I Spit on Your Grave 2: A Descent into Torture Porn
Katie is an aspiring model desperate for a professional portfolio, but her funds are limited. Her search leads her to a studio run by three Bulgarian brothers who promise a free photoshoot – only to reveal that it requires her to pose nude. Katie refuses and leaves, but one of the brothers, obsessed with her beauty, follows her home. He murders her neighbor who comes to her aid and then rapes her. With no turning back, the killer abducts Katie to Bulgaria, turning her into a sex slave.
The original film had a limited theatrical release in the US, while the sequel went straight to video.
“Torture porn” can now be considered an official subgenre of horror. “I Spit on Your Grave 2” fits this description perfectly, accurately capturing what you’re about to witness. The original 1978 film gained notoriety due to its ban in many countries, sparking curiosity and driving audiences to see what made it so controversial. However, the sequel, released 15 years later, faced no such bans and remained largely unseen.
Director Steven R. Monroe directed five other films between the two installments.
The remake from three years prior followed the original’s formula, simplifying the plot to a basic “Rape? Revenge!” concept and maximizing violence per square inch of film. This connection to the original’s controversial history helped the remake recoup its $1.5 million budget, primarily through video sales. The sequel follows suit, offering another retelling of the same story of a beautiful woman’s brutal revenge. With nothing new to offer, the film relies on escalating the level of violence to shock the audience.
Pushing the Boundaries of Violence
If “I Spit on Your Grave 2” is “torture porn,” then previous films in the genre could be considered “softcore erotica.” Director Steven Monroe carefully blends physical and psychological violence. Electric shocks to the vagina alternate with spitting in the face, and testicles in steel vises are followed by forced immersion in toilets filled with urine and feces. Each scene is excessively drawn out, pushing the limits of what the rating board allows. The plot between these scenes is weak, with the rapists inexplicably chasing after the “ghost” of their victim into dark, unknown basements.
Lack of Artistic Merit
There’s little to no artistic direction or acting to speak of. The film resembles a typical pornographic film, but instead of moans of pleasure, the actors scream and writhe in pain. Jemma Dallender, as Katie, spends most of the film naked, covered in dirt and fake blood. While it may be a step forward in the “torture porn” genre, it shouldn’t be judged as a work of art. Just as we don’t analyze regular porn for its artistic value, we shouldn’t apply those standards to films featuring tortured, naked women mutilating their tormentors into a bloody mess.