Directed by the Soska sisters, a pair of eccentric twin filmmakers from British Columbia, this unconventional rape/revenge film takes a typically feminine, clinical approach to its subject matter by avoiding the comforting recourse to humor in its depiction of horrific extremities. This allows the directors to tackle a plethora of intriguing social issues such as evolving gender roles and shifting corporal identities with all the emotional maturity necessary to do them justice. And despite a very unsatisfying ending, the result proves entirely earnest, original and genuinely disturbing, a privileged window into a world of dark and deviant fantasies. Further providing a captivating new avenging angel to the roster of rape/revenge artisans, the film also brings some much-needed estrogene to a sub-genre that usually objectifies the women it is meant to empower. Perhaps most important of all, it provides a meaty part for the best scream queen of Northern Hollywood, the lovely and dangerous Katharine Isabelle, my love for whom has actually grown with the spectacle of her gory retaliation against male oppressors and the revolutionary gender politics that it entails.
 |
| It's a shame for our national pride to be dubbed "American" Mary... |
I knew nothing about American Mary or the Soska sisters before I wandered into the video store a few months back, which is hardly surprising considering the nature of their work and the popular tastes in these matters. Being both a fan of body horror and women's cinema, I was immediately drawn to the film, and the eminently fetishistic box art featured on the DVD cover. For me, the whole project screamed of innovation, or at the very least, singularity. After all, there are but a few rape/revenge films produced each year, and even fewer outside of Hollywood. Hence, a Canadian rape/revenge film directed by two women felt to me like a once-in-a-lifetime find, and I duly decided to indulge in its revolutionary iconography, hoping that it would subsequently wash the awful taste left by the recent I Spit on Your Grave remake. And so I eagerly got home to indulge myself in the spectacle of artsy reconstructive surgery and bask into the moody light of true horror unblemished by comedy.
The story of the film focuses on Mary Mason, a brilliant medical student on her way to graduate as a surgeon, and thus enter a privileged circle jealously guarded by eccentric macho males. Unfortunately, she is eventually stopped in her tracks by her college's student loan offices, to which she owes a whopping 364$. Forced to come up with that sum within two weeks, Mary applies for a masseuse job in a seedy local nightclub. Dolled up for the interview, but clearly unwilling to partake in the degrading antics expected of her, she ends up wowing the owner by stitching up one his battered henchmen. But then, she also catches the eye of an exotic dancer who hires her to perform deviant reconstructive surgery on a close friend. Initially shocked by the ungodly nature of the operation, Mary finds a new occupation in the process, the path to which is validated when she is raped by one of her tutors during a decadent party in the high-rise apartment of a prominent surgeon. Convinced that her newfound wealth is the product of prostitution, the man seems to think it OK to have Mary drugged, raped and videotaped, which will seal not only her, but his fate as well. With some help from the nightclub owner who previously interviewed her, Mary eventually captures her aggressor and practices her new craft on his unwilling body, creating a monstrous work of art that positively spurs her on. The rest of the film chronicles her dealings with various interlopers as she promotes a home-based clinic for body modification. And while it features many intriguing tribulations on the way there, the film is unfortunately crowned by a clumsy, disappointing twist ending that feels painfully perfunctory.
 |
| Beauty and the Beast: Mary wakes up next to her rapist in one of the film's most uncomfortable moments. |
In the end, what I first envisioned when appraising the DVD cover was pretty much what I got: an off-kilter account of the protagonist's shattered innocence and subsequent strive for self-determination untainted by sensationalism and simplistic characterization. Eschewing excessive sentimentalism and oblivious showmanship, the film thus manages to convey a respectful and even-handed portrait of its characters and their deviant passions, using broad caricatures only to depict the self-styled male surgeons. In recourse to social realism, the film turns traditional representational tropes on their head, scratching off the veneer of the surgical profession and allowing marginal individuals to come out of infamy. This tactic also applies to the rape/revenge genre itself, which evolves from a shock-based mechanical tradition to a poignant dramatic framework. This is achieved by constantly keeping the focus on Mary and relegating the rapist to the background. Here, the story is hers and hers alone. As for the male aggressor, he is given minimal exposure, just enough to convey his disgusting contempt for women's sexuality. As for his eventual victimization at the hands of the protagonist, it constitutes not an end in itself, but merely a step in her transformation. Hence, while the pivotal rape is the main contributor to Mary's characterization, she does manage to cover some ground on her own, becoming an assertive new version of herself and not merely the shell-shocked killing machine usually associated with male iterations of the genre.
