Martyrs
0/4
Starring: Morjana Alaoui, Mylene Jampanoi, Catherine Begin
The version being reviewed is unrated. For the record, the rated version is rated R for Disturbing/Severe Aberrant Behavior involving Strong Bloody Violence, Torture, Child Abuse and Some Nudity
Back in the early years of the last decade, the term "torture porn" was used to describe horror movies like "Saw," "The Collector," and so on. Those movies scared audiences through showing characters facing not only death, but horrific pain. Of those, I've only seen the original "Saw" (which was good) and its first sequel (which was not). "Saw" may have been horrifically violent and graphic, but it, as the adage goes, it's only a movie. "Martyrs," on the other hand, is anything but.
I can think of no other purpose for "Martyrs" than being pornography for individuals who experience pleasure from watching women in pain. Almost the entire movie is watching women getting tortured. 90 minutes of women being forced to experience unbearable physical pain and humiliation. This is one sick movie.
A ten year old girl named Lucie (Jessie Pham) has escaped her captors. She is unable to tell anyone what happened to her, but authorities figure out that she was kidnapped and horrifically abused. She's placed in an orphanage, where she makes fast friends with Anna (Erika Scott). Soon, the girl begins to heal.
Cut to 15 years later. Lucie (Jampanoi) has her mind set on tracking down the people who robbed her of her childhood so violently and getting revenge. She has enlisted Anna (Alaoui) to help her, but Anna doesn't know how far Lucie intends on taking it. Lucie has escaped Anna's watchful eye and brutally gunned down a family, having been convinced that the parents were her torturers based on a photograph she saw in a newspaper. After events too tedious and nonsensical to explain, Anna finds out first hand what really happened to her friend.
There's almost nothing here in terms of plot or character. Writer/director Pascal Laugier, who probably needs to have some long sessions with a shrink about his issues with women, doesn't care about anything else but watching Anna get tortured. What she goes through is vile and humiliating. Misogyny really doesn't begin to describe this movie.
The performances are okay, with Alaoui and Catherine Begin, who plays the main villain, being particularly effective. But in service of what? They have nothing to play. Alaoui just has to scream and writhe in pain while Begin merely has to be a one-dimensional psycho, whose motives (when revealed) are laughable. Being scared requires that the audience form a bond with the protagonist. In another movie, I think these actors might have a shot, but here, all I could think was, "Why the hell am I watching this garbage?"
As I have said before, I have nothing against violence or torture in movies, even horrific acts of both ("Frontier(s)," another French horror film, is a fine example). They are worthy of defense if they are in the service of a strong character or story. That's not the case here. It's all about how sadistic Laugier can get, and he goes very far.
Aside from the violence and hatred of women, the film is still a load of crap. Character development is so scattershot that the characters never have consistent motives or behavior. The editing at times is unbelievably haphazard. And the film can get downright cheesy. Take for example when one character gets repeatedly beaten on the head with a sledgehammer (believe me, this isn't half as awful as what Laugier has in store for Anna later on). The woman's head doesn't bleed, spill brains everywhere or anything. It was probably a rubber hammer and Laugier didn't bother to make it seem real (not that Laugier was being coy...once the film shifts to present day, there isn't a scene that goes by where someone isn't covered in blood and body matter.
This movie attracted my attention through iMDb, and as I'm writing this review, I'm looking at what some of its defenders have said. Apparently, Laugier called it the "anti-'Funny Games,'" (Michael Haneke's revisionist revenge thriller that sounded a lot better than it actually was). The film's staunchest fans called it "brave" and "daring" and so forth. A few have admitted that this is not a film that one "likes," which is certainly true. Attempts to put it into some sort of philosophical or political metaphor, which undoubtedly some have tried to do (I've never understood why that is...are they trying to impress the intellectual crowd?), would be hilarious if the movie wasn't such a sickening piece of shit.
Trust me, there are many more films that are scarier, more intelligent and visceral than this garbage. Watch one of those instead. If there's any justice in the world, every copy of this movie would end up in a landfill next to the "E.T." cartridges for the Atari. I can think of no better fate for this monstrosity.
