Too Graphic

I'm going to give you a ? even though I disagree. How you stated yourself and gave constructive criticism was great. Nice to see that for a change.

"I didn't see how this one separated itself from the other revenge flicks."

How about it had Maria Bello, Olympia Dukasis and Ann Dowd in the cast? Story by Stephen King? Directed by Mikael Salomon? A decent budget?

I don't think I agree that it was too graphic, exactly. They certainly didn't draw it out, and keeping her largely covered was almost comical in its unrealistic restraint. But I do think it was too impersonal, mainly due to being shown almost entirely from third-person perspective. We didn't see enough of her torment from Tess's point of view, or really feel her anguish more than momentarily, in stark contrast to the novella, which was unsparing about what she was feeling. The movie's very brevity and impersonality in this may have failed the viewer, especially in the scenes after Tess was left for dead, with the other bodies. The enormity of the experience might not have really got across.

I'm inclined to agree about it being pretty standard revenge-flick fare. It's unfortunate because it didn't have to be. Part of the problem is that the movie version left out something that I thought was pretty important in the novella. That is, that part of what decided Tess on killing her attacker was that she keeps seeing the dead victims, and thinks about how it had to be for them, and wanted to prevent him raping and killing more women. Since she's unwilling to go to the police, she's all she's got.

Prevention wasn't ultimately her prime motivator. She acknowledges to herself that deep down, she really wants to GET HIM. But she thinks about it deeply and has some serious conversations with herself about it, and it definitely helps her decide to act.

Tess also wasn't, as best I can remember at this late date, fully decided on killing his mother before she saw her and got her definite admission of collusion. The way it plays in my memory, she admits to herself after it's over that realistically, she always knew she'd have to kill Ramona. But I am pretty sure she was still kidding herself that it might not be necessary when she went there.

Omitting all of this, in my view, leaves the character flat and one-dimensional, and leaves the viewer a little baffled about how she came to this pass. Both the gravity of her experience and her complexity as a person have been largely removed, and it's a particularly strange choice for Lifetime - you'd think they'd want their female protagonists to be more fleshed out, especially since King took the trouble to do it for them.

You don't sneak up on people in a zombie apocalypse, okay?

Are you kidding? Seriously? I have seen other movies, older ones that is, where nothing is shown, except that the man walks towards the woman who screams and the screen goes black. Period. Later on, it is mentioned that the woman was "attacked" or "assaulted"; however, in those movies the impact of the attack on the viewer was very light and not that meaningful.

There were other movies where you are shown little baubles falling to the ground or furniture falling while the woman is screaming; but then, you don't know if the man is attacking her or just pounding the furniture near her and, again, the impact is not there.

I believe that the assault scenes here were just right: not too graphic but showing you just enough, without nudity, so the viewer can understand what is happening.

I agree. I thought the rape scene was horrendous. It turned my stomach. Too much for a t.v. movie.

I find it pretty ironic that someone using a screen name like Hitchcockubrick would claim to hate rape scenes. Hitchcock and Kubrick are two of the most notorious film makers for having some pretty graphic rape scenes in their movies. Aaahhh... Clockwork Orange...??? Hellooooo.....

Actually I would be surprised if this movie was Not made for TV. If it was I applaud the people who made the movie for at least trying to show rape for what it is. Rapes scenes should be brutal. Because they are. If it is a movie about rape and vengeance there should be a brutal scene. This is nothing compared to a rape scene in "Irreversible", a French film about rape and revenge. I think we as American like things pretty even when they are not, and that IMO is a problem with a lot of our TV and movies. If more people saw how savage the crime is perhaps women would have more support. Instead of people worrying about some brute who did the crime. And women not being afraid to report rape because of the support giving to the male.

I do agree, that scene made me really uncomfortable I hated it. But I think that may be the point. Its like they want you to root for the vigilante.