Rating: 
Summary: oh my
Review: The re-enactment was just too much
Rating:
Summary: Jodie Foster Shines in a Lackluster Film
Review: The storyline moves somewhat slowly, the conclusion is anti-climactic, and the characterizations are overly-stereotypical. The performances leave a lot to be desired...except, of course, for Jodie Foster's powerful performance for which she received her first Academy Award. Foster gives a truly remarkable portrayal of Sarah Tobias, a woman gang raped on a pinball machine in a bar. Her character provides an emotional depth which is simply lacking in the others. Despite its many flaws, this film is worth watching just to see Jodie's acting skills.
Rating: 
Summary: To encourage a rape is a crime
Review: This film has aged, and yet it is brightly up-to-date. It is an eye-opening film that wants you, hence us, to realize the seriousness of rape. Not maybe the crime itself. No one will reject, entirely at least, the criminal nature of this act, even if some men may look at it with dubitative eyes and gross jokes in the mouth. But what this film is all about concerns justice for one and the « audience » of the rape for two. Justice finds it difficult to go to court and they prefer at times some deal rather than a full-out trial. It is easy. It gives the attorney some good conscience. And it does not rub the wide public too much against their grain. But the most difficult problem of the two is the attitude of the « audience » of the rape. A rape is often a multiple event that engages several men in the act, several, rapists but also several and at times many spectators. You can find different behaviors in front of such a crime. Those men who will look or even watch, shocked in their deepest unconscious or subconscious mind, but who will do nothing to stop it or to expose it. Then you have those men, and at times women, who will be shocked and will walk away and try to forget. Finally you have those men who will encourage the « show » and become accessories of the crime without realizing they are becoming accessories of a crime, entirely taken up by the action and their thrilled excitement. Which is worse : to be a rapist or to be a thrilled, excited and encouraging if not even more accessory ? I do not know, but the film definitely considers that both are crimes, and they are. Is it as simple as that to say that without such an « audience » many rapes would not take place ? Maybe. Do those accessories have to be tried, convicted and sentenced severely ? Probably, because after all they may become some kind of master-minds to the rape itself, though to behave like that is not really to show the intelligence we could expect from a master-mind. Such films will never be outdated as long as that crime exists, even if it were possible to reduce the numbers. That crime is massive in numbers and it is committed most of the time by perfectly sensible, intelligent, coherent people, who yet demonstrate that in some conditions they lose all their sense, intelligence and coherence. It is a crime that does not require the slightest amount of intelligence to be performed. In fact it even requires to have as little intelligence as possible : a rapist loses all sense of decency, most of the time. Of course it is a surviving practice in our societies where ethics have changed tremendously, and yet the animal is so close to the surface of so many people, men, should I say, because rapists are essentially men.
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Performance by Jodie Foster
Review: This film is pretty much a run of the mill made for TV flick up until the startling, graphic rape scene. However this distinction must be made. First, TV movies just weren't made about this subject until after this film came out--it opened many doors, and for that it should be applauded. Second, Jodie Foster gives an excellent performance and provides an unflinching look at how rape can ruin a victim's life.
Also, this film deserves credit for portraying the victim as a strong willed character who is far from perfect-and it sends the message that flirting with someone does NOT mean that you deserve to be raped. And I applaud the fact that this film doesn't take the extreme view (hello Lifetime channel) that all men are pigs who either enjoy victimizing women or don't see anything REALLY wrong with doing so. On the contrary, this film has many likeable male characters (even one who helps the victim with her case, despite the fact that one of his friends raped her). Though it's not perfect, there are many redeeming qualities to this ground breaking film.
Rating:
Summary: WHERE TO DRAW THE LINE?
Review: This film was timely in that it brought the issue of date rape to the forefront of public consciousness. Not so much "date rape" as the concept of what constitutes rape? Is it enough for the rape victim to have said no? Was she asking for it because she dressed provocatively and had a spotty sexual or personal history? Do those things matter? Should they matter in the eyes of the law? These were questions that were rarely asked in the 1980s, but at the time when this controversial film was released, these issues were starting to become very high profile, public issues. For this reason, the film is effective. The other reason the film is effective is because Jodie Foster disappears into her role as the rape victim. And Kelly McGillis is a strong advocate for Foster's character and for the pursuit of this issue of prosecuting rapes and the rapists who perpetrate such crimes. Apart from a very visible and vivid rape scene, the acting abilities of the two women, and the raising for the rape issue, this film is just another film.
