I was not expecting to be persuaded that there is some amount of nuance in some 80's gore shlock. It's interesting to think about if depicting horrible scenes is necessary to understand the subject mater. Like you've laid out its accurately extreme when discussing the horrors of colonization but that visceral disgust locked a lot of people away from being able to read what the movie was after. I think it's a strong argument that metaphor is a more effective way to sneak in thinking about difficult subject matter rather than shock.
That is a good point, by adding a lot of shock there is a strong visceral message but it makes that message more inaccessible and therefore not able to reach more people.
Thank you, Tara, for this well balanced review! I loved the movie and share your criticism. Your description of the screenwriting was so on point. I read a lot of reviews beforehand where people said that a lot of scenes were „unnecessary“ (eg. animal deaths, rape). I didn’t feel like that but I couldn’t tell exactly why until you explained the set up-pay off technique. Also absolutely loved you going off on the hypocrisy of the film‘s bad reputation. 👏
For me, the excessive brutality of this film *was Ruggero Deodato’s actual point!* He achieved the controversy he sought & captured some WILD scenes on film 🤷🏾♂️🎬💯
Amazing review! Finally someone that reviews this correctly. If the movie was devoid any plot, just shocking for the sake of shock, that would be different. Difficult movies are important . Directors such as Pasolini, Gaspar Noe and Lars von Trier make controversial movies also with a purpose for the ones that are actually trying to understand the movie. I highly recommend you to check them out. You gained yourself a follower. Very refreshing review.
I hated the movie purely for the real animal scenes, real animals shouldn’t have to suffer in the name of art, and recently I learned the snake that was killed was actually A PET! In saying that though i learned the natives were made to go into the burning huts and the native girl who was gang raped was actually 14! I don’t care if it was a different time blah blah blah some things should never be allowed
I don't know why, but I stumbled on your video about Sam Levinson (even though I've never watched any of his works and I intend to keep it that way) and in that video you talk briefly about this one. Since I fucking love this movie along with a shit ton of other extreme cinema garbage, I had to come and watch this video and I must say you did a great analysis here, talking about all of its strong points and didn't sugarcoating its problems and all the nasty stuff. As an older millennial born in the mid to late-80s, I can say that this movie is one of those "cursed tapes" you'd see in very specific video rental stores in the 90s, side by side with all of the Faces of Death and others of the same ilk. I've watched it for the first time only a couple of years ago though, and being a vegetarial the scenes with animal cruelty were especially tough to watch, but I think the movie is a masterpiece anyway. I'm going to subscribe to your channel right now and check out your other stuff later, because I really liked what I've seen so far 😊
When i watched this movie for the first time i was surprised by how well made it is. The movie is certainly not trashy cheap exploitation and has a lot of firsts for cinema.
The fact that the words love this movie is all I needed to hear….that’s messed up. You like this story’s message? Fair enough I agree, but yet they never paid the indigenous people for their work and labor, which is complete hypocrisy. Why would you agree with the message but yet like the movie that stands against their own message……makes no sense to me
I saw it during the premiere in Italy back in 1980, yes those first 10 days before it was taken down and not allowed to be released for serveral years. It attracted a lot of people right from the start. First of all, those animals were not tortured, this is how indigenous tribes used to kill animals for food, and they were killed for food while pointing a camera, just because they dont kill them based on people's own moral standards does not mean it is animal abuse, this film has been criticizing this kind of moral colonization that so many people have ironically demonstrated with regards to how other people should treat others, including obviously indigenous tribes. This is how ahead of time this film was. It is showing thematically exactly what the audience has been doing with regards to the treatment of animals and humans during the making of this film, It is this authoritarianism that has been part of the story where people come and abuse others because it is their norm, so they feel justified to inflict it on others, because somehow in their minds it is objectivelly wrong, and so they are creating a systemic homogeny by inflicing their own way how others should live. When people really really think about it, the title Cannibal Holocaust is symbolical in the way how it is showing how modern societies are cannibalizing themselves through their disconnection from pain and death in their repressive ways of life, which eventually manifests as a violent colonization of others, other cultures, other moralities as a reflection of their own self repression in need to impose this kind of repression on others. How tragic that so many people could not see through the message of this film to get it. The reason Deodato was judged like this, because he existed within the moral systems that did not allow it, but it is this moral system that needs to be questioned, because it is imposing itself on others. It is at the core of monarchical authortiarian colonization and violence. Humans by nature are tribal, and the colonization is enforcing a homogeny, repression and elimination of individuality.
Cannibal Holocaust isn't my favorite movie, but I completely agree with you that there are certainly worse films out there, especially in the exploitation horror genre since this one actually has a solid message about sensationalism in the media. Take my like. BTW have you ever watched A Serbian Film? Cannibal Holocaust is a fucking _Disney flick_ compared to that.
What people forget ... is that people in the 70s made such movies and their vision storytelling was for a reason to portray a different image towards the tribes and see an in depth closeness.. if people from modern times disrespect then this is what you get .. its very horrific and somewhat true . It's not a film to be enjoyed but to be understood.
You need to have nuance with a film like this. I think it's a masterpiece and a total landmark in film history. Like most landmark horror of a bygone era, it has a complicated and unsavory history. This particular film's history is a bit harder to reconcile than other infamous productions but it's a compelling piece of art.
Hi Tara, can't say I don't agree with you - and yet, it's a bitter twisted irony, isn't it? An exploitation film satirising exploitation, aye, right, says sarcastic auld me...and yon Signore Deodato must have been a nasty piece of work. Little wonder poor Franca Ciardi gave up acting soon afterwards. Should have kicked his jewels!
