In the good olde days of silent films, the moustache-twirling villain would kidnap the damsel, carry her off with much oomph and flailing of arms, then tie her to a railroad track from which she would be rescued in the nick of time by the hero, the villain would be vanquished, and the couple would live happily ever after. In the 1970s, things were a little different; in this particular offering, the damsel is grabbed by a masked sicko who rapes her while she sings "Jingle Bells" for his amusement. As with most bona fide rapes, the damsel defends her honour as best she can which results in her being stripped naked and slapped around. This guy is big though, and he warns her that if she puts too much effort into it, she won't live to tell. She does the math, and survives without too much collateral damage. At the police station she is informed she is the latest victim of a serial rapist with a bizarre "modus operandi".While at this time the police did not handle rape cases with the same discretion they do today, it is difficult to believe they were quite this insensitive even in the 1970s. Clearly this film had a political motive as much as any other...entertainment?It is here that it begins to lose its way, the victims meet up and form a group to track him down, taking martial arts classes into the bargain, but while the second wave of feminism would undoubtedly have approved of this, they would most definitely not have approved of the accompanying gratuitous nudity. Happily, the bad guy is eventually vanquished and they all live happily ever after. Apart from the two he murders, that is.

I thought this movie would be a good movie to watch. It has a couple of my favorite actors in Jo Ann Harris and Peter Brown, and I liked the idea behind the movie - rape victims getting together and trying to capture their rapist. However, I believe the film concentrates too much on the Rape Scenes, showing the Rapes once or twice would have been more than enough. And I absolutely hated them using Jingle Bells during the Rape Scenes.This movie could have been made as a made for TV movie without the nudity and I think most people would have called it an OK movie. For me, there is way too much nudity and the acting is not very good. You get no idea why this guy is raping these women and that would be fine if the movie did not spend a considerable amount of time with him on the screen committing these attacks. For me this movie was OK, but not great.

I worked at the company that made this. Actually, many years later I went through the files after the company was bought by MGM. The funny thing is the director had a really Jewish name so he used an alias. (Tells you something about the MPAA that they let him do that.) I haven't seen it myself but when it was made some women working on it complained so they knew they had a problem. It wasn't intentional. AIP made all sorts of terrible films or sometimes bought them. In the files there were notes on the screening from Sam Arkoff like "the dubbing on this is terrible but we can make some money". Back then porno wasn't so easy to get so this type of movie was a substitute.

This movie is pathetic. An anti-rape film that wants to have it both ways by being exploitive too. The men are portrayed as insensitive buffoons and the victims are self-pitying, careless, indecisive, vindictive and stupid. The gratuitous nudity is another issue that I have with this piece of junk. And the ending in which I guess is suppose to have the audience cheering just seem ridiculous (as I'm sure it did back in '74). A previous reviewer refered to this movie as I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE-lite. ISOYG didn't try to hide the fact that it's trash. This one tries to have it's cake and eat it too.