Diary of a Cannibal
Tags: romantic, psychedelic, violence, flashback

Plot synopsis:
A young woman named Noelle (Jillian Swanson) lies dying in a prison hospital bed after being severely beaten by female inmates. Police detectives interview her, pressing her for her account of the events that lead to her incarceration. In a flashback, she thought she found her soul mate online when she met Adam (Trevor Parsons). Eventually, they fall madly in love. Something about Adam isn't quite right, though, when he insists that Noelle eat him in order for them to be "truly one." Knowing his request is insane, she refuses and even stops taking his calls. However, Noelle finally gives in to his request. They drive out to the desert and bunk down in a warehouse. Noelle does the deed, cooks his innards, eats him, and then steps out for a smoke. A man shows up at the warehouse looking for old furniture, wanders into the grisly scene, and calls the police.

Review: As no one has yet commented on this piece of trash I think it is my civic duty to warn people not to be tempted by the title into watching this.
It is not a horror movie.
I know Ulli Lommel has produced some of worst movies in history but this surpasses even those god awful efforts.
Maybe Lommel's parents are to blame for encouraging him or maybe he's just some spoilt rich kid with more money than sense but either way, he should stop making films immediately.
I believe the movie is taken from a book called "Diary of a Cannibal".
I'm intrigued enough by the awfulness of the film to seek out this book and see if it is better.
It must be.The entire movie is made up of flashbacks that are, more often than not, repeated over and over.
The whole thing looks like it was shot through the bottom of a jam jar and the main actors do nothing of consequence throughout the whole turgid 80 minutes or so.
I am shocked by what I just saw, and not because of the contents, but by the way they were brought to the screen.I remember the movie's story being on the news, as it is based on actual events.
Unfortunately, there is hardly anything left of the true story, and it is turned into a vague 'romance' story.The filming, editing, acting and effects in this movie are so terrible, that it is a horror movie in the fact that it is simply horrific.
Don't let anybody tell you this movie is good, they are lying.
It looks like a project of a starting film student, who is about to be kicked out for lack of talent.The best example to the sadness of this attempt at film, is when the headless body is shown.
Not only is it a horrible movie, but it seems like the Director approves of the whole situation.
(thats not a spoiler, it tells you what happens on the back of the DVD) "Cannibalism is misunderstood".
It's like ignorance claiming genius....ugh....The thing that makes me sick is that the movie appears to be trying to get you to sympathize with the twisted crap.
I got this movie from the $1 section at my local video rental store.
I actually turned the movie right off after about 20 minutes...and I've never done that with ANY other movie.
It seriously looks like some man just took his home video camera and filmed two kids staring at each other in a van and then every once in a while threw in a clip of a shiny knife with blood.
I almost WANT people to watch this movie...just to seriously see how horrible it is.
The only interesting part of this movie was the true story which inspired it, however, even that is lost in a never ending parade of cuts, fades and pointless scenes.
There are certain unspoken rules about the appropriate number of scenes, the repeated use of single scenes and timing that Ulli Lommel (Director) either doesn't understand or chooses (unfortunately) not to obey.
Top this off with ultra low budget digital film quality, poor acting and a hollow cliché of a soundtrack.
Unless you really just enjoy bad films, there is no reason whatsoever for me to recommend this to you.
This movie, like Lollels other work, is a waste of time, money and space..
I rented this movie looking for a typical gore-fest a la Romero.
It turned out the be the worst 82 minutes I've spent in a long time.
Something could have been done with the story, reputedly based on actual events, but it was not.
The were endless flashbacks that conveyed nothing and were put in solely to add some time to the film.
I don't recall having seen an Ulli Lommel film before but at least I am now forewarned to stay away.
Please, if anyone recommends this movie to you, I would suggest that they immediately seek professional help and counseling..
Diary of a Cannibal (2006) 1/2 (out of 4) Ulli Lommel is back once again with yet another "based on true events" film.
This time he tells the story of the German man who was sent to prison for killing another man and eating him.
In this film, the story is changed around to a man and woman who meet on the internet and he wants her to eat him.
The story of the German man was better told in the film Cannibal, which I viewed earlier in the year.
That film was the sickest film I had ever seen and had me on the verge of throwing up but I can honestly say this film had me close to throwing up but for different reasons.
Lommel shows once again that he's turned into the biggest hack master in the world delivering yet another horrible film.
Everything from the performances to the special effects are horrid so that doesn't leave much going for the film.
It's really sad to see Lommel selling himself out with this incredibly horrid film but Lions Gate keeps buying them so I guess he'll keep making them..
Ok, I'm going to start off by saying, the negativity towards this movie are written by social losers who don't know how to critique a movie nor even write a movie to prove betterness.
As the aspiring horror film writer/producer/director I am I must say this movie is absolutely phenomenal!
