Nothing could be further from the truth. Banned in more than sixty countries at the time of its release because of the extreme violence of its images, Cannibal Holocaust remains known for having been the most censored film of all time. Filmed with handheld camera, the second part of the film is presented as a sulphurous documentary retracing the expedition of four young journalists in the heart of an Amazonian forest inhabited by cannibal tribes. Murders, tortures, rapes, amputations, the result is, so to speak, extremely realistic… Much too realistic for the taste of the Italian authorities in the beginning of the 80’s, who accused the director Ruggero Deodato of having really killed actors during the shooting of what was then considered as an authentic snuff film.
A totally unfounded rumor of course, although half a dozen animals were indeed sacrificed for the needs of the film… Finally, Cannibal Holocaust was given an X rating, a ban on under 16s and even on under 18s in most countries where it is only allowed in its heavily censored version. Here, I will analyze the full version. Get ready to discover the film that traumatized entire generations of seasoned moviegoers…
After the first twenty minutes of introduction, here we are in company of the doctor Monroe, of his guide, and of the soldiers charged to accompany him in his journey, confronted with all the dangers which conceal the terrible Amazonian jungle. The film is not at first sight stingy in paradisiac images: fauna and flora high in colors have no equal to charm us and bring us to almost forget that we are about to attend the ultimate representation of the ultra violence in the cinema. But these idyllic landscapes are quickly supplanted by the terrible reality, as evidenced by the abominable scene of punishment for adultery, which marks the very first encounter between the civilized world and the atrocities of tribal mores, but also the first confrontation of the viewer with the paroxysmal visual horror of Cannibal Holocaust.
This scene, like all the others filmed in an incredibly realistic manner, suddenly plunges us into another world, a world of archaic fury in which the human body is nothing more than a pile of barbaque that can be destroyed in the blink of an eye. The idea is crude: a cannibal drags his unfaithful wife to a deserted beach before penetrating her savagely with a blunt flint, leaving her to suffer in peace for a few moments, before repeating the barbaric act with a stone adorned with deadly spikes. The man completes his sinister ritual by smashing the skull of his agonizing companion with the said customized stone.
This scene acts as a seismic shock in the viewer’s mind: what the hell is he witnessing? How could a film go so far in terms of graphic violence? But this is only the beginning, other more sadistic and improbable elements are about to leave a deep and indelible mark in his mind definitely not prepared for such images.
As I said before, Cannibal Holocaust is composed of two parts: the first one tells the story of the expedition of Dr. Monroe’s team to find the film left by the missing journalists; the second one is the viewing of the film itself. To reinforce the realism of the film, Ruggero Deodato took care to add video effects aiming at making the found film dirty and damaged, in order to make us adhere even more easily to the presumed veracity of the facts which take place under our eyes. It is during the second part that things get tougher: violent situations of shameless sadism follow one another at high speed.
The most striking scenes are undoubtedly the one where we see a woman belonging to one of the numerous cannibal tribes impaled on a vertical stake, which comes out of her mouth; or the one of the delivery, during which a baby is torn by force from its mother’s belly and immediately buried in the ground, while its mother, bound hand and foot, is killed with stones by a horde of furious women. These scenes are disturbing, of course, but perhaps not as disturbing as the scenes that blithely mix horror and pornography. Two scenes of gang rape in particular have been much talked about because of the extreme crudity of their representation, which allows us to fully grasp the horror involved in witnessing this monstrous act.
The cruelty with which the perpetrators of the rape commit their crime is at least as shocking as the act itself, filmed with as much impartiality as possible – the documentary aspect of the film consequently annihilating any racy aspect. It’s a shocking fact that many of the actors have accepted to play completely naked during entire sequences, and it must be admitted that seeing so many sexes uncovered in a single horror film, and therefore with a non-pornographic aim, remains quite destabilizing. Speaking of sex, I can’t but feel obliged to mention the emasculation scene of one of the journalists, really impressive of… realism, yes, that’s the word.
These scenes are the backbone of Cannibal Holocaust, which constitutes the whole “legend” that surrounds it, but they are nevertheless not without a certain satirical charge against the media: the fact that these horrors could be filmed implies the insatiable search for sensationalism of journalism, which happens to be the main target of the director here; but also the total abstraction of any ethics, as well as the cruel and unabashed voyeurism of an audience subjected to a dangerous trivialization of violence by the media. Unfortunately, this critical aspect of the film has been almost entirely swept away by the violence of the film itself, and only the shocking scenes in which Cannibal Holocaust seems to indulge remain in our minds.
It is still difficult to talk about the acting of the actors, since most of them are members of Amazonian tribes and are content to be natural – except for the cannibalism scenes, at least we hope so… As for the others, the simple fact that the film could have been mistaken for a snuff film is enough to prove the accuracy of their respective interpretations.
On the other hand, it seems very difficult to conceive that the actors could have accepted to indulge in such barbaric acts on living animals. What acts are we talking about? The decapitation and dectication of a river turtle, among others, which will end up cooked on a wood fire and eaten by the team of journalists in the second part of the film. This scene, really disgusting, will be enough to make the defenders of the animal cause howl with scandal, as everything is shown in the smallest details, up to the last nervous movements of the poor animal which has neither its head nor its viscera left. Not to mention the monkey that has the top of its skull cut off with a machete, or the water rat whose throat is slit in no time, and with a smile on its face, etc.
These animal sacrifices, although regrettable, nevertheless contribute to the feeling of intense unease that runs through the film and reinforce the extreme realism wanted by Ruggero Deodato. Finally, the finale of Cannibal Holocaust, which obviously could not be assumed to be optimistic, brutally closes the film in the manner of The Blair Witch Project or [Rec] – the camera falling to the ground, the cameraman’s face dead in close-up facing the lens -, realizing more than twenty years earlier what was to become one of the main codes of films shot with subjective camera.
Shocking, sadistic, immoral, gratuitous, cruel, disgusting; detractors of Cannibal Holocaust have no shortage of adjectives to choose from… Nevertheless, one cannot reproach this UFO of horror cinema, which alone crosses all the limits of decency imposed by the codes of censorship, for questioning the notion of the unrepresentable. How far can we go in cinematographic representation? In its own way, Cannibal Holocaust answers this question with accuracy,… A cult film that should not be put in everyone’s hands, but which is certainly worth seeing, at least once in one’s life.
