Roger Ebert Hated the Original but Loved the 2011 Straw Dogs Remake

by

From different perspectives, some people view the Hollywood scene as thriving at its peak, while others see it as chaotic and disorganized. While studio executives cheer over the blockbuster earnings from films like the live-action remake of Lilo & Stitch, creators such as writers and directors lament the scarcity of original content. Regrettably, in today’s movie industry, remakes, reboots, and sequels are dominating trends. This relentless cinematic fad has unquestionably produced outstanding productions, like Blade Runner 2049, Avatar: The Way of Water, and Mad Max: Fury Road; however, it has also contributed to numerous ill-fated movie failures.

Back in 2011, I found myself captivated by the revival of “Straw Dogs,” a crime thriller classic that had stirred controversy decades earlier. The remake, released four decades after its original, predictably drew harsh criticism from critics, while the original’s reputation only seemed to grow stronger. However, one contrarian critic offered a surprising perspective, and his arguments still baffle me to this day.

What Makes Straw Dogs (1971) So Special?

To label a remake as “misguided” before its premiere, the original must be an exceptional, one-of-a-kind masterpiece, and that’s certainly true in this case. The movie “Straw Dogs,” a blend of action, crime, and suspense, was born from the violent imagination of Sam Peckinpah. Following the tremendous success of both “The Wild Bunch” and “The Ballad of Cable Hogue,” Peckinpah chose to abandon his tradition of Western revisionism for a more raw and realistic style. This change in direction is brutally effective. In “Straw Dogs,” Peckinpah’s penchant for violence meets the restrained performance of Academy Award-winning actor Dustin Hoffman, creating an intriguing contrast. These two unlikely partners proved to be a potent duo.

The battle at Trencher’s Farm presents a distinctive perspective (as demonstrated by Williams’ open criticism of the movie version). Contrarily, Peckinpah’s Straw Dogs centers on David Sumner (played by Dustin Hoffman), a tranquil and reserved mathematician who relocates with his wife Amy (Susan George) to a rural town in England. Instead of the serene retreat he envisioned for work, David finds himself embroiled in a contentious rivalry with the locals in this countryside community. Despite refusing their advances, they perceive him as a feeble newcomer and persistently provoke him.

Not long after, David, eager to fix up his garage at home, enlists a local crew for help. In this group is Charlie, an ex-boyfriend of Amy who has a history of being harsh. Driven by jealousy, the crew begins to create trouble for David, mocking and distracting him rather than focusing on the house repairs. As time goes on, their presence becomes more annoying. Eventually, the situation escalates into a shockingly violent and unsettling moment where Charlie and another man sexually assault Amy.

In this critical juncture, David’s selfless act of shielding a mentally handicapped town resident, wrongfully accused, escalates dramatically towards the movie’s grueling culmination. Enraged by the situation, the villagers march on David’s residence with the intent to seize the man, employing extreme measures in their assault. Pushed beyond his breaking point, David retaliates fiercely, defending his home with unrelenting vigor. The climax that unfolds is arguably one of the most brutally graphic endings ever committed to film, replete with firearms, blunt instruments, and a touch of slapstick humor reminiscent of “Home Alone”.

The gradual transformation of Dustin Hoffman’s character, David, is one of the most impressive examples of character development in cinema history. Even those who find the initial 100 minutes less appealing often can’t help but appreciate David’s newfound self-assurance and harshness. However, Straw Dogs presents a bleak perspective on the world that stands out among contemporary films, evoking emotion even from viewers who are usually emotionally reserved. Despite its brief moments of happiness, the film effectively makes the comfortable uncomfortable, leaving an indelible impact that must be experienced to be fully understood. While many viewers have become desensitized to violence in movies, Straw Dogs still manages to push boundaries and challenge our comfort zones.

Straw Dogs Was Highly Controversial Upon Release

1971’s “Straw Dogs” faced numerous challenges due to its disturbing plot and shocking scenes, particularly the rape sequences that occurred multiple times in the movie. Given the contentious nature of the film, it was common for studios and distributors to censor or modify these scenes. In America, the initial rape scene was heavily edited to secure an R rating from the MPAA. However, in Britain, the situation was more complex. The British Board of Film Classification outright banned the rape scene, while refusing to approve the uncut film as a whole.

