PDA

View Full Version : Cannibal Holocaust Opinions?


RyanPC
05-17-2003, 07:15 AM
I just watched this movie (downloaded it from Kazaa). I didn't get to see it for a while because I uninstalled my regular Kazaa because of all the spyware and popups... it was seriously killing my computer! I had to get a Pop-Up Popper and everything because like every second an ad would pop up, usually from the same company. But anyway, I installed Kazaa Lite and by that time CH was finished downloading, so I could watch it. I was impressed... it is an amazing film. The photography is absolutely beautiful, and certainly ahead of it's time. I had been waiting a long time to see this and it sure was worth the wait! Now I have to have that Grindhouse DVD... if it ever comes out! :D I wouldn't mind owning that EC DVD, but what if I buy it and then Grindhouse suddenly decides to release their version? Then I'd be screwed. So I decided it's best to wait a while and see if Grindhouse wises up any. If not, then I'll just give in and buy the EC version.

Great movie!! :)

Any opinions?

DefJeff
05-17-2003, 07:18 AM
well I would just go ahead and buy the EC version to be honest with you.

about the movie, i think its wonderful. great all around, but what stands out the most to me is the amazing score

RyanPC
05-17-2003, 07:23 AM
Yes, the score was excellent also... I would LOVE to have a soundtrack to this on CD! :)

DefJeff
05-17-2003, 07:25 AM
Originally posted by RyanPC
... I would LOVE to have a soundtrack to this on CD! :)

Haha, hey thats my line!

Acutally, I passed on picking this soundtrack up somewhat cheap awhile ago :cry:

RyanPC
05-17-2003, 07:37 AM
They released a soundtrack to it? Was it on CD or vinyl?

The Chaostar
05-18-2003, 01:32 PM
I have it ... download it fron Napster some years ago. But you can get it on WinMx.

aoiookami
05-20-2003, 01:12 AM
I also watched this via download months ago, and cant decide if I enjoyed it or not. It felt like just a gore-fest exploitation flick, and at times it felt like it was trying too hard to get a rise out of the viewer. But it is definately one of the nastiest movies Ive seen, maybe that is where is succeeds? if that is even something to be proud about. In the end I think I didnt enjoy this movie more than I did enjoy it because it had no depth for me, the characters were evil ppl and I wanted them to die anyways so whats the big deal? I think the only thing I gained from this flick is that if I'm ever asked whats the sickest movie Ive ever seen I can say this...

anyways, some of the effects were really fantastic for a film of its age, I'm still baffled on how they pulled off that girl-impaled-on-stick effect. If anyone knows how it was done I'd like to know..

Andrew
05-20-2003, 01:28 AM
Deodato mentioned somewhere (JUNGLE HOLOCAUST soundtrack maybe) that all he did was have her sit on a bicycle-seat type thing and have another stick put in her mouth and had them line up. One of the cooler things I've seen though (just look at my avatar).

I would say the film does have depth though, as opposed to many of the cannibal flicks from Italy. It's an indictment of the media and asks the question "who are the real cannibals?". I think it works on both that level and the visceral one you described.

RyanPC
05-20-2003, 02:39 AM
Definitely a brilliant film. It was extremely well shot and impressive with it's presentation.

dwatts
05-20-2003, 04:48 AM
--It's an indictment of the media and asks the question "who are the real cannibals?". I think it works on both that level and the visceral one you described.--

I think this commonly expressed view was made up to justify this film. During its conception and making, it was simply a gorefest.

Andrew
05-20-2003, 05:32 AM
I disagree, as I think they could have been much more explicit in the gore department. It's hardly the goriest film ever made (even at the time).

Mortis
05-20-2003, 06:51 AM
You should buy the EC version so that the Grindhouse one does come out for the rest of us.

Originally posted by RyanPC
I wouldn't mind owning that EC DVD, but what if I buy it and then Grindhouse suddenly decides to release their version? Then I'd be screwed. So I decided it's best to wait a while and see if Grindhouse wises up any. If not, then I'll just give in and buy the EC version.

