Comments on: Review: Straw Dogs

By: Rodney

Rodney — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 09:26:01 +0000

I haven’t seen Straw Dogs yet. As I write this, there’s a remake coming out by director Rod Lurie, who also gave us the magnificent Gary Oldman starrer The Contender (check it out if you haven’t seen it) – I read an interview with Lurie about his intentions behind the remake, which shed some light on WHY remaking such a classic film anyway was worth a shot… : http://www.moviesmackdown.com/2011/09/rod-lurie-talks-smack.html

I plan on giving Straw Dogs a shot at some stage very soon….

Dan, this is one of the best reviews I think you’ve written.

By: Dominic

Dominic — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 12:32:44 +0000

It’s a hugely riveting movie. The rape is supposed to shock and unsettle but Peckinpah never suggests she asks to be raped only that she appears to get satisfaction out of the act once it has started. That alone is an interesting conceit – daring and provacative. But let’s not forget she has had sexual relations with this man before – her ex-boyfriend – and that she is craving for male attention (both mental and physical). Her enjoyment isn’t in being raped but in remembering what it was like to have the raw sexual energy she remembers with her ex. Peckinpah clarifies that this barbaric act is not in her wishes when she clearly hates the second man (someone she has never been attracted to, or had sexual relations with, presumably) and his violation of her.

It isn’t easy viewing but that’s the point. The ambiguity of it all makes the film so damn good. Where I think people get stuck up on is her role in bringing the rape on to herself. That doesn’t mean she asked to be raped but she made it more lightly given the circumstances. So, was she at fault – yes, she was. Does that justify rape – no it does not. But, just like you wouldn’t walk down a dark alley in a bad neighborhood all alone at night, she is in part at fault for what happens (both directly to her and indirectly through David).

By: Dan

Dan — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 09:43:04 +0000

@Goregirl: A 1970s month sounds like fun! Straw Dogs would be great addition for a spot of violent retribution and another fine Dustin Hoffman performance.

@Grace: Thank you Grace.

@JasonW: Agreed. For me, Straw Dogs is Peckinpah’s best film.

By: Goregirl

Goregirl — Wed, 10 Nov 2010 20:30:45 +0000

A powerful and provocative film and Dustin Hoffman (one of my favourite actors of all time) is particularly brilliant here! Great review as always and yet another awesome flick I will definitely need to add to the queue for my 1970′s month.

By: JasonW

JasonW — Wed, 10 Nov 2010 16:25:31 +0000

This and The Wild Bunch are Peckinpah’s two best films in my opinion.

In regards to the rape scene – it is obvious she is not happy about it in the second instance even though the first is a little ambiguous.

By: Grace Owen

Grace Owen — Wed, 10 Nov 2010 10:59:38 +0000

I’ve never been a huge fan of Straw Dogs. It isn’t because I think it glorifies rape but the violence is too heightened for my tastes. That said, I think it is a powerful film and portrays its message of revenge in a stylish and effective way.

As an aside, I don’t think Dan suggests for a second the girl asks to be raped. She craves attention and gets more than she bargain for in, as Dan says, the most shocking way possible.

Dan’s analysis of the film is one of the most original and interesting I’ve read. That Peckinpah chooses to see the girl appearing as though she is in fact enjoying the forced sexual act is a hugely contentious issue. This review rightly looks at it from a different perspective – and if the film is about alpha males and male dominance, so be it. It doesn’t mean rape is justified though.

By: Dan

Dan — Wed, 10 Nov 2010 09:11:00 +0000

@Diana: Yes, you’re right, it is her honour. But in my analysis of the film I saw it to be a film about David. Amy’s character is an extension of his story (in the most shocking way possible). The rape is therefore the ultimate violation of David’s honour. You could argue that the ultimate violation of him would be a rape directly against him but isn’t is made more powerful that it is against his wife?

By: Diana

Diana — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 22:32:31 +0000

So a woman’s gang-rape is ‘the ultimate violation’ of her husband’s honour? I thought it was her own honour that was being violated – thanks for enlightening me!

By: Dan

Dan — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 22:31:07 +0000

@Diana: There is no doubt she acts provocatively which was my point. She is trying to gain attention and she does this by posing naked, knowing that it will get a reaction. That isn’t the same as saying she brought the rape on to herself. Even though she knew her attackers she obviously had no clue they would go to such terrible lengths.

There’s also a difference between walking around naked in your own house, and walking around naked in full view of workers fixing your roof. She knows they can see and there is a method to her provocative nature. She is bored and she wants to get a reaction out of David. Again, trying to amuse herself and gain the attention of her husband (as well as draw some male attention from others where she feels it is lacking currently with David) is not the same as saying – “well, she asked for it”. That’s the sort of thing I’d expect to hear from a narrow-minded feminist.

By: Diana

Diana — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 22:15:28 +0000

” She even displays her naked body at the window when she knows he’s outside working on the house roof, her body available for Venner and his co-workers to see.” God forbid that a woman should dare walk naked in her own home. Why don’t you just come out and say she asked for what happened to her?