D.B.Tarpley's Amazing Ass Blog-4/27/18

Greetings and salutations people and peoplettes,

Most of you know me as an author and if you have ever read any of my work I am eternally grateful. But what so few of you know is that I am also a huge cinephile – to the extent that I would be completely happy serving in some dusty old warehouse somewhere cataloging old movies whilst wearing a bowtie and smoking a pipe.

As a huge cinephile I occasionally throw movie parties, and I will often give a little speech before the titular film relaying its importance and or influence on contemporary cinema. One film I have always wanted to feature is ‘Cannibal Holocaust.’ The only problem with this is that it is not the sort of film you can show just anyone. It has been called ‘the most notorious film of all time’ with a very real claim to the title. The film was originally banned in over 50 countries and still remains banned in several today.

But I think this is an extremely important piece of cinema and a film well worth watching, provided you have a gut which isn’t prone to becoming an involuntary vomit sprinkler from time to time. So let’s do this: sit back in your comfy recliner, take this tub of buttery popcorn sprinkled with a generous portion of Reese’s Pieces and gummy bears, kick your feet up, and listen to my speech on ‘Cannibal Holocaust’.

Consider this a test run for when you are in my house doing the real thing.

Before discussing the film we have to give some historical context. In 1962 a film came out called ‘Mondo Cane.’ It was an Italian film which literally translated as ‘A Dog’s Life.’ The film was in the midst of a category of exploitive documentaries which came to be known as “Shockumentaries.” These films usually endeavored to show weird and bizarre cultural practices from the far corners of the world – Aboriginal to Slavic cultures – generally selected for their wow factor or shock value.

The genre eventually spawned such films as the notorious ‘Faces of Death’, and ‘Shocking Asia’ series. But ‘Mondo Cane was the first to hit it big in America and as such it was the film which insured the lengthy gestation and marketability of this particular type of film. In fact it was so popular that the vast majority of copycat films to follow had ‘Mondo’ in their title. The Italians, if nothing, love brand recognition through deceased equine assault.

One of the writers on Mondo Cane was a fellow by the name of Gualtiero Jacopetti. If ever there were a mayor of ‘Mondo’ town it was him. He worked squarely in the middle of the genre for years while also building a career as a freelance video journalist, often coupling his two jobs while shooting footage to be simultaneously shown as exploitation and news. He quickly found a partner in Franco Prosperi and the two became very successful in the field. In 1966 the pair released a film called ‘Africa: Blood and Guts’, (also known as ‘Africa Addiou.’)

It is an above average graphic entry showing various exploitive aspects of African culture from basic tribal nudity, to body piercing, to animal poaching, to Warlord executions.

There is a saying every journalism major knows: If a dog bites a man that is not news, if a man bites a dog that is news. This originally meant that the more sensationalistic the story the wider the potential audience… but the phrase ‘man bites dog’ has come to refer to journalists who actually participate in an event to ‘make’ their story happen.

This is what is alleged of Gualtiero and Franco during the filming of ‘Africa Addiou.’ Specifically that they hired poachers to hunt down quarry and more importantly that they paid Belgian Mercenaries, who were present in the employee of African Warlords, to execute prisoners via firing squad. This is shown in the film. The charges were solid enough to require the pair to flee the Congo in the middle of the night for fear of being arrested. Journalists from around the world caught wind of the allegations and the pair were vilified in the press.

Nowhere were the critics harsher than in America to the extent their prized market was nearly wiped out as far as their names were concerned. I believe the pair took this backlash in an extremely personal manner because in 1971 they released ‘Goodbye Uncle Tom’ which is a scathing condemnation of America’s relationship with slavery, depicting the rawest footage on the subject committed to celluloid to date. It was a huge ‘Fuck you.’ to America and what they perceived as its self-righteous critics.

And what does any of this have to do with ‘Cannibal Holocaust’ D.B.?

Well if you pull your panties out of your ass I’ll tell you.

‘Cannibal Holocaust’ was released in 1980. It was shot on location for a mere 100,000 dollars. The film depicts the tale of a group of journalists who travel into the Amazonian Rain Forest to do an expose on a hidden indigenous tribe. The entire narrative structure revolves around the recovery of several cans of film stock discovered by a search party sent in after the missing journalists. The footage is then examined to see what exactly happened. Sound familiar?

This was the first film to use the ‘found footage’ motif, nearly 20 years before ‘The Blair Witch Project’ supposedly launched the found footage genre. There is an unflinching rawness to the film from the acting, to the script, to the cinematography, to the mind-blowingly beautiful score by Riz Ortolani. And yes, there are hard to watch scenes of gritty rawness from animal mutilation, to muddy rape, to a notorious impaling which is so realistic that the film’s director, Ruggero Deodata, was actually brought up on criminal murder charges. He was later able to prove in court that the scene was the result of special effects; but the impression has stuck with the film like a rain cloud over the years.

To give it an authentic feel, the director used real natives to spectacular effect. The real controversy which has dug its claws into the movie over the years revolves around the slaughter of several live animals throughout the story. The director is on record as saying that these were all animals the villagers ate and killed in the manner in which they were normally killed. And this issue parallels one of the major points of the film which is the act of one culture imposing its values or norms on another culture to the second culture’s great detriment.

Deodata was inspired by the actions of the ‘Africa Addiou’ film makers. ‘Holocaust depicts a group of journalists who, when confronted with normal, peaceful villagers, mostly old men women and children – ravage the tribe and burn down huts with people in them just to get the footage they desire. They treat the natives as expendable tools to their own selfish ends, the consequence of which is their ghastly end at the hands of the returning young warriors who chop them up and eat them.

It may sound exploitive and grisly and it is; but this is all to the effect of revealing the directors true intention - exposing cowardly journalists everywhere who would rape an isolated culture for any sensationalism they can muster. It is an inspiring and insightful cinematic thesis and I feel, one of the most misunderstood films of all time.

Even though the cannibal film was already a thing at the time, (Deodata himself came up in the ranks of the genre), the notoriety and subsequent success of ‘Cannibal Holocaust’ spawned countless shockies, or shock copies. The most enjoyable of these is ‘Cannibal Ferox’ otherwise known as ‘Make Them Die Slowly.’ The movie is a fun, over the top B genre groaner. Without the subtext of the original though it is sorely lacking as an overall experience.

‘Cannibal Holocaust’ is one of the most divisive entries in the art vs exploitation cinematic debate. But there are many fans such as myself who feel it has real social merit coupled with the fact that the revolutionary narrative structure and enjoyable elements make it a must watch for any serious film fan. The film is so revered in certain circles that in 2013 filmmaker Eli Roth released his personal love letter to the movie called ‘The Green Inferno’ with a copycat plot. And it is perhaps a statement to the visceral rawness of the original that Roth’s film with all his gruesome acumen paled in comparison.

I can’t recommend the film to everyone, but if you are intelligent and a lover of thought provoking cinema I feel you owe it to yourself to watch this movie. Thank you for taking the time to listen to this preachy rant. I will now dim the lights...

Keep your vomit bags handy and have an amazing ass day.