ChanBot i must have seen a different film!!

ThrillMessage There are better movies of two hours length. I loved the actress'performance.

BelSports This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Marva It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

tavm This is another avant-garde film directed by John and Yoko (as Lennon and Ono are credited here) that I just watched on the UbuWeb site. It follows through several long dolly shots a woman in Austria played by Eva Majlata as she first goes walking through a graveyard and then downtown during the daytime. And then we go to her apartment as she cracks under the constant intrusion of the camera constantly in her face. These dolly shots all begin with the clapper getting clapped as camera operator Nicholas D. Knowland mentions the take. Not completely boring but very tedious by the time we get to her apartment which gives a lot of blank dark shots for several seconds. Except for "I don't speak English" and "Thank you", Ms. Majlata only speaks in her native language during the whole thing. I must be a masochist because I managed to endure the whole 78 minutes without taking a break! So on that note, I only recommend Rape (good thing John and Yoko didn't take that title literally) if you're a fan of the above and is willing to watch about anything.

mrdonleone okay, so now I know John Lennon had some weird kind of humor. his movie 'Erection' was about a house, 'Rape' is about stalking some girl, what will be next? I don't know, because I was unfamiliar with Lennon's movies until now. but I like him better when he sings. his movies are not of great quality. and I mean this: if John Lennon would desperately want to videotape you without your permission, you should be proud about it instead of avoiding him and his camera for about 80 minutes. and if you even don't like to do that, the least you can do is asking him for an autograph. that would be so much wiser than to go away, acting as if you don't know him. I mean, BEEP, he is John Lennon, one of the greatest songwriters ever lived! how can you ignore someone like him? and if it's true that she is just an actress, she acts very poorly! her looks for instance: it's as if she is a doll that lives (and I don't mean the bride of Chucky).and if you're making a movie about how society stalks everybody, why don't you just call it 'Stalking'?

django-1 My copy of this is many generations removed from the Austrian TV showing from which it was taken, so if there is any subtlety to the photography, then I probably missed it. What I see is a pastiche of Samuel Beckett's "Film"--which I'm sure a Fluxus person such as Yoko would have been aware of, and John probably was too--where someone is running away from the camera, trying to hide, but being "invaded" and "violated", hence the provocative title. That's it, and it goes on for over an hour. There doesn't seem to be much if any dramatic tension to the chase, and the whole thing must have been more interesting in "concept" than it turned out to be in execution. Maybe with a pristine print on an actual movie screen I would be more impressed, but I have a feeling the result would still be tedious and pretentious. Don't expend much effort or money to find a copy of this.

jbels This movie was way ahead of its time and would make a lot more of an impact if viewed in the age of reality tv. This Blair Witch-esque exercise in chasing a woman around with a camera is dull in ways and thrilling in others. If I remember correctly, there was some controversy over whether or not the woman was randomly chosen, but it is apparent that she is an actual actress.