Cult Labs

Go Back   Cult Labs > Cult Labels > Official Shameless Fan Forum > The Shameless Collection > Cannibal Holocaust

Like Tree22Likes

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 10th March 2011, 12:13 PM
Jonny's Avatar
Active Cultist
Good Trader
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 399
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul@Lovelockandload View Post
'Definitive' is a term that's mostly used by film companies - with or without the director's involvement.

As I mentioned before, I'm excited to see just how Deodato approaches the material for his new cut but like you, I do believe the version as originally released is definitive because of its notoriety.

There always room for more than one cut of a film as far as I’m concerned and as I said before, Deodato’s newfound distaste for some of the scenes make a compelling argument for a new version to exist.
Yep, totally agree with all that.
  #82  
Old 10th March 2011, 12:17 PM
Sarah@Cult Labs's Avatar
Newsletter Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 2,302
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sargento View Post
The difference between the sexual violence and the animal violence is that the animal violence is REAL.

Not to mention that the human actors had a say in what they were doing. No one forced the pregnant actress to take part.

I can stomach those scenes because it's simply not real. I have watched the film uncut and actually find the animal scenes upsetting but love the film in general. Animal friendly version suits me!

Sent from my HTC Tattoo using Tapatalk
__________________
  #83  
Old 10th March 2011, 04:02 PM
nekromantik's Avatar
Cult Acolyte
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Worthing
Posts: 4,608
Send a message via MSN to nekromantik
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarah@Cult Labs View Post
Not to mention that the human actors had a say in what they were doing. No one forced the pregnant actress to take part.

I can stomach those scenes because it's simply not real. I have watched the film uncut and actually find the animal scenes upsetting but love the film in general. Animal friendly version suits me!

Sent from my HTC Tattoo using Tapatalk
100% agree!!
the animal violence added to the controversy of the movie. Will be interesting to see if anything will be said about this new release sans the animal violence if nothing else is cut.

I do however think the rape with dildo scene MIGHT still be cut/
__________________


My DVD Collection
Tumblr
  #84  
Old 10th March 2011, 04:07 PM
bigandya's Avatar
Active Cultist
Good Trader
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 453
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sargento View Post
The difference between the sexual violence and the animal violence is that the animal violence is REAL.

This is where I feel the distinction becomes blurred. The animal violence isn't real; the animal violence was real. The animal violence was real 30 years ago at a time when the world was a much more violent place and when approach to film was very different to what it is now. What you are seeing on film are the deaths and mutilations, torture and eviscerations of animals, captured on celluloid for the purposes of cinematic "entertainment" three decades ago. Foul as it may be, its as much a part of Deodato's original expolitative vision as the guns the agents used in ET which Spielberg later regretted and removed when he revisited the film in more politically correct climes.

Animals are slaughtered every day for food, for sport, for fun. It happens the world over, and removing offensive sequences from this 30 year old film will not alter the fact that it happened then, was filmed then, and should be seen now for the true "story" of Cannibal Holocaust to be fully "appreciated".

As for the human actors and, particularly, actresses who were so degraded by their roles within the film, I would like to know from Sarah where she acquired the information that the heavily pregnant lady appeared in the film through choice. I have never seen a written or filmed interview with the actress and wondered if she did this out of necessity for money, or food. I would be very pleased to know her appearance in the film was of her own choosing for this singular scene, as far as I am concerned, is horrendously more disgusting than anything involving the on screen death of unintelligent animals.

The woman is pregnant, heavily, carrying a live growing baby, and is appearing naked in a violent sequence exploiting that very fact. Exploiting the growing child within her. The fact that this scene was shot with a genuinely pregnant lady I find truly repulsive - and it continues to surprise me that this is not talked about more.

