Featured Audience Ratings

• Gregory D

  
  I thought the original was both powerful and traumatic so I was excited about the remake. I was disappointed when they opted for a more trendy style, with a torture set up rather than a more primal and cinematic revenge film. I liked Saw, but the original I Spit On Your Grave had its… More
  I thought the original was both powerful and traumatic so I was excited about the remake. I was disappointed when they opted for a more trendy style, with a torture set up rather than a more primal and cinematic revenge film. I liked Saw, but the original I Spit On Your Grave had its own formula that would have worked better without borrowing from other films.

• Matt G

  
  Terrible remake. Less elaborate and exciting than the first. Sarah Butler has NOTHING on Camille Keaton. Honestly, the first one had her manipulating the guys after the rape, while this time around she just straight up kills them with no trickery. Not very entertaining. The only funny… More
  Terrible remake. Less elaborate and exciting than the first. Sarah Butler has NOTHING on Camille Keaton. Honestly, the first one had her manipulating the guys after the rape, while this time around she just straight up kills them with no trickery. Not very entertaining. The only funny thing was when that dick ate that dick.

• Jeff "

  
  This one of those rare remakes were the remake exceeds expectations, and becomes better than the original. This is a brutal, unrelenting revenge horror film that doesn't shy away from being extreme. Like the 1978 original, I Spit on Your Grave leaves the viewer feeling uneasy,… More
  This one of those rare remakes were the remake exceeds expectations, and becomes better than the original. This is a brutal, unrelenting revenge horror film that doesn't shy away from being extreme. Like the 1978 original, I Spit on Your Grave leaves the viewer feeling uneasy, and in my opinion, it's what makes this film so unique in delivering the tension. Nothing is more powerful in the horror medium than exploring the darker side of human nature. The result is a powerful film that will most likely stay with you long after you've seen it. This is a bone chilling tale of vengeance and every cast member is excellent in their parts. Director Steven R. Monroe delivers a stunning remake is better acted and at times more disturbing than the original, but that's what he seaked to accomplish, and in that regard, he succeeded. This is Exploitation cinema at its finest. This is not a film for the weak minded as the film is pretty violent. If you're looking for a horror film that takes a look at the dark side of the human nature, this is one the one to watch. In many ways, this is superior to the original, due in part to its good cast who bring something terrifying to the screen. The standout aspect of this film is the actual retribution of the lead character who suffers the violent rape and beatings of the gang. This is a hard film to watch, but if you can manage it, it's worth seeing. This is a film that joins the original and The Last House on the Left as one of the definitive revenge films.

• Josh L

  
  I have not seen the original, but this movie is brutal and had me flinching a few times (I rarely flinch). This is disturbing stuff and really makes you think about how it is probably happening out there right now to someone as I type this. It's thought-provoking and at the same… More
  I have not seen the original, but this movie is brutal and had me flinching a few times (I rarely flinch). This is disturbing stuff and really makes you think about how it is probably happening out there right now to someone as I type this. It's thought-provoking and at the same time still entertaining as a thriller.

• Crash E

  
  a real must-see... one of the best remaked movies and I think there is no need to see the original one!!, watch it and you well be able to taste the sweet brutal taste of revenge

• Unknown H

  
  Whether you liked the original or not this film is enough removed from it to be viewed on its own. The torture scenes are not that of the last movie and Butler holds her own as the lead. Of course in 1978 when the first movie came out it was easier to shock audiences, so this 2010… More
  Whether you liked the original or not this film is enough removed from it to be viewed on its own. The torture scenes are not that of the last movie and Butler holds her own as the lead. Of course in 1978 when the first movie came out it was easier to shock audiences, so this 2010 remake was bound to follow in the footsteps of Saw and the like with torture traps all suiting the crimes of their victims. Yawn. Its been done, but when it is done well you can kind of let it off. Interesting take on the storyline, brutal, graphic but ultimately not that great.

• Reid V

  
  Grade A torture porn. No that is not a compliment.

• Dean !

