Cannibal Holocaust (1980)
★★ / ★★★★
When aspiring filmmakers (Francesca Ciardi, Perry Pirkanen, Luca Barbareschi) decided to go to a rainforest in the Amazon to document real cannibals and never returned, a New York University professor (Robert Kerman) went on a journey to get them back. But when he found out that they have been murdered by the cannibals, he took the footages shot by the crew back to America. Little did he know that the contents of the film reels contained grotesque behaviors performed by the aspiring filmmakers which included rape, flaying animals, and multiple attempts in murdering the natives–all the while putting on a show for the world that the things they stumbled upon were shocking and sometimes enlightening. Directed by Ruggero Deodato, “Cannibal Holocaust” has a reputation of having the most intense images portrayed on screen. What I liked about the movie was its daring attempt to blur the line between simulated and the actuality. When I saw an image and I could not tell whether it was one or the other, that was when I thought the picture was at its most horrific. But there were a plethora of scenes where it was easy to tell if something was real of not. For instance, the flaying of the giant turtle was obviously real. I experience no pleasure in watching animals suffer because when I was a kid, I’ve seen a dog being killed in the bloodiest, most unkind way and it was later served as a meal. So it was a bit of a struggle when I saw that segment. As for the filmmakers being killed by the natives, it did not move me as much–in a positive or a negative way–because the movie tried too hard to make it look real to the point where it looked fake. However, the most disappointing element in the picture was the heavy-handed messages that it tried to get across. Questions such as the media’s role in trying to sensationalize every story in order to get reaction from the people were painfully transparent. There were also some bits and pieces about who the real savages were: the tribes in the Amazon who were “backwards” or the Americans who stupidly decided to walk into the tribes’ territories and terrorized them for the sake of having power over them? As a faux-documentary film, it felt too calculated, too controlled, and too contained so it ultimately worked against itself. As for the graphic nature of the film, I was horrified at some points because it was indeed very violent. But then I started thinking about modern horror movies of today and their gratuitousness. The “Saw” pictures suddenly came to mind and I felt that “Cannibal Holocaust” did not seem as bad as a whole. Nevertheless, “Cannibal Holocaust” is definitely not for everyone especially the squeamish. I wish it left a lot more unanswered questions. Since it answered everything for us, despite the many intense images, I started to forget about it right when the credits started rolling.
★★★ / ★★★★
I was pleasantly surprised how effective this psychological thriller was. With a running time of two hours, it was able to build up the tension it needed to truly scare the audience when the evil child began to unravel what she was capable of. Directed by Jaume Collet-Serra, “Orphan” was about a mother who is still mourning for the loss of her baby (Vera Farmiga), a father who wants to help the family move on from a tragic loss (Peter Sarsgaard), and their decision to adopt a precocious girl named Esther (Isabelle Fuhrman) to join their family. Little did they know that Esther has a plethora of secrets of her own and it would take a great deal of effort and energy (and a whole lot of convincing) to unravel just one of them. It is really difficult for me to say any more about this film without giving away the final twist. But let me just say that this movie did not cheat (i.e. result into supernatural explanation or fancy camera work) to achieve that twist so I was impressed. This picture definitely reminded me of “The Good Son” and “The Omen,” just because a child was a villain in both. However, I think this film was on a different level of excitement because, unlike “The Good Son,” the villain’s methods are much more graphic yet insidious, and unlike “The Omen,” it is actually grounded in realism and that made the picture more haunting. I also liked the fact that the other two kids in the family (Jimmy Bennett and Aryana Engineer) had important roles that drove the movie forward. If I were to nitpick, the only thing I thought the movie could have worked on was the history regarding Esther. By the end of the film, I felt like there were a lot more that the audiences did not find out about her and what made her the way she is. Other than Farmiga as the mother who no one believes in and labels as paranoid (which brought “Rosemary’s Baby” to mind), Fuhrman is a stand out. I want to see her in more movies and her range of acting because she made me believe that a child was capable of doing all those horrible things. Even though “child-killer” movies have been done before, I enjoyed this flick because I could not help but imagine that if I was in the mother’s situation, I would do absolutely anything to keep that evil child away from me and my family.
In the Realm of the Senses (1976)
★★★ / ★★★★
Writer and director Nagisa Oshima tells the story of a former-prostitute-turned-maid’s (Eiko Matsuda) and her employer’s (Tatsuya Fuji) sexual obsession with each other. After Matsuda sees Fuji making love with his wife, something inside her changes–it is as if she has to have him no matter what the cost. When the two eventually sleep together, they begin to spend pretty much every minute in bed together as they experiment with their sexuality, sometimes in front of other people. I liked that this film really tried to push the boundary between art and pornography. While it did show certain body parts that a “normal” picture would not normally show, it was different from pornography because it had a story to tell: the repercussions of surrendering to one’s desires without ever having to think of the consequences. To me, even though this was released in 1976, it is still very relevant today, especially in college campuses, due to the high rate of casual hook-ups or one night stands. One can never really know what one is getting into by inviting another person into one’s life–may it be for sexual purposes or otherwise. Disease is one of the first things that comes to mind (or should come to mind) when one engages in random hook-up, but psychology should also come into the equation. I’m not saying that people with mental disorders are always violent (they are not). I’m referring to people’s fetishisms and what they are willing to do to maximize their pleasure. In this film, the two lovers eventually tried to suffocate each other for one reason: it felt good. Other issues that were explored include excess, sadism, masochism, traditional gender roles and transgressions of societal norms. While most people may get lost in its graphic portrayal of sex, one should really try to look at what’s underneath because it’s that much more rewarding. “In the Realm of the Senses” is indeed a classic and should be seen and remembered by film-lovers because it’s one of the first motion pictures that tried to tread the fine line between art and pornography and was successful at it.
★★★ / ★★★★
I had a difficult time digesting this film because even though there are elements I liked about it (such as the quiet chaos that happens in suburbia that of which focuses on an Arab-American main character), I thought the sexual scenes are graphic, especially when Summer Bishil plays a thirteen-year-old girl. Yes, it’s honest in its portrayal of sexual predators, blooming sexualities, and wanting to escape a home full emotional suppression but it just felt wrong to me. But at the same, I feel like it’s necessary to make, show, and watch films like these because they function like a mirror to our deluded society. Most people like to believe this idea of middle schoolers retaining their innocence, but in reality, kids do have sex at a young age nowadays (The thirteen-year-old father comes to mind.). Films like “Towelhead” reminds us what we choose to ignore and (maybe) eventually forget. I also liked this film’s portrayal of Bishil’s sexuality. I know a lot of people will assume that her character is a bisexual or lesbian, but argue that she is not. In my opinion, she is aroused by looking at the magazines of naked women because it’s what she is not: a person who is free to do whatever she wants and looking like a model (despite being heavily Photoshopped). Moreover, since that magazine is the first thing that awoken her sexual curiosity, it’s only natural that she keeps going back to it. Subtle messages like that forces me to give this film a recommendation because it’s trying to get its audiences to dig under the surface. Other good performances include Peter Macdissi as Bishil’s strict father, Toni Collette as the kind-hearted pregnant neighbor, and Matt Letscher as Collette’s wordly husband. I really enjoyed Collette and Letscher’s characters because I found a certain light in them that I otherwise couldn’t find in the other characters (with the exception of Bishil). Most of the time, I love films that push the envelop but I found it hard to love this one; I admire it but I don’t quite love it because it made me feel sick and disgusted. That said, I think it’s a powerful film because it’s able to get a negative intuitive reaction from me–a trait that I haven’t encountered in a long time.