As quoted as the title of this review, you need to get in the mindset of the writer to understand the film.
A young hot troubled young lady meets a charming man online and as expected they fall in love and he says the best way to prove her love to him is to gut and kill him, cook him and eat him.
Yes, there are a lot of bounce around shots but like I said, I am an aspiring writer and my most educated answer is Ulli was writing the bounced shots as if he was recreating what was inside the girls head.
Hence why she was telling the story to the police in a different set of the film.
But either way it is still entertaining and worth a watch if you can actually put aside what's going on and understand where the writer came from when making this film..
Oh Ulli, why do I still act like a cinematic masochist by continuing to watch your unwatchable 'based on a true story' (albiet EXTREMELY loosely) waste of celluloid.
Maybe i won't long for the sweet embrace of death to keep me from viewing until the movie's end.
i had to suffer through this spectacularly awful movie.
Atrociously acted, shot worse than a student film.
Hollywood House of Horror: Cannibal.
Diary of a Cannibal (2006) is one of Ulli Lommel's Hollywood House of Horror's many "horror" films based upon a true story.
But the young man wants her new lady to prove to him who much they love each other.
How far will these two go to prove their love for each other?An art film style this time from Lommel and his acolytes.
Maybe that was the intent.Released on DVD as Diary of a Cannibal for some reason..
Ever.In long: This is, in my humble opinion, one of the worst and most misleading "movies" I've ever seen.
This movie is AWFUL, and by that, I mean first-year experimental film student awful.
Oh wait, it has an enticing title, and box art that is reminiscent of recent horror fare in the vein of 'The Hills Have Eyes', so people who like horror flicks get duped into renting it.
I knew renting it was a risk, as most direct-to-DVD horror flicks are frankly, garbage, but I was in the mood for some cheap slasher-style fun, what I got was 84-minutes of poorly shot, cheaply edited, flashbacks.
There is little to no dialog, and whenever there is any, it is horribly Mic-ed, it sounds in places like it was actually in-camera audio, with no location audio used at all.
There is the bones of an interesting movie in the concept here, but with no character development, no real reason given for the events that transpire, beyond horribly pretentious and annoying bible quotes that appear randomly throughout, and no action to speak of, this just really angered and frustrated me.
I actively beg you NOT to watch this movie.
Ulli Lommer, find another career, you obviously don't understand the first thing about making a movie.Mike Renzella.
You know "women's" pictures of old - tragic love stories, soft focus camera work, weepy scores.
Well, the tradition is alive and well in this boring tale from Ulli Lommel.
Based on a true story of a man who ate another man because he met on the internet (was it consensual?
was it murder?), "Diary of a Cannibal" trades the details to modern California love.
It tries to combine horror and romance, but it just falls flat on both counts.As a horror film, it's too slow and not gory enough, plus it gives all the money shots too early.
We know what's going to happen and see the same shots over and over again.
The way the story is structured, the girl isn't driven to madness or secretly already mad.
Romance and horror can work - just look at "Dellamorte Dellamore" or even "Return of the Living Dead 3." Just don't look at "Diary of a Cannibal.".
I honestly watched this movie from beginning to end, I had the worst headache of my life and even watching Ulli Lommel movies couldn't make me feel worse.
I can honestly say the only plus to this movie was that there was hardly no dialog, because the acting wasn't even worthy of being called acting.The story and characters are extremely unrealistic, this movie was inspired by the man advertising on internet to eat somebody and getting a response.
Lommel tries to apply this on a seemingly normal 16 year old girl.
No dialog is spoken, so it's hard to say what they see in each other, but he seems like a nice guy.
Out of the blue one day he says "I want you to eat my heart" and tries to justify it, she, I guess, says she dosen't like it and dosen't want to see him anymore (or they should not see each other for a while), but somehow he convinces her to kill him and eat his heart, why is never explained, neither is why he believes in this act.Lommel's explanation, I guess, is after the girl has killed the guy she puts the heart, liver and something more on a grill and walks around, her "father" has dialog...
One of the letters is "when you meet the perfect guy you should do anything to make him happy." Honestly, that is not how you reason to eat anybody.
But honestly, this is a Lommel movie, he obviously lacks socials skills and don't even know what people say to each other - hence the lack of dialog.Was this movie scary?
No. Did this movie make any sense?
yes.Honestly, you learn nothing about cannibalism, the characters are unrealistic and the movie is mind-numbing boring..
A poor attempt on what could have been a decent film..
Firstly I would like to point out that the "spoiler alert" will spoil nothing as it was already spoiled when it was made.SUMMARY Overall this movie is defiantly NOT WORTH IT!
DO NOT be fooled by the tittle or cover.PLOT This movie is not entirely bad.
