Straw Dogs

Audience Reviews

View More

Jamie C. @JamieChill Apr 26 I’m biased because I’m from a small town and totally relate to this. It’s kinda funny how the geek beats the jocks but overall- (I watch a movie every night,) & this has been the peak of my week. See more Briana I. @Anaire Apr 22 Very stupid film only men would enjoy... White promiscuous wife thinks it's ok to be disrespectful to her husband and tease her ex and redneck friends because she wants to be a childish hoe but then turns victim when you reap what you sow happens to her hmmm.... The husband was a naive sissy most of the film, who invited the devil in his home when he gave them work. The end was a good example of " Im not a killer, but don't push me" lol Overall Very stupid movie and basically an accurate portrayal of how white people think and are in real life... ALWAYS THE VICTIM, NEVER THE PROVOKERS! See more Peter M @Movieman21 Mar 18 Where the original one was slow, insipid, dragging, depressing, this is a smart, fresh, exciting well approached remake with a standout performance by Skarsgard. Kate Bosworthy adds sultry hotness. This one is never boring, and always engaging. See more Giovanni P @imgiovanni22 Jan 26 This remake of Straw Dogs is like the worst bag of junk food you'll ever eat: you won't be able to stop until it's finished and then you'll feel sick afterwards. Someone needs to find out how much Kate Bosworth was paid to do this movie because apparently that's the price at which someone is willing to sell their soul. You would think a movie in which stupid angry redneck football coach James Woods finally gets blown away would be a feel-good movie. You would be wrong. See more Dave S @RT68722908 Oct 25 On the long list of totally pointless remakes, Straw Dogs has got to be close to the top of the list. Sam Peckinpah's original, a dark journey into the heart of human nature, was filled with brooding intensity and suffocating atmosphere thanks to its perfectly constructed story, well-developed characters, a memorable score, and the harrowing final thirty minutes. Rod Lurie's useless remake misses the mark on most of its predecessor's attributes, other than the story itself. James Marsden pales in comparison to Dustin Hoffman as the nebbish protagonist. Kate Bosworth lacks Susan George's raw sexuality. The antagonists, led by a laughable James Woods, come across as country bumpkins as opposed to the ominous villagers in the original. Little of what made the original so disturbing works in the remake. If you're going to subject yourself to the horrors of Straw Dogs, stick to the original. See more Blu B @RT43513976 04/16/2025 Ummm...This one is a bit complicated. First off the cinematography is half decent here. Some good framing and the setting of the South is interesting and memorable. But the direction while not terrible doesn't hold a candle to Sam Peckinpah's. The kills are kind of decent and the iconic scenes of the original are done fairly competant. But nothing is really added upon and it was just done so much better, more memorably, and more disturbing in the first. The ending especially which felt like a fever dream is more of an action horror movie type of style than anything truly unique. Granted the stlye and tone of the ending of the 71' version is almost impossible to recapture or do better. The visuals are the highlight here for what it's worth. Everything else ok. Nothing broken, nothing blatantly bad like Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor or anything. But this has a couple big problems. First Marsden is probably the wekest of the acting cast. He looks too pretty boy like to be belivable as a awkward pacifist bookworm. And he probably was the least likeable character of the whole thing. Which is crazy given there really isn't any changes to David's character. Save for they made him more of someone who looks down on people vs. wants to say "bro I'm just chillin. Leave me out of this" It's just the acting and direction makes THAT big a difference. Honestly I actually ended up liking the bad guys here more than anything. They never really came across as trolls, menaces, or anything for the most part until the end. That's such an odd "failure". Second, this doesn't expand upon anything the original did. It doesn't add additional backstory or expansion of existing or new characters, it doesn't have any new commentary, or fix any problems the original had. Which is a bit of a trick statement because the original besides being very dark and disturbing is pretty flawless. So as much as I struggle to find something wrong with this, I struggle to understand what the point of remaking this was. It follows 90% of the same beats of the original and the changes that are made. Like the setting, some of the kills, and making David a writer really doesn't add anything. Finally, what made the original more than just an exploitation flick is the commentary of taking a stand, isolationism and the effect it has on others whether you know it or not gets lost in this. It feels like the subtle moments have been removed and what's left is only face value stuff. t's just not as sophisticated with handling the underlying message/characters study elements as the original was. This is much more face value stuff. As violent as the original is, it's one of the most sophisticated character studiy films I've ever seen. Granted the character arc and same message are still there but it's not as "Subtly Refined" as the original. a BIG reason why that one is amazing. If I saw this first over the 71' version I'd think it's probably a half decent action/psychological thriller. Maybe even good honestly. But the whole reason this exists is because of the 71' one. It's not even like a Rob Zombie Halloween but more like a 98' Psycho. Skip This. See more Read all reviews

Straw Dogs

My Rating

Read More Read Less WRITE A REVIEW EDIT REVIEW POST RATING