Do Unto Others

Actresses discuss their rape scenes 

 

The trailer

 

Synopsis

A janitor can no longer deal with the insults of the women in the office building   His revenge takes the form of degradation.

 

What led to the story?

Bill Zebub had read, as have many people, about males who go on shooting sprees.  Some behavior can be categorized.  But what if there were a vindictive man who decided that a bullet is too merciful?  What if his idea for revenge were more of an eye-for-an-eye?  If the man felt degraded, he would degrade when he had the chance.

Rather than research the kind of man who becomes a mass murderer, Bill Zebub decided to write a character who only appeared to be such a criminal. His back story was completely different.

 

Where to Buy

You can buy the DVD at teh following locations (click):

Walmart

Best Buy

Amazon

Barnes & Noble 

TLA

Bonus

The DVD contains a re-edit of RAP SUCKS.

Spoiler

Bill Zebub created the Steve character (the villain in the movie) as a serial rapist.  This character was not a janitor.  He assumed another man’s identity, got hired in a building where the women who worked there matched his preference, and he took his time to plan the perfect night of crimes.  He was meticulous in his preparation.

The office workers deemed him a lowly janitor with poor social skills.  They were unaware of his cunning.  Even the viewer was unaware of the secret until the end, and even then, the facade of the Steve character was so convincing that many viewers missed the real reasons for the behavior.

This version of the story was made into the movie titled “Disgruntled Employee” which was financed by Rough Pictures, a production company that held the rights for five years.

The Alternate Story

When the rights reverted back to Bill Zebub, he decided to re-edit the movie.  This way, the Rough Pictures version would be a collector’s item, and the new version could provide alternate performances which would delight fans of the original cut.

Bill Zebub decided to cut the secret identity of the villain in the new version.  He re-named the movie “Do Unto Others” because the title could be interpreted in different ways.  

Removing the serial-rapist aspect of the character, and making his crimes seem like the result of acute psychosis rather than long term planning allowed for a cautionary tale rather than horror story that used eroticism (rather than blood).

Another thing that was removed was the voyeuristic aspect of the villain in the first version.  He had installed cameras in the bathroom and other areas, which he monitored in his lowly janitor room.  The new version of the story did not require that.

The actresses had each loved the idea of showing the different coping mechanisms of each personality, and that stayed true even in the re-edit.  Some characters went along in order to appease the villain, while others fought.  But they all ignored the signs that were intentionally places (in both versions of the movie)

There were subtle behaviors, like when the villain, prior to his  crimes, would place himself at the door to the room, which was a sort of practice for the power that he would later wield.    He a;so said things that seemed socially awkward, but he was testing the reactions of the women – to predict the kind of control that was necessary for each.

There were signs of danger that were ignored.  Some of the signs were overlooked because it was easier to feel contempt for am awkward man of low social rank.  Other signs were ignored because of politeness.  And of course some signs were overlooked   because of the villain’s manipulation.  These signs, according to the director, were the real focus of the story.  Each victim could have had a better chance.  The focus, however, is not a message.  it is incredibly stressful to go through life always being on guard.  So there isn’t a main message for people to follow,  Rather, there are many messages, but none that tell you how to live you life.  This is a horror movie, and it provides horror.  

The Sexual Aspect

Some people may be confused by the b=nudity and the sex, and they will label the scenes as pornographic.  Those people should never watch this movie.  

In all of the “erotic horror” movies that Bill Zebub makes, he strives to remove seuxality from the sex scenes.  These scenes are not meant to provide arousal.  They are meant to induce feelings of repulsion and intense discomfort.  Gore movies try to provide a “cringe” factor with blood and grisly images.  Bill Zebub’s erotic horror movies rarely have blood.  The tension and cringe-inducing scenes come from the vile behavior.

You may read this explanation in other movie pages for Bill Zebub’s erotic horror, but it may be necessary to repeat.  If a movie has a rape scene and the crime is filmed according to the usual rules of editing, etc. then the scene could possibly be kinky and erotic.  This is irresponsible.  The scene MUST be difficult to watch. If it is beautifully shot then the act will be beautiful.  If the camera cuts away at the right time, then the rape might as well be a love scene.  But if the camera lingers. – if it stays – if it does not cut away from the disturbing act – then it becomes unsettling, which is the proper reaction.  

 

But why film this at all?  Well, why film murders?  Why film romance?

Film theory vary.  Are films supposed to exalt people?  If so, isn’t that dangerous?  Are films supposed to have moral messages?  Are they supposed to be cautionary tales?

Rather than answer these questions, or to justify this particular movie, let it be simply put that this is a story.  Why it exists, or what it offers, is ultimately up to you.  The director/writer started the tale while thinking about a certain kind of criminal.  He wanted to depict a story in a way unlike other director/writers who explore this sort of behavior.  It may very well be that the director/writer is without talent, skill, or wisdom, but he tried to create something new and original.  

%d bloggers like this: