Our world of steel and glass, of choking fumes and crush of people
synonymous with the Green Inferno: both are jungles of violent beauty, hunting
grounds where we satiate our never-ending appetite for destruction. This tragic
exploitation film is a caustic indictment of modernity, depicting civilization
as the antagonist, the invader whose presence conjures the specter of Death to
prey upon the indigenous peoples of the Amazon. It is also a bitter critique of
the Documentary, as scenes are staged, a set-up that passes the simulacra of
verity through violent manipulation; through slick editing, a film that will
pronounce its blatant lies as truth for an audience that revels in its visceral
impact, a society weaned on violence and gore, which does indeed eat its own
kind.
The film’s low budget, stock acting and convulsive point-of-view
cinematography adds an element of authenticity. The bloody special effects are
shocking; in context, making the deaths very convincing. But the film
ultimately consumes itself, like a starving man whose very existence is
dependent upon cannibalizing his own body: the equilibrium will eventually skew
towards self-destruction. Director Ruggero Deodato has the makings of an
interesting and thought provoking film; a social commentary buried under the
canopy of the thick jungle, but can’t separate exploitation from
scrupulousness. He eviscerates live animals for his horror show and lets the
camera linger over the slimy entrails, taking sadistic pleasure in the
suffering of live creatures. But I admit this brutality is nothing new to the
cinema: Coppola’s APOCALYPSE NOW, Haneke’s CACHE, Klimov’s COME AND SEE are a
few modern masterpieces that kill live animals for effect…and generate little
controversy. But CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST seems to go too far, the killings only
create a gut wrenching vomitus expungement, as your gorge rises, its acidic
tendrils caressing the palate. Juxtaposed with the fake murders, I must admit
it does add a crimson patina to the film that helps reflect a genuine flare of
homicide.
Deodato fails to point out the irony of his own film which capitalizes on
the very morality it condemns. The film is structured as an investigation of
the lost ‘Dream Team” of Documentary filmmakers, young guns who strutted into
the Amazon never to return. The story is told from the perspective of
Anthropologist Harold Monroe, a man hired to trek into the Green Inferno and
find out the truth about the missing crew. The very first problem with the
story is that Harold Monroe acts and speaks nothing like a scientist: he’s more
like comic relief to the tough guy role of Chaco, his guide. If that can be
overlooked, the heart of the film itself is corrupt. Deodato wants to have his
corpse and eat it too! That is, he uses Monroe as a cipher to condemn the
actions of the guide as Chaco uses brute force against the indigenous peoples yet
Monroe himself becomes part of the problem. He belittles and demeans these
tribesmen with “magic” (a radio) to get what he wants: the missing crew’s film
canisters. These canisters a worshiped as part of a totem placed before their
village. No Anthropologist would commit such a despicable act (or go on this
mission in the first place).
Monroe eventually takes the film back to New York City and develops the moving
pictures. What he discovers is dreadful: the film crew was raping and pillaging
the tribesman in order to make a more exciting documentary: the power is in the
editing. As Monroe curses their atrocious behavior and the Producers who are
considering releasing it as a documentary, Deodato fails to make the final step
towards irony. If the film were self-reflexive, acknowledging its own pretense
as a fictional creation by having Monroe speak directly to the audience by
breaking the fourth wall, then the message would become crystal clear. As the
morality of the filmmakers within Deodato’s film becomes more and more hellish
then Monroe could be used as an avatar to speak Deodato’s mind, to directly
relate to the audience watching his film and have them consider their own
reasons for watching a film called CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST. But Deodato isn't that
savvy and, as it stands, his film becomes that which it condemns as Deodato
himself abuses real indigenous people to tell his story and eviscerates living animals
to make a point.
Ultimately, I cannot recommend a film where actual suffering is food for
the thoughtless, a recipe for consumerism.
Final Cut: (F)
