Sorry, this movie sucks

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

I have already seen this classic formula in horror films, in which a group of young friends go on vacation to a far-away land, only to find their trip cut short by a series of fortuitous and gory events, followed by an imminent death. "Antropophagus" manages to stand out in its own way, by offering a genuinely frightening villain, extreme gruesome deaths and a perfect setting for the story. I have always thought that the locations of a horror film sometimes have a greater role than the central characters of the story. In this case, the scenario in which the action takes place in a European island, which is actually a beautiful place, but also a devastating scenario that creates a feeling of isolation and vulnerability.In "Antropophagus", a group of travelers go on a trip to Greece and are joined by a young woman named Julie, who asks them for a ride to an island because she wants to meet some friends. While the group explores the seemingly deserted island, they come across a rotten dead body, which obviously prompts them to rush back to the boat, only to find it adrift. Julie suggests taking shelter at her friends' house, and when they get there, they find the family's blind daughter in an utter state of panic. The teenage girl, named Henerietta, explains them that her family was killed some days ago by a lunatic. Later, the friends find out that most of the island residents were murdered by the same insane killer, a man named Nikos, who feasts on human flesh and is now out to get them. I have seen hundreds of horror films and while I can see that certain horror villains, such as Michael Myers, are frightening and creepy looking, that's basically it; I can acknowledge their creepiness, while not necessarily being afraid of them. With this film, I was genuinely afraid of the antropophagus (performed by the surprisingly good-looking Luigi Montefiori). The cannibalistic villain appears as a gruesome beast-like creature with hideous scars all over his face, shredded clothes, a sinister smile and deranged eyes that give the impression that he is some kind of ravenous wild animal that is out to catch his prey. The antropophagus is definitely one of the most intimidating villains I have seen and his image is haunting. "Antropophagus" features some very effective chase sequences full of suspense, in which the killer goes after his human prey with ferociousness in his eyes and a very disturbing smile. The gore is plentiful and intense, which made my stomach turn once or twice, while not necessarily making this film a torture show. I admit I am easily impressed by gore and I tend to dislike extreme brutality, even when it looks ridiculously fake. However, sometimes gore serves a purpose, when is not just there for the sake of seeing guts scattered all over the place. In some cases, like it happens with this film, the crudeness of the gore help to convey a feeling of vulnerability and even anxiety. The lead actress is Tisa Farrow (Mia's less known sister) who gave her last performance in this film, in which she accurately provided all the basics that the audience normally expect on a lead girl from a classic horror movie: she's beautiful, but also angelic and innocent. Her character is likable and nice, but also capable of becoming a warrior towards the end and facing that horrible man that is out to get her. And speaking of the devil, the antropophagus himself is played by Italian actor Luigi Montefiori (who goes by the name of George Eastman in this film). I have never seen Montefiori in anything else, except "Antropophagus", but I honestly have to say that this is one of the scariest horror villains I have seen in basically 20 years as a horror fan. He was amazing as the beast-like killer.To this day, "Antropophagus" remains as one of my favorite horror films, although in all honestly, I don't see it very often, because I actually find it scary and even depressing for moments (that's a good thing, since horror films are not supposed to cheer us up)

Don't look for great acting in Joe D'Amato's gory horror flick. This is strictly low budget. In fact D'Amato, known as "The Evil Ed Wood," was never concerned with production values in his over 200 films. He was out to make money, and that was his yardstick for a good film - it was profitable.This film, properly known as Antropophagus, along with Absurd (Horrible) and Buio Omega (Beyond the Darkness), have given him cult status among horror film fans.It does have one great thing going for it. It was filmed in Greece and has a Greek soundtrack. Splendid! A lot of it was also filmed in Italy, and that is good, too.If you see the uncut version, as I have, you will gain 3 minutes of gore over the American version (The Grim Reaper), including the pregnant woman scene.The movie was the last for Mia Farrow's sister Tisa, who went on to become a nurse.

