| Cannibal Holocaust (1979) 98 min |
| Where does one begin when describing the atrocities that take place throughout this film? I'll start by saying that although I give this film a favorable rating, I am in no way out to defend its sickening behavior. In some ways the film is vile and just about inexcusable. In another way, it is perfect in that it creates a challenging paradox with no concrete answers for those with a strong enough stomach and an open enough mind. This film certainly isn't for everyone, and I wouldn't blame someone for not wanting to watch it. It won't leave you alone for a long time after you see it. So if you're going into it for the first time, be warned: this is more than a simple 'gross-out' gore movie, and it's not a movie that you're likely to have a good time with. I find the movie to be both vile and extremely interesting. What I find even more interesting though, is the effect that it has on people. This is a film I love to talk about with people. Almost everyone brings different ideas to the table, some are fanatical, some are apathetic, and some are somewhere in between. |
| Throughout this review I'll also go back into my views on the content of the movie, most importantly those concerning the animal mutilation/slaughter. To get a more detailed picture of my stance though, I urge you to take a look at my review for Mountain of the Cannibal God. While they are very different movies in terms of tone and structure, they have unavoidable parallels in content (for Italian cannibal movies, that is) that make for an interesting comparison. On top of that, I consider them to be my favorite films in the cannibal genre. Before going any further, I would also like to add that this review does contain what I consider to be unavoidable spoilers. I will work on a spoiler-free review for the site in the near future, but I feel the need to look at the film as a whole to get a clearer picture. This means that some of the most shocking scenes as well as the end will be discussed here. |
| Now, for one final rant before I get to the actual movie: I'd like to briefly go over the structure I'll use for the review. I'll start as I normally do with a plot summary. As I said earlier though, I don't recommend reading this unless you've already seen the movie. Normally I try to keep those brief and avoid spoiling major revelations, this time I see that as necessary. From there, I'll discuss the aesthetics of the film's structure and its relation to the moral dilema and the criticisms of the mondo films within. Finally, the most interesting part for me will be trying to clarify my feelings on the movie, and discussing the reactions I've met with from other people. As I said, with a movie like this, you get some very passionate opinions out of people. |
| The film opens with a title card that states something along the lines of the depictions in this film are explicit, but not meant to exploit. Instead the goal is to expose such sensationalism so that these acts may never again be repeated. Here the film is already throwing any form of subtlety to the wind by spelling the main theme out for the viewer. It really wouldn't work any other way, Cannibal Holocaust doesn't tap dance around anything. We open with some good looking aerial shots of the jungle that is to play host to the horrible acts that follow. That is juxtaposed with some similar aerial shot of the concrete jungle in Manhattan which director Ruggero Deodato suggests to hold many of its own savages (again, not done very subtlely, and hammered home by the film's closing line - more on that when we get there). |
| Through a television report, we learn about a renowned team of documentary film makers that have been missing for two months since setting off into the South American Jungle. They are a cocky group with a reputation that precedes them, we are introduced to the group: Alan Yates is the leader, director of well known documantaries on Vietnam and Africa. Faye Daniels is his girlfriend and script girl. Rounding out the group are longtime friends Jack Anders and Mark Tomaso. |
| The above serves only as the motivation for the first part of the film, but almost as the entire narrative for the end. Hoping to learn exactly what happened to the missing film makers, NYU Professos Harold Monroe organizes an expedition after them. He is guided by some more civilized (from an academic point of view at least) South Americans who take a native hostage before Monroe arrives. Along the way, they find a lighter that is known to have belonged to Faye. This relatively short journey also begins the onset of brutality that sets the tone for the film. We see a brutal punishment for adultery that is explained by one of the guards as it happens, almost in a play by play fashion. This also begins the recurring theme of the low regard which the natives hold for deviant sexual behavior. |
| The explorers are never to be 'one upped' in savagery by the natives though. Soon they stumble across a scuffle between two warring tribes. They take the side of their hostage (knowing that he had one of Faye's possessions) and shoot some of the opposing natives (Shamatari). Story wise, this serves to establish a more productive relationship with the Yamamomo tribe, or Tree People. It also seems to both propell and contradict the main theme of the film. Yes, the Americans once again prove to be just as ruthless in attaining their goals as the savages, but Monroe is also supposed to be a more civil voice of reason than Yates and Co. (or maybe he doesn't develope as such until later). |
| Monroe spends a good deal of time trying to earn the trust of the Yamamomo in order to get the still sealed cans of film from the Yates party. He finds the skeletal remains of the team, but now needs to know the hows and whys (academic curiosity or morbid fascination?). In the process of gaining their trust, we learn a good deal about the tribes which makes for a somewhat interesting subtext of the film. This is one aspect that gives this difficult film some replay value. Although it's not gone into in extreme depth, we learn the differences between the tribes with repeated viewings (whereas they all seemed like 'savages' to me the first time around). Deodato does well to keep his distance from the natives, but also offers slightly more intimate detail if someone is willing to look hard enough for it. |
| Anyway, the story moves on as Monroe works to gain the trust of the Yamamomo natives. He presents himself naked and vulnerable as he bathes for them all to see (taken out of context, this is quite funny). He later gives the leader a lighter as a gift and shows him how to use it. It appears that he has given them a magical gift, and that does the trick. He is able to get the film cans and gets the hell out the there. |
| From here on in, the film takes on a different structure. The majority of the remainder of the narrative is told by the raw footage of the Yates crew and their journey into the 'Green Inferno'. This is intercut with scenes of the sensationalist academics watching in amazement as Monroe pleads with them not use this exploitation for commercial purposes. They see the footage as a ratings goldmine. Monroe sees this as the ultimate attorcity of exploitative sensationalism that has finally gone too far. He argues that this must never be shown, and should have never occured in the first place. They argue back that such disturbing material can be edited in something groundbreaking under the thinly veiled guise of a warning. This arguement of course parallels the opening disclaimer, and really the two most popular base arguements for and against Cannibal Holocaust itself. |
| By now most people have probably either seen enough and are disgusted or are lusting after more...some may even be lusting after more but pretending to be disgusted and appalled. Either way, please oblige me with a little more of your time and then I promise we can work on putting all this unpleasentness behind us! |