Martha Marcy May Marlene

Written by Jonathan Jacobs

Martha Marcy May Marlene is by all measures an appalling film that will make people sick to their stomachs. This pronouncement comes at the great ire of Screen Spotlight editor Charmaine Saratan. For Charmaine, the main character's struggle is painfully real and society does not do a good enough job of reintegrating victims of abuse into normal society. From my perspective, even the worst films (grindhouse Halloween slasher films for example) can be made interesting once naked breasts or tuchises make their cameo appearance. Yet, somehow, Martha Marcy May Marlene is loaded with T and A, but I still feel like vomiting rather than indulging in a little love making. The entire film focuses on sexual degradation, the psychological impact of being a part of a harem, and on pseudo-rape. Every scene is peculiar, sinister, and there is absolutely nothing to enjoy. It is merely a spectacle and one that I prefer never to rubberneck again.

Writer/Director Sean Durkin has some explaining to do. For instance, why is his film necessary? What does it contribute to the world of cinema, and what is its greater point/meaning? Does the public need to be educated about the psychological impact of being trapped in a sex cult? Do moviegoers require images of rape in order to feel they have gotten their $9.99's worth? Nudity is beautiful. It has been the foundation for the majority of humanity's artwork and storytelling since the dawning of intelligent/vocal mankind. Nudity is not however attractive when at the expense of a young woman's very existence. What is attractive, interesting, or sexy (barf) about forced fornication? Elizabeth Olsen(a sister of the Olsen twins) is beautiful naked but were I a betting man, I would put a thousand to one odds on Olsen never resurrecting her acting career after being exposed naked from every angle and portrayed as a sex-abused nutcase. Sean Durkin is not a visionary, he is a tormented person trying to prove a non-existent point that only a handful of deeply disturbed people care about.

Fox Searchlight Pictures has gone the route of bankrolling two feature films that are headlined by sex and nudity. The first, Shame, debuts this weekend. The reviews from the intellectual elite are mixed. Most believe the film explores human desire to too great an extent. I read (paraphrasing here) that sex is meaningless if it is for excitement and not for orgasming or for love. Really? Sex is one of the most exciting activities a human being can take part in. It makes life worth living. Shame is all about sex, group sex, masturbation, gay sex, anal sex, and every other type of well, SEX! Michael Fassbender and Carey Mulligan may tell a story about a battered and bruised family but they are so hot and interesting in doing so. Seeing the vagina and penis of two of the most world-famous actors intrigued me. They played their roles with reckless abandon.

Fox Searchlight's second nudity-laden picture is the aforereviewed Martha Marcy May Marlene. I cannot truly elaborate on the plot in any sort of a meaningful way because the film outraged me. The protagonist, played by Olsen, is deranged. Her mind has been poisoned by a cult leader who happened to ass rape her on a daily basis. Through flashbacks we come to find out about the group's various thefts, murders, and acts of sexual delinquency. The cult members give the name "sick-fuck" a new meaning. In the aftermath, the poor girl is living with her sister and her sister's husband. They are intolerant of her strange behavior and inclination toward doing everything in the nude. It is so hard to like anything about Martha Marcy May Marlene because it will likely anger audiences and not to prove a point or for any positive reason.

I feel guilty ladies and gentlemen. The studio sent me this screener in good faith. I am supposed to balance out this review by writing positive remarks. The only equilibrium I can manage is to suggest that the nudity would be steamy if viewers can ignore the background leading up to it. Otherwise, I am at a loss. I thought Shame blew the roof off of Hollywood's standards and will transform the way actresses go about showing their bodies. Martha Marcy May Marlene however will only make most people sick and they will demand a refund. Sorry, I cannot in good conscience endorse this one.

Charmaine, editor in chief of screenspotlight.com, takes the opposing view of Martha Marcy May Marlene. From her point of view this film is a true portrayal of the aftermath of being raped or having a sex addiction. According to Charmaine, women are rarely the same person after enduring sexual abuse. Their personalities and behavior change. While I felt the director propounded pointless images of abuse, our editor is convinced these piercing images contain a great deal of veracity. An abuse victim would not be helped by living with people that "act normal" because the victim has not broken their addiction and would not easily distinguish between what is appropriate and what she is required to do. Essentially, Charmaine found Martha Marcy May Marlene to be a psychological melodrama that tells a real story that people need to know about in case they have an abused friend or family member. This film illuminates their trauma, torment and struggle. For the record, my opinion remains unaltered.