Umberto Lenzi's jungle shocker is one of the most notorious movies in existence, so it goes without saying that this is a film suited best for those with strong stomachs. On closer examination it soon transpires that most of the gruelling gore scenes are actually restaged from the earlier Italian cycle of cannibal movies, here given more realism thanks to the sterling special effects work of Gino de Rossi. Although it's a generally unpleasant film, it's not as gruesome as you might expect and the gore scenes are not dwelt upon. Unfortunately what is dwelt upon are many deeply unpleasant scenes of animal cruelty; despite being a usual addition to the Italian cannibal cycle, I always find these unwatchable and deeply despicable.

Mixed in with the expected jungle action is an unexpected - and, in addition, totally unnecessary subplot involving a police investigation in New York into the disappearance of Mike Logan. Here we get to watch a couple of foul-mouthed Mafia hoods go around beating up and shooting people for no apparent reason; former porn actor Robert Kerman (EATEN ALIVE) investigates and discovers that Mike has gone into the Amazon, and that's it; sub-plot over. These scenes are supposedly used to explain the background of Mike's character, but as his wounded friend does this anyway, they come across as a waste of time and effort on Lenzi's part.

Once the film reaches the jungle, the atmosphere sets in; a claustrophobic, horrific atmosphere of lurking danger and death at every step. This is a world in which people and animals are frequently tortured and killed and there is no mercy or happiness. A wonderfully evocative score helps to add to the horror and tension of the situation, and there's no denying that Lenzi draws the full visual impact from his jungle setting. Into this world arrive three typically B-movie types. There's the macho "Rudy", a photographer who enjoys snapping pictures of mutilated corpses; the blonde bimbo Pat, and Gloria, the unappealing lead who spends the entire film with a permanent frown. It goes without saying that the acting is pretty much non-existent, wooden and the dubbing bad; as these are expected I won't dwell on them. The one exception is Giovanni Lombardo Radice, aka John Morghen. His portrayal of the manic drug dealer is way over the top and a lot of fun; with the look in Radice's eyes at some points it becomes very easy to believe that the actor really is on drugs, which is a pretty good effort in my book! Of course, there are moments of unintentional hilarity to savour, like the scene where our courageous explorers discover a native, sitting quite happily on a tree-stump, devouring giant maggots! "I've got a bad feeling" says Gloria - so has the viewer by this point! The cannibals themselves are mostly portrayed in a sympathetic light, but of course the racism inherent in this particular sub-genre is always prevalent.

Let's get down to the nitty-gritty; the gore. This is the main reason that people will be watching or want to watch this film, and it delivers just the right amount of blood-soaked carnage that you would expect from the title and reputation. Gone is the fantastical, splattery, sometimes artistic work that Giannetto de Rossi (Gino's father) put into Fulci's THE BEYOND and others; here the carnage is made to be as painful and realistic looking as possible. Violence involves eyeballs, disembowelment, hooks, and even piranhas. Actually, these bits came as something of a relief to me; it's pleasing to watch violence that it so obviously portrayed by special effects rather than the cruel and unstaged animal violence that fills the rest of the movie. Rounding out the violence are a number of cunningly-devised jungle traps designed to cause maximum pain to the unfortunate soul who finds himself in one! Is CANNIBAL FEROX well made? Not really, but Lenzi's direction is passable and better than in some of his lower-budgeted movies. The location work in the Amazon gives the film a convincing look, and the unforgettable jungle music by Maglione is every bit as good as Frizzi's score for ZOMBIE FLESH EATERS (and pretty similar in places). Overall, as CANNIBAL FEROX sufficiently manages to horrify just about any viewer in a number of instances (even if it is in the most basic way imaginable),the raw horror on display is undoubtedly effective - why else would it be "banned in 31 countries"?. This is why I rate it as an effective horror film, even if it is for all the wrong reasons.

