MovieChat Forums > Cannibal Holocaust (1985) Discussion > OT: My review of Cannibal Holocaust (198...

OT: My review of Cannibal Holocaust (1980) - SPOILERS ALERT!


Dear Ruggero Deodato,

a day after 9/11, somebody should have sent a copy of your film to the Bush administration. They would never have invaded Iraq.

Let me just say that Cannibal Holocaust is a tremendous achievement. What can you say about a 35 year old horror film that puts most modern horror films to shame? There is just so much to appreciate in your film.

Let me start with the structure. Now I am no horror movie geek. But I think yours must be one of the first found footage films. Only a third of the movie is found footage. Unlike recent found footage films, your film involves characters reflecting on the found footage. I think this was a great idea as it provides context.

Your fearless daring also needs to be appreciated. I heard you got arrested for some of the stuff you put on film. But I read that Sergio Leone congratulated your personally. So it did pay off in the end. I admit that I had to take my eyes off the screen during some of the animal violence. But I dont get all the outrage. I am on the side of the people who argue that animals get murdered everyday to feed families anyway. The scenes of violence between the tribal s and the civilized were also gruesome and disturbing. I can only imagine what went on during the shoot. I guess the crew must have had great fun. The sex scene was almost pornographic. I seriously doubt whether they were acting.

And that score by Riz Ortolani. And the way you used it. Ortolani's score which conveys a sense of nostalgia and doom at the same time elevated this movie to another level. I cannot imagine this movie without the background score. Or this background score being used for another movie. The tune called "Adulteress' Punishment" played during the scenes of primitive violence is just art. The warm and summery "Main Theme" provides a great start to the film with the overhead shot of the forest.

Last but not the least, the social commentary. I couldn't help but feel that the whole film is a critique of Western intervention in the affairs of third world nations. The two fighting tribes and the civilized Western man playing them against each other is almost certainly you having a go at American foreign policy. The civilized Western man and woman making love out in the open as the tribal s look on could be an allegory for the spread of debauched Western culture across the world. And the repeated shots of the tall skyscrapers in the Western cities. Were you implying that in the face of man's primitive urges, all the skyscrapers would amount to nothing - I wonder if the 9/11 terrorists watched CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST.

Once again, your film is a tremendous achievement. I am not rating it a 10/10 due to the bad acting. But that is a minor complaint in a film like this.

I hope to watch this in Blu Ray. And I will be watching more of your movies.

Best Regards,
Pimpin.

(9/10)

reply

I think you're overstating how much substance this film has. I would argue that it exploits precisely what it purports to condemn, specifically the sensationalised portrayal of "savage" cultures. The occasional cutaway of white executives sharing disapproving glances doesn't make this satire.

CH sets out to shock but like all films with that very basic agenda, shock turns to numbness and finally boredom. The documentary-style segment is impressively authentic but it's undermined by being framed within the completely unconvincing and poorly-acted other stuff.

The notion that humans are deep down driven purely by base drives is old-fashioned and wholly negative: an extreme perspective which which denies moral evolution and is no more convincing than the happily-ever-after Disney version of humanity at the other end of the spectrum. In fact, I would argue that Disney films have always shown a far broader range of the human condition than this very silly and dated film.


My movie reviews: www.rocknreelreviews.com/reviewed_by/rupert

reply

I would argue that it exploits precisely what it purports to condemn, specifically the sensationalised portrayal of "savage" cultures.


thats your personal opinion. as relevant as mine.

The occasional cutaway of white executives sharing disapproving glances doesn't make this satire.


where did i say this was satire?

CH sets out to shock but like all films with that very basic agenda, shock turns to numbness and finally boredom.


once again, your personal experience and perception. as relevant as mine.

The notion that humans are deep down driven purely by base drives is old-fashioned and wholly negative


this depends on the sort of person you are. i live in india and this film - well, it resonates with me.

an extreme perspective which which denies moral evolution and is no more convincing than the happily-ever-after Disney version of humanity at the other end of the spectrum. In fact, I would argue that Disney films have always shown a far broader range of the human condition than this very silly and dated film.


can you prove it? maybe list 10 disney films and explain how they show a broader range of human condition? also, every film need not aspire to show the broader human condition? this is degatto's perspective.

your opinions are as relevant as mine .

reply