  
  A re-make of the 70's video nasty that was banned for a long time. I've not seen the original to compare them. The actors do quite well considering the brutality of the film, imagine it was tough to film as it can be tough to watch at times. It maybe has a few plot holes or… More
  A re-make of the 70's video nasty that was banned for a long time. I've not seen the original to compare them. The actors do quite well considering the brutality of the film, imagine it was tough to film as it can be tough to watch at times. It maybe has a few plot holes or questions along the way, but basically this is all about the payback being dished out in gory inventive ways. Well made if not a great film. If you don't like violence don't watch it!

• Bethany M

  
  Very weird and scary! I was on the edge of my seat and some of the scenes really make you feel sick. A must see!

• Cynthia S

  
  A sick, twisted, bloody time of a horror film!! It's as violent, as it is disturbing. I even had a tough time watching a couple of parts which is alot coming from me (I can handle my horror gore). Revenge is not so sweetly done!

• E.J. B

  
  Let's put it this way. What if your sister, your girlfriend, or some girl you know is brutally gang raped and left for dead. Miraculously, she survives. Now let's say you were in a position to exact a bloody revenge on her attackers without the law knowing about it. Would… More
  Let's put it this way. What if your sister, your girlfriend, or some girl you know is brutally gang raped and left for dead. Miraculously, she survives. Now let's say you were in a position to exact a bloody revenge on her attackers without the law knowing about it. Would you do it? I can speak for myself and say I wholeheartedly would but that could be because I watch too many movies. This remake may be cheap exploitation, but it's cathartic and I can't imagine a single person watching it feeling that these rapist pigs didn't deserve every ounce of pain that Jennifer Hills dishes out to them. Now, the question remains whether the movie is worth sitting through. Well, if you think there's merit in a movie that depicts a girl being raped and then that girl turns around and tortures her attackers in scenes that look like they're straight out of a Saw movie, then this is the film for you. I mildly enjoyed Meir Zarchi's original film, and this is a less raw, more polished remake that is more or less the same in terms of quality. Like the original, I barely knew Jennifer Hills' character at all, I was horrified by her rape, and I cheered on her revenge. I won't deny I wasn't entertained by seeing a woman do to rapists what the law should be doing to those convicted of such a crime, and I think that was the intent of both Zarchi's original and this remake. Thus, the movie may not be a great movie per se, but show it to the right people, and you could get a great conversation going.

• Drew S

  
  I Spit On Your Grave's abjectly uninteresting female lead ultimately undoes any positive feminist statement the filmmakers might have been trying to essay; their interests were clearly, first and foremost, in depicting her rape and subsequent torture-porn revenge on said rapists.… More
  I Spit On Your Grave's abjectly uninteresting female lead ultimately undoes any positive feminist statement the filmmakers might have been trying to essay; their interests were clearly, first and foremost, in depicting her rape and subsequent torture-porn revenge on said rapists. Past the first fifteen minutes of the film, Steven Monroe makes absolutely no effort toward developing Jennifer Hills. She's a writer; she is nice; she has friends; she smokes pot; she gets raped; she is sad; she gets even. With about twenty words, I've hit the exact same character bases as the film does with the exact same proficiency. This isn't necessarily the fault of Sarah Butler's decent performance, but Jennifer feels far less like an actual person and more of a ravaged blow-up doll come to life to spit edgy one-liners at its attackers. I will not deny the film its considerable strengths, as Monroe has a definite knack for dramatic rhythm and pacing. Unfortunately, they're in service of a hollow, cynical, pointless product, bizarrely devoid of fear or shocks; the only time the film is truly unsettling is during the rape itself, but only because the intention of the content is so blurry and dubious that you can't help but feel a little dirty. The kills substitute gore for meaning, as we're not really sure what it was inside this unassuming woman that drives her to commit such brutality in the first place, and the shallow ironies ("so you like to watch?") just make I Spit On Your Grave seem like it's trying too hard to be clever. Exploitation is at its worst when the human element is lost, but I Spit On Your Grave never really found it in the first place...

