Review of The Green Inferno (2013) by Martin R — 26 Oct 2015

[9/26/15] In some ways less is more, and let me explain what I mean. When horror films show too many kills, reveal the antagonist too many times, or rely on jump scare after jump scare--it takes something away, a sort of sense of fear.

It's like you're being taken out of the moment, it doesn't feel "real" anymore. "The Green Inferno" is not that kind of film; it's a tribute to the cannibal film boom of the 80s and because it is a product of those films, Eli Roth had some big shoes to fill.

The rawness that those cannibal flicks had is gone, replaced by beautiful shots of Amazonian jungle and rivers in stunning high definition, and that's not a bad thing. To see the cannibalistic tribe in the glory of such clarity provided an opportunity for Roth to get crazy with the butchering.

And occasionally, he does--but after having seeing the movie twice--I can definitely say that there was a good amount of cutting in the editing room. "The Green Inferno" promises a lot but the gore is so restrained that it doesn't feel quite like it should.

There's moments where somebody is being ripped apart and we catch glimpses of some genuine "I can't look at this" stuff, but then it cuts away. The cannibal village has skeletons, rotten man-meat, and skulls hanging from vertical sticks in the background, BUT, to see those you have to focus your eyes beyond the foreground or to the corners of the screen.

And in my mind, I'm thinking: "you're going to go through the effort of making these impressive props, I mean, the bones still have flesh that have been chewed on or some shit, and you're not going to let us have a good look?" No, Eli, no, I demand an unrated cut.

Seriously. But enough of that, let's talk about the jabs that filmmaker takes at social justice warriors because I DO think that some of the dialogue/gestures/motives of the characters act as one of the strengths of the movie.

Roth makes it very clear that these suburbian college kids have NO business sticking their noses in the jungle [or anywhere else, really]. The issue isn't the cause, it's the reasons that people rally behind a cause--in particular the ones who become "activists" to be recognized (or some other selfish reason).

Even then, the social commentary isn't as strong as it would like to be. We get it, it's ironic that the kids go to Peru to "save the natives" [remember, they don't really believe in the cause] only to be eaten by that same tribe.

Again, the jabs are pretty obvious--but I don't think that the jabs had enough punch if that makes sense. The primary strength lies in the natives; everything about them just comes off as 'legit,' especially the make-up.

And it's extremely fitting to have the cannibals be the true stars of a cannibal film since these folks are the real deal. Whoa, hold on, correction time: they don't eat people in real life, but they are actually isolated from the modern world, and they NAIL their parts.

You can tell that they had a lot of fun, from the elders of the village to the kids. In the end: Eli Roth has a fine horror film here, it's just not the masterpiece I was hoping for. More is more, Mr.

Roth, more is More! I want to SEE the carnage (not just glimpses here and there). To be fair, Major props need to be given that no animals were killed in front of the camera, and there's no excessive rape scenes or anything like that.

Don't misinterpret what I'm saying, "The Green Inferno" is gory, however, it makes you hungry for a bit more human meat and blood instead of providing a satisfying meal. It's easily THE cannibal film of the last.

..I don't know, when did "Cannibal Holocaust" come out?