This was a "me too" film based upon the success of "Cannibal Holocaust"-1980. The plot is basically unimportant as a group goes into the Amazon for different reasons, emeralds and a doctorate thesis. They get caught and eaten by cannibals, sorry for the cover art spoiler. The film is hailed for the graphic scenes, which in my version really didn't happen until about an hour and twenty minutes into the film. What we do see is actual animals being killed, which is not that exciting to someone who grew up watching Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom, but maybe for the younger crowd. This is not the most horrific or goriest film out there. Stop with the superlatives. I will grant you it does have gore we don't normally see such as a metal hook (where did those primitives get those?) piercing a breast and a human's brain getting eaten etc. or yeah, that castration thing. However I was bored for much of the film.

Guide: F-word and nudity (Zora Kerova)

The film begins with the murder of a drug addict in an unknown apartment by some gangsters looking for a man named Mike Logan. As the police begin their investigation into the shooting, the action relocates to the Paraguayan jungle, where two students, Gloria (Lorraine De Selle) and Rudy (Danilo Mattei),and one tag-along Pat (Zora Kerova) are making their way into the heart of the jungle looking for native tribes who have been accused of cannibalism. Gloria is out to disprove the claims of cannibalism for her dissertation, and after they come across two mangled bodies of tribesmen, they also come across Mike Logan carrying his injured partner Joe (Walter Lucchini),who both claim to have been attacked by savage cannibals.

Between 1977 and 1981 there was a huge boom in cannibal films. They boasted exotic locations, horrific gore, real animal killings, and the threat of the unknown in the primitive tribes. It was Ferox's director Umberto Lenzi who kick-started the sub-genre with Deep River Savages in 1972, but they only really hit their stride in 1977, when the Grindhouse theatres were at their most popular. The cannibal genre died out pretty quickly, thankfully, as they represent everything that is ugly about the horror genre, and Cannibal Ferox, possibly the second most notorious after Cannibal Holocaust, is no exception.

The gore and violence is by no means convincing, or even disturbing, but it is clear from the off that the film's sole purpose is to be more repulsive than anything else before it. Multiple cocks are hacked off (and one is eaten - yummy),a woman is lifted into the air with fish- hooks through the breasts, there is an eye-gouging, and of course, no cannibal film would be complete without a bit of the ol' brain eating. This is all well and good and what can be expected from an Italian exploitation film at the height of the nasties era, but the animal killings are simply needless.

I always found myself defending Cannibal Holocaust for the animal cruelty, as that is a genuinely good film, and the horrific animal scenes really do add to the horrible and deeply unsettling atmosphere. But after seeing Ferox, I realised there is really no excuse for it. Regardless of the film's quality, there is no place for the pointless killing of animals. Radice refused to wield the knife during the pig- killing scene, and in the DVD commentary, director Lenzi said 'Robert De Niro would have done it!', to which Radice replied 'Robert De Niro would have told you to f**k off!'

Anyway, the film really is pretty damn awful. Why the action keeps shifting back to New York is anyone's guess. Mike is a wanted drug pusher that legged it off to Paraguay in search of cocaine and a fortune in gemstones, but surely knowing this is enough? There is a rescue attempt near the end that looks like joining the two stems together, but nothing comes of it. It seems to be there only to add a few more minutes onto the running time, allowing the film to render itself a feature. As you would expect, the acting/script/story is guff, but the strange thing is the moral message it seems to be putting out. When it revealed that Mike was lying and it was in fact him that attacked the tribe (shock horror),it seems to be a 'don't judge a book by it's cover' type message. But when the tribe acts out their revenge, they revel in the torturing.

Well anyway, the real torture victim was me, who had to sit through this. There's a few more cannibal films to get through for the nasties project (maybe I'll leave them to Marc),and although I'll welcome (if that's the right word) another viewing of Cannibal Holocaust, I have to say that I would be happy not to have to sit through another cannibal film. And there's always the Mondo sub-genre I suppose!

www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com