Perhaps this is because a huge proportion of the audience for Cannibal Holocaust is male.
  #85  
Old 10th March 2011, 04:18 PM
Sargento's Avatar
Cultist on the Rampage
Good Trader
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sheffield, UK
Posts: 1,545
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigandya View Post
This is where I feel the distinction becomes blurred. The animal violence isn't real; the animal violence was real. The animal violence was real 30 years ago at a time when the world was a much more violent place and when approach to film was very different to what it is now.
Eh? Whenever the animal violence was/is doesn't matter .. the fact that it's captured on celluloid is the whole point! Of course animals are killed every day for food and clothing, this is not the point here of course, it's the fact that it was shot for "entertainment" value!
__________________
Steelerik on Twitter .. look for me ;-)
  #86  
Old 10th March 2011, 04:21 PM
Nosferatu@Cult Labs's Avatar
Cult Don
Cult Labs Radio Contributor
Good Trader
Senior Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The Land of the Prince Bishops
Posts: 31,425
Blog Entries: 4
Default

I'm beginning to wonder whether bigandya really believes the nonsense in his posts or whether he is just trying to be deliberately antagonistic in the hopes of starting an argument.
__________________
  #87  
Old 10th March 2011, 04:24 PM
nekromantik's Avatar
Cult Acolyte
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Worthing
Posts: 4,608
Send a message via MSN to nekromantik
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sargento View Post
Eh? Whenever the animal violence was/is doesn't matter .. the fact that it's captured on celluloid is the whole point! Of course animals are killed every day for food and clothing, this is not the point here of course, it's the fact that it was shot for "entertainment" value!


exactly
__________________


My DVD Collection
Tumblr
  #88  
Old 10th March 2011, 04:25 PM
Sargento's Avatar
Cultist on the Rampage
Good Trader
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sheffield, UK
Posts: 1,545
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nosferatu@Cult Labs View Post
I'm beginning to wonder whether bigandya really believes the nonsense in his posts or whether he is just trying to be deliberately antagonistic in the hopes of starting an argument.
There are some odd comments Nos that's for certain .. especially in his last post.

As Sarah as stated, the bloomin actors had a choice!
__________________
Steelerik on Twitter .. look for me ;-)
  #89  
Old 10th March 2011, 04:25 PM
Sarah@Cult Labs's Avatar
Newsletter Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 2,302
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigandya View Post
As for the human actors and, particularly, actresses who were so degraded by their roles within the film, I would like to know from Sarah where she acquired the information that the heavily pregnant lady appeared in the film through choice.
I am sorry. I should have been more specific. I simply meant that no one was holding a gun to her head. Regardless of whether she did it out of necessity for money, she still had a choice and could have said no at any time. If she didn't want to exploit her unborn baby, as you put it, she did not have to appear in this film, whether she needed money/food or not.

The animals did not have that option, did not choose to be in the film in the first place, and that is why a lot of people see it as cruelty.
cannibal360 likes this.
__________________
  #90  
Old 10th March 2011, 04:27 PM
Sargento's Avatar
Cultist on the Rampage
Good Trader
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sheffield, UK
Posts: 1,545
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarah@Cult Labs View Post
I am sorry. I should have been more specific. I simply meant that no one was holding a gun to her head. Regardless of whether she did it out of necessity for money, she still had a choice and could have said no at any time. If she didn't want to exploit her unborn baby, as you put it, she did not have to appear in this film, whether she needed money/food or not.

The animals did not have that option, did not choose to be in the film in the first place, and that is why a lot of people see it as cruelty.
Nah Sarah, you were quite clear.

__________________
Steelerik on Twitter .. look for me ;-)
Closed Thread

Like this? Share it using the links below!

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Our goal is to keep Cult Labs friendly. If you feel discouraged from posting by certain members' behaviour then you can e-mail us in complete confidence.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
All forum posts are contributed by members of the site; Cult Labs cannot take responsibility for all content posted on the site. If you have an issue with content posted on the site please click the 'report post' button.
Copyright © 2014 Cult Laboratories Ltd. All rights reserved.