Cannibal Apocalypse - 1980

 Also known as Apocalypse Tomorrow, and Invasion of the Flesh Hunters.

Man was I confused starting this, because this has one of the guys from Cannibal Ferox in it and I was tricked into thinking I had watched this one already!  

This movie starts with a helicopter landing in an unknown foreign land and I steel myself for more tribal cannibal nonsense.  But it quickly steers away from that, and I sorta sat up and paid attention.  This is...oddly enough...a compelling drama?  And a movie sorta about PTSD?  And a virus movie?  What is this?

Charles Bukowski (what the fuck?  he is just named the exact name of the writer, at a time when the writer was still alive?) is rescued from the tribe after eating human flesh.  He returns to the real world and at first it seems he has broken to some degree, can't hack it.  He attacks a woman in a theater and gets chased by a gang, shoots one of them in self defense.  This all spirals into a hostage situation and it quickly becomes apparent that the cannibalism in this movie is treated as a virus, ala zombies, once you get bitten you transmit the craving to the next guy.

With John Saxon as a cop who gets the virus, this had good actors and an original idea.  It caught me and enraptured me in the beginning with the hostage stuff, but to be honest it does go a bit downhill after that.  It just feels a little bit rinse and repeat after about minute 30, as it just becomes more people getting turned - nothing else really happens that's new.

There's a few slightly grisly leg chopping scenes, there's a couple guts n whatever.  Relatively light in the Video Nasty realm.

In the argument "for" or "against" the concept of Video Nasty, this is very slightly "against"

On the Nasty Meter, I give this a 1/10

Cannibal Holocaust - 1980

 My friends and I used to endlessly riff on the title of of a book "Controversy Creates Cash" by Eric Bischoff.  Everytime something iffy would happen we'd look at each other and say the title.  Does it?  And more importantly, why did it once do that, and possibly arguably not do it now?

This is the question that several of these movies has made me think of, but since currently Cannibal Holocaust is making me ask it, it gets this intro.  There's a scene of real animal killing, followed by a rape scene and murder scene with frontal female nudity.  Nothing new for these Video Nasties, but gruesome, controversial, and at the time, cash creating.  Nowadays a real animal killed on screen is still legal, but the fuckin controversy would push 99% AWAY from it instead of towards it.  Why?  Why was that at one point a curious morbid interest and not anymore?

This rewatch of the infamous Italian movie was generally fine.  This is still not my genre, and luckily I've been in the Video Nasty realm for a little while so this didn't feel all that bad.  It has wall to wall violence and gore and nudity, it has aforementioned animal deaths on screen, it has cannibalism scenes.  It has sexual violence and rape.  The rest.  Also, as shouted out in this blog before, a great soundtrack.

Interestingly enough, I am less and less convinced that the Video Nasties were that extreme.  In the defense this movie used against its many legal issues, they cited Apocalypse Now as having animal cruelty scenes that were not prosecuted.  With films like Caligula, Salo, Texas Chainsaw, and yeah Apocalypse Now, how the hell did the prosecution have anything to say?  Its all about tone, and its all about that keyword that this entire genre got mounted with:  "Exploitation".  There's a scene of them killing and dismembering a turtle in here, for example, pretty much just to do it, for no purpose.  

A sort of "found footage" movie, a group finds a video of filmmakers going to the Amazon and finding a local tribe of cannibals.  They interact with the tribe and they find cocaine which they begin to use.  This all culminates in the white people raping and killing locals, which the locals take revenge for.

I feel like this was a little bit better than I thought it was, but thoughts aside this is still just like....not for me.  I recognize the value I guess, and I give it a whatever I dunno 3 stars.