Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

Teddie Blake The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

Payno I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Francene Odetta It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

Stephen Abell This is an atrociously dire film in every way. The only silver lining was the premise of the story where three student anthropologists enter the Columbian jungles with the naive aim of disproving cannibalism. They come across a couple of adventures who claim to have escaped from a cannibal tribe after they had devoured their colleague. It's the twist in the story that could have saved this film had it been correctly explored and utilised. This, however, isn't the case and there just isn't anything else that makes this a film to watch.Other reviews state the film is so bad that it unintentionally makes you laugh... that wasn't my case. What writer and director Umberto Lenzi gives his viewers is a lesson in the banal, boring, and tedious.From the previously mentioned wasted story issue to the under-acted, over-acted, and wooden performances of the cast to the uninteresting and dreary direction to the worst and insipid locations available, this is a bad film.However, there are a few issues which did earn it the rating I gave. I did like the twist in the tale which wasn't fully envisioned. There were actual moments when the cast got serious and wasn't too bad in their roles. Even Giovanni Lombardo Radice, who was mostly ludicrously over-the-top, actually had a couple of moments where he was menacing and believable. Then there was the glorious gorefest of the special effects, though these are expected to be bad, they never fail to entertain; the scene of the penis extraction brought a wince to my face. However, even the effects aren't without their errors. The way they are filmed is so matter-of-fact that they lose their shock value.Then, of course, there's the animal cruelty as you are witness to the killing of a turtle and a wild boar. I do hope these animals were to be used as sustenance and were subsequently eaten. I must admit to not liking the thought of them being killed and then discarded for entertainment's sake, as these scenes were not required for the story.This is not the best cannibal film: For the best story and acting, watch Cannibal Holocaust For an interesting twist on the genre, better story and acting, try Cannibal Apocalypse For the best jungle location, I suggest you watch The Man From Deep RiverThough, I will say I do not find the cannibal genre that interesting and even though these are better than Ferox they're still not brilliant.

bowmanblue I recently watched Cannibal Holocaust and, in some strange way, actually enjoyed it. I'd heard that Cannibal Ferox was similar, so I thought I'd give that one a go too.Ferox has the tagline 'banned in 31 countries' on the front and all I can say is that, now it appears to have got a mainstream release, they must have taken a lot of it out. The version I saw ran at about 83 minutes and was not just bad, but pretty tame.The plot centres around a budding scientist, dragging her brother and her friend to the Amazon in order to prove that cannibalism doesn't exist. Once they get there, they meet the most psychotic drug dealer there is and decide it would be a good idea to team up with him. Unfortunately, said dealer has slaughtered half a tribe of natives around here in pursuit of some emeralds. And, guess what, the natives want their revenge.I couldn't really see why some people seem to enjoy this. Even if it had its full compliment of gore, it was pretty awful. The acting was bad (okay, so horror films never normally have Oscar-worthy performances in, but this went even lower than normal); it was almost as if they were trying to be over-the-top and bring a parody edge to it (not that I can find any actual evidence to back this up - it just seemed this way).The 'heroes' are too stupid to like (and that's just the most likable ones!), the drug dealers are the type you want to see eaten alive.And, while these hapless souls are trudging through muddy swamps in the Amazon, there's a subplot about the police in New York trying to track down one of the dealers. This wasn't necessary, as, by now, you're probably gagging for whatever 'pay-off' is going to come at the end of the film. When it does come, it's over before it gets going.Like I say, I could be being unfair on Ferox, as I've clearly only watched a heavily edited version. However (and I never thought I'd say this), if you only want to watch one gut-wrenching sick cannibal film about people eating each other, stick with Cannibal Holocaust.

Jack Hawkins (Hawkensian) 'Cannibal Ferox' is trash, terribly dull trash. It's a shameful rehashing of Ruggero Deadato's 'Cannibal Holocaust', which is the Citizen Kane of the cannibal genre compared with this. Naturally, the acting is bad, that is to be expected from an exploitation film, however the sheer lack of talent on display is beyond anything I've ever seen – it is diabolical. It was so awful that I laughed and even gasped in shock; I really cannot stress this enough, it's like you're watching a parody. There is a particular moment where a woman in peril begins to sing in an attempt to comfort her friend and herself – it is spectacularly embarrassing.However, don't think this is an addition to the 'so bad it's good' category, because it's far from that, it's just plain rotten. The film has bad pacing issues, it appears to forget that it's merely sleaze; the majority of its 93 minute running time plots a thoroughly unengaging story concerning emerald thieves. When the film finally reaches the viscera that apparently resulted in it being 'banned in 31 countries', the viewer has been anaesthetised by just how boring and amateur it all is.In what appears to be an attempt to diffuse the viewer's boredom, there are scenes of animal killing placed at random throughout the dreariness; it's exploitation at its most unsophisticated. It is this random placement that makes you shake your head with disappointment rather than recoil in horror.Considering it was released in 1981, the film is remarkably dated; it is a product of a bygone era where films with zero production values somehow managed to secure funding and pollute cinemas the world over. At least the majority of today's smut has something of a professional sheen.www.hawkensian.com

tomgillespie2002 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