Hell Hath No Fury

 Movies: Various, Rape-Revenge

Trigger and content-warnings foreveerrrrrr!!!

***

Let's talk about rape-revenge films. 

This divisive genre has been around for a long time. Ingmar Bergman's The Virgin Spring was released in 1960 and serves as the inspiration for more infamous RR films, such as Wes Craven's The Last House on the Left. But stories about women in peril and other people avenging them have been around practically since humans began telling stories. Such stories allow us a double-whammy of enjoying the sick thrill of hearing/seeing violence (and sexual violence in particular) and also enjoying seeing the bad guy get his just desserts. It allows us to enjoy the rape AND the revenge while still feeling good about ourselves. Which is perhaps why so many people loathe this particular genre.

However, the rape-revenge film has been changing over the last few decades. More emphasis is being put on the revenge, rather than the rape. And more films let the women themselves take revenge, as opposed to showing the woman's family, friends, or partner dishing out justice.

There was a Tweet going around recently that basically said "there is never a good reason to show rape in film and TV". While I do agree that glamorizing and eroticizing sexual assault is wrong, I don't entirely agree with this Tweet. For one thing, I don't think that *anything* should be completely "banned" from film and television with the exception of stuff like child porn. Which is illegal anyway. But even with this extreme example, films such as Mysterious Skin have been able to "show" the sexual assault of a child without actually showing it and, in my opinion, have masterfully captured the horror of such an act. (Mysterious Skin is, by the way, an absolutely great film that I basically can't recommend to anyone because it is so intensely upsetting). 

I feel that there is a place in cinema to show horrific acts because to refuse to show them, regardless of how they are shot and what the context is, puts them in a category of taboo. And what happens when we are unable to talk about think about horrific things? Well, they continue to happen and we are able to ignore them. It is by confronting such horrors and staring them right in the face that we take power back and have the courage to say "this is wrong". Now, this isn't to say that anyone should be required to watch films that depict sexual assault, violence, etc. I believe very strongly in trigger and content warnings because it gives people a chance to exercise consent in their viewing choices. I personally think filmmakers should have a lot of leeway in filming whatever they want to (within legal bounds of course), but also provide strong warnings so that people can pick and choose what they are exposed to. The solution is NOT to "ban" depictions of sexual assault. And let's not forget that if we can ban depictions of assault and violence, that sets a precedent for banning depictions of healthy, consensual sex in film and TV. 

So back to the rape-revenge films. Why do I--and others--like this genre so much? Is it because we're sick and want to see people (usually women/femme persons) suffer? Au contraire! It's because we want to see rapists suffer. Films let us indulge in our wildest fantasies, whether that's a trip to Middle Earth, a flight on a dragon's back, or, well, seeing a rapist/abuser actually get punished--often brutally--for their crimes.

As we know, rapists often *don't* face adequate justice IRL. Many rapists never even see the inside of a courtroom, and those who do (example: Brock Turner) often get off with a slap on the wrist. Our society is inclined to put the burden of proof on the survivor of assault, and place additional burdens on them, such as justifying/explaining past sexual behavior, what they were wearing, why they were drinking, etc. We all know that the way our culture handles sexual assault is incredibly misogynistic and traumatizing. 

Rape-revenge films give us the much-needed catharsis of seeing a rapist PAY and pay dearly for their sins. Now, you might be saying "But Jenny, what we REALLY need is for more justice IRL for rape survivors! Not just the fantasy of justice that film can provide." And boy howdy, do I agree! I would trade the entire genre of rape-revenge films for even just 30% more justice for survivors in real life. If we had true justice, perhaps this genre of film wouldn't even be a thing because no one would need the catharsis. But we currently do not have adequate justice and it's something we need to keep pushing for and working towards. And I don't think that rape-revenge stories necessarily equate to *less* justice IRL. In fact, really good stories in this genre can perhaps inspire us to take action in reality.

