← Back to Reviews
in
Cannibal Apocalypse was released during the Italian cannibal wave alongside such notorious shockers as Cannibal Holocaust, Cannibal Ferox and Jungle Holocaust AKA Last Cannibal World, but it doesn't feel a whole lot like those movies. For one thing, instead of the jungle, it's set in the US, and a lot of its tension comes from how the urban environment affects the proceedings. The other key difference is that the cannibals, rather than some othered group as in those movies, are characters we directly identify with. It's also quite a bit less violent and mostly lacking in animal cruelty (aside from one unfortunate moment involving sewer rats and a flamethrower), although I must admit it still got to me. Maybe I'm getting soft in my old age (I only turned thirty this year but have more grey hairs than I'd like), but there's something about the disarming way this movie slides into its gore that gives it an added impact.
The movie opens during the Vietnam War, where a squad led by John Saxon rescues a pair of POWs (Giovanni Lombardo Radice, Tony King) who have succumbed to cannibalism. (One detail that might stand out to sticklers for historical accuracy is that Sazon uses a Thompson submachine gun. While this was likely used in the movie because it would have been a readily available prop from World War II macaroni combat productions, I learn that this weapon was in fact used by the South Vietnamese army, so I concede it wouldn't be impossible that Saxon's character would be using the weapon.) Upon their return to America, Radice and King are committed to a mental institution for several years, but upon their release, they're quickly back to their old habits. Even worse, Saxon starts to feel the urge as well, and others may or may not be getting in on the act as well.
This is a portmanteau movie, where the different genre elements come together to complement each other in interesting ways. The Vietnam context gives it metaphoric value with respect to the characters' PTSD, the cannibalism adds the blood and guts, the zombie angle (which is cannibal-adjacent, if we must quibble) give the movie a welcome sense of escalation, and the urban thriller elements package all of this together with a certain immediacy. I am no expert in Antonio Margheriti's career, but despite being namechecked in Inglourious Basterds, it seems he doesn't command the same following (at least in my internet circle) as an Argento, Fulci, D'Amato or even a Mattei. But comparing this to my viewing earlier this year of Castle of Blood, I'd wager there's a certain flexibility in his directing style. His work here is far from the thick Gothic atmosphere of the earlier movie, but is still quite effecting in generating tension, particularly in the claustrophic finale in the sewers, where the militaristic presence of the police (including a cop with a flamethrower) mirrors the warfare of the opening scene. The performances also give this all a nice human element, with Radice playing another great nervy, unstable character and the ever-reliable Saxon turning playing a character who seems to form a sturdy centre for the movie...until he doesn't. Saxon claims that he was lured by a translated script that conveniently left out the violent content and was dismayed when he learned that it was a cannibal movie and not the strict Vietnam metaphor he assumed it was. If I can respond to Saxon, I think it still kind of works in that respect, and however unhappy Saxon was with the movie, his work onscreen doesn't betray it. If there's a movie where he phoned it in, I haven't seen it.
Cannibal Apocalypse (Margheriti, 1980)
Cannibal Apocalypse was released during the Italian cannibal wave alongside such notorious shockers as Cannibal Holocaust, Cannibal Ferox and Jungle Holocaust AKA Last Cannibal World, but it doesn't feel a whole lot like those movies. For one thing, instead of the jungle, it's set in the US, and a lot of its tension comes from how the urban environment affects the proceedings. The other key difference is that the cannibals, rather than some othered group as in those movies, are characters we directly identify with. It's also quite a bit less violent and mostly lacking in animal cruelty (aside from one unfortunate moment involving sewer rats and a flamethrower), although I must admit it still got to me. Maybe I'm getting soft in my old age (I only turned thirty this year but have more grey hairs than I'd like), but there's something about the disarming way this movie slides into its gore that gives it an added impact.
The movie opens during the Vietnam War, where a squad led by John Saxon rescues a pair of POWs (Giovanni Lombardo Radice, Tony King) who have succumbed to cannibalism. (One detail that might stand out to sticklers for historical accuracy is that Sazon uses a Thompson submachine gun. While this was likely used in the movie because it would have been a readily available prop from World War II macaroni combat productions, I learn that this weapon was in fact used by the South Vietnamese army, so I concede it wouldn't be impossible that Saxon's character would be using the weapon.) Upon their return to America, Radice and King are committed to a mental institution for several years, but upon their release, they're quickly back to their old habits. Even worse, Saxon starts to feel the urge as well, and others may or may not be getting in on the act as well.
This is a portmanteau movie, where the different genre elements come together to complement each other in interesting ways. The Vietnam context gives it metaphoric value with respect to the characters' PTSD, the cannibalism adds the blood and guts, the zombie angle (which is cannibal-adjacent, if we must quibble) give the movie a welcome sense of escalation, and the urban thriller elements package all of this together with a certain immediacy. I am no expert in Antonio Margheriti's career, but despite being namechecked in Inglourious Basterds, it seems he doesn't command the same following (at least in my internet circle) as an Argento, Fulci, D'Amato or even a Mattei. But comparing this to my viewing earlier this year of Castle of Blood, I'd wager there's a certain flexibility in his directing style. His work here is far from the thick Gothic atmosphere of the earlier movie, but is still quite effecting in generating tension, particularly in the claustrophic finale in the sewers, where the militaristic presence of the police (including a cop with a flamethrower) mirrors the warfare of the opening scene. The performances also give this all a nice human element, with Radice playing another great nervy, unstable character and the ever-reliable Saxon turning playing a character who seems to form a sturdy centre for the movie...until he doesn't. Saxon claims that he was lured by a translated script that conveniently left out the violent content and was dismayed when he learned that it was a cannibal movie and not the strict Vietnam metaphor he assumed it was. If I can respond to Saxon, I think it still kind of works in that respect, and however unhappy Saxon was with the movie, his work onscreen doesn't betray it. If there's a movie where he phoned it in, I haven't seen it.