The film's topsy-turvy take on representational tropes also allows for revolutionary gender politics. Aside from the fact that it features a composed, self-assertive female protagonist, the film is also intriguing in its depiction of her revenge, understood not as a primitive exercise in retaliation, but as a truly intellectual endeavor. Transforming her former tutor in a truncated and sutured work of art instead of bluntly removing his genitals or shoving a shotgun up his ass, Mary refuses to be brought down to his level of animality. Instead, she achieves four revolutionary objectives in one fourteen-hour session of tentative surgery: 1) she practices her new craft, making a mockery of her tutor's contention to the effect that "surgeons aren't allowed any mistake", 2) she selfishly imposes her will on his body, much as he did during the chilling rape scene, 3) she empowers herself with his craft, thus gaining his elusive professional power and social status, and 4) she transforms a man's body through surgery in order to befit her own needs whereas it is usually the other way around. This clinical venture further proves us that Mary won't be dogged down by male abuse, but will rise instead to take her place in our increasingly competitive world despite crippling emotional hurts. It also begs the question as to what constitute the appropriate punishment for the male rapist. Personally, I was first made livid by the spectacle of Dr. Grant's butchered body and I had trouble sleeping on the night. I don't know why since I am the least susceptible man to incur such a woman's wrath, but I did. And thus does the film showcase the very last word in terms of poetic retribution, spurred on by millennia of unspoken sexual abuse against valiant girls and gals who lacked both Mary Mason's resources and unflinching assertiveness. An unpleasant, but necessary venture into visual extremes.
 |
| Mary's revenge is not beastly and brutal, but poised and clinical, a liberating effort for all the silent victims of rape. |
Revolutionary gender politics also help denature the film's obligatory love story between Mary and shady club owner Billy Barker. First drawn to him by the need to score some quick cash, the protagonist is initially subservient to him, accepting his 5,000$ offer only because she direly wishes to pursue her studies. But after being raped, Mary quickly turns things around, becoming a major transformative force not only in regards to herself, but to all the film's satellite characters. This is made abundantly clear through a very short shot in which she waltzes into Billy's club, asking him if "he'd like to make 5,000$" (by capturing Dr. Grant for her). Using a similar formulation as he previously did, the film entertains no illusion as to who is now in charge. Simultaneously attracted and frightened by the young woman, Billy quickly becomes subservient to her, lending henchmen for her protection and club space for her meetings. He even develops a candid crush for her as exemplified by a fantasy sequence in which she lasciviously dances on his stage. In the end, he even begs her to elope with him, away from rainy Seattle toward sunny Los Angeles. And so it is Billy who eventually loses his poise, unable to dominate his seething emotions and ultimately playing the traditional "female" counterpart of a truly empowered "male" mogul.