So what constitutes a "good" rape-revenge film vs. a "bad" one. I have some thoughts.

A "bad" rape-revenge film focuses more on the assault itself, lingering on the victim's (again, usually a woman) body. The camera takes pleasure in the victim's suffering. The revenge is carried out by someone other than the survivor--perhaps a husband or father, a man whose job it is to "protect" the survivor. The film has no deeper message about sexual assault or gender politics.

A "good" rape-revenge films focuses more on the revenge. The rape itself is either not shown at all, just implied, or if it is shown, the camera does not linger on the body of the victim. Perhaps the camera shows their hands or face (which can be upsetting, but the point is that is DOES NOT eroticize the assault). The survivor carries out the revenge--with or without help from friends and family. The overall theme of the film is empowerment, taking back one's power/body, and clearly, boldly underlining that rape is a crime that deserves punishment. 

Now. Many films within the rape-revenge canon don't perfectly fall into either of these categories. Two recent films that come to mind are A Promising Young Woman and Violation. 

(spoilers ahead for both films)

Violation is a film in which the rape that occurs is a fairly common type of assault: the survivor knows the assailant (he's her brother-in-law) and the rape is not "violent" in that she doesn't have a gun to her head. Instead, she wakes up with him inside her and she is confused and scared. She says "don't" and he keeps going. The punishment she metes out to her rapist is...VERY extreme. Not only does she kill him, she drains his blood, dismembers him, and grinds his bones into dust. There is also a suggestion--though it is not explicit--that she puts some of his ashes in food that she then serves to his family. The film implicitly begs the question, "did he deserve to die?". Given that this is a rape-revenge film, the answer is "yes" because more often than not, death is the punishment for rapists in this genre of film. However, the fact that Violation is so realistic makes the punishment very jarring. Wes Craven's The Last House on the Left is ridiculous, over-the-top, and baldly exploitative, so it makes sense within the world of the film for the victim's mom to lure the rapist with a blow job and then literally bite his dick off. In contrast, Violation is so naturally filmed and the rape is not a super violent one, (to be clear, I don't think rape needs to be "violent" in order for the rapist to deserve punishment) so the audience is thrown for a loop at how intense and utterly gruesome the punishment is. 

Likewise, A Promising Young Woman could be viewed as a rape-revenge narrative that goes "too far" in that Carey Mulligan's heroine, Cassie, punishes people who didn't actually rape the victim, but didn't help her either. A Promising Young Woman is controversial because Cassie isn't a "good" heroine. She goes above and beyond to punish everyone who hurt her friend and does so by putting some of them in danger's way. The ending is also super controversial and unsatisfying for some people, despite being more realistic than other rape-revenge films (such as the excellent French film Revenge). 

But what both of these films do is honor the intense rage that a victim of assault--or someone whose loved one was assaulted--may feel. Another thing our society does is see rape victims as people to be pitied. Literally, people will say shit like "The rapist RUINED HER LIFE" as if rape is something that is so damaging, a person can never recover from it. There are even people who imply that rape is worse than death. Now, look, I am fortunate to have never been a victim of assault so far in my life, but if I were a victim of assault I'd be pretty fucking incensed at the implication that it would be better I had died than be violated. I trace this sentiment back to our culture's obsession with a woman's "virtue". That a woman is "ruined" or "damaged goods" if she--willingly or not--engages in a certain amount or type of sexual activity. Because we have this incredibly damaging and false narrative about women and sex, survivors of assault as assumed to be sad and scared more than anything else. But what about mad? We rarely honor the justifiable anger a woman might feel not just towards her assailant, but towards all the people who downplayed her assault or didn't believe her. These two movies honor than rage. 

I think I'll just end by reiterating a few opinions, as well as giving some recommendations.

1) No one should ever feel pressure to watch films, television, etc that contain content that is upsetting to them. 

2) We should not strive to "ban" certain acts from being shown on film, or for certain topics to not be addressed, because being able to confront and talk about taboo topics allows us to fight for justice IRL.