As a cinephile, I must confess that Peckinpah and his team were unfortunately hit hard by controversy, an issue that transcended merely the ratings boards. While the film was lauded universally by both critics and moviegoers alike, a vocal minority of passionate objectors emerged with unrelenting fervor, and their voices continue to echo against this film today. These opponents primarily argue that the film’s controversy isn’t solely due to its graphic rape scene, but rather, it lies in the character’s reactions during the pivotal moment itself.

In the opening scene with Charlie, Amy, and Scutt, along with another local man, Amy seems to ultimately give in to a distressing situation, even going so far as to kiss and embrace her attacker. This creative choice by the director and actors sparked criticism from some critics and viewers, who argue that it makes light of and sensualizes sexual violence. However, defenders of this decision point out that Amy later shows signs of trauma from the incident, suggesting that her actions in that moment were merely a means of survival.

Straw Dogs (2011) Is Worse By All Metrics, But Roger Ebert Loved It

40 years after the initial release of Sam Peckinpah’s iconic movie, we have a fresh take in 2011 titled Straw Dogs, helmed by Rod Lurie (The Outpost, The Last Castle). Unlike its predecessor, this version steers clear of the contentious uproar that surrounded it. This updated adaptation maintains ties to both the movie and the original Gordon Williams novel, but with a more streamlined and contemporary narrative flow. The storyline follows a similar trajectory, though there are several notable variations.

As a movie critic, in my personal perspective, this modern adaptation of “Straw Dogs” sees the protagonists, David and Amy, moving to Mississippi. Here, our lead character, David, transforms into a screenwriter with aspirations of settling down to complete his work. The narrative paths of the various “Straw Dogs” films are remarkably parallel, leading Peckinpah and co-writer David Zelag Goodman to be frequently recognized for their contribution to the film. However, Lurie’s interpretation of the story seems to fall short in certain aspects, leaving a noticeable void compared to its predecessors.

The narrative of “Straw Dogs” heavily depends on the pessimistic perspective that Peckinpah infused into it through his distinct directorial approach. Although a faithful adaptation of “The Siege of Trencher’s Farm” (a more compassionate and less violent story) could potentially be achieved without this perspective, replicating Peckinpah’s film is not feasible. This was the consensus among most critics and fans of the original movie, but Roger Ebert, known for his peculiar viewpoints, often had credible opinions. One of his more debatable viewpoints from his early critical days was his stance on Peckinpah’s “Straw Dogs.” Ebert argued that David’s character development and lack of remorse encouraged violence, vengeance, and revenge, which significantly hindered the film’s credibility according to him.

What I found most troubling about the film is its contradictory nature; it heavily endorses violence, yet it presents itself as a moral crusader by overloading the viewer with righteous indignation. The best criticism of ‘Straw Dogs’ has already been expressed. It can be summarized as ‘The Wild Bunch.’

Initially, Ebert penned a moderate, 2 out of 4 stars critique for Peckinpah’s brutal masterwork, but the real surprise wouldn’t unfold until four decades later. The movie “Straw Dogs,” headed by Marsden, was initially met with harsh criticism upon its release, earning a 42% rating from critics on Rotten Tomatoes and a 34% approval from viewers. Despite the widespread disapproval, Ebert didn’t let popular opinion hinder his enjoyment. He promptly bestowed a favorable 3 out of 4 stars on the 2011 remake, expressing his appreciation for it.

Following the first movie, I found myself troubled by the actions the protagonist could perform. After watching this one, maybe I felt a sense of relief instead? Movies often provide us with an escape into fantasy. Nevertheless, Rod Lurie has created an exceptional film about psychological warfare, and yes, I believe it surpasses Peckinpah’s work.

In his review, he acknowledges that decades of excessive on-screen violence might have numbed him to such content, yet he still believes this version surpasses others. While Ebert’s perspective on the film may be uncommon among critics, scholars, and movie enthusiasts, his argument holds some merit. His problem with Peckinpah’s portrayal of the story lies in its hypocrisy, suggesting he would favor a more moderate depiction of violence and controversy. Regrettably, the original film isn’t held in as high regard now due to this.

Read More

2025-06-04 05:09