Jaded

Rating:
Summary: Full of surprises!
Review: The cover, the nudity, the use of the "f" word, and the R rating may make you think this is an exploitation movie but actually director and co-writer Caryn Krooth's psychological drama is full of surprises. It begins with Meg Harris (Carla Gugino) claiming to have been raped by two women. Rape is apparently legally defined as a male crime only so, in order that the assailants are prosecuted to the full extent of the law, Meg must have them charged with sodomy which is defined in terms of subjugation and force. The rape is shown in flashbacks but Krooth suggests rather than makes the acts explicit. This strategy probably goes one better than the scene in The Accused since here, in spite of featuring 3 naked females, the sex is de-eroticised and marginalised. The narrative follows the course of the investigation leading to the trial, which Krooth cleverly skips, and the plot develops in more and more interesting and unexpected ways. The subject is probably handled so well because the writers and director are female, and the strength of the film is the acting of the women. There are good performances from Aida Turturro as a policewoman, Catherine Dent as the prosecuting attortney, Lorraine Toussaint as the defendants attorney and Ellen Greene in a cameo. The actors playing the rapists aren't given much depth though and oddly, Krooth's male characters are all weak. Meg has additional problems so Gugino's twitches become repetitive and even the one good time she is given is marred by her wearing a disfiguring black lipstick. Could Krooth be saying that shade is fortuitous? Don't ask me what the title is supposed to mean though.

Rating:
Summary: Full of surprises!
Review: The cover, the nudity, the use of the "f" word, and the R rating may make you think this is an exploitation movie but actually director and co-writer Caryn Krooth's psychological drama is full of surprises. It begins with Meg Harris (Carla Gugino) claiming to have been raped by two women. Rape is apparently legally defined as a male crime only so, in order that the assailants are prosecuted to the full extent of the law, Meg must have them charged with sodomy which is defined in terms of subjugation and force. The rape is shown in flashbacks but Krooth suggests rather than makes the acts explicit. This strategy probably goes one better than the scene in The Accused since here, in spite of featuring 3 naked females, the sex is de-eroticised and marginalised. The narrative follows the course of the investigation leading to the trial, which Krooth cleverly skips, and the plot develops in more and more interesting and unexpected ways. The subject is probably handled so well because the writers and director are female, and the strength of the film is the acting of the women. There are good performances from Aida Turturro as a policewoman, Catherine Dent as the prosecuting attortney, Lorraine Toussaint as the defendants attorney and Ellen Greene in a cameo. The actors playing the rapists aren't given much depth though and oddly, Krooth's male characters are all weak. Meg has additional problems so Gugino's twitches become repetitive and even the one good time she is given is marred by her wearing a disfiguring black lipstick. Could Krooth be saying that shade is fortuitous? Don't ask me what the title is supposed to mean though.

Rating:
Summary: this movie is not a sex romp
Review: to tell you the truth, i mean thats what i expected to, i mean just look at the girls on the cover(though i want to make one thing clear, the 2 on the cover are models used for a cover, they are not the actors in the movie, the girls in the movie are on the back in the black and green tinted picture of them all dancing, though the large photo on the cover is carla gugino "meg"), "BUT" there is also blood on the cover, is there not. Its about a girl named Meg. A strait girl. Shes had a rough night and wants to go to the bar for drinks with her friend. She ends up going stag and meets up with 2 girls named pat and alex at "jacks" a local bar. jack introduces pat and alex to meg and they buy her a drink. What she believes to be a fun night with the girls is actually a meditated sadistic rape being planned out. They go to the beach together to skinny dip and they sense she may be bi curious and decide to use that against her and they cut her up, rape her and leave her for dead. for the most part this movie is prep for their trial. See a while back women couldnt be tried for rape in the first degree. it didnt exist in legal terms, only sodomy in the first. it follows her throuought the process of trying to get justice.
its a great movie. i wouldnt be rating it if i didnt think so.

Rating:
Summary: this movie is not a sex romp
Review: to tell you the truth, i mean thats what i expected to, i mean just look at the girls on the cover(though i want to make one thing clear, the 2 on the cover are models used for a cover, they are not the actors in the movie, the girls in the movie are on the back in the black and green tinted picture of them all dancing, though the large photo on the cover is carla gugino "meg"), "BUT" there is also blood on the cover, is there not. Its about a girl named Meg. A strait girl. Shes had a rough night and wants to go to the bar for drinks with her friend. She ends up going stag and meets up with 2 girls named pat and alex at "jacks" a local bar. jack introduces pat and alex to meg and they buy her a drink. What she believes to be a fun night with the girls is actually a meditated sadistic rape being planned out. They go to the beach together to skinny dip and they sense she may be bi curious and decide to use that against her and they cut her up, rape her and leave her for dead. for the most part this movie is prep for their trial. See a while back women couldnt be tried for rape in the first degree. it didnt exist in legal terms, only sodomy in the first. it follows her throuought the process of trying to get justice.
its a great movie. i wouldnt be rating it if i didnt think so.