![Ladydny1](/img/default-banner.jpg)
- 3
- 82 548
Ladydny1
Registrace 26. 03. 2011
Siskel & Ebert 1980 Women In Danger Part 2
Siskel & Ebert 1980 Women In Danger Part 2
zhlédnutí: 21 796
Video
Siskel & Ebert 1980 Women In Danger Part 1
zhlédnutí 61KPřed 13 lety
Siskel & Ebert 1980 Women In Danger Part 1
Horror movies rule & are fun (who usually survives the final……girl 😉) I never liked these 2 schmucks
This is like Anita sarkessain before Anita sarkeesian Was a thing
I agree with some of their comments but think they also miss the point too. Horror films often involve women screaming or in peril, go back to the Hammer Mummy film 1959, The Tingler 1959. In Rosemary's baby the main character is seemingly raped by the Devil but its still considered one of the greatest horror movies of all time partly because of its subtext about religion, paranoia, modernity, privacy , the women's movement, its wonderfully directed and acted, its simply a classic. By the 1980s all that had happened was films had just got more graphic. In Friday the 13th which they hated the main villain is actually a woman who kills both men and women without distinction. The final survivor is also a resourceful and brave character who's presented as a good independent positive character throughout isn't a goody goody either, she smokes weed and is in a relationship with her boss at the start. Women girls in danger and needing saving is not new, it goes way back to Dracula and even Little Red Riding Hood.
I Spit On Your Grave was not copying Halloween, it was made the same year.
I wonder if the glut of then contributed to their opinions. These seemed to come in all at once
One thing we can all agree on. If it wasn't for these movies Jamie Lee Curtis probably wouldn't have been discovered and had the huge career she's had.
WAIT wait wait wait...in the year 1980, a movie ticket cost only FOUR BUCKS?????? No joke, THAT is what scares me the most about this special.
Siskel mentions movie tickets in 1980 cost $4.00 dollars. I looked up the inflation calculator and that translates to a little over $13.00 dollars today.
Some of the stupidest remarks from Siskel & Ebert, not only with the ludicrous references to women's lib, but also the suggestion that _Psycho_ was different somehow and less offensive in its portrayal of violence to women. If anything, it was more graphic than some of the films mentioned here (even if it is mostly implied). And ten years after this review, they gave glowing praise to the "serious" movie, "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer", which makes these films seem tame by comparison in its realistic, nonstop, beginning-to-end brutality, and where most of the victims are women, including a teen who isn't a stranger, but the sister of his friend. Henry kills her after she expresses her love for him
Gene gave thumbs up to the Howling wich I find ironic
PRE WOKE COMMENTARY
But the killer in Friday the 13th was not even a man Siskel.
"Motel Hell" is one of my all-time favorite movies. And besides that, I'm pretty sure Roger Ebert liked it and gave it ***. MH is not part of the genre they think they are talking about. And besides that, in "Motel Hell" there were more male victims than there were female!
Siskel and Ebert are taking these movies way too seriously and that's exactly what the slasher fans don't do is take any of it seriously. These guys just need to lighten up. Of course they're ridiculous movies. These guys are just no fun, as far as I'm concerned.
I spit on your grave is violent but a woman get revenge in that
Uh, did they forget Halloween starts with a POV shot of a little boy stabbing his topless sister? Interesting video. I thibk their best theory was that people just keep ripping each other off. I don't think there was a anti women's liberation themes in the movies.
When a stranger calls was actually a good suspense horror. In what way was it sleazy? I spit on your grave and Maniac were sleazy movies. Mind you that i liked both of those movies especially the last one. But my point is that Ebert don´t know the difference between sleaze and suspense. May him R.I.P.
Siskel & Ebert sucked. Two thumbs down to these clowns. They sound like the Catholic Church condemning films. Two Jerks
I find it ridiculous that these two were always bashing horror movies, stating that these movies "hate women". Anyone who grew up watching 80's horror movies, or watches Dead Meat's CZcams channel knows that the number of men who die in these movies almost always outnumber the women who die. For example, in Friday The 13th, Pamela Voorhees kills four women, but kills five men. Yet I never heard Siskel or Ebert address this fact. I loved these two and respect their opinions, but they were always biased towards the majority of the slasher movies that came out in the 80's. Their point became invalid, whenever they mentioned the amount of women killed in these movies, while completely ignoring the men's deaths, and that there were almost always more male victims than women. Plus, in Friday The 13th, the killer WAS a woman. She didn't hate women. She was a mentally unstable person who was killing to avenge the death of her son. I would have loved to have seen horror movie fans sit with Siskel and Ebert, pointing out everything I mentioned. Men almost never survived horror movies, which is why we have the phrase "final girl", instead of "final man".
