Remove ads


84 min.
Wes Craven
Rating *
Votes *
2.7% (1:38)
* View IMDb information

Top comments

  1. dajmasta94's avatar


    My goodness it seems like most people here have completely avoided viewing this film under the right context. First of all this is an independent production from the early 70's so it's right in there with that first big wave of American independent filmmaking, these guys had no real idea of how to make a movie so you have to take things like the soundtrack (which is only half bad, there's some aspects of the soundtrack that are actually pretty strong) and the goofy comedic relief with a grain of salt. This movie is certainly not a masterpiece but it is definitely important and shrugging it off as a poor taste rip off of Virgin Spring is a pretty surface level criticism. This movie has an affect on people because it shows all of the graphic details of monstrous behavior without flinching. It does not give you the vice of cutting away very often and no this is does not make it pornographic or celebratory; evidence of this is after the rape of Mari you can literally feel just how conflicted the perpetrators are about their actions. There is an unspoken disgust amongst all of them for what they have done. Picking grass that has stuck to their bloody hands and just standing there not saying a word until they decide to get cleaned up and change. They have to put on new clothes to rid themselves of this disgust. There is so much power in that scene and that certainly isn't in Virgin Spring and it definitely wouldn't be as powerful or effective had the violence been depicted in a less graphic way. Appreciating this movie now is all about context and understanding that yes, it is a bit of a mess if you want to go through the boring check list of conventional craftsmanship but the movie is important because it challenged conventions so it would just be missing the point. I also kinda find the clunky soundtrack and comic relief to be kind of charming from the perspective that it's a bunch of guys who haven't learned about how to make all of those things work yet. It's obviously a huge learning experience for Craven. I get that's a lot to keep in mind while watching a movie but that's why the film is so highly regarded amongst certain people, not because it's genuinely some masterpiece but because it presented something interesting and upsetting to the established norm of the genre and it had huge impact on it. 5 years 11 months ago
  2. avatud2013's avatar


    The Infamous remake of Ingmar Bergman's "The Virgin Spring".

    I never watched it before, probably because thinking it would be a cheap and schlocky film overplaying the shock, but now having watched it I find it not to be the case.

    Well, definitely a lot of the fame comes from historical value. The film was made in the context of something that has now become widely called "a cultural revolution" in America. As I understand, a lot of such deeper/rougher themes were missing from American cinema before that time. I doubt many people had access to seeing Ingmar Bergman's original. Craven presented the idea in a b-movie scenario, to an audience that had been shielded from a lot that was going on in the cinema of other countries.

    Definitely rough around the edges, and being usually listed under horror movies probably does it disservice, as people are watching it trying to find something "believable" or "scary", something "examining the essence of violence", while seeing from historical perspectives might give it much more meaning.

    The characters and situations are unbelievable, it's a "constructed movie", to be sure, but I think it might have a lot of value if used to analyze "culture wars", "generational conflicts", etc. The horror movies from that time period ("Night of the Living Dead", "The Texas Chain Saw Massacre") definitely were doing things in relation to what was on at the time, they reacted to the failure of the happy "hippy-love"-attitude (that perhaps could be compared to the "pc-culture" of today - people thinking that by making other people not talk about bad stuff, it would disappear), and they definitely played with the "genre and function of horror movies as whole" to be sure.

    In a way this movie does seem as "conservative horror" at the start, and a lot of horror movies seem to present this "conservative" picture of the world - a girl deals with people of the wrong class, plays with "dangerous behavior" and gets what's coming to her, but from the ironic/playful/comedy tone that is used, (which it seems to slightly have in common with "The Texas Chain Saw Massacre") and the fact that it turns into a revenge-fantasy film by the end, and by the year it was made, I doubt it's too "serious" in some such conservative message.

    This film really makes you think of the "horror genre" as irony on conservative views. Just when imagining the context. Young people going to the cinemas (or renting a "banned in UK" videotape) to watch films with an exaggerated conservative message (don't do drugs or participate in disallowed forms of sexual behavior or there will be consequences), for fun, to smoke pot and to hopefully participate in disallowed forms of sexual behavior. It seems to be sort of like an ironic form of viewing (and making) movies, perhaps.

    I enjoyed aspects of this movie, both in music, editing, script: the main villain is quite good at almost being an iconic villain, though trying to do that in some quite unbelievable and constructed scenarios and I think the script definitely has it's moments: Nice reference to Alice Cooper through the fictional band Bloodlust. (Cooper's famous chicken incident had happened just a few years before.) I also quite like how the group of villains are talking about the "sex crime of the century" and the girl lists Sigmund "Frood", because he can't ever see phone posts without thinking of male sexual organs again. Yes, boys and girls, psychologists/philosophers can be the greatest sexual criminals of history.

    Overall, the movie is probably not ever going to be a "masterpiece" in any category, but valuable if seen from a historical or genre theory perspective and with somewhat clever moments of screenwriting, framing, editing, scoring here and there throughout. Also seems to foreshadow chainsaw as an iconic horror weapon.
    2 years 6 months ago
  3. Oneironaut's avatar


    I can't believe that there are fans of this. Awful movie, and I've seen it recommended as a good horror.

    Horrific soundtrack, terrible writing, worthless characters, just bad in every way. I regret watching it.
    11 years 11 months ago
See all comments


Login to see which of your friends have seen this movie!


  1. vortex_surfer and The one without an username added this movie to their watchlist 4 days 4 hours ago
See more activity

In 4 official lists

  1. This movie ranks #29 in Grindhouse Cinema Database's Top Grindhouse Classics
    Grindhouse Cinema Database's Top Grindhouse Classics's icon

    Grindhouse Cinema Databa…

  2. This movie ranks #38 in Tim Dirks's 100+ Most Controversial Films of All-Time
    Tim Dirks's 100+ Most Controversial Films of All-Time's icon

    Tim Dirks's 100+ Most Co…

  3. This movie ranks #101 in TSZDT's The 1,000 Greatest Horror Films
    TSZDT's The 1,000 Greatest Horror Films's icon

    TSZDT's The 1,000 Greate…

  4. This movie ranks #334 in Jennifer Eiss's 500 Essential Cult Movies
    Jennifer Eiss's 500 Essential Cult Movies's icon

    Jennifer Eiss's 500 Esse…

View all lists this movie is in