Snuff (American Cannibale) Reviews
It makes you wonder just how far from the truth is it? Many actresses have had humiliating and painful memories of being on a film set and clearly there are countless filmmakers out there who aren't exactly trustworthy. In this case, there aren't even any screen credits of people to point your finger at. All of which I suppose adds to the "snuff" illusion. Apparently, the actress being killed at the end, did have a panic attack during filming and she ran off the set hysterical because she thought they were actually going to kill her. This self-reflective approach is similar to what the French New Wave were all about. It's as if Godard lost his mind and decided to make a video nasty. The notorious ending also was an early pre-cursor to the reality TV craze. The American producer spent only 5,000 for Slaughter but after releasing it with this new ending, the film made him a killing. This found footage approach would become more popular four years later with Cannibal Holocaust. At any rate, Snuff is the kind of movie where its mythology is far more interesting than the end result.
Snuff is a film that is really about Easy Rider meet's The manson family...Despite was it is told to be...It has nothing to do with Snuff film...The ending is the only thing that stop's me from giving it a zero.
Simply of story of when a few young girls have a run in with a Manson cult that decide to slaughter them to please their dark lord but until one escapes and the film ends with some gritty and fake Snuff footage of the crew murdering the young teen.
Look I liked the story okay there is nothing better than watching a supposed fake Snuff film at midnight with your girlfriend. And of course her looking away at all the disgusting acts of violence. But overall it was enjoyable nothing really ever gets boring and the ending we see a suppose real girl get killed in front of the camera.
The acting is pretty good for a cast we have never heard of (And who never appeared in another film) but their lack of direction can annoy a viewer (Not the ending though). The special effects are pretty good but they were the best by the end I can't deny that with the girl getting murdered. But overall disgusting vile stuff.
Here are some facts I found.
The final scene involving the simulated murder of a cast member was shot much later than the rest of the film at the behest of the film's distributor.
The interpolated murder sequence at the end of the film was shot in the New York production studio of adult film director Carter Stevens.
The voice of "Carmela" was dubbed in by Roberta Findlay and is uncredited. The Carmela character is seen here in archive footage from The Slaughter (1971).
A limited edition, numbered Blue Underground Region 0 DVD was available. Playing with the 'cheapness' motif of the film the case is made to look like a brown paper bag. There are also no menus, no chapter stops and no special features. This version is uncut. (Also my disappointing DVD .)
Overall an okay Cult suicide flick that's for some die hard gore fans and I am sure anyone who has late nights will enjoy it. And my final verdict is underrated and recommended.
Are images HARMFUL to children?
An EMPHATIC yes.
Even though BLOODSUCKING FREAKS (aka THE INCREDIBLE TORTURE SHOW) is an outrageous GRAND-GUINGOL comedy,
a 13 year old may not realize that he's watching a comedy;
and the BRAIN-SUCKING and CASTRATION and QUARTERING (where they sever all four limbs from a woman's body in EXPLICIT and GRAPHIC detail)
may seem kind of serious to the 13 year old kid watching it.
In fact, anyone with kids 12 and 13 years old: make them watch this film and see how they react to see if I'm joking or not.
Figure its an experiment:
CAN an image actually be HARMFUL to 12 and 13 year old children?
(try it out guys and report back to me) ha ha ha ha
--Another "DAMAGING" scene I saw as a kid is the "cut" of the film SNUFF appearing in FILMGORE where the "Snuff-film maker" cuts-up a-girl-lying-on-a-bed with an electric wood-saw . . .
to me, at 13 years old), I wondered if the scene was real since there REALLY ARE snuff-movies out-there where dudes actually murder people on camera and then clandestinely pass-around the (usually 8mm footage).
When The snuff-film maker DID sever the lady's hand from her arm, the fingers DID twitch as though it were a real hand.
(so, what's a 13 year old supposed to think?
a real woman had her hand sawed-off and her real-hand was twitching on the bed with a lot of blood leaking from it.
Its called SNUFF, there are real SNUFF-films in existence
therefore the hand is real; a woman's hand was really sawed-off her wrist; at least to a 13 year older's rationale.
I "grew-up" working in my family's funeral home so death and decay is pretty commonplace to my life-experiences up to that age, but
JOHN BOORMAN'S DELIVERANCE where one guy screws another guy over a log in the woods
SNUFF, where a woman literally gets SAWED-APART on a bed
and the aforementioned BLOODSUCKING FREAKS
totally screwed with my 13-year-old mind.
You guys are probably CRACKING-UP heartily,
well, if you have children of your own or nieces or nephews who are around 12 or 13 sit them down to watch DELIVERANCE, BLOODSUCKING FREAKS, and FILMGORE (and/or SNUFF)
to see if either of the three movies screws with their heads.
again, figure you're doing an experiment to see if images really are HARMFUL to children.
Remember, show BLOODSUCKING FREAKS to a 12 or 13 year old kid;
as adults, BLOODSUCKING FREAKS wouldn't seem real so the experiment won't work on an adult; try it only on kids.
and then tell me how the kid reacted. I'm interested in your results.
CAN images actually HARM CHILDREN; is the question.
ha ha ha ha ha