Robert J. Maxwell Forcible rape is such a traumatic violation of personal space that it's hard to imagine what feelings it brings in its wake. Men who find it even more difficult to imagine need to watch the movie "Deliverance." In her husband's absence, Montgomery is raped by an innocent-looking young man she meets at night school. Afterward, she scrubs herself and disposes of the clothing, and she's too embarrassed to tell anyone about it, not even her friend and neighbor (Patricia Smith) or her own husband (Ronny Cox). She tries to call the police but the officer at the other end of the line is busy and distracted, calling out to someone, "Make it with cream cheese!" Cox returns from his trip happy with the results and is too animated for her to talk to.Then the innocent-looking young man assaults her again in an underground parking lot. This time he punches her and leaves her bruised, more or less forced now to report these incidents to the police.It has to be said that the movie dates poorly and that the moral lesson is cheapened by the way it's structured. When I say "dated", I mean that the message was pertinent in 1974 when the movie was shown. We're more sophisticated about these things now. People take rape seriously and don't get it mixed up with rough but consensual intercourse. The person at the other end of 911 is going to tak you seriously. When we were in Newark, New Jersey, my son tried to call his mother in North Carolina. The area code is 901, but he dialed 911 by mistake and hung up at once when he realized the error. Five minutes later, two police officers knocked on the door with the snaps on their holsters unfastened. The responders are more considerate, the victims are more knowledgeable, and the community more understanding. It isn't 1974 anymore, and thank God for that.When I say the story is structured in a way that cheapens the theme, I mean, for instance, that except for Elizabeth Montgomery and her children, everyone else is semi-moronic. After she reports the second rape, she's forced to undergo the complete rape kit, have photos of her bruises taken, and those who are doing the exam are brusque beyond belief. Montgomery sits huddled in the waiting room on a bench filled with pimps, cross-dressers, junkies, and other devalued people. Then some orderly with a clipboard enters the room and begins shouting, "We got a RAPE here? Who's the RAPE case. You have to sit in the wheelchair because RAPES aren't allowed to walk." And of course everyone is staring at the RAPE case. Certain medical venues aside, I have trouble swallowing a scene like that, even for 1974.When she's in the stirrups, Montgomery asks about a uniformed police officer, "Does he have to be here?" "I'm afraid so," replies the doc, while permitting the officer to stand in a location that allows him to see her in her obstetric aspect. Pointless humiliation piled upon pointless humiliation. That's ridiculous.It doesn't improve when she's interviewed by two detectives. They seem barely interested and treat her with disdain and sometimes sarcasm. They challenge her on simple points. Is she sure it was the same man both times? "Getting hit with a rape charge is a terrible thing to do to a man." The prosecutor explains that her sex life will be on trial in open court, while the perp's previous arrests for rape can't be mentioned. Does she really want to put herself through it? As the weak husband, Cox is no help at all. He can't give her any advice. Moreover he can't get the rape behind him and is impotent. It gets worse. He begins to doubt her story. The trial is unable to avoid some of the usual clichés. Montgomery leaps to her feet on the witness stand and screams, "Lies! All LIES!" The script is unsparing.None of these criticisms of the film mitigates the horror associated with rape.

richard.fuller1 For it's time, this was a break-through movie. Montgomery always seemed like she wanted to tackle more taboo subject matter like this, Lizzie Borden, Belle Starr (she's not wearing a bra in the final scene) the movie with OJ (wow), there was all but even a hint that Serena would be overly risqué to an extent.And there were problems in how women were handled in instances such as these. All In The family had to show that it wasn't just beautiful young women who were victimized, and an episode of Alice (of all shows!) had Alice questioned as tho she encouraged a flasher by the clothes she wore.Yet here, we have Montgomery rather badgered all around her, but having just watched it, I cant' help but feel she did things incorrectly one time and stood up later when she should have done this sooner.She hangs up the phone when she tried to report the initial attack, but later has no problem confronting the neighbor lady about 'enjoying' the sexual force ("Why don't you come down to the courtroom and listen to all the details, if that turns you on?") and she challenges her husband and the other guy who are blaming the woman for cheating, or whatever it was.WHY wasn't she this strong after the first attack, when she was on the phone? Granted, one would say she was just brutally raped. This then gives the impression she was less of a rape victim later on then.She confronted her husband outside the courtroom just before the verdict with 'we can't just act like it's business as usual' but that was EXACTLY what she did when he came home; she played it as business as usual.She would find her voice outside the courtroom and when confronting the neighbor, but would be put off saying anything to him when he got back, or when they were at the pool party? Strangest of all, she wants to wash after the second rape and the officer tells her no, that would wash off the evidence. She acts as tho it is a personal attack upon her person; this officer is being mean to me after what I've been thru.Hardly the case of course.When he says it would wash away sperm, she reacts like Donna Reed and he just said an ugly word to her as well, yet once again, finds moments later on to offer a voice.Again, one could say she was gaining her voice from the anger of how she was treated. Right off the bat, she was raped. She should have found that voice then over that phone, if anger could offer such motivation.A dated film, worth comparing with other entries such as The Accused and a TV movie in '81 called Victims, with Howard Hesseman.I wish there was a program or movie before this one showing what a woman had to contend with in the '50s and '60s, but unfortunately there isn't going to be.An intriguing comparison would be Rosemary Murphy, the defense here, as the alleged rape victim in To Kill A Mockingbird.