3) That said, websites like Does the Dog Die? are excellent resources for folks to consult before they watch a movie that might contain triggering content. Also, anyone who says "there are no trigger warnings in life!" to mock people or downplay the very real importance of trigger warnings can suck my butthole.

4) Rape-revenge films can be exploitative. They can also be empowering and cathartic. Most often, they can be both.

5) Here are some recommendations of not just rape-revenge films, but narratives that handled assault in a unique, often empowering, way:

I May Destroy You (perhaps one of the most nuanced TV shows about rape/assault that I've ever seen. I cannot recommend this show enough)

Teeth (a young, Christian woman discovers that she has teeth in her vagina. High-jinks ensue!)

A Promising Young Woman (literally nominated for an Oscar this year)

Revenge (a French film in which a young woman murders her attacker, as well as the men who stood by and did nothing)

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (the rape-revenge plot is more of a side-plot, but Lisbeth Salander is one of the most badass avenging angels in cinema)

Unbelievable (this Netflix limited series based on a Pulitzer Prize winning article about a serial rapist and the women who worked together to bring him to justice)

The COVID Diaries--Part 16

Here is what I am watching (so far) during the quarantine for COVID-19.

General spoiler warning for the whole post, as well as trigger warnings for discussions of violence and rape in a couple of the reviews.

***

The Last Blockbuster

This delightful documentary is about the last Blockbuster video rental store, which is located in Bend, Oregon. The film chronicles the rise and fall of Blockbuster, which for a couple decades was *the* dominant video rental chain in the world. The director interviews the manager of this relic and self-proclaimed "Blockbuster mom", Sandi Harding, as well as famous funny people like Kevin Smith, Doug Benson, and Paul Scheer, who all reminisce about the effect that video stores in general, and Blockbuster in particular, had on them as children and young adults.

I learned some cool stuff by watching this movie, such as the fact that VHS tapes would sell for nearly a hundred dollars when they first came out (and to think that you can't give them away now!) and that Blockbuster (allegedly) had the opportunity to buy Netflix and turned them down back when Netflix was a fledgling video-by-mail company.

I recommend this documentary to anyone who loves nostalgia and to all the film nerds out there who were undoubtedly effected by Blockbuster. Although I was always more of a Hollywood Video gal myself.

Grade: B+

***

Death Proof

I'm kind of shocked that it took me this long to watch Quentin Tarantino's half of the double-feature Grindhouse which was released in 2007 (I haven't seen Planet Terror, either, and weirdly--it's not streaming on the same platform as Death Proof). I am a devout, if sheepish, fan of Tarantino's (I say sheepish because I think the man himself is gross, even if his movies are...*sigh* unquestionably genius. I wish Tarantino had as much character as he has talent) so I've pretty much seen every movie he's directed multiple times. 

Well, Death Proof did not disappoint. It contains the mixture of pulp exploitation, gut-churning violence, and truly excellent dialogue that QT is known for. The film is split into two halves, and each half focuses on a group of young women. The first group include "Jungle" Julia (Sydney Poitier--yes, daughter of Sidney), an Austin-based DJ, Shanna (Jordan Ladd), and Arlene (Vanessa Ferlito)--three friends who go out to a bar for a very extended drinking session before a friend meets up with them and they head out to a party. While at the bar, they meet "Stuntman Mike" (Kurt Russell, cast perfectly in the role), a stuntman with a "death proof" car (well, death proof for him anyway). But Stuntman Mike spends most of his evening talking with Pam (Rose McGowan), and he gallantly offers her a ride home at the end of the night. When Pam gets into the passenger side of the car, which has a metal seat, no seatbelt, and a glass partition, we know she's done for--even if she hasn't realized it yet.

