well where to start here . straightheads present me with a bit of a dilemma . have this film come out of italy in and say and 1975 and be direct by ruggero deodatto and star david hess and then i would be lap it up faster than labrador drink water on a summer day . because whilst tarantino and rodriguez be busy elsewhere with their homage to grindhouse cinema and dan reed have produce a rape or revenge grindhouse picture of his very own in england and and on seemingly the same budget a it would have take rodriguez to turn rise mcgowan leg into a machine gun . because if you want to play grindhouse bingo and then let me call out the number represent 1. rich and high fly career woman meet a bit of rough from the wrong side of the track in an implausible manner and and equally implausibly and get the hots for him . check . 2. gratuitous shot of say high fly career woman in various state of nudity . check . 3. convoluted and highly unlikely plot development that set up character that exist solely to do what they do and who can not be imagine to have any existence outside the scene they be in . check . 4. unnecessarily graphic rape scene perpetrate by a gang of male with no discernible depth of personality or background other than they be there to rape . check . 5. gritty and bloody scene of murder and revenge to round it all off . bingo . plotwise and straightheads be pretty basic stuff represent dyer meet anderson and she invite him to a party at a country pile own by her bos . on the way home and they upset three local in a landover who take their revenge by give dyer a good shoeing and gang rap anderson . the couple then set about get their revenge . so far and so straw dog and late night train and house on the edge of the park and i spit on your grave etc etc . so why do not i think much of this film . a number of reason represent i suppose first off and have the like of gillian anderson in the cast prima facie lead me to expect good and but it the complete lack of honesty here than rankles most . because whenever anyone sit down to watch hess and his ilk terrorise woman and murder their menfolk in those period piece from the 70 and then they always know exactly what they be get low budget quicky design solely to shock and appeal to the low common denominator . the baddie terrorise and murder the goody and the goody turn the table on the baddie and kill them back and and everyone go home satisfy and their desire to see a bit of nasty violence slake and safe in the knowledge that the world order have be restore . a writer and director however and dan reed clearly believe straightheads have far more to say on the state of the human psyche than that and and desperately try to imbibe his film with a philosophical depth that be simply not there . for instance and when anderson and dyer be plan revenge on their attacker and they learn that one of the rapist have a fourteen year old daughter who be an object of lust for the two men he hang around with . when anderson finally meet him face to face and he confess that he only rap her a a distraction so that his two mate would take their attention away from his daughter . the casual and audacious way that reed drop this little revelation into the plot be simply jaw drop and it almost a if he expect this simple reference to paedophilia to be enough to throw the audience moral compass into overdrive and make them leave the cinema think they have just sit through something of significance . to make sure we get it and at this point we be show a run through of the rape sequence for a second time and ostensibly from the view of the attacker and his concern for his daughter and but reed ensures that we get plenty more shot of anderson rough handle and rap across the bonnet of her car . gratuitous do not enter into it . after be tell his reason for rap her and anderson tie him over a table and ram the business end of a sniper rifle ( complete with bulky silencer and just in case anyone wasn not clear on the phallic imagery ) up his jacksie but lack the courage to pull the trigger and tell dyer ( who have no such moral qualm ) that it over . dyer argue otherwise and their moral dilemma be present a something that wittgenstein and russell may have discuss in their room back at cambridge over tea and cake . it be almost unwatchable in it ludicrousness . in fairness and m anderson act her gut out throughout the film . it obvious she want to leave scully far behind and and bless her and she certainly do that while one wonder what mulder would have make of his erstwhile partner squat down to take a leak at the side of the road and then sodomise a man with a gun . dyer and on the other hand and do what he do in virtually every film he make to date that be and play a gor blimey guv cockney type chappie with a roguish grin and a cheeky line of patter and a face that most people would never get tire of punching . this be particularly true at the closing scene where and after murder his assailant in cold blood and dyer gaze at the camera in and what i be sure be mean to be and a look of existential anguish that invite u to sympathise at the hand fate have deal him and the moral quandary he have have to overcome and but instead be far more reminiscent of oliver hardy look exasperatedly at the camera after stan have land him in yet another fine mess . which incidentally and sum up this film quite nicely .