Dave Seaman (dnseaman) Elizabeth Montgomery's clout and talent is unquestionably what got this film made for TV in the early 1970's. Up until this point, rape was a taboo subject and to see a studio invest so much money and risk so many affiliates for what would ultimately become a legend in Made-for-TV-films is refreshing and brave.The story is about Ellen Harrod a married woman with two children who is raped twice by the same man. She takes herself to the hospital and we see her go through the steps of a routine medical exam to a routine legal proceeding. Harrod is treated worse by culture and society than she was by the rapist.Montgomery's performance is remarkable; not just the horrific scenes, which are done very carefully for a 1974 television audience, but the scenes that follow; the many showers, the slight grimace of her eye muscles on the medical exam table as the camera stays with her eyes and not with the pelvic exam, the manner in which Montgomery's performance begins to display a wearing down of strength as well as soul and resilience as the film proceeds (this film was NOT made in scene order- most films are not- so that for consistency Montogomery had to know this script very well.) The subject of rape itself remains "untouchable" within the cinema. Jodie Foster's remarkable, Oscar Winning performance in "The Accused" in 1984 was the next that we saw such a powerful performance (that was the year that everyone was shocked that "little Jodie Foster" had beaten Meryl Streep for an Oscar; this would happen again in 1992 for "Silence of The Lambs").The film "Sleepers" deals peripherally with the issue of male rape, but this is a film about vengeance and doesn;t do much to teach the frequency and situation of boys who are raped. Statistically, one out of four girls and one out of six boys will be sexually abused by the time they reach age eighteen. This is one out of five children. Hold out your hand, randomly select a finger and cut it off. It doesn't matter which finger; the choice should be as random as a child. Rape is a serious crime and has been seen as a female crime (It was only in January of 2012 that President Obama changed the law to include men as potential victims) for centuries. Subsequently it was only the women's rights movement that brought about awareness.Elizabeth Montgomery left "Bewitched", a sickening housefrau who should have turned Darrin into a ashtray, and went on to create television movies that represented women in a much different light. Lizzie Bortden, Etta Place, many roles that are typically male leads and as such she should be credited right along with Mary Tyler Moore as a pioneer in the Wokmen's Movement using television for her voice. Jodie Foster has achieved the same through the motion picture industry which is about twenty years behind with films such as "Silence of The Lambs", "The Brave One" and, again, "The Acused." A Case of Rape is impossible to find on DVD which is a pity since historically it's of great importance. More so than that, it;s a film that teaches a great deal about the horrors of this crime and the horrors of how our culture deals with it. There is not much difference statistically in 2012 than there was in 1974. in fact, I seriously doubt that one of the Networks would ever make this film today. For those of us who were there and saw it, we are still affected by it, for those who cannot see it, there are still ways to learn about it; certainly Ms Foster's Award winning performance (based on a real case in- of all places- Fall River, Massachusetts) But none the less, this lesson has to be taught. Rape is a serial crime, it is about violence and control and not about sexual gratification and far too many citizens of the world suffer this crime in silence.As for the ending to this film, I shall not spoil it because my voice is one of thousands who continuously ask that this film be released. And when it does, I don;t wish to be the critic who spoiled the end for you.

bob_meg Liz Montgomery, who doesn't seem capable of a dishonest performance, really pulls out all the stops in this Movie of the Week from '74 that pulls no punches, literally or metaphorically.What makes her performance so fantastic is how repressed, pain filled, and thus realistic it is. It's almost hard to watch at times. A less accomplished actress would be tempted many, many times to go for the over-the-top hysterical money shot. She works up to it at the end, but she earns every bit of it.Ronny Cox and William Daniels give visceral, vivid supporting performances, the directing is journeyman competent and the script is raw, unforgiving, and immediate in its urgency.It's hard to imagine a less cozy movie about our legal system and some of the archaic laws that still drive it...kudos to all involved who brought a really bright light to a horrendous system of injustice that, hopefully with the advent of rape shielding laws and DNA testing, will be less needed in the future. Still, this film contains a lot of very valid lessons in protecting oneself that are helpful even today. Highly recommended...catch it on YouTube.