers the girl to the floor his mouth starts to bleed.(Not after police arrests him). So, clearly it is his own blood because there is a distance between them. I wonder if the director tries to imply the girl becaming mute that way.

And about why a 10 yo girl shouldnt be shown while being assaulted: Thousands of little girls are being raped every day all over the world. We know this is going on. So why not show it? It is the reality. Maybe then people get really disturbed about it and do something. Not showing such scenes or protesting those scenes is hipocracy. Those hipocrats are trying to ban such scenes but dont do anything to solve the real problem. Hiding it from the eyes doesnt mean it is not happening. I think there should be advertisements showing this so that people start talking about it because child rape is a taboo of the modern age. And because the US government doesnt want you to know it is a widespread problem.

[–] jesski527 17 years ago

At first I thought it was blood, but it is significantly darker to the other blood used in the film (which is much more red, almost candy redish). Tobacco makes sense, but damn it is a lot. I mean, It oozed out of his mouth.

Also, when he grabs her shoulders, he pulls off her yellow dress/jacket and she runs away (it does a close up of her dress). Then it goes to girls POV (disturbing as hell). Then it goes to her mother holding her, and the man getting arrested.