I Spit on your Corpse, I Piss on your Grave
Review by Peter Syslo

I SPIT… (2001) is very close to being a “snuff” film, much in the same vein as the August Underground films. It is exploitative in every sense of the word and it truly goes “balls to the wall” with the shock factor. It’s funny, but I actually came across this movie because of a mistake at my online movie rental site - I put the original I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE (1978) on my queue but I received this instead. At first I wasn’t even going to watch it, because I was disappointed that it wasn’t the 1978 film. But, I put it on anyway because nothing else interesting was on the largely worthless cable channels that gobble up part of my monthly income. Surprisingly (about 20 minutes into it), I changed my tune and it became a voyeuristic, freakish spectacle which I wanted to continue to watch. A strange, morbid curiosity came over me, much lik e the first time I watched a FACES OF DEATH video, and I wanted to see how it all ended. While I am still debating the entertainment value of this film, I can’t deny that the filmmakers really did produce a compelling exploitation film that shamelessly crosses many boundaries.

I SPIT… is written and directed by Eric Stanze, who is the owner of Wicked Pixel Cinema - he recently (2007) made DEADWOOD PARK (which I am eager to see) and he has been a real force in the independent horror community. Regarding I SPIT… ; the film stars Emily Haack (Sandy), Scot Spookytooth, Shaun Snow, John Specht, Jeff Atwater, and Kimberly Pesek.

The basic plot of the film centers around a woman named Sandy ; she is taken hostage by an acquaintance and it turns out that this man also captured three men, with whom Sandy is also familiar. At first, it seems like a traditional horror/torture situation but it quickly spirals out of control as Sandy begins to take grisly revenge upon all of the men involved. The tables are severely turned as an unstable, mistreated Sandy unleashes hellish fury and it all leads up to one of the most graphic climaxes (no pun intended) that I have ever seen in any movie.

Well, the movie is an experience – there is no doubt about that. As I hinted at earlier on, I can’t say that I would necessarily watch this film solely for entertainment. Actually, it is the kind of film that may be best to watch by yourself; I would be careful who you show it to, they may not be your friend afterwards – and it probably would guarantee a breakup or divorce, for that matter. However, I think that it is a well-made film and it was one that kept me watching; if nothing else, it is worth seeing for the, “I can’t believe they showed that” aspect.

Now, let me say a few words about the graphic nature of the film. Overall, it is not really a gory film – the graphic nature has to do more with perverse situations. Believe me, even the toughest guy may cringe at some of the things depicted in this movie (the effects are really good). You do see flashbacks to Sandy ’s mistreatment, but they are not nearly as graphic as the revenge scenes, involving the men. Overall, the perversity of the film ranges from a lot of female frontal nudity to urination and defecation. Last but not least, is perhaps the most talked about aspect of the film: the final revenge scene. I really can’t go into too much detail because words just can’t do it justice and because a minor may be reading this review. All I will say is that it invo lves a broom handle and it is something straight out of an adult/fetish film (I am still in disbelief over this scene, and over Emily Haack’s conviction).

But, all shock value aside, I think that pretty much all of the actors were truly invested in their roles, with Emily Haack being the definite high point . According to the documentary, Haack suggested things that were beyond the scope of the script and Stanze himself explained that he asked everyone if they were sure that they wanted to do certain things – all said “yes” and I think that the devotion of the actors really came through in the final product. Apparently the foreign backers of the film really wanted to add shock elements to make it truly exploitative/fetish. Instead of everyone fighting it, they all said, “let’s go for it” and pushed it as far as they could go – which I admire and I think that the resulting film was worth it.

Cutting to the chase: I SPIT… is harsh, unapologetic, and perverse – yet, I think that it is very well made and it is one of the most “interesting” independent films that I have ever seen. Also, the special feature documentary was really good and provided a great accompaniment to the movie (the police actually investigated Stanze because someone found special effects “body parts” in his dumpster). I think that Eric Stanze is an up and coming director and he may be like the next Sam Raimi – yeah, I think that this guy has it in him to really knock the horror genre on its arse and revitalize it; I’m eager to see what he does in the future. To wrap it all up, if you like 1970s exploitation cinema or like the August Underground/Nick Palumbo type of films then you may like this movie. If you are easily offended or you are more of a tradi tional viewer then I don’t know if it would be for you – but, you never know. More often than not, the penitent church-goer is the depraved fetish fan – on every other day but Sunday, of course.