Italian horror - a genre as equally celebrated as it is reviled. The undisputed master of the craft was the legendary Dario Argento, famous for his strong sense of surreal imagery and and poetic violence. Then there was Lucio "Godfather of Gore" Fulci, who was something of a poor man's Argento, but the bulk of his work is still highly enjoyable and he has generated a cult following possibly even more dedicated than Argento's. And then there was Ruggero Deodato, a director who possibly could have joined Argento and Fulci in the ranks of the Italian horror elite, if it weren't for a premature ending to his career due to a scandalous little piece of work called Cannibal Holocaust. Where Argento was known for visuals and Fulci for over-the-top gore, based on Holocaust, it looks as though Deodato could have made a name for himself based on sheer unapologetic brutality.

The film follows a researcher (Kerman) as he travels to the South American jungle in an attempt to find a missing film crew who were shooting a documentary on the cannibalistic natives of the area. The filmmakers are long dead, but their footage is discovered, and what it contains is among the most shocking brutality ever witnessed.

If you're at all familiar with classic horror, then you've undoubtedly heard about Cannibal Holocaust and the ravenous infamy that surrounds it. The question that seems to hang on the minds of those who haven't seen it is: does it really live up to its reputation? The answer: absolutely. Don't be mistaken; it isn't gore nor is it actual violence that makes Holocaust so infamous - hell, almost any of Fulci or Romero film is gorier than this. No, what makes Holocaust so disturbing is, among other things, the unflinching realism of the brutality. Deodato was actually arrested and the film was siezed upon its completion, and he had to present the actors in court to prove that he had not actually butchered them to make the film. I wondered, before viewing the picture, if it was even possible to make film violence look THAT realistic, especially back in 1980, but upon watching the film, I have to say that I can easily see why the courts had their suspicions in '80. Hell, the film would probably be brought under question even if it were made today. Though Deodato was able to prove that he did not actually murder anyone, he was still thrust into further hot water due to the fact that the cruelty toward animals in the film was real. Even after Deodato was able to release the film, Holocaust's future was to be rough, to say the least. Throughout the world, the film was either heavily cut/censored or banned all together, even in its native Italy. It actually holds the record for national bans: sixty countries.

So yes, it is brutal. Yes, it is shocking. But is it really any good? Well, the film suffers from poor dubbing, a common affliction among Italian films of the era. This tends to be a big contributor in making Italian horror films so famously campy, and while Holocaust isn't repulsing with unspeakable horrors, it does tend to be a bit campy. The mediocre acting also plays a role in this. However, Deodato's direction is actually quite good, as is the cinematography and the acting of those portraying the documentary film crew. Riz Ortolani's strange score is also quite good; the film opens with a series of beautiful aerial shots of the jungle accompanied by a peaceful, sad, almost pop-like piece of score, and then CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST flashes on screen - one can't help but feel that this is an uneasy juxtaposition. In fact, the first forty-five or so minutes of the film don't really prepare the viewer for what is to be unleashed upon them in the latter portion.

But on top of being the most infamous exploitation film ever made, Holocaust is actually a very powerful piece of cinema.

*BEGIN SPOILERS*

As the faux-documentary footage begins, the viewer is subjected to a group of "civilized" filmmakers who commit disturbing acts of brutality on both the less aggressive natives and the jungle animals. The desensitized manner in which these people behave is presented masterfully by Deodato and is truly frightening to watch. These men (and woman) slowly descend further and further into repugnant insanity, and this loss of all things humane and decent comes to a climax in a despicable scene in which the three male members of the crew take turns brutally raping a young female native. What makes Holocaust so powerful is the manner in which it presents the demise of these maniacs. Yes, the aforementioned rape scene is very troubling, but in a subsequent scene when all of the heinous acts committed by the crew come back around and are inflicted upon them by the more aggressive natives, I found myself asking: why is seeing the woman from the film crew violated so much more affecting than seeing the helpless native girl violated? Why is seeing these reprehensible people getting what's coming to them so disturbing? Why am I afraid for these horrible people?

By the time the footage is over, a troubled executive who was viewing it calls the projectionist and says "I want this footage burned. All of it." What a powerful note to end on. (Yes, I'm ignoring the last "Who are the real cannibals?" line of voice-over dialogue, as it is blatant and unnecessary.)

*END SPOILERS*

Cannibal Holocaust is one of the few films that delivers on the hype. A startlingly well-presented profile of madness that will probably rattle even the most seasoned horror fan, and an experience one's not likely to forget.

I like Cannibal Holocaust. Then again, I'm also a big Budd Dwyer fan. Sometimes I kind of like watching a lot of shit die.

The only thing that could possibly be more more brutal is Versus.

The only thing that could possibly be more more brutal is Garden State.

garden state makes me feel all warm inside.

Its a bad movie but pretty legendary at this point. Its was surpassed in weirdness/shock-value a long-time ago. Still fairly horrific in parts though.

Why do you think it's bad? And when was it ever weird?

Well I've only seen it once, but the whole premise just came off badly. Like what they wanted to express was overshadowed by shock value. It just wasn't that impressive and the same themes were done in previous films and done better. And my gut reaction to films with excess shock value is usually to not take them as seriously, but this is a personal issue. Come on, Cannibal Holocaust? As if there wasn't some irony in the title. The music was also horrendous. I take back what I said about it being bad, but its not terribly classic or artistic either. I would still recommend it, actually.

Well I've only seen it once, but the whole premise just came off badly. Like what they wanted to express was overshadowed by shock value. It just wasn't that impressive and the same themes were done in previous films and done better. And my gut reaction to films with excess shock value is usually to not take them as seriously, but this is a personal issue. Come on, Cannibal Holocaust? As if there wasn't some irony in the title. The music was also horrendous. I take back what I said about it being bad, but its not terribly classic or artistic either. I would still recommend it, actually.

Why I am the only person who has NOT seen this movie yet?

Seriously, man. Get your shit together.

At least once a month someone promises to bring me a copy of this movie and never makes good on the promise. I guess I'm just going to have to break down and buy the motherfucked if I ever want to see it.