atomicgirl-34996 Wow, when I was growing up, this movie was such a big deal, pushed as some kind of edgy movie that dared to show the worst in humanity and explore moral ambiguity. So, I was pretty proud of myself when I reached college age and embraced this movie wholeheartedly. I thought I was being "so mature" for appreciating films like this over the ones that ended on a positive note or had a moral story.Fast forward several decades and now I see Straw Dogs for what it is: vacuous garbage that thinks it's deep for being nihilist, based on the fallacy that depicting rape, violence and mayhem is more realistic than showing the best in humanity. Well, I've got news for everyone. Showing the ugly side of life is no more realistic than showing the best side of life. Heroism, compassion, and kindness are just as much a part of reality as the ugly stuff. It's not a fairy tale that there are good people in the world, that terrible events can end on a positive note, that sometimes good people triumph over evil. This is my particular issue with Straw Dogs. Had the movie existed in its own amoral universe, that would've been okay. But this was the film that said that this was the reality of the world, and introduced the nihilism that is so prevalent in today's movies and TV shows now, in which there are no good guys or bad guys, no such thing as right or wrong. Almost everyone in every movie or TV show today will be a snide, unlikable jerk or guilty of some irredeemable act. And, have you noticed how the sweetest, kindest, and most endearing characters are always killed off in the most sickening, heartbreaking way? If you wanted to know why so much of today's entertainment is like this, it's because of this movie.Straw Dogs was also the film that also destroyed the concept of the anti-hero. Previously, anti-heroes were just flawed people who may have committed some so-called "sin" but had redeemable traits that more than made up for it. Thanks to this movie, anti-heroes can be flat out murderers and sadists. Comic book superheroes have been turned into murderous sociopaths, with the excuse that they're "troubled" or that giving them a dark side makes them more realistic. P'shaw. All of this is why I find Straw Dog's nihilism even more troubling than the infamous rape scene, because that scene did very little in the way of influencing public opinion about rape in general. Its nihilism, on the other hand, had a long lasting, toxic influence on American culture, so it merits a 1/10 from me for this alone.

yougottrumpedshow At the time this movie came out it was very controversial, violent and nihilistic. But it is still worth watching today even though it is dated. Dustin Hoffman gives an incredible performance as a man possessive of his wife, insecure, jealous, and simultaneously frightened hunted and aggressive, excessively violent hunter. This movie should be watched by all film fans, not to guarantee you will like it but you will at least see a very different film with a unique point of view and some questionable morals.

tstudstrup This is one of those movies that ticked me off so much that the fact that 0 stars and real swear words are not allowed here, infuriates me even more.David Sumner a spineless guy with no cojones and no love for his wife Amy, moves to a small town in England where they move into a farmhouse. Local drunk men are building a garage for them. They all wanna have sex with Amy. And that is okay apparently, because, she wears no bra and her nipples are visible through her sweater. And when a woman dresses like a slut, as the old saying goes. That is the message here. I kid you not. David treats Amy like crap. He doesn't pay any attention to her and wants to be left alone to work on his math. Amy is understandably frustrated and when she tries to tell him they want her, he tells her that they have good taste and that she should wear a bra. They have the local reverend over who invite them to annual festivity in the town.Afterwards David tells Amy how attractive the reverends wife is. Husband of the year right? But it gets worse. The men strangle Amy's cat. Amy knows who did it but David refuse to do anything about it.At one point David orders Amy to go take a shower (he does that a lot) and tells her to close the curtains, because the working men can look into the bathroom from the roof of the garage. To spite David she flashes her breasts in front of all the men. Dumb move. But that doesn't justify what happens next. Because later on two of the men rape Amy while the clueless dumb David is hunting ducks with some of the other men. And let me be clear here: nothing justifies rape!! Absolutely Nothing!! The fact that Amy partially enjoys the rape as it appears, it seems to me is because, she gets no love or affection from David. And she desperately wants that. So she just takes it where she can get it. Amy doesn't tell her a-hole world class husband that she's been raped. Because she knows he won't believe her anyway. He even scolds her once more right after the rape scene. All David does after that is firing the men that builds the garage. But I suspect he only does it to get his wife off his back about the dead cat.At the end of the movie He goes as far as protecting a local dimwitted pedophile, after accidentally hitting him with his car. The pedophile has killed a girl just moments before this. David doesn't know this,but he should care about his wife, not some guy that poses a threat to him and Amy, because the men outside want the pedophile. Instead of just handing him over to the men, he kills most of them, not to protect Amy but the pedophile. Some of the men kill each other.Then David asks Amy for the first time if she is okay. She nods and he takes the dimwitted murdering pedophile to a hospital.The movie ends.All this movie does is being sexist towards women. It tells us that it's okay that a man doesn't pay attention to his wife when she acts childish (wants her husband to pay her attention to her and be there for her)because she disturbs him in his work which is more important to him than his wife. It also tells us that because a woman dresses a little naughty and flirts with local men it's okay that they rape her. Because she brought it on herself.It also tells us that murdering a teenage girl is okay, because she brought it on herself, trying to seduce the pedophile. And he's dim-witted so he can't help himself.Has this movie taken place 100 years ago or at any point in time in the middle east, David's behavior towards his wife might have made sense. I have no idea why this movie is considered a masterpiece. People who praise this crap must be sexists and hate women.Avoid this turd of a movie.

SnoopyStyle David Sumner (Dustin Hoffman) is an American astro-mathematician city boy. He moves to his wife Amy's home village in Cornwall, southwestern England. He doesn't fit in the rural life. Her ex-boyfriend Charlie Venner is still interested. Charlie's friends are hired to repair the buildings. Their constant meddling start causing problems within the marriage.There's nobody to really root for in this movie. David and Amy start out as a happily married couple but for some unknown reasons, they start fighting. Out of the blue, she's flashing her boobs for the workers and he's coldly distant. Neither of them are that appealing. The connection drawn by Sam Peckinpah between violence and manhood could have been an interesting idea but this couple is really problematic. This movie is infamous for its violence and its rape scene. Amy's wandering eye really complicates matters, even the rape scene.