Since you bring up Dead Meat, it's important to note that he often counts all kills in a movie, regardless of whether they happen on screen or off. So a dead body that you see a character walk by counts as much as someone that takes some time to kill (think Terrifier where we just see the pizza owners head decapitated by Art while we see him sawing through Dawn). I'd also encourage you to watch the Kill Count in Saw 3D. In that there are 19 men that die and only 7 women. But James specifically points out how it has a strangely angry attitude toward women. Think of how there's a subgenre where women get raped and tortured throughout it. Sure, in the end with some of them they survive and kill their abusers. But most of the movie is again them being treated like shit. There's no comparable horror subgenre that specifically targets men like that. And also think of all the horror movies that have to show women being killed while they're naked and compare that to how often you see a guy hanging dong while he's killed. I remember in the Friday the 13th remake where Jason kills a woman on the dock, and just has to lift her up to show show that she's topless.
One of the most infamous episodes. And for good reason, it’s not very well researched.
I wonder what Roger ebert thought of gta
He Said video game Can’t not be art
Prom Night is a really strange pick. It's not a slasher film it's a revenge film. He doesn't just target women he only targeted the people that killed his sister.
You'd expect such respected film critics to understand that depiction doesn't mean endorsement. Also fuck Gene Siskel in particular for doxing Friday the 13th star Betsy Palmer simply because she was in a film he didn't like. Real mature.
As someone who's seen a lot of slasher films, the men tend to suffer more gruesome deaths than the women. Plus I Spit On Your Grave is an explicitly anti-rape, pro-feminist film. Frankly, Siskel and Ebert come across as incredibly out of touch here.
I remember seeing this when it first appeared on TV. It definitely influenced how I look at "horror" films.
Today's bullshit films are ghost and haunted house's because society is worst than fiction..theres 4 networks devoted to real slasher one born every minute. I write films horror since 1990 has nowhere to go that's why it sucks.to be scared of killer's in the dark you have to be scared of killer's in the dark if everyone's a killer who is it your scared of.rape one click on porn hub.murder the news. If society wasn't sick you could enjoy a slasher film
They would not have enjoyed Grand Theft Auto video games.
Ebert say he not video game fan
Ah. Siskel and his feminist rants lol. I'm a huge Siskel and Ebert fan as well as a massive horror hound especially the golden age slashers. These two were so misguided by these films. I never let their views upset me. However, I can completely understand why so many horror fans hated them. If they had taken the time to interview other horror fans who could give their opinions and some defense of these films I think that would've gained them more respect from the horror community rather than just aim their show on strictly bashing these films with their misguided opinions. Did they stop to think about all of the men that are killed in these films as well (probably even more than the women)? Did they realize that the killer in Friday the 13th is a middle aged woman? Did Siskel even know that The Howling isn't a slasher film HAHA? Love you guys! R.I.P.
PSYCHO AND HALLOWEEN MUST HAVE HATED WOMEN TOO THOUGH NO MATTER IF THEY WERE CLASSIER OR NOT BECAUSE WERE WOMEN WERE MURDERED AND THEIR LIVES WERE IN DANGER IN THOSE MOVIES TOO
In "Silent Scream" and "Friday The 13th" the murderer IS a woman!?!? And men are also victims in both films. And if EVER there WAS a film which HAD an independent woman it was "I Spit On Your Grave"!!!! Calling the cops wasn't going to satisfy her need for justice! I always enjoyed these two blowhards crying about graphic violence in exploitation films.
Long live William Lustig!!!!! RIP Joe Spinell and thanks for the unforgettable performance in the masterpiece that is "Maniac". Oh, and thanks to Tom Savini also....
Remember that the 70s were also a time of lots of real serial killers out there in the USA. A scary time to be a young independent woman with Berkowitz, Bundy, etc all out there. Maybe art reflecting life?
I wonder how they felt about the 3 Sleepaway Camp movies. There you had a female character (better played by Bruce Springtsteen's little sister in the 2d and 3rd) killing boys, as well as girls.
I miss Gene and Roger. :-(
666 Likes! Oh the irony! LOL!
I own & love everyone of these movies...