Mortis
05-20-2003, 06:55 AM
I found the main theme in MP3 format.

http://www.brian-oshaughnessy.com/downloads/music-01.zip

Originally posted by RyanPC
They released a soundtrack to it? Was it on CD or vinyl?

dwatts
05-20-2003, 08:44 AM
It's okay that we disagree. I honestly feel this film does not deserve much analysis time at all. To imagine that Deodato had anything other than making a shocking gore film, is stretching reality. The so called analysis of the "meaning" of this film is analysis applied after the event, and has more to say about the so called critics who would see "meaning" in a dog turd, than it does about the intention of the filmmaker himself.

Don't believe me? Well, I have the words of Deodato to back me up. You'll find the quotes in "Eaten Alive!" by Jay Slater (excellent book, by the way). In the section on CH Lloyd Kaufman says the following: "I once interviewed Deodato at his home in Italy, and asked him to comment on his views of the media (the entire interview can be found as a bonus feature on Troma's DVD release of Argento's Stendahl Syndrome, 1996). Deodato told me that if I planned on asking him stupid questions like that, he would stop the interview. He'd set out to make a movie about cannibals, and that's it."

I'll stick with the words of the man who made it. Plenty of others defend the film, and that's all well and good. However, imbuing it with some kind of intellectual merit - when in reality it's an exploitation flick like any other, just seems to me to be an excuse people use in order to enjoy watching this film, animal killings and all. I like plenty of the exploitation genre. However, Iím not going to pretend they are anything more than what they were intended to be Ė and thatís okay.

The Chaostar
05-20-2003, 05:37 PM
Remember this. Even if indeed Deodato said that MOVIES DO NOT BELONG TO THEIR DIRECTORS ONCE THEY'RE OUT ON THE SCREEN. They belong to us. And we can make whatever we want from them.

The Chaostar
05-20-2003, 05:40 PM
And CH it's an intelligent, thought provoking horror film. They don't make them anymore...

dwatts
05-20-2003, 06:25 PM
Sure they do. Frailty is really good in this regard. I don't find CH intelligent at any level - EXCEPT - the Director set out to shock, and he DID succeed in that regard.

Of course, we all have views about what is good and what is not. I know there are several films that I really like, that others have no time for. When we talk about movies having an overall meaning, we can clearly say what it represents to ourselves. However, we should not suggest the Director himself had intentions when even he says he did not.

Just to make it clear - if it means a lot to the individual - way to go!

Latency
05-20-2003, 10:10 PM
I am with Dwatts on this one (ins ome ways). It's a cannibal movie plain and simple. Maybe it was well shot and what not but it's still a cannibal movie and that's all it will ever be. People some times look too deep into a movies elements or "hidden meanings" instead of watching it for the reason it was made. I am not attacking anyone here on this board so don't reply in hate and anger :) Everyone watches movies in different ways. Some people watch for artistic reasons, some just watch for plain dumb fun. Most movies are actually meant to be watched in certain ways, but clearly CH was not. This is just an observation I have seen over the years all over the place.

Nice example with the "turd" Dwatts :)

Andrew
05-21-2003, 02:14 AM
I actually mentioned in a thread a while ago how funny it is when people read too much into things that weren't really there. I think some EVIL DEAD reviews noted some "obvious influences", but it turned out Raimi hadn't even seen those films. It's possible it's BS, but I see more than a gore movie. But we can agree to disagree :).

Nemesis
05-21-2003, 03:32 AM
hmm, so the EC version is the best available at the moment? thats the italian R2 release yea? or is the italian R2 release still a coming soon? i lose track of these things..

is JUNGLE HOLOCAUST any good? i was thinking of picking that up to but its a bit pricey so i wanted to make sure it was good before forking over my dosh for it

dwatts
05-21-2003, 03:43 AM
It is okay to like a film coz it is messed up.

Andrew
05-21-2003, 04:31 AM
The EC version is NTSC R0 I believe. JUNGLE HOLOCAUST is very good, and worth the money IMO. Has a Deodato comentary and some interviews, along with some lobby card reproductions.