Mike has a fetish for killing women using his car. After taking Pam on a brutal ride where he speeds up and slams on the breaks, forcing her to slam all over the interior of her side of the car, he finds out where the other ladies are driving and drives at them, full speed, with the headlights off. Even the ones wearing seatbelts are goners.

Cut to...MOTHERFUCKING LEBANON, TENNESSEE! I used to live there! It's not as cool at QT makes it look, but I also did not run into any murderous stuntmen while living there, so it's a wash I guess. The second group of ladies are all Hollywood folks: stuntwoman Zoe Bell (playing herself), fellow stuntwoman Kim (Tracie Thomas), hair and makeup artist Abernathy (Rosario Dawson), and actress Lee (Mary Elizabeth Winstead). Zoe sees an ad in the paper for a 1970 Dodge Challenger and wants to test drive it. She convinces Kim to play a dangerous game called "ship's mast" with her (and Abernathy, who begs to come along) which involves lying on the hood of car, using only belts to hang on to, while the driver speeds down a country road. Well, these ladies encounter none other than Stuntman Mike while on their joyride, who, unsurprisingly, tries to kill them. They escape him and end up hunting him down, and the film ends with Mike--broken, shot through with bullet holes, and probably concussed--being beaten to death by these women. Yay feminism!

I realize I just relayed the entire plot, but I highly recommend this fun and gory movie. If you like QT you'll like it. If you don't like QT, you probably won't. But if you want to see a bad guy do bad things and then be brutally punished for it, this is your movie. 

Grade: A

***

Violation

Uhh...speaking of bad guys doing bad things and being brutally punished for it. This movie is that. Big time. Violation is a rape-revenge film by Madeleine Sims-Fewer (who also casts herself in the lead role of Miriam) and Dusty Mancinelli. I found it to be very intense, compelling, and not like a lot of other rape-revenge films. For one, it's not exploitative in the way many films in this genre can be. But, more surprisingly, it suggests that in this particular case, the punishment that the victim metes out really does not fit the crime. However, it still honors the absolute, soul-destroying rage that a survivor of sexual assault might reasonably feel towards their attacker. 

In this movie, Miriam, who is raped by her brother-in-law, takes that rage to a grotesque extreme, plotting and carrying out revenge on him that looks like something that would occur in a slaughterhouse. It's violent, but not in a Tarantino sort of way--the violence looks real, not cartoonish. I don't know if that makes it easier or harder to watch. I mean, it wasn't that bad to me, but I watch some pretty extreme shit. 

I actually might write an entire blog entry about rape-revenge films because I have a lot of thoughts about them and how I feel that they often have something to offer beyond exploitation. Some people say that acts of sexual assault should never be shown on camera, but I disagree because sexual assault is part of so many people's lives, that to not show it, ever, no matter the circumstances or how it is shot, is tantamount to suggesting it is too taboo for people to contemplate. And you know what, people SHOULD contemplate it. Men especially. But more on that in a later post. 

Violation is a very good and interesting film, if not an easy one to watch. The most difficult scenes were not the ones of Miriam's assault (which is filmed in a very non-exploitative way, focusing on her eyes and hands, rather than on her body) or the ones of her sawing off Dylan's legs (don't worry, he's already dead. Whoops, spoiler I guess), but the scene of her trying to confront Dylan about what happened and him refusing to acknowledge it, as well as the scene of her trying to tell her sister what happened and, heartbreakingly, her sister suggesting that, in fact, Miriam "fucked up" and it's her fault. The victim not being believed is the true violation of Violation and makes it a difficult watch. Proceed carefully.

Grade: B+

***

Naughty Books

This cute--and at times, melancholy-doc is about women who write erotic fiction. The film follows writers C.J. Roberts, Kristen Proby, Laurelin Paige, and others (as well as, unfortunately, some commentary by noted fake feminist hack Katie Rophie) as they discuss how the were inspired to write books in the wake of E.L. James' success with her Fifty Shades of Grey trilogy. Many of these women ended up selling hundreds of thousands of copies of books that they published themselves--a phenomenon that would have been impossible before Fifty Shades of Grey. Criticize the fake-BDSM trash pamphlet all you want, but it helped a lot of women make bank, so...