• Michael S

  
  Pointless remakes piss me off. For a remake to be justified and/or recommended, it has got to be better than it's elder or different enough to holds it's own (True Grit). This is an ugly, POINTLESS remake of a film that was bad to begin with (though the original was… More
  Pointless remakes piss me off. For a remake to be justified and/or recommended, it has got to be better than it's elder or different enough to holds it's own (True Grit). This is an ugly, POINTLESS remake of a film that was bad to begin with (though the original was entertainingly bad; remake is not). It's only redeeming factor for some will be some good killings, and that's not really redeeming at all. Skip this.

• ♥˩ƳИИ &

  
  Cast: Chad Lindberg, Tracey Walter, Daniel Franzese, Sarah Butler, Jeff Branson, Andrew Howard, Rodney Eastman, Saxon Sharbino, Mollie Milligan Director: Steven R. Monroe Summary: In this horror remake, young writer Jennifer (Sarah Butler) finds life at her rented retreat… More
  Cast: Chad Lindberg, Tracey Walter, Daniel Franzese, Sarah Butler, Jeff Branson, Andrew Howard, Rodney Eastman, Saxon Sharbino, Mollie Milligan Director: Steven R. Monroe Summary: In this horror remake, young writer Jennifer (Sarah Butler) finds life at her rented retreat perfect for working on her first novel. But her enthusiasm is shattered by her vicious rape. Now, the local thugs responsible will face an excruciating fate. Jennifer's attackers command developmentally disabled Matthew (Chad Lindberg) to kill her, but he fakes the murder, leaving the scarred writer to carry out a gruesome plot for revenge. My Thoughts: "I've seen some pretty brutal films, and this one will definitely make that list. It's never a treat watching movie's with rape scenes. But what is a treat, is seeing those abused getting their revenge. This film really made me gag. Some of the scene's are pretty gruesome and will make some of you, like me, cover your eyes or turn your head away from the screen. *POSSIBLE SPOILER* My favorite kill would have to be the sheriff. He really made my skin crawl more so then the others.*END OF SPOILER* The acting is OK. The lead, Sarah Butler wasn't bad and was believable in as her character. Obviously this isn't a film for everyone, but those who like a good revenge flick will enjoy this."

• Dean M

  
  This do-over of the 1978 rape-and-revenge nasty improves on the crude original in every respect - save that it's less upsetting. Among the most needless entries in the make-it-again stakes, it's a game of two halves: the first section finds city girl Jennifer (Sarah Butler)… More
  This do-over of the 1978 rape-and-revenge nasty improves on the crude original in every respect - save that it's less upsetting. Among the most needless entries in the make-it-again stakes, it's a game of two halves: the first section finds city girl Jennifer (Sarah Butler) menaced, molested and raped by a gang of rural misogynist creeps; this effectively unpleasant experience licenses the audience to enjoy Part Two, in which she visits Jigsaw-like vengeance upon scuzzball dolts. Director Steven R. Monroe does a sturdy job with the material, melodrama is salted with suspense (something the original couldn't manage), old plot holes are filled and Butler is strong enough to survive professionally. Among its redundant peers, better than the remake of <i>The Last House on the Left</i> or <i>A Nightmare on Elm Street</i>.

