Cannibal Holocaust (1980)

As i skimmed my DVD collection today i noticed a ungodly blemish of a film on the bottom shelf. Imported from Australia and only watched once by my eyes is a movie not quite accepted for what it is but relished for everything it isn't. I bring you Ruggero Deodato's Cannibal Holocaust, and friends this isn't going to be pretty.

Although not my favorite controversial Italian film ever (Salo by far is the greatest) but still a good piece of explotation cinema that blends actual movie style filming (which in my opinion was the downfall of an otherwise believeable "mockumentary, but more on this later) with guerilla-esque documentary style shooting (which gets pretty grisly). It tells the tale of a group of amatuer filmaker's as they set off for a wild excursion in the jungle "Heart of Darkness" style, but if you decided to break every rule there is. They just don't make them like this anymore, and I will try and sum up the whole thing without ruining it for you.

First of all, the violence in this movie is unlike anything you have ever seen or will ever see again in this life or the next. Not for the faint of heart or the ever so common animal lover, seriously, if you love animals to any extent other than considering them a pet than this movie is not for you, and I mean it. Real animals get slaughtered in the name of art and it gets pretty grisly (the turtle scene is by far the gastliest thing i have ever seen and this is only for the sake of the animal lovers i had to sit and watch this with. I wasn't effected much other than quenching my curiosity of what it looks like under a turtle's shell) and Deodato doesn't stop there and he adds a few rape scenes, a primitive abortion, an impalement, more blood, oh and some good ol' cannibalism. Did i mention a baby pig gets shot in the head? Yeah, there is some of that too. A monkey getting the top of it's head chopped off you ask? This movie delivers that in spades. The only aspect that seperates this from all those quasi-horror films or the current heap of gore filled cannon fodder they are passing as films these days is that the majority of this is real, yes REAL. I wont disclaim what is and what isnt (all the animal scenes are real mind you), but im sure this wont stop you from googling it anyway.

The only reason this movie isnt as good as it could have been is the beginning is shot like a movie and it decimates the overall momentum that this movie is suppose to have. If they just showed you the tapes they found on the decrepit carcasses of the camera man and his fellow friends then this would have been a monumental film in a genre that had already hit it's high point a few years before (Salo again) but they had to make it a movie and add in some cheesy 80's era acting that a few slides of text or even a narrator could have taken care of. Even in the wake of all this bad acting the movie still raised every red flag from here to Nantucket and back again. A few court cases and proof that everything was fabricated (not the animals dying though, sorry.) and what was left was a monsterous movement in the freedom that filmaking can garner to someone with a clear vision of what he wants and who he wants to upset.

Clearly im praising this movie to some extent and I do recommend this to anyone who likes to see something a bit different (read: unlike anything you will ever see). Not a good "family flick" or something you watch with the signifigant other, your mother, or anyone for that matter. This movie is to be watched alone with the drapes pulled down and behind locked doors, and for good reason.