I once saw an exploitation flick usually known as I Spit On Your Grave (aka Day of the Woman). Starring Buster Keaton's granddaughter, though that might be generous, it basically is a revenge flick ... both the rape and revenge brutally shown. But, I was not among those (including Roger Ebert, who hypocritically likes some revenge movies) who thought it trash. The movie actually provided some lead-up and follow through ... the final shot was particularly powerful. A glance of someone who gained revenge, but lost her soul.
[The selective support of 'trash' is interesting. For instance, this movie was supposedly uniquely horrible as a revenge flick, unlike a Death Wish sort of movie where the victims are treated as just story devices, the revenge supplied by a Bronson type, at times without much in way of cost to them personally. It looks rather mechanic. Thus, underlining the horror, using the victim herself as the avenger and showing real consequences all around mattered. We even saw the family of the lead rapist.]
Surely, the movie was exploitation ... the violence on both ends was provided graphically, along with the nudity. But, taking that into consideration, the film did strike me. One scene had the woman force the ringleader to strip, to expose him as he exposed her. There is a scene like that in Descent with Rosario Dawson (Rent etc.), and along with the revenge again, it reminded me of the old film. Be wrong to equalize the two, however. This one is well made, so much that the NYT said it was a "must see."
The NY Daily News did not care for it ... the capsule review even gets a plot point wrong ("weeks later" when the caption* noted a change of seasons) ... but it was unfair. The movie is well acted and the revenge part only comes in that last third, if that. It is ultimately a character drama about a consistently troubled smart young college student, in the beginning dealing with a failed relationship and feeling alone, later dealing with a rape. [The relationship set up the rape in that she let her guard down, wanting to have some male companionship.]
Rosario Dawson is very good throughout and the writing/atmosphere as a whole is well done. The lonely student room, feeling ill at ease at a party, the rape scene, the look of shock (seen only through her p.o.v.) that a student in the class she is a T.A. for raped her, etc. The changes in her personality also is complex, and not just a matter of the rape. It can very well be the result of any number of young women who fall under the influence of drugs or have crises of some sort. The final bit is pure revenge, but on that level, done fairly well as well.
The NYT (who is coy about the exact nature of the revenge ... it's logical, but has a nifty surprise that makes sense, but still shocks) notes it is a polemic. It surely has feminist inclinations. On that level, let me toss something out there. We often hear how rape is not a crime of sex, but one of violence. I disagree in part. It is a crime of violence via sex. In fact, the control of sexuality is part of the violence. This does not belittle the crime, or suggest it is just sexual. But, maiming and other crimes also can be more than the specific crime itself. This is the whole point of the "hate crime" concept.
We also sometimes hear "you can't understand" ... only experience can provide that. This sometimes is tempered by the possibility of the experience ... thus, women in general might understand since there is always a potential of being raped (one might add men too ... in prison). But, I think even here, some rape victims might not totally agree. A victim of a crime has a special experience, one different from those who might be victimized in the future. Obviously, they have a point, though only so far.
It is the road to perdition ... I'm pretty passionate about this ... to think that we must only experience something to truly understand, even a decent amount, something. For instance, how can we set policy or judge someone (judge/jury/punishment) if only the class themselves "understand" what is happening? We are ultimately on some level alone in this life, viewing things through our own eyes and experiences. But, the human family is not totally alone. There must be and is some perspective, some ability to step in someone else's shoes, especially given on some level we do experience things alike.
Thus, a religious minority respects another ... or some other minority respects the religious minority ... or one respects them because a loved one is a member. etc. Yes, as a man, I cannot truly understand rape in the most direct sense, the feeling of violation and fear of it happening. [Like you only truly experience parenthood when being one, but we were kids, and had parents. We can go half way, right?] But, am I not able to connect with loved ones who are women, or the overall idea of being violated, and attacked? This so on both a mental and visceral level. I think I can. We need to guard against assuming too much in this regard, being too full of ourselves.
But, yes, roughly ... as they say ... I do think I can relate. If we truly cannot, it is a sad world.
---
* Errors that appear to suggest the reviewer did not see the film is a pet peeve of mind. Anyway, I had this idea where the caption on the screen says something obviously not true ... think of those shots of Toronto or whatever that is supposed to be some major U.S. city. Once, we saw mountains in the background for a movie that supposedly took place in the Bronx. Good sight gag?