Nemesis
05-21-2003, 05:15 AM
which version is the one that was discussed a few weeks ago as being a R2 Italian PAL version.. but was the best release so far?

Latency
05-21-2003, 07:15 AM
Originally posted by AndrewBBD
I actually mentioned in a thread a while ago how funny it is when people read too much into things that weren't really there. I think some EVIL DEAD reviews noted some "obvious influences", but it turned out Raimi hadn't even seen those films. It's possible it's BS, but I see more than a gore movie. But we can agree to disagree :).

So true :)

I will have to watch CH again after all of this discussion.

rhett
05-24-2003, 03:16 AM
Originally posted by dwatts
It's okay that we disagree. I honestly feel this film does not deserve much analysis time at all. To imagine that Deodato had anything other than making a shocking gore film, is stretching reality. The so called analysis of the "meaning" of this film is analysis applied after the event, and has more to say about the so called critics who would see "meaning" in a dog turd, than it does about the intention of the filmmaker himself.

Don't believe me? Well, I have the words of Deodato to back me up. You'll find the quotes in "Eaten Alive!" by Jay Slater (excellent book, by the way). In the section on CH Lloyd Kaufman says the following: "I once interviewed Deodato at his home in Italy, and asked him to comment on his views of the media (the entire interview can be found as a bonus feature on Troma's DVD release of Argento's Stendahl Syndrome, 1996). Deodato told me that if I planned on asking him stupid questions like that, he would stop the interview. He'd set out to make a movie about cannibals, and that's it."

I'll stick with the words of the man who made it. Plenty of others defend the film, and that's all well and good. However, imbuing it with some kind of intellectual merit - when in reality it's an exploitation flick like any other, just seems to me to be an excuse people use in order to enjoy watching this film, animal killings and all. I like plenty of the exploitation genre. However, Iím not going to pretend they are anything more than what they were intended to be Ė and thatís okay.
I do not understand how so many people dismiss films as so simple. Think of the thought and detail that goes into a film. Thousands of dollars and hundreds of collaborators don't just get together to make a simple "cannibal" movie. There is obvious social context here dwatts, choose to ignore it or not.

An ironic contrast is made between "civil" society and the tribal age. We, the societal age, are the obvious cannibals, which is an opinion expressed by many of the better films of the 1970's (think TAXI DRIVER, MADAME ROSA, and EASY RIDER). Yeah, the movie has gore and animal cruelty, but that should not be held against the merit of the film as an indictment of 70's society. Right from the opening credits with Riz Ortolani's score it is established that this is a film abot loss and injustice. His score is haunting and somehwat out of place in the typical "cannibal" film.

A criticism of Robert Altman has always been that he makes sexist films. To that Altman has always said: "I don't make sexist films, I make films about sexism." To the same extent I think Deodato could just as easily claim he made CH as a film about cannibal exploitation. CANNIBAL FEROX is a film very much like CH, but the tone is much different and the intent of the film, I believe, is too. HOLOCAUST is much darker and much sadder than CF. From the animal cruelty to the murder of the tribeswoman by her own mate, the focus of the film is never diverted away from the melancholic regret of the entire movie.

As for what Deodato said about his film, I wouldn't believe everything the filmmaker says. Look at what some of the Coen brothers say about their films. For MILLER'S CROSSING they said they thought it would "be cool" to put some gay characters in, and that they just wanted to make a simple gangster movie. CROSSING, of course, is so much more than a simple gangster film, despite what the Coen's say about it. Many filmmakers, like Deodato for CH, refuse to talk at length about their films, because rally, like Chao mentioned, films ultimately belong to the viewer. A film should provoke thought, not tell you what to think. Spielberg has spoke at length about this, saying how he does not like talking about his films because he wants the viewers to experience them with a clean state of consciousness.

I think many of us take filmmakers for granted. It is not like someone just gets up one morning and becomes a professional filmmaker. A lot of thought and detail goes into a film, and to just label something a shallow genre demonstration is undermining the intelligence of all those involved in film.