(This paragraph contains spoilers)
Unfortunately, while its refreshing politics and accurate characterization allow the film to transcend its male-produced counterparts, I was displeased with two crucial narrative devices: the anemic dramatic trigger and the atrocious twist ending. Call me picky, but I had a real hard time immersing in the story on the back of its perplexing dramatic trigger, namely the fact that Mary is "forced" to take on a sleazy job to generate a measly 364$. Therein lies the credibility crisis of the entire enterprise: if the protagonist is supposed to have money problems, then why does she live alone in a big apartment with a wi-fi internet connection, an iPhone, a Macbook, a car and fashionable lingerie? Are we really supposed to buy this “glamorous starving student” bullshit? Well, I personally couldn't, and it nearly ruined the film for me, seeing how this shockingly ineffective attempt at miserabilism further creates a crisis out of something that isn't, allowing the film to run with the ensuing drama and generate dubious tribulations from it, thus bringing the story into a far darker realm than it should've gone according to common logic. A troubling screenwriting flaw. But then there is the perfunctory twist ending, yet another flaw that compromises the whole enterprise. Having Mary killed by a tertiary character, one that didn't utter a single line of dialogue in the whole film, is a slap in the face to whoever was actually involved in the narrative. But the real insult lies in the fact that the directors had to include a flashback in order to remind us of the killer's identity. Dramatic progression being what it is, you'd expect the ending to be a carefully planned affair involving returning themes and characters. But having a nondescript jilted husband pop out of the closet and off the protagonist, that is plain lazy. It makes for a tragic climax sure, but so would a deadly slip on a banana peel, a device equally irrelevant in terms of true tragedy.
 |
| The film's flawed dramatic trigger features an annoying new archetype: the glamorous starving student. |
Despite some small screenwriting flaws, the film is entirely redeemed by its singular imagery. Starting with the breathtaking opening sequece in which Mary practices her craft by dissecting and sewing turkey meat in disturbing close-ups, the film offers a privileged venture in the world of surgical fetish. A frightened novice herself, the protagonist is brutally introduced to that world when she is first asked to perform genital ablation on a troubled fashion designer. Providing a mesmerizing display of ungodly self-indulgence (the discarding of the nipples and vaginal lips being framed in sensuous close-ups), the following operation proves to be quite a brutal introduction for the uninitiated. And while such bodily alteration is considered a form of self-abuse in some parts, it is actually a growingly popular, and distinctly postmodern practice fit for disturbed eccentrics and fashionable cosmopolitans alike. Unbeknownst to many, the art of body modification actually goes far beyond scarification and breast implants, and the film proves quite didactic in that regard, allowing us to glimpse at some lesser known practices such as tongue-splitting and penile sub-incision. It's not always pretty, but it's always intriguing. There's also a quaint charm to it if you can appreciate that sort of stuff. Personally, I thought that watching the devilish Soska sisters waltz in Billy's nightclub, smirking jagged smiles and sporting elegant strands of lace running through flesh bodkins in their backs, was a rare treat. And so is the sight of Mary's happy patients as they display recently forked tongues or slightly infected penises. There's not only pain involved in body modification but also a certain aesthetic enjoyment. By displaying both within the same narrative, the directors create not only a singular, but also an earnest effort in representation.
In the end, while the film is abruptly cut short by the intervention of an obscure peripheral character, the trip was absolutely worthwhile. American Mary, while flawed and catering to some very specific tastes, is a mesmerizing effort in humanistic representation. Denying intricate characterization to the self-serving, self-styled and inhuman "slashers" in their ivory towers, the film gives the spotlight to those marginalized individuals vilified by popular mores, rape victims, strip club owners, beastly bouncers and explorers in the nether realm of experience. As such, it offers a privileged look into an alternative world where women can be empowered as artists and surgeons alike, a dark world obscured mostly by bourgeois tastes, reaching for the light of nobility with some help by the surprisingly talented Soska sisters, who would impress me even more if they were to pull off a worthy sequel to nondescript slasher See No Evil (2006). A very surprising effort from two really intriguing artists.
3.5/5 This revolutionary rape/revenge film brings a whole roster of marginal eccentrics out of infamy by way of a refreshingly humanistic take on traditional narrative tropes. A mesmerizing journey for those open-minded enough to undertake it.
NB - I'd like to thank my friend Louis for this review. Thanks for your helpful insight, your emotional honesty and your genuine love for women.
