Connect with us

Editorials

[Butcher Block] The Controversial Infamy of ‘Cannibal Holocaust’

Published

on

Butcher Block is a weekly series celebrating horror’s most extreme films and the minds behind them. Dedicated to graphic gore and splatter, each week will explore the dark, the disturbed, and the depraved in horror, and the blood and guts involved. For the films that use special effects of gore as an art form, and the fans that revel in the carnage, this series is for you.

Ruggero Deodato’s well-known cannibal exploitation film wasn’t the first in the cannibal film boom of the ‘70s and ‘80s, and it was far from the last. It is, however, the one with the biggest reputation and the most controversial. Cannibal Holocaust is an uncomfortable watch, and the on-screen animal deaths and extreme violence makes it one of the rare films that earned its prosecuted and banned status as a Video Nasty. There’s a surprising depth beyond the shock value, though; Deodato didn’t consider this to be a horror film because his underlying, timeless message of media sensationalism is rooted deep in reality. The wave of found footage films that emerged in the late ‘90s also owes a tremendous debt to Deodato’s film.

Inspired by the sensationalized news coverage of terrorist organization the Red Brigades in the ‘70s, Deodato crafted a narrative that stemmed from a team of documentary filmmakers willing to do anything possible to get their story on the cannibal tribes of the rainforest.  That story was told in the framework of found footage; a professor stumbles across the documentary team’s footage while on a mission in the Amazon, and that footage shows what happened to the missing crew. Playing back the footage, the professor (and viewer) discovers the blatant disregard of the indigenous people by the filmmakers as they resort to harsh measures, even extreme sexual violence, to get the story they want until eventually the tribes are pushed to their breaking point.

As the crew winds through the rainforest to the cannibal tribes, they encounter many animals along the way. A number of which were slaughtered on screen. A turtle is decapitated and disemboweled in preparation for eating, various animals are slaughtered with a machete, a pig is shot at close range with a shotgun, and a coatimundi is killed by knife. None of it is easy to watch, especially knowing it’s real, and it affected the cast and crew during production as well. Actor Gabriel Yorke flat out refused to shoot the pig, and the job had to be handed off to actor Luca Barbareschi.

The cringe-worthy animal deaths are a precursor to one of horror’s most harrowing final acts that sees the documentary crew unleash a torrent of violence toward the cannibal people, taking extreme action in manipulating the tribes in ways to shape their documentary narrative. They somehow didn’t account for their violence to be met with equal, disturbing violence. Gang rape, impalement, genital mutilation, corpse defilement, decapitations, and more ensured that the censors would be triggered in a way they likely hadn’t before.

Outside of its ban in the UK as a Video Nasty, Cannibal Holocaust faced bans and censorship issues around the world for its graphic gore, sexual violence, and brutal animal slayings. More than that, the film caused Deodato to be arrested 10 days after the film’s release in Italy. He was charged with obscenity, and murder charges were later added when Cannibal Holocaust came under suspicion for being a snuff film. Because the actors had signed an agreement to go into hiding for a year after the film’s release to promote the idea that the footage was actually real, it’s no surprise that the gimmick worked a bit too well. Deodato had to not only prove that the actors were alive and unharmed, but also to recount how he achieved the special effects on some of the most grisly kills in the film to prove his innocence.

Deodato wanted to make a statement on media sensationalism, and he succeeded. Cannibal Holocaust is a rare film to earn every bit of its infamy, both on screen and behind the scenes. The sexual violence and animal slaughter means that most who watch it never revisit it again. Considered the apex of cannibal exploitation films, Cannibal Holocaust remains high in the ranking of most extreme cinema.

Horror journalist, RT Top Critic, and Critics Choice Association member. Co-Host of the Bloody Disgusting Podcast. Has appeared on PBS series' Monstrum, served on the SXSW Midnighter shorts jury, and moderated horror panels for WonderCon and SeriesFest.

Editorials

Finding Faith and Violence in ‘The Book of Eli’ 14 Years Later

Published

on

Having grown up in a religious family, Christian movie night was something that happened a lot more often than I care to admit. However, back when I was a teenager, my parents showed up one night with an unusually cool-looking DVD of a movie that had been recommended to them by a church leader. Curious to see what new kind of evangelical propaganda my parents had rented this time, I proceeded to watch the film with them expecting a heavy-handed snoozefest.

To my surprise, I was a few minutes in when Denzel Washington proceeded to dismember a band of cannibal raiders when I realized that this was in fact a real movie. My mom was horrified by the flick’s extreme violence and dark subject matter, but I instantly became a fan of the Hughes Brothers’ faith-based 2010 thriller, The Book of Eli. And with the film’s atomic apocalypse having apparently taken place in 2024, I think this is the perfect time to dive into why this grim parable might also be entertaining for horror fans.