Apart from this review, I just love your eyes and your pout! And that voice - and there's only one other lady on RU-vid I have told something along these lines earlier this year, and I meant it too!
Director was clearly a PoS, but this comment is inaccurate. Ciardi worked in film for 11 years after this with her last movie being The Safari in 1991. She then left film until being a part of Death Walks in 2016
Italians b movie directors from the 70s had great technique, people like Martino, Fulci, Castellari, Di Leo. They basically elevated the subject matter with a lot of tricks and good ideas, the practical effects in CH are great and even if the pov style was common in giallo movies, or best sellers like Halloween, Deodato used it in a really peculiar way, he basically gave the blueprint to The Blair Witch Project's guys.
This film and Dances With Wolves probably perfectly show how to validate each other, each other's cultures, how to eradicate our colonizing nature within us. This relates also to how for example trans people have been treated, as if man or woman as genders are a land that can be colonized, when acxtually it is their own embodiment of those genders in their own way that other people want to colonize and take away from them, by taking away their own autonomy, their own sens eof self, and when they cant do it, they start pathologuzing and dehumanizing them to completely take their own agency and humanity away from them. Or what happens to Palestine. It is horrifying how people can not see the connections to what is happening. This film is hiding the cure this world needs, this is why this film has been so important. I was guided back to this film after asking myself what to do with the state of the world we live in. Sacrifice, thats it, humans need to learn how to sacrifice themselves for others in the name of love. People also need to learn again how to be curious instead of assuming. Because assumption itself is a thief that steals from the mystery, it is a colonizing psyche within humans acting out when we do it. The value of an individual needs to go on top above any beliefs people hold in their minds.
The only genuinely wrong thing about this movie are the real animal killings staged for the story. It’s just wrong and shames everyone involved in my opinion. If there were none of these scenes it would be an undisputed horror classic as you say. Great channel love it!
I love the acerbic sarcasm!! The wit that is so dry I’m not sure if it’s supposed to be! In any case, I will be tuning in more often for these 🎥 reviews and I am going out in this blinding snowstorm we are having to track down this one!!!!❤️👏🏻👍🏻👏🏻
As much as the story is well done I cannot ever call this a good movie given the production. Live animal deaths plus unsafe scenes and the director being more or less a tyrant to his cast and crew. Good story but bad movie.
This wasn't about colonialism or anything deep; This was about how far some people are willing to go for fame and money. You stated yourself how often they talk about that. I saw this when I was 11 years old... Oh yeah, that toughens up the soul real quick. 😆 Oh, and Depps version was actually a lot better than it's predecessor. The Dahl estate declared as much and Roald himself even hated (or was it 'loathed') Wilder's version.
The only reason why I thought it could be about colonialism is that the director decided to make a movie about westerners going to new lands. He could have told a story about fame and money a different way, but he specifically chose a story about white people interacting with indigenous tribes
@@TaraNatalia well, in western society we kind of trip over them whities so no surprise there. And it's not so much the fame and money thing in and of itself, it's the atrocious behavior it can induce in some people. I admit, the intensions of the director are not always clear.
I was on board with you until you said that Charlie in the chocolate factory is pretty much the worst movie every made, like what dude thats a great film imo how can you hate it that much
This flick is trash of the highest (or lowest?) order. I saw this after having first seen "Make Them Die Slowly" (both on VHS some time in my teens in the 80s, both rented from a mom and pop shop called The Video Barn owned and managed by my hometown's ex-mayor). It was great seeing most of the Video Nasties as kid before even knowing there was such a thing. I would rent this kind of stuff (The Video Barn didn't give a shit if you were 13 so long as you had the coin), and my dad would make a big pot of spaghetti or chili and we would laugh heartily at the gore as we ate. Well, except that time I rented "I Spit on Your Grave," then I think we had tuna casserole. I actually prefer Ferox to Holocaust, mainly because Ferox dispenses (mostly) with the moralizing and just goes full throttle on the sleaze, wrongness, and mean spiritedness. Granted, the structure is not as interesting as in Holocaust, but then I don't go into this kind of film expecting an innovation in the art of filmmaking. I still chuckle when I think about Deodato and Lenzi having a pissing match over who initiated the subgenre.
The animal deaths depicted in the movie were considered acceptable beause they were quick deaths. Another movie that also had animal death was Apocalypse Now. Now i do not blame the movie but those who made it. It is a disgrace for any film maker to do such a thing. However there is certainly biased when it comes to how Cannibal Holocaust is viewed (as an exploitation video nasty) and how Apocalypse Now is viewed (as a classic piece of cinema), Apocalypse Now is excused for being of its time where as Cannibal Holocaust is outright banned in many countries still. Infact the recent movie The Hobbit was responsible for the deaths of 27 animals in the making of those movies and those animals in some cases did not receive quick deaths and yet nobody talks about how disgusting it is to hear of how 27 animals died in the making of such a recent movie.
I totally agree with everything you said in your great and honest review. People are dumb and they focus on the gore element and brutality when there is a message in the film. I like what the professor said few times, and he tried to gain their trust, but what that film crew did is unforgivable and they deserved everything that happened. Lesson learnt ... always respect different people cultures and civilisations. Cross the line and you'll be eaten !
No, people are not dumb. They saw the so-called message in the film being insincere and disingenuous. The film maker shoe horned in a morality story thinking it will somehow absolve him of his own hypocrisy.
I haven't seen this film since I was a young teenager, but my only issues were with the animal cruelty. The poor spider and especially the beach turtle! Did you catch the reference to Cannibal Holocaust on Kong: Skull Island?