Starring: Morjana Alaoui, Mylene Jampanoi, Catherine Begin
The version being reviewed is unrated. For the record, the rated version is rated R for Disturbing/Severe Aberrant Behavior involving Strong Bloody Violence, Torture, Child Abuse and Some Nudity
Back in the early years of the last decade, the term "torture porn" was used to describe horror movies like "Saw," "The Collector," and so on. Those movies scared audiences through showing characters facing not only death, but horrific pain. Of those, I've only seen the original "Saw" (which was good) and its first sequel (which was not). "Saw" may have been horrifically violent and graphic, but it, as the adage goes, it's only a movie. "Martyrs," on the other hand, is anything but.
I can think of no other purpose for "Martyrs" than being pornography for individuals who experience pleasure from watching women in pain. Almost the entire movie is watching women getting tortured. 90 minutes of women being forced to experience unbearable physical pain and humiliation. This is one sick movie.
A ten year old girl named Lucie (Jessie Pham) has escaped her captors. She is unable to tell anyone what happened to her, but authorities figure out that she was kidnapped and horrifically abused. She's placed in an orphanage, where she makes fast friends with Anna (Erika Scott). Soon, the girl begins to heal.
Cut to 15 years later. Lucie (Jampanoi) has her mind set on tracking down the people who robbed her of her childhood so violently and getting revenge. She has enlisted Anna (Alaoui) to help her, but Anna doesn't know how far Lucie intends on taking it. Lucie has escaped Anna's watchful eye and brutally gunned down a family, having been convinced that the parents were her torturers based on a photograph she saw in a newspaper. After events too tedious and nonsensical to explain, Anna finds out first hand what really happened to her friend.
There's almost nothing here in terms of plot or character. Writer/director Pascal Laugier, who probably needs to have some long sessions with a shrink about his issues with women, doesn't care about anything else but watching Anna get tortured. What she goes through is vile and humiliating. Misogyny really doesn't begin to describe this movie.
The performances are okay, with Alaoui and Catherine Begin, who plays the main villain, being particularly effective. But in service of what? They have nothing to play. Alaoui just has to scream and writhe in pain while Begin merely has to be a one-dimensional psycho, whose motives (when revealed) are laughable. Being scared requires that the audience form a bond with the protagonist. In another movie, I think these actors might have a shot, but here, all I could think was, "Why the hell am I watching this garbage?"
As I have said before, I have nothing against violence or torture in movies, even horrific acts of both ("Frontier(s)," another French horror film, is a fine example). They are worthy of defense if they are in the service of a strong character or story. That's not the case here. It's all about how sadistic Laugier can get, and he goes very far.
Aside from the violence and hatred of women, the film is still a load of crap. Character development is so scattershot that the characters never have consistent motives or behavior. The editing at times is unbelievably haphazard. And the film can get downright cheesy. Take for example when one character gets repeatedly beaten on the head with a sledgehammer (believe me, this isn't half as awful as what Laugier has in store for Anna later on). The woman's head doesn't bleed, spill brains everywhere or anything. It was probably a rubber hammer and Laugier didn't bother to make it seem real (not that Laugier was being coy...once the film shifts to present day, there isn't a scene that goes by where someone isn't covered in blood and body matter.
This movie attracted my attention through iMDb, and as I'm writing this review, I'm looking at what some of its defenders have said. Apparently, Laugier called it the "anti-'Funny Games,'" (Michael Haneke's revisionist revenge thriller that sounded a lot better than it actually was). The film's staunchest fans called it "brave" and "daring" and so forth. A few have admitted that this is not a film that one "likes," which is certainly true. Attempts to put it into some sort of philosophical or political metaphor, which undoubtedly some have tried to do (I've never understood why that is...are they trying to impress the intellectual crowd?), would be hilarious if the movie wasn't such a sickening piece of shit.
Trust me, there are many more films that are scarier, more intelligent and visceral than this garbage. Watch one of those instead. If there's any justice in the world, every copy of this movie would end up in a landfill next to the "E.T." cartridges for the Atari. I can think of no better fate for this monstrosity.
I think you were definitely WAAAAAAYYYYYYYYY TOO harsh on this film, it's pretty well-made and has some tense scenes, my issues are the second-half(which goes too far off track). There are definitely FAR worse films then this one(like the Twilight series).
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't call this film "misogynist" at all just because it has women being tortured.