I'm really interested in other people's thoughts on this, since I haven't watched any of the movies. I spit on your grave is a rape and revenge story, isn't it? How does this fit in with the rest of the movies? I was under the impression it was more empowering than demeaning of women, almost like a reply to the other movies which were coming out.
Siskel and Ebert got a few things right here, but they got a lot of things wrong. ISOYG is misogynistic in the fact that it depicts a graphic rape (though it doesn't glorify the rape at all, so...) But, ultimately, the movie is about a woman who gets her revenge and the men's death scenes are done in a way where the viewers will cheer the woman on. A lot of the movies they're talking about do not belong here. "The Howling", "Motel Hell", "When a Stranger Calls" and, in a way, "Friday the 13th" because the killer is not a sexually frustrated male going after scantily clad women.
ISOYG isn't "empowering" imo, it exploits the girl's revenge for viewer's excitement, just like all male revenge movies do. It would be like saying that, say, "Commando" is empowering to guys, when it's just exploitation aswell.
Little did they know in 1980 that the entire decade would be chock full of these types of movies.
While I agreed with them then (and now), this special may have backfired, giving those movies a second life and exposure to a larger audience. In fact, I recall a few years ago finally watching the original "I Spit on Your Grave," and I wish that I listened to the two and bypass this picture. It had zero redeeming value, and it made me feel sick watching it.
I love & own everyone of these movies ..Mothers day (1980) & I Spit On Your Grave (1978), are my absolute favorite movies.
Lol! People making comments on this are ridiculous as are Siskel and Ebert's point of view. Black Christmas and Texas Chainsaw Massacre were the precursors to all of slasher movies. In each of those movies we see the perspective primarily from the killer. Slasher movies aren't typically done from the victim and when you show it from the victim, it defeats the purpose of building up suspense. You yourself are the victim being stalked by the killer. In almost all of these moves all the women lasted until the end when the fought back. In real life women are not as physical as men so showing the latter and what happens builds up hatred for those people. I.E. the people from I Spit on Your Grave.This is why Siskel and Ebert hated horror. they never understood it. If we left it up to them, we'd probably have nothing outside of ghost stories.
I remember enjoying Siskel and Ebert when I was a kid, but even back then, really being put off by their stance ( sincere or otherwise ) on slasher films .. Women in peril was nothing new in 1980, as you can look back to 1960's masterpiece PEEPING TOM or 1964's BLOOD AND BLACK LACE as the films that ushered in the modern era of horror, and what eventually became the slasher genre .. Or go back to 1929 with UN CHIEN ANDALOU and see Bunel and Dali put a women onscreen having a closeup of her eyeball slashed .. These are MOVIES and no one should be forced to adjust for political correctness or the comfort of any audience .. If someone doesn;t want to witness women being targeted, simply don;t see the movie .. And if it means that much, make your own movie - relying on other to get what you want never works out in life ..
Also a little known horror film called Violent Midnight from 1963 was supposed to be the first teenage slasher horror film
I didn't know that.
Exploitative women in danger films were out there long before Halloween
Black Christmas, Texas Chainsaw Massacre both very violent slashers yep. The whole women or girls in peril from the monster goes way back in time to stories like Frankenstein and Dracula or even Little Red Riding Hood, Snow White for kids. The original Little Red Riding Hood is very dark for children, the wolf actually eats her and that's the end of it and the moral is to beware of dangerous wolfs with nice manners. Of course now Disney is making them all woke and pc.
And the movie also had sexually active teenagers and scantily clad teenagers and naked teenagers in it
All the final girls were responsible and strong why didn't they recognize that and Jamie Lee Curtis cowered in the closet and a knife was being brandished in her face
Or Dressed To Kill (1980)
They didn't mention Maniac (1980)
That film did not play in Chicago-Siskel & Ebert's home base-until less than a year after the special was first broadcast.
Friday the 13th was huge and acceptable
I admit I saw all the Freddy Krueger and Jason Vorhees movies as a kid. That was because I had an older sister I was close to and we watched a lot of movies together and she identified with the survivor girl in those films, but those films always made me afraid and I never routed for the killers. But the problem may be with slasher films is that they show sexually provocative imagery of women followed with scenes of realistic depictions of graphic, brutal violence and perhaps in some viewers it creates an association which links sex and violence. Some of the worst most detestable crimes are committed by perpetrators who are sexually aroused by violence.
That's true.
On the other hand, it may make some people scared of sex, by connecting the act with unavoidable "punishment". Both options suck. But most of us are just simply entertained by the thrill. And that's what counts.