• jd c

  
  Brutal film...a very, very brutal film. I found it to be much more extreme than the original (mainly for its torture sequences - not the rape). I wasn't a fan of the 1978 version. Actress Camille Keaton was provocative and sexy as hell, and the performances were descent I guess,… More
  Brutal film...a very, very brutal film. I found it to be much more extreme than the original (mainly for its torture sequences - not the rape). I wasn't a fan of the 1978 version. Actress Camille Keaton was provocative and sexy as hell, and the performances were descent I guess, but I was a latecomer to all the controversy (Perhaps a little too late). When I watched the 78' version I was in my early 20's. By that time I've already seen too much, and had a lot to compare it to. I don't blame the 78' version completely though. I put part of the blame on me and my friend. We watched it with the promises of a most blood-soaked, all-time shocking and extreme cinema. Our source was a guy at work - a methadone addict stuck in the mid 70's, always in daisy dukes, with a ponytail down to his ass. He spoke of the film for weeks, and I've heard how shocking it was from others, but I was never interested enough to see it - Finally the hippie convinced me! Before then the movie just looked way too cheap to be any good (for my taste) and no one pushed it on me as much before as this crackhead did. So its title became forgotten to me. He said it was to be the most powerful, most sickening motion picture I'd ever see. The horror movie to end all horror movies! Every other horror title I threw at this guy he'd say, "Fu*k that! Rent I Spit on Your Grave! You'll never be the same again." Finally I watched it. Maybe I should have taken it more seriously, but my friend and I wound up abusing the movie from start to finish, laughing our asses off the whole way through. I was too desensitized by age 23, and maybe I was even drinking too much that night (but even watching it for a second time I still didn't find it MOST extreme and most POWERFUL). Maybe it was the most overrated! But all that crap aside, I couldn't even like it for its good qualities. The first viewing with my friend totally destroyed my image of the film. So I do place part of the blame on me. I really never gave the film a chance. I even made fun of the methadone addict for weeks after that. We disliked the guy already and he was an easy target. But his taste in movies, mainly I Spit on Your Grave, became the butt of most of our jokes. Whatever reason for disliking the original, no matter how unfair, I still can't watch it without thinking "poo-poo". I always said however, I kid you not, that If I was ever able to remake a horror movie, I Spit on Your Grave would be one of them (in matter of fact, I do have a top ten - all shitty, but potentially great films). So of course I wanted to see what they did with this remake. This time around I was blown away. I didn't think I was going to cringe at all, but boy was I squirming in my seat. Finally, a near-perfect remake! Better performances, better script, better filmmaking, BETTER KILLS...just better in every way. And I wasn't expecting the "most shocking" film at all, which it wasn't, but I also wasn't expecting it to be this good. That's what shocked me more than anything. I went from being just curious to being a big fan. This movie kicked ass. If you can stomach this kind of shit, give it a go. Otherwise stay away. You've been warned. Very sick flick! But I won't lie and preach to you, "It's the sickest movie ever made!" I wouldn't want to ruin a good movie. <img src="http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm89/JDHallowEEn/Horror%20CF%203/ISpitonYourGrave.jpg">

• Lorenzo v

  
  <i>""Tell me again how sorry you are."</i> A writer who is brutalized during her cabin retreat seeks revenge on her attackers, who left her for dead. <center><font size=+2 face="Century… More
  <i>""Tell me again how sorry you are."</i> A writer who is brutalized during her cabin retreat seeks revenge on her attackers, who left her for dead. <center><font size=+2 face="Century Schoolbook"><b><u>REVIEW</u></b></font></center> Back in 1978, the film I Spit on Your Grave (also known as Day of the Woman) provoked controversy due to its violence, gore and for daring to show a woman taking revenge on her own hands against the louts who raped her. As the time went by, the film became into a cult classic, not so much due to its intrinsic merits, but for having been censored (or forbidden) in many countries, something which helped to make it more popular. However, I Spit on Your Grave (1978) is definitely an intense and visceral experience thanks to its semi-amateur manufacture, rural locations and realistic style. Besides, the revenge methods from the main character seemed like a direct answer to the then rising slasher cinema, something which brought an additional level to the narrative. So, with all that "cultural baggage" carried by I Spit on Your Grave, how would a modern remake work? Considering the standards of the contemporary horror cinema, we can be sure that it will be more brutal and cruel; but would it reach the same historical and emotional impact from the original film? Even though the answer ended up being "no", I have to admit that on its own merit, I Spit on Your Grave (2010) is a disturbing, satisfactory and very competent horror film. As I expected, I Spit on Your Grave (2010) adds more blood and some new narrative elements. Some of them feel a bit irrelevant (for example, the destiny of the camera with which the rape is filmed), but other ones deepen into the private life from the villains, revealing the hypocrisy of monsters who disguise their evilness with a facade of respectable civilization. However, the biggest change is made on the main character's revenge, which adds a very interesting psychological component to the movie. Fortunately, I Spit on Your Grave (2010) remains within a plausible field, and even though it follows the torture-porn formula, the cruelty and grotesque violence feel justified and organic in the story. I truly appreciate the fact that screenwriter Stuart Morse found an appropriate variation which respects the original formula, at the same time he added a new subtext which avoids the film from being another hollow torture film. I Spit on Your Grave (2010) is a very interesting horror film which ended up being better than I expected. The first half of the film is very disturbing and impossible to "enjoy" in the conventional sense of the word; however, the second half is cathartic and very satisfactory. In conclusion, I recommend it unless you are a sensible person.