But Naughty Books also shows how when the market is flooded, not as many people can turn a profit. Similarly, the fickle nature of readers means that authors are at the mercy of what readers want to read about--and if they write what THEY want to write about, they might not be able to live off of their sales. Also, a couple of the women find themselves in marriages that are now miserable because of their success. It seemed that no one interviewed had a truly supportive spouse, and, in fact, one woman found herself the victim of abuse once she became successful because her husband couldn't deal with her bringing in more money than him. She leaves him, and meets someone better, so--like the books featured in the doc--there is a happy ending after all. 

Grade: B

***

The Perfect Host

I just could not with this bizarre film. I went into The Perfect Host thinking that it would be a straightforward psychological thriller: a career criminal, John (Clayne Crawford), tries to escape the cops by showing up at a random man's door and pretending to be a friend of a friend. The man, Warwick (David Hyde Pierce), is the consummate host, and welcomes John in even though he is in the middle of preparing for a dinner party. But when John's scheme is revealed, it turns out that Warwick wasn't the simpering wimp that John thought he was. Ok, this sounds good: criminal ends up at the mercy of secret psychopath. I'm in.

Only...that's like one of about 25 tedious "twists" in the film, each more ridiculous than the last. Not only is Warwick a psycho, he also turns out to be THE POLICE LIEUTENANT IN CHARGE OF INVESTIGATING THE VERY CRIME JOHN COMMITTED BEFORE HIDING OUT. Come the fuck on, seriously?! Plus, there are twists (multiple) involving the actual crime (a bank robbery), twists (multiple) about whether or not Warwick is a serial killer...just twist upon twist upon twist until the movie barely made sense anymore. It's like someone had ideas for five separate movies and decided to cram them all into one. 

Though The Perfect Host starts out strong and has its moments, overall the damn thing is a disappointing mess.

Grade: C-

***

Badlands

Terrance Malick's first film, Badlands, is based on the true crime spree of Charles Starkweather and his girlfriend Caril Ann Fugate. In the movie, Martin Sheen plays Kit Carruthers, a 25 year old garbage collector who starts "dating" 15 year old Holly Sargis (Sissy Spacek). Ok, look, this is definitely child grooming and statutory rape, but that's not really what the movie is about so I will simply point it out and move on. 

Holly's dad doesn't approve of their relationship--shocker--so Kit shoots him and burns the house down. He and Holly run off to the badlands of Montana where they hide out and live in peace and freedom until bounty hunters show up. Kit kills them. Then Kit's friend, Cato, shows up. Kit kills him. Then friend's of Cato's show up. Kit lets them go. Just kidding--he fucking kills them too! Basically, Kit is trigger-happy (although very sweet to Holly, thank God) and the ending of this movie is inevitable. It's sort of like Thelma and Louise except, you know, no one in this movie really had to die. 

Like Malick's other movies, the plot isn't really isn't the point. Badlands is beautifully filmed and the soundtrack is also gorgeous and dreamy. Spacek's voiceover narration infuses the whole film with a childlike sense of wonder even during the most chilling and violent moments. But just as every child must grow up, Holly eventually decides she's had enough and turns herself in. The movie ends on kind of a quirky note with Kit charming the hell out of the National Guard troops, who treat him like a celebrity, and then Holly's voiceover informing us that Kit was executed by electric chair while she, Holly, went on to marry her defense attorney's son. Which was not quite how it ended for Charles Starkweather's girlfriend. 

Badlands is considered an American classic. For me, it was much like Terrance Malick's other films which feel very "ASMR-y" to watch--like, they lull me into this state of calm and relaxation--but I never feel a strong desire to return to. However, I think of all the Malick films I've seen so far, this is my favorite one. Recommended for film buffs.

Grade: A-