Anthropophagus (or The Grim Reaper, which is a cooler title) is a mostly terrible, unspectacular, and uneventful horror film that slowly stalls through it's non-plot, with some minor chasing and bloodshed during its brief conclusion. On most grounds, it is an undeniable failure. While it features the same goofy problems of every Italian horror flick from this period (terrible dubbing, bland acting in service of non-characters, and a story and sequence of events that don't seem to have been thought out in any logical fashion), this film creates a bigger sin than others of its ilk; it's about absolutely nothing for most of its scant runtime. Most Italian splatter flicks from this era are garbage, but entertaining garbage, and occasionally well-shot and insane garbage. But this film seems to exist in some sort of narrative black hole.The film follows a group of 6 boring tourists who travel to a small island for some bland fun: Tisa Farrow (who was briefly bitten by the acting bug just like her look-a-like sister Mia minus having, you know, any talent and never becoming famous), this guy who I think is supposed to be the male lead, but he doesn't do much and disappears for the entire last act of the movie (only to show up in the last 5 seconds to save the day!), this other guy who looks EXACTLY like the other guy, even down to having the same face and wearing the exact same clothes, he has a pregnant wife (uh oh!), this guy who is younger than the other two guys who falls in love with Tisa Farrow's charm and beauty, and Zora Kerova who completes the pointless love triangle by being in love with younger guy. Zora also acts as the one person who has a bad feeling about their trip to the island, as every one of these movies requires the crazy hysterical skeptic who turns out to be right about the evil amongst them. It's an easy way to work around characterization. Anyway, after an underwhelming opening kill, it takes the film almost an hour before the killer shows up and one of the central cast members is killed. An hour. It's amazing how long the characters are safe for in this film. They wander around, sleep in a spooky house during a thunderstorm, and wander around some more outside, and everyone is always A-OK, the killer is no where in sight. And then BOOM thunder reveals he's in the house with young guy and requisite blind girl. And the biggest surprise is that the cannibal maniac is actually kind of scary, genuinely.But his brief first appearance past the halfway mark of the film turns into another lengthy absence and he disappears for another half hour (!) only to show up again for the last 10 mins. D'Amato must have been going for a less is more approach, and normally I'd agree, but when the rest of the film is so static and uneventful and not particularly effective at sustaining any consistent mood or dread (though there are occasional moments that are decent at building this), it seems like an odd choice. D'Amato, the epitome of the lowest dreck of Italian cinema, and from what I read more interested in the business side of filmmaking than the artistic, either was genuinely trying to make a spooky film that didn't rely on only gore and sex (in fact, there's no sex or nudity to speak of), or they had no budget and most of the film is filler. There's no doubt the film is meandering and boring for 90% of its runtime, and the characters somehow feel like mannequins AND are blandly over-developed ("I sometimes work at a TV studio" "I'm in pharmacy, only 2 more tests and I have my degree").So it's a waste of time....except that killer is eerie! He's barely in the movie, but maybe that makes his appearance more effective. The make-up work is on the cheap side (as is all the gore), so some shots of him look better than others. But I must admit the chase/well climax kind of works because he is genuinely intimidating and threatening looking, and the music is actually kind of cool. It's an odd film because it is SO bland and uneventful, it doesn't seem right to suddenly have the cast be attacked by a giant scary madman with a gross face. A cast this minor and a plot this scant and atmosphere this lacking should feature a predictably lame villain, but in this case he's actually scary. And that well climax is a cool idea and is pretty suspenseful, though it doesn't milk the idea to its full potential, and then is kind of ruined by the film's stupidly abrupt ending.And disappointingly, most of the characters get off easy and get pretty minor deaths (except of course for the pregnant woman whose fate is the only one in bad taste, therefore it's the only memorable one). Zora Kerova is practically killed humanely for this type of movie (merely gets her throat slit, off screen I should add).So it's almost a complete waste of time, except for that killer, who fascinates me. He's like an uncontrollable, rogue element who doesn't seem to belong in the film, which is what makes him so off-putting and eerie. He doesn't conceivably belong in the movie; he's too creepy of a killer for a movie this uninvolving and pedestrian. So in that way, the movie stayed with me, despite 90% being a real slog. Is it worth it? That depends on whether one wants to put the time in to watch a worthless film with an underused but uniquely unsettling killer. He deserves to be in a better film. Anthropophagus just screams for a remake.

The plot = A young woman and friends sail to a small Greek island only to discover that everyone has vanished, upon investigating they come across a blind girl who claims a monster has killed everybody, which turns out to be a disfigured man with a taste for human flesh and the group of friends quickly become his main course.I know this movie more as "The Grim Reaper" besides it's other title that I can't even pronounce. Only a few slashers have touched upon mixing Cannibalism with straight up slasher, but this one seems to go all out there, but only in the uncut version and there are several scenes which make this movie hard to watch, like the infamous fetus scene. But other than those scenes this movie is far from perfect, for a start the bad lighting makes it almost impossible to see especially the night scenes and most of the characters aren't very likable and the only standouts are from Tisa Farrow and Geogre Eastman who plays the psychotic madman.I also found the storyline quiet interesting and the setting of the Greek island is both eerie and beautiful at the same time, and the background story on the killer is both thrilling and unsettling to watch at the same time, The scares are all in the right places from the opening scene all the way through to the final showdown between heroine and killer, kept me on the edge of my seat all the way through.All in all Anthropophagus is something of an acquired taste, but a slasher with a interesting storyline mixed with true terror and sickness is a true rarity in slasher movies.