Rape? *spoiler*

Good film..
My basic take on the film in her non-emotion in the last 'sex/rape' scene, was to show that even if Erika got her way and had the type of 'sex' she wanted in the letter, she wasn't able to drop her 'stiffnes' and become the affectionate person that she hoped that kind of sex would allow her to become. I believe in her fantasies, only the most extream sexual acts she thinks would 'free' her from her authoritarian nature. But then once that scene starts and they start having sex/rape, (i still can't make up my mind which), she realises even this extream degree wont release her.. Even as he is having sex he says somthing like "i'm doing what u asked, now give me a little back", sort of asking her to show him some affection. He then continues to kiss her, but even now she can't allow herself to get wrapped up in the emotion of the moment.

The knife scene, hmm, i think she was so gutted that her fantasies didnt turn out as she planned, it was a lose lose situation. If he had acknowledged her and stopped to talk, i believe she would of stabbed herself infront of him. And as in the film he gave her just a fleeting word and she still stabbed herself.

All interesting views from everyone, and even as i'm writing this i'm changing my mind again, which is why this is a excellent film

I saw it as rape, by the way she quietly said "please stop", and how she was crying silently through the whole thing. I think it was more of a punishment on his part, how he kept saying "you can't do that to a man" about how she would turn him on and then leave. It seemed like he was humiliated by the power she had in the relationship and he took the what she desired to a level that was actually harmful, when perhaps she wanted their experiences to be 'safe'? I don't know, I'm just sort of guessing here. It just seemed that it was his way of pitifully reestablishing his sense of power by hurting her immensley when he called her "sick" earlier when he recieved her letter. Also, with the acts that she told him she desired in the letter, that would have been a mutual thing. She would have had some control over it, because she had been the one who requested it. But when he broke into her house and started to hurt her mother as well, and then hit her in the face so hard she got a bloody nose, that was not out of any sense of "love" or trying to give her what she wanted.

Technically it could be interpreted as a rape because she was forced to have sex. But in the other hand she practically ordered him to do it before, when she wrote the letter.

Let's see; Erika is a spinster, a woman not particularly attractive who still lives with her control-freak mother.
She is obviously sexually repressed and therefore uses her imagination to escape from her sordid reality. She starts to fantasize about having sex with some dude; The only kind of sex she knows: the one she watches in S&M porn movies. But when confronted with reality she realizes it is not as exciting as she thought, she doesn't like it, actually she is afraid. Therefore she tries to chicken out, but it was too late.

About Walter, he is not your average youngster neither. He has also a kind of paraphilia: feels attracted to bossy, cold and older woman instead of young and beautiful girls. Apparently he has a sort of "platonic" attraction with his mature piano teacher but as soon as he discovers the truth about her, he gets confused. Walter feels both disgusted and attracted.
Anyway once he either raped his teacher or just did what he thought she would enjoy, seems he lost interest on her.

That's probably what hurts Erika the most. The fact that she tried to use this boy in order to fulfill his darkest desires but at the end realizes she was the one used. She feels now despised by him and by herself.

The question is: Does Erika feels that she was raped or just punished?
Does Walter realized he raped Erika or believes he just did what she asked him to do?

Think about it.

To me the reason she looked rejected is because she planned on using that knife on him but he came in witha group of people. She then turned it and used it on herself. I also grappled with the "rape" scene and wondered if a person not prone to violence would have stooped to what she wanted no matter how much he supposedly loved her. I then wondered if this was his makeup all along. There are a lot of questions about his character change but I emphatically believe he raped her. Nothing more.

No I absolutely think it was rape. There was no consent there.. despite what she had previously written in the letter or whatever happened in the bathroom etc.

I thought immediately that it wasn't rape. Rape scenes in films really, really bother me, and this scene did not. Because he was doing what she wanted! She was being completely confusing to the guy, and wrote him the most detailed letter about a rape she desired (he actually gave her the tame version) and then she acts surprised when he somewhat acts on it? She annoyed me with that. At the time his motivations were wrong, however, had she not given him that letter, I don't think he would have done that. She treated him like dog s**t, playing with his head, with his feelings, with sex, with his masculinity. That doesn't mean she deserved to be raped, but I really don't think she was raped. When you treat a guy like that and give him an instruction manual on how to rape you and say "I want this. Ignore when I say 'no' and do it more. I'm completely serious". Then pull out your rape kit you want him to use on you. What do you expect, really?

Of course it was rape. That is not the question. The question is, did Erika make Walter a rapist, and all signs would point to yes.

She dragged his still young mind down into the sickness and depravity of her world and he simply could not adjust. When we are first introduced to the character, although he is brash because of his age, he wasn't a sexual deviant or rapist.

This can be seen with their first encounter in the bathroom. Walter at that time was still mentally stable, able to understand "Nos", "Stop". He truly was in love with that woman, but Erika's game irreparably damaged his psyche.

The heart crushing thing is, that when Erika realised she couldn't live without Walter and was willing to change for him, his mind, his demeanor had become twisted. Erika managed to pull her self out of the hole, momentarily, but forgot to pull Walter out as well.

The entire scenario was reversed. Walter was now the deviant masturbating outside of apartments, where as that was Erikas depravity, by the time Erika had come to a somewhat "sane" place. Walter was now lost to her.

It was so soul destroying. We now have to assume Erika has created a monster and with the end of the film, her realisation of losing him, she has slipped back into the madness.

I definitely saw it as a rape when I watched the movie. Her letter gave him specific and detailed instructions about what she wanted, and he neither agreed to them nor followed them when he busted up into her house. She may have asked for a specific sexual encounter, but he rejected her request so I don't think that gives him carte blanche to just show up and abuse her whenever he feels like it.

I think I'm also interpreting the scene as rape because I read the book, and it's written more clearly as an assault and his way of 'punishing' her for making him feel emasculated. As I recall the book has more of a feminist leaning than the movie does; Jelinek characterizes Erica as the damaged victim of a repressive Oedipal patriarchy desperately seeking freedom (and finding only destruction), whereas Haneke uses the story for one of his trademark "descent into madness/obsession" narratives and gives Erica more agency and cruelty in her motivations. They're both really well done, but I think the movie makes the relationship a little more ambiguous and Erica a little less sympathetic, so that may explain why people are coming away with different interpretations.