MovieChat Forums > I Spit on Your Grave (2010) Discussion > Why the original was better.

Why the original was better.


Simply put, while the acts of the men upon the woman were horrific in all the versions, in the original the acts were somewhat less bad and the victimized woman had more power to walk away and recover her life.

Because of this, her acts of revenge were somewhat less justified in the original.

That creates more grey area -- a reasonable person sympathizes less with the revenging woman in the original than they do in the remakes. Overall, it makes for more “debate” of sorts; it makes you think a bit more about whether or not justice was served and more about how rape -- which comes in many forms -- compares with murder and dismemberment on a scale of heinous crimes.

Thoughts?

Your film gods: Lee Van Cleef and Laura Gemser
http://tinyurl.com/pa4ud44

reply

Haven't seen the original but just watched this one tonight, and there isn't really much room for debate in it. Even if you don't think the rape is worth killing them all over, the thing I found the most disturbing was that after they finished raping her they were just going to shoot her and then go back to their lives without a care in the world. It was blatantly obvious that they were trying to kill her, and would've killed other people in the future if given the opportunity, so it made it very black and white.

In the original, do they just let her leave without trying to kill her? In that case, I agree that it definitely does open up the debate much more.

reply

In the original, the rapists are a bunch of ignorant jackasses who seem to rape because of some messed up sense of entitlement to women’s bodies, rather than (especially according to the views of the time) evil incarnate.

Your film gods: Lee Van Cleef and Laura Gemser
http://tinyurl.com/pa4ud44

reply

There's definitely more grey area in the original but i wouldn't say that makes it better.

What are words for when no one listens anymore

reply