you lot are gonna crucify me for this....

Rating: Null/10 (4 January 2002)

so on new years eve, i saw the recut, and was duly impressed. afterwards, i felt like i was onto something about the film, in connection with another film, so i decided to watch this other film to see if i was crazed or not. what i saw was that in essence, these two films, while "apocalypse now' did fare better thanks to a large budget, were working the same angle...that man's inhumanity to those it sees as inferiors or savages, makes us monsters. and that one man's journey into the "a-hole of the world" can ultimately cure him of his suppositions of superiority. so what was the other film? "cannibal holocaust"!!!! yeah yeah..."but that was nothing more than a sick piece of crap and its only reason for being was to show brutality for brutalities sake". your denial is beneath you, and i see through you! after all, everyone bashes cannibal for the real animal deaths....anyone up for some cow? everyone points to the stark worldview of ruggero deodato's film with damning criticism, but everyone exhalts the "pure realism" of coppola's film. i tell you, watch them back to back, excuse the poor dubbing/acting (well some of the performers were okish) that one gets when they have to make a film on a budget of less than any given american eats on for a year....and ask yourself who the real cannibals are.
i'm not saying that cannibal holocaust is as good as apocalypse now, but i am saying that it isn't the turgid piece of crap that too many have been lead to believe. and i'm saying that the central themes really are similar. go see for yourself.