We as a society will not believe a word a lawyer or politician says, yet when a filmmaker makes a single musing it is immediately perceived as fact. Opinions and ideas are so much more than just tidy little quotes. What Deodato has been quoted on many be the truth, but I'll bet almost everyone else on this forum will tell you otherwise dwatts. But hey, to each his own.

dwatts
05-24-2003, 03:42 AM
I think what you miss is context. Robert Altman compared to italian cannibal flicks or their makers? No way. Deodato a professional filmaker? Well sure, if you define a professional as someone who gets paid to do what they do - but his work is mostly third rate, at best. Just because someone makes a commercial film does not imbue them with talent. Further, it is clear that the italian films of this era (in this genre) were made to shock, and make money from the ideas of others by way of imitation and excess.

Dismiss what the filmmaker says about his film? Well, that sure makes life easier, doesn't it. Whom should we believe then? While I might not agree with filmmakers, I don't think we can simply ignore what they say and pretend we know better

Obviously we disagree - but I personally I don't feel that Speilberg and Altman should be mentioned in the same paragraph as Deodato. Nor can we compare their intent in making films.

As you say - each to their own. I stick with my - i"t's okay to like this film as a messed up experience. But talking about it as though it has some hidden meaning is a misfire of logic."

Azmodan
05-24-2003, 04:55 AM
Love this movie, one of the better Cannibal movies. I have the EC Remasterd disc and it rocks... I also was waiting for the Grindhouse disk but gave up. Still... Cannibal Ferox is better :evil:

rhett
05-24-2003, 08:50 AM
So dwatts, all the contrasts between civil society and primitive tribal life are just in there by chance? They have no meaning or ultimate point to them? I am not trying to be facetious, I just want to know how you can dismiss them as nothing but elements of a gorefest.

dwatts
05-24-2003, 02:59 PM
-- all the contrasts between civil society and primitive tribal life are just in there by chance?--

The film looks like a bunch of "modern" people dumped into a jungle where they meet cannibals.

Look at this description: "A scientific expedition happens to discover that gold exits on *** escarpment. The villainous Medford and Vandermeer kidnap *** and ***to extort from*** the location of the gold. Everyone is captured by wicked natives."

Huh! Modern man in Africa, mixing it up with "wicked natives"!

Oh, did I mention this is a description of "Tarzan's Secret Treasure" from 1941 starring good old Johnny Weissmuller?

I fail to see anymore significance in CH than I do in Fulci's Zombie (good modern doctor on island trying to save natives from desease) or Cannibal Holcaust (modern doctor using natives as guinea pigs) when more people come from modern society to save them. The plot of CH is not all that unique in the context of cannibal films, or even, in general terms in italian horror films overall. I just fail to see it.

I feel very confident in saying that CH would never have been made without the gore.

dwatts
05-24-2003, 03:37 PM
Do you all know this site:

http://www.cannibalholocaust.net/

A must for fans of the film.

Atmims
05-24-2003, 04:12 PM
I pretty much agree with Rhett. I don't think Deodato intended for any sort of "message" to be in the movie but the "message" is there and that's all I'm concerned with. I actually enjoy the movie more for it's fucked-upness but by the end of the film I can't help but to realize that maybe society today is wrong.

Mortis
05-24-2003, 09:55 PM
Zombie Holocaust. :D

Originally posted by dwatts
[BI fail to see anymore significance in CH than I do in Fulci's Zombie (good modern doctor on island trying to save natives from desease) or Cannibal Holcaust (modern doctor using natives as guinea pigs) when more people come from modern society to save them.[/B]

dwatts
05-24-2003, 10:01 PM
Oh yeah - that's it. God that film sucks --LOL-- But in a good way.

Mortis
05-24-2003, 10:12 PM
I love when the guy jumps from the window and the dummy's arm blows off.

thegreeninferno
06-18-2003, 07:18 AM
:lol:

thegreeninferno
06-18-2003, 07:20 AM
If hellholes like this didn't exist, I'm sure you people would create them.