I'm not too sure about that but I do like the idea of the film.
Although it seemed to me like the film would have only run for about 40 minutes but they decided that instead of adding more on they have just drag everything out.
There was little dialog through the film and when there was you almost wish there wasn't.
The whole film was almost like a bunch of kids had done it.
You can't really blame the actors when the actual script is that bad.CAMERA QUALITY As soon as the movie starts you can tell it was not properly done.
The filming quality was very poor.
The movie dragged on and on.
I love gory movies and I am interested in cannibalism.
I was extremely disappointed to find that the movie merely touches cannibalism and the gore was Extremely fake!
My boyfriend works on films, particularly war movies so its not like I have no clue what I am on about.
I've seen a lot of blood work they have done and it is so much better then this.
Diary of a Cannibal, or: Please Don't Watch This.
The constant flipping between the past, present, and memories of 'the incident' was extremely annoying -- not that I had been drawn in by anything in particular during any point in time throughout the movie.
In my opinion, the movie was far too long.
Story Synopsis: Dying in hospital of injuries suffered in a prison bashing, a young woman convicted of cannibalism is forcibly interrogated by a pair of detectives.
There he tells her to kill him & eat his organs as an act of love.Film Analysis: Diary of a Cannibal is another of the cheap genre films made by Ulli Lommel.
Lommel is a former German New Wave legend who had made the art-house hit Tenderness of the Wolves, based on the true story of a German gay serial killer, before abandoning that career after moving to the USA.
Since then he has made several cheap films, mostly about serial killers (although there was one exception - a brainless film about a robot helicopter with mind control powers!).Diary of a Cannibal was one of the films Lommel made as part of his "Hollywood House of Horror" filmmaking group, one of a staggering number of serial-killer themed films (17 in less than half a decade!) made in such a short time.
Like most of them, Lommel takes a true story & turns it into an abstract film.
I say abstract because Lommel is not a filmmaker who makes straightforward films.
Instead he repeats the same scenario over & over again with little variation, using all sorts of tricks to demonstrate his visual style.This is the fourth film Lommel film I have reviewed so far.
The quality of his films has been see-sawing between bad & mediocre.
Lommel, for a change, manages to take a fairly simple story & tell it in a (relatively) cohesive fashion.
The subject matter is pretty grim - a young woman kills her lover & eats his flesh on his orders as the ultimate act of love - but it strangely makes you wonder how far someone will go for love.
The ending, with the girl dying after telling her story, leaving the two detectives walking away arguing about whether she was right in doing so, will get under your skin.The acting is passable - Lommel gets some of his regular cast doing their thing with a modest efficiency.
Jillian Swanson makes a strangely sympathetic heroine despite the deeds she performs in the film..
I'm sick and tired of reading bad comments about Ulli Lommel's films.I am a devoted fan of Ulli Lommel's movies and have seen many of them, this one "Diary Of A Cannibal" is one of his best so far.
I was very impressed with it.Diary Of A Cannibal is certainly unconventional.
The film examines the issue of cannibalism.
There are not very many films that you finish watching and ponder afterwards, but I found myself lying awake thinking about this one after seeing it last night.
It left me with a definite impression; both disturbed and curious.In the movie two people, a young man and a young woman, who are intensely in love, decide that the ultimate way to consummate their love for each other is by an act of cannibalism whereby the woman kills her lover and eats his heart, and he submits willingly to the act, and this is portrayed as the ultimate act of love.
The film mainly examines the ethics and the psychology of the act (not the gore), and interestingly, it seems to portray the act of cannibalism sympathetically, not at all objectively.
I don't believe that this is wrong, maybe the film makers are just expressing their opinion, in any case it makes for interesting viewing and it was a bold film to make.The acting was good throughout.
I sensed in the performances of the actors, particularly in that of Jilian Swanson (a very beautiful girl), real passion and feeling, and I really believed in and sympathized with her character and the inner conflict she felt because she played it so real, and with subtle conviction.
The camera work is the typical realistic documentary style employed on many of Lommel's films, which I quite like because it brings immediacy and realism to the film, but clearly it irks many people who obviously prefer to remain more detached from the subject matter so it can be viewed purely as mindless entertainment.
The only factor which costs this film stars in my opinion is the screenplay which could have been better.
True, the dialog is minimal, the story is told mostly with images, but sometimes the script was a bit thin, and possibly could it have used some better script writing in parts.I think that the reason many people trash this movie, and Lommels films generally, is because they are too attuned to more conventional films and just want quick satisfaction without having to do too much thinking (blood, gore, violence, etc): this is typical of mainstream audiences, and obviously Lommel does not make films for mainstream audiences.I enjoyed this film and it left me with something to think about.
I recommend it to anyone interested in cannibalism or anything related to it, or anyone looking for something a bit different.