Originally penned by gaming journalist and The Walking Dead: The Game co-writer Gary Whitta, the spec script for The Book of Eli was already making waves back in 2007 when it appeared on the coveted Blacklist. It wasn’t long before Columbia and Warner Bros. snatched up the rights to the project, hiring From Hell directors Albert and Allen Hughes while also garnering attention from industry heavyweights like Denzel Washington and Gary Oldman.

After a series of revisions by Anthony Peckham meant to make the story more consumer-friendly, the picture was finally released in January of 2010, with the finished film following Denzel as a mysterious wanderer making his way across a post-apocalyptic America while protecting a sacred book. Along the way, he encounters a run-down settlement controlled by Bill Carnegie (Gary Oldman), a man desperate to get his hands on Eli’s book so he can motivate his underlings to expand his empire. Unwilling to let this power fall into the wrong hands, Eli embarks on a dangerous journey that will test the limits of his faith.


SO WHY IS IT WORTH WATCHING?

Judging by the film’s box-office success, mainstream audiences appear to have enjoyed the Hughes’ bleak vision of a future where everything went wrong, but critics were left divided by the flick’s trope-heavy narrative and unapologetic religious elements. And while I’ll be the first to admit that The Book of Eli isn’t particularly subtle or original, I appreciate the film’s earnest execution of familiar ideas.

For starters, I’d like to address the religious elephant in the room, as I understand the hesitation that some folks (myself included) might have about watching something that sounds like Christian propaganda. Faith does indeed play a huge part in the narrative here, but I’d argue that the film is more about the power of stories than a specific religion. The entire point of Oldman’s character is that he needs a unifying narrative that he can take advantage of in order to manipulate others, while Eli ultimately chooses to deliver his gift to a community of scholars. In fact, the movie even makes a point of placing the Bible in between equally culturally important books like the Torah and Quran, which I think is pretty poignant for a flick inspired by exploitation cinema.

Sure, the film has its fair share of logical inconsistencies (ranging from the extent of Eli’s Daredevil superpowers to his impossibly small Braille Bible), but I think the film more than makes up for these nitpicks with a genuine passion for classic post-apocalyptic cinema. Several critics accused the film of being a knockoff of superior productions, but I’d argue that both Whitta and the Hughes knowingly crafted a loving pastiche of genre influences like Mad Max and A Boy and His Dog.

Lastly, it’s no surprise that the cast here absolutely kicks ass. Denzel plays the title role of a stoic badass perfectly (going so far as to train with Bruce Lee’s protégée in order to perform his own stunts) while Oldman effortlessly assumes a surprisingly subdued yet incredibly intimidating persona. Even Mila Kunis is remarkably charming here, though I wish the script had taken the time to develop these secondary characters a little further. And hey, did I mention that Tom Waits is in this?


AND WHAT MAKES IT HORROR ADJACENT?

Denzel’s very first interaction with another human being in this movie results in a gory fight scene culminating in a face-off against a masked brute wielding a chainsaw (which he presumably uses to butcher travelers before eating them), so I think it’s safe to say that this dog-eat-dog vision of America will likely appeal to horror fans.

From diseased cannibals to hyper-violent motorcycle gangs roaming the wasteland, there’s plenty of disturbing R-rated material here – which is even more impressive when you remember that this story revolves around the bible. And while there are a few too many references to sexual assault for my taste, even if it does make sense in-universe, the flick does a great job of immersing you in this post-nuclear nightmare.

The excessively depressing color palette and obvious green screen effects may take some viewers out of the experience, but the beat-up and lived-in sets and costume design do their best to bring this dead world to life – which might just be the scariest part of the experience.

Ultimately, I believe your enjoyment of The Book of Eli will largely depend on how willing you are to overlook some ham-fisted biblical references in order to enjoy some brutal post-apocalyptic shenanigans. And while I can’t really blame folks who’d rather not deal with that, I think it would be a shame to miss out on a genuinely engaging thrill-ride because of one minor detail.

With that in mind, I’m incredibly curious to see what Whitta and the Hughes Brothers have planned for the upcoming prequel series starring John Boyega


There’s no understating the importance of a balanced media diet, and since bloody and disgusting entertainment isn’t exclusive to the horror genre, we’ve come up with Horror Adjacent – a recurring column where we recommend non-horror movies that horror fans might enjoy.

Continue Reading