This is by no means the easiest of films to watch. It has numerous flaws and executions within the film that would provoke one to make immediate criticism, for example the sub-par, almost at times robotic acting and unimaginative script, and what could indeed be labelled a lack of cohesion (could this be due to editing and censoring? I am not sure), Cannibal Holocaust never ceases to shock and provoke, as well as provoke immediate questions of ‘who are the real savages?’ and how people might want to generally assess their modern, non-organic way of living.
For those unaware, the film centers around an anthropologist who is searching the wherabouts of a film crew, lost and presumed dead after having gone on a expedition discovering primitivist tribal cultures, and the alleged cannibalism associated with it. Upon retrieving a camcorder containing reels of film that entail the ill-fated decline and fall of the expedition, the anthropologist then returns to the United States, to show the footage to the executives of a major television station. As each reel is played off, we see the young crew begin as arrogant, gung-ho, civilised and white skinned carefree adventurers, with little or no respect for a habitat that is not, and will never be their own. As the film footage progresses, we see the crew make contact with the native tribespeople, and imposing their presence on them in a harsh manner, committing beatings, tortures, arson and rape, whilst filming their deeds, which they attempt to justify on the grounds they are more civilised than they. As the title of the film partially implies, the predators surely but quickly become prey, each of them killed barbarically and ritualistically. In between the pausing of the reels, the executives of the television network are convinced that the celluloid they witness would indeed make for good viewing ratings, to the anthropologist’s objection that such a thing is exploitative and in bad taste.
The film is at times unsettling, and we see many obvious critiques of how life, substance and nature are valued by the modern ‘civilised’ human being. One easily gets the impression at times that the intrusion of camera, gun and machete wielding Westerners into isolated, indigenous land is a metaphorical allusion to the ills of colonialism. The film also questions the bloodthirsty sales appetite we see in the modern media, ‘blood equals ratings’, which is too often seen when a mainstream newspaper is more than happy enough to make their own material gains from anothers tragedy.
As I have illustrated in the opening paragraph, this film is badly executed in certain avenues, and when viewed it is easy to realise this. The real-life killings of animals are stomach-churning, and will alienate many. The depictions of sacrifice, abortion, rape, castration, mutilation and torture are profoundly realistic and shocking, they give a raw attribute to the film that very little in the cinematic world will ever match.
The most redeeming features of the film are the soundtrack by Riz Ortolani, which utilises rather dated synthesisers alongside a string orchestra, often interspersed with music that sounds not too dissimilar to Italian religous music, with arpeggiated acoustic guitars playing upbeat music that adds a brilliantly sarcastic touch to an otherwise grim and unrelenting series of violent acts. The usage of hand-held camera is very effective. As opposed to films where every scene is portrayed from a multi-angle perceptive, we see absolute realism for the most part, and is done in a non-perfective, improvised fashion that otherwise contributes heavily to making the film for the most part, very convincing. Cannibal Holocaust is flawed, yes. But it is a triumph of the cold, efficient will. Unlike the humoured (but still excellent) Dawn Of The Dead, Cannibal Holocaust is the work of the cynical sociopath, and seems to metaphorically imply that when one reaches or exceeds a certain threshold of excess, be it due to ignorance, lust, greed, self-indulgence etc, there is not even the vaguest chance of redemption. In a sense, the message of this film is an all-out war against the modern way, and the belief that furthering it to those who are otherwise unwilling to accept it is nothing short of a disastrous consequence. The film also suceeds in that it doesnt moralise about the issues it raises, and also leaves the film open to many possible interperatations. Overlooked by critics for its very bad acting, reviled by the politically correct, adored by much of the exploitation crowd, here is a film which holds truths and meanings beyond a framework that would isolate and sicken many.
Bad acting? Never seen it, but it was considered for a short while that it’s a snuff film and the director had to defend himself against the court of law.
Comment by Morbid_lad — July 12, 2010 @ 12:44
excellent review. untermenschen being dismembered is always good.
Comment by niggerfaggot — July 12, 2010 @ 13:25
Of course to those who do not speak English on a day to day basis, the lack of a linguistic barrier would blur the notion of these perceptions. This film was an Italian production that used English speaking actors (of whom a few had established careers in pornography) for the directors purpose of giving it a wider commercial audience.
Comment by Pearson — July 12, 2010 @ 13:43
Pearson, so you think that only one reason – commercial?
Oh and thats really deathly :$
Comment by PoD-Stas — July 14, 2010 @ 10:06
“Pearson, so you think that only one reason – commercial?
Oh and thats really deathly :$”
You got that totally wrong if you’re trying to assume that’s the only reason I’m giving the film any credit, sir.
Comment by Pearson — July 17, 2010 @ 01:16
Look at the rest of the review and that would surely give depth to the notion I would not give praise to a film solely for such purposes.
Comment by Pearson — July 17, 2010 @ 01:18
Watched the film last night on google vids based on this review. Compared to any hollywood run of the mill Saw film, this has nothing on them. There are the “six genuine animal deaths” and these are about the only “shocking” part of the film (of course this is nothing either, when one has watched enough nature and survival documentaries, where live animal deaths are routine). Truth is, the director had no commerical prospect of this film besides the huge contorversy surrounding its release. Its actors were contracted not to sign up to anything for a year to give credeance to their “deaths” (does one smell a Blair Witch prototype-kids lost in a jungle, magic, witch doctors hand held cameras?).
The film does however have its historical place. Before this film, and very simliar to its protrayal is “Africa Addio”. The true to life documentary about the British extraction from South Africa; as a result all hell breaks loose once the power vacuum is open. Mass Murders, burnings, animal slaughter, all with “hand held cameras” and the BBCs own little neat soundtrack(lets not forget Adi Admin, Vietnam war footage etc). To the Hessian; all this is blaise.
Nonetheless the author is correct to point out the overemphasis on western imperialism/colonalism and the cliched inversion of “the civilised becomming the savages”; a narrative often repeated in liberal Hollywood -Avatar being the latest incarnation. However no “noble primates” here. Essentially this is yet another democratic liberal attack on the white male, whose only guilt is for being too altruistic towards shit-eating savages.
Comment by Abraxas — August 17, 2010 @ 22:33
[...] macabre will always have the generalization of being attached to the horror genre. A very recent review of Cannibal Holocaust on here is testament to the leanings that many metallers and Hessians would have towards gore, [...]
Pingback by Rodrigo D: No Futuro « DeathMetal.Org — November 8, 2010 @ 14:11