I have been a fan of Italian cinema for more than 30 years, and I find Cannibal Holocaust an extremely violent masterpiece of heart rending terror. I find the sequences involving intense sexualised violence towards women far more shocking and repugnant than anything involving animals in the film, and I have stated my views and reasons for this.

Could I ask how that is being antagonistic? As your response appears somewhat conceited to say the least.

You seem to be of the opinion that it is okay to film an animal being butchered for the purposes of entertainment but not to use pregnant actresses, you know exactly what they are doing, in stressful situations. If anyone challenges that opinion then you reply with another long post outlining why it was perfectly reasonable to kill the animals but not to use that pregnant actress.

Speaking independently here, I don’t think Andy’s trying to stir trouble, rather it looks to me that he’s trying to stimulate debate. I think a lot of people have gotten their knickers in a twist over the animal cruelty because it’s real, but there are people who find the depiction of sexualized violence just as troubling. I know I certainly do, and I think that’s the reason why the film will retain its power to shock even when it’s had the scenes of animal torture/death removed.

There are a lot of people I know that I would never recommend CH too, even with the animal stuff removed. It’s an extremely distressing film.

Sorry, my point is not that it was acceptable to kill the animals, but that this (in my opinion) was not as reprehensible as the sequence involving the pregnant woman and, to a lesser extent, the punishment for adultery with the spiked dildo.

But I'll leave it there....

Do you work in a slaughterhouse by any chance? I just can't get it round my head how you can find simulated scenes more distressing than the actual deaths of living creatures?

I think perhaps there has been a misunderstanding. I'll admit that from one of bigandya's posts it seemed that he was saying that it was OK to kill animals for the purposes of entertainment but that is one of the big problems with forums - it's easy to misuderstand tone in a written medium.

I am all for debate and, if there was ever a film that inspired debate then it's Cannibal Holocaust, but let's not let things get too heated. It's an opinion divider, that's for sure, (and animal cruelty issues tend to get people very wound up) but that doesn't have to be a bad thing.

I'd just ask that everyone reads their post before they press "submit" and checks that no one's going to think they're being rude or aggressive when giving their opinion (and all opinions are welcome).

Thanks.

Now... :focus:

Let's just say that CH will always divide folk, for numerous reasons. It is a shocking piece of celluloid indeed, and of course if it hadn't been, we wouldn't be talking about it 30 years later. I for one find it more of a curio than entertainment. Yes, I own the Grindhouse edition .. more for collectible reasons than entertainment value. But if I do watch it from time to time, I have the option of animal cruelty free version, or the complete version on the same disk. What one person may find offensive, others may not .. we are all different after all.

;)

You're not wrong there, pal. I've seen do many CH-related arguments on forums over the years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah lets not create a argument. :lol:

I love the film but can't see the point of another dvd.I expect every fan of the film has it on DvD allready from EC,Grindhouse or vipco.