• Nicki M

  
  This was a good horror/revenge film, but I have to say it was not easy viewing. Of course that was to be expected considering it is a remake of a banned 70's "video nasty", (which, for the record, I have not seen, so cannot compare this to). I understand that the… More
  This was a good horror/revenge film, but I have to say it was not easy viewing. Of course that was to be expected considering it is a remake of a banned 70's "video nasty", (which, for the record, I have not seen, so cannot compare this to). I understand that the rape/abuse is much longer in the original, so I shudder to think, really, as it is, this is pretty hard to watch. The story follows city girl,Jennifer, who goes to a small town, staying in a cabin alone in the woods to work on a novel she is writing. I had trouble buying the attractive young actress as a novelist, but on the whole, the girl who plays Jennifer is very good. I would be interested in seeing her in some more substantial movies- this one is not a repeat viewer! (not for me, anyhow). She gets lost along the way and meets some of the locals at the petrol station. When they later discover where she is staying, they decide to go around there and assault her. There seems no real reason for the attack, and what follows is pretty horrific. Worse, when she actually does get away and asks for help from the sheriff, he turns on her too, and is even more vicious than the hoons! More torture occurs with Jennifer eventually left for dead. Where this differs from your usual horror is that Jennifer has flipped out, and she wants revenge! While I have to admit that the guys all got what they deserved, it was kind of uneasy viewing. It raised a few moral questions such as was she now as bad as them? Particularly with the mentally disabled boy, although the others really couldn't have cared less about. Though they were awful guys and no loss to the world, it still felt wrong to be cheering Jennifer on. She obviously needed help herself after all she went through. Really, really yucky viewing, but a good movie for it's genre.

• A.D. V

  
  Nowhere as uncomfortable as the original when it comes to the rape scenes but far more satisfying when it comes to Jennifer's revenge. While I'm not a fan of the whole 'torture porn' sub scene this is a very good example of what a film looks like when it actually… More
  Nowhere as uncomfortable as the original when it comes to the rape scenes but far more satisfying when it comes to Jennifer's revenge. While I'm not a fan of the whole 'torture porn' sub scene this is a very good example of what a film looks like when it actually works.

• Lewis C

  
  "Tell me again how sorry you are." I Spit on Your Grave is a remake of a vicious revenge/horror movie for the late 70's, when these kinds of movie were much more common. It's a brutal movie that some people will outright hate, but if you like seeing truly… More
  "Tell me again how sorry you are." I Spit on Your Grave is a remake of a vicious revenge/horror movie for the late 70's, when these kinds of movie were much more common. It's a brutal movie that some people will outright hate, but if you like seeing truly despicable people getting much deserved payback for their actions, you might want to give it a shot. Jennifer (Sarah Butler) is a young writer who rents a cabin in an isolated wooded area for a few months, in order to work in peace and quiet. She's attacked and terrorized by a group of sadistic rednecks that she had a run-in with earlier, and narrowly escapes to what she thinks is safety...only to end up in a much worse situation. She eventually gets away from them, but only after the group has horrifically assaulted her. They think she's dead, and they don't learn differently until she has already begun getting vengeance on them one by one. I really hope Sarah Butler gets to star in many (perhaps more pleasant) movies in the future, because she's a pretty good actress. These movies demanded the full gamut of emotions from her, and she delivered. The whole cast was good, but most of the other characters only had to worry about portraying various degrees of evil, pain, or terror. Lots and lots of evil, pain, or terror. Like I said before, I Spit on your Grave is definitely not for everyone. The initial attack on Jennifer is truly horrible, and the deaths she visits on those responsible are absolutely gruesome. It's not as difficult to watch as the recent remake of the somewhat similar Last House on the Left, though. It's also a better movie, overall.

Read all 20 featured audience ratings