Rating: 
Summary: Sensitive portrayal of rape, no "male-bashing" whatsoever
Review: This is a difficult movie to watch at times but is worth it because Jodie Foster deftly portrays the struggle of a young woman to prosecute the men who gang-raped her, and the others who cheered on and instigated the crime. Her character determinedly fights against all odds to be as brave as possible when she has hardly any support from anyone, and even her lawyer seems to think she partly deserved to be raped. The film demonstrates, however, that even when a woman flirts, wears skimpy clothing and has too much to drink/does drugs, nothing should ever take away her right to say "no" to sex.
One reviewer thinks this film is about male-bashing. The scene she refers to, where she tells a potential witness that he's "worse than the others" takes place right after he informed his lawyer that he really "didn't remember" what happened in the bar and that the lawyers pressured him into testifying. Since he was the only witness who was able to help her, it should come as no shock that she was upset and hurt that he chose to back out of testifying and stick up for his rapist friend rather than her, the rape victim. In the end, though, he went with his conscience and told the truth, that he did watch her get raped and he knew who had cheered it on--and at that point, Jodie's character was most grateful towards him. A "heroine" needn't be a perfect angel. To believe that this movie involves male-bashine is to not have been paying attention and to make knee-jerk assumptions.
Rating:
Summary: Impressive thriller
Review: This law room thriller is about a woman (Foster) who is raped in a seedy bar. Although her lawyer (McGillis) believes her, her past involving drugs works against her and the rapists are put away for only three to five years. The guilty McGillis then sets about trying to prosecute those that watched the rape, in doing so letting Foster tell her story. There is obviously a lot to criticise here, although the central performances and the reluctant friendship that the two women form pull it above the usual courtroom fare. Foster pulls in an absolutely outstanding performance that makes you forget all about 'Silence Of The Lambs'. She manages to be both feisty and vulnerable at the same time and your eyes will be fixed on her in every scene that she's in. That's certainly not to say that McGillis isn't just as good, as she underplays effectively in a less showy role. In short, they work together perfectly, making the quietly respectful friendship the two form never appear clichéd or dull. The movie also wisely steers clear of pushing any feminist message too far, making this simply a movie about one woman and her struggle for justice. It's a credit to Foster that this struggle is never less that riveting. A great deal is made of the explicit rape scene, which is without a doubt incredibly disturbing. Although some may see it as the emotional weight of the movie, Foster's performance is enough to convince you of the hell her character's been put through. Still, it's not often that a movie often known purely for its explicit nature should turn out to actually be pretty accomplished.
Rating:
Summary: Damned Mad!!!
Review: This movie sent shock waves through my system which remained in my inners for a long time. I realize it is only a movie, but when the acting, the writing and the direction are almost flawless, the final product is convincing and long lasting. Jody'role and acting had to affect her emotional well being as she had to endure humilliation in one particular scene. The movie deals with crude real life drama and at times, it's not easy to watch. I give this movie a powerful 5 stars and thumbs up.
Rating:
Summary: Strong Performance
Review: This movie starts immeadiately after a rape occurs, and follows the victim (Jodie Foster) through medical care, interaction with her friends and family and through the court system. "The Accused" in the film's title actually refers to the victim (Foster) whose charcter and history is the issue for most of the film, instead of the rape. Foster gives a fine, nuanced performance as a working class woman. Most court room films end up being fairly anticlimatic. This film has a huge ending by showing the actual rape at the end of the film instead of the beginning. Foster's performance here is searing. Anyone who does not understand how a women can dress suggestively, get drunk and still be raped really needs to see this film.
Rating:
Summary: about the movie the accused.......
Review: This story is basically about how a rape case was won in the court for a young woman(as narrated in the story) whom was gang raped by five people pinning the actress down on one of the pinball machine in the game machine vicinity at one of the private pubs. The scenario of the rape scene is not graphical like irreversible and this usually stir the minds of woman with the man's raping beasty acts. This movie was shown cut in Singapore during the 88-89 period under Lee Kwan Yew. I personally saw this movie at my indonesian classmates house where we went in to Malaysia to purchase during of Secondary school time(at the age of 17+) before it was screened later in Singapore. This is the reason why we have lots of chance to watch these movies at that time when Malaysia Prime Minister was Tunku Abdul Rahman. There was no VCD at that time but only in VHS tape format which is usually bad video quality. There was no internet at that time and the movie was not allowed in Singapore as most of these western movies are recorded using the 'papa' finger.
|
