I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Stylish but barely mediocre overall

Boring

It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

Basically I can begin by simply stating that this movie was totally abysmal. It's a slap in the face to the albeit small cannibal sub-genre that lives among horror/exploitation movies.This movie is a total pox on what cannibal movies are supposed to be. How can this be called Cannibal Holocaust when there is not one ounce of cannibalism in it?The movie starts off relatively OK, and it's a stock standard affair in the premise of going to the jungle region in the first place, however after 30 minutes, tedium begins to mount and you start to realise that very little, if anything, is actually going to happen.The movie almost starts to redeem itself when the natives suddenly turn on the group of four and tie them up in various positions and set about their regimen of torture. One of the guys is pinned to the ground and they place an ants nest on him, so you prepare yourself for what you think is going to be a rather painful death, but they managed to talk their way out their predicament, he gets up, brushes off the ants and the movie continues as normal. The natives forget all about the group as they are now more interested in a tape recorder playing jungle sounds!! What the hell??Very little of this movie actually makes any sense, and it appears to be a culmination of several half-finished scripts all thrown together. I can live with the bad acting, as this was to be expected, I can even live with the poor filming and sound quality, but for a movie that was previously "banned" you expect it to be able live up to that kind of reputation. I gave this movie 2 stars based solely on actress Jessica Quintero who played the young native girl, Kuwala. Since I'm an Australian I thought they were calling her Koala, but in any case she was the only one who seemed to know what she was doing from the time she first showed up, and despite being naked for most of the time she was on-screen, She's really the only believable character in this drivel. Even the hammock loving villain who ordered the 3 guys to remove their pants to be threatened with castration via anaconda, seemed hardly able to maintain a straight face let-alone be capable as anything even remotely bad.The ending made about as much sense as the rest of this abomination. The woman of the group along the guy they were looking for suddenly take off in the seaplane without a word and head back to civilisation with a vague promise she'll return for the others. By way of an epilogue, you find out that she did come back after about 2 years! The movie just makes no sense and just plods along much like a high school play. Do yourselves a favour and avoid this movie. There are plenty of good cannibal movies out there, so get one of them instead.

Unfortunately, there are no "Cannibal", no "Holocaust" and actually no "II" in this movie. The story is something like BBC documentary supplied with poor and, in fact, unnecessary acting. It can't be compared to Deodato's "Cannibal Holocaust", the title of the subject is just the exploitation of Deodato's movie success. Even some rather natural and, frankly speaking, amazing scenes, for example, with strange fish crawling in aborigine's fundament or the reanimation of a monkey with the help of rubber tube can't save the movie from total failure, at least in my eyes.And I am sure that it will be completely useless and pretty disappointing for all Italian (cannibal) horror movies fans and for all that violence-lovers. And, for certain, it is not a must see movie for true cinemaddicts.

Anything usually associated Deodato's original Cannibal Holocaust will conjure up images of severe violence, real animal cruelty, and pure visceral shock.When Cannibal Holocaust 2 reached the shops here in the UK (released by the 'weak' VIPCO label) it seemed like a rather intriguing title. Having only been cut by a few seconds (according to the BBFC) I was expecting something rather extreme, to say the least.This film is simply incomparable with Deodato's. Again, no cannibalism is shown whatsoever and what exists is, to quote my title, extremely diluted. The acting and (alarmingly) bad dubbing makes this film seem emphatically laughable. There is nothing worth analysing here and the only reason to review this film is to shame it. A hyperbolic blood-bath would have done the trick more than this!Protagonists driving around in 'monster' trucks...stealing amphibious aircraft...playing trumpets while canoeing down the amazon...sound terrible so far? The problem is, it continues to get worse by the minute. Anyone expecting a crescendo of violence at the film's 'climax' is going to be very disappointed. It makes you question why this film was given an '18' certificate. Blow-darting monkeys...fish swimming up natives rectums...getting worse...and the cherry on top: a vomit inducing 'happy ending' whereby all characters seem to find some form of happiness after parading around the jungle like a prize set of ignorant s**ts! If only I could have returned this and got my money back. It is fair that this sub-genre of film is a marginal one but this is, without a doubt, absolute garbage.

Antonio Climati is a man who will be remembered for one thing and one thing only: spectacularly contentious mondo films. During the 70s and early 80s, Climati produced a handful of some of the most unpleasant movies ever committed to celluloid, all in the name of "documentary". It was his 1976 film THIS VIOLENT WORLD that directly inspired some of the scenes in Deodato's exploitation classic CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST, a film which dealt a critical blow to the mondo genre. With the similarities between mondo and the violent jungle travelogue approach of the classic cannibal movie, it seems only fitting that Climati would finally try his hand at it too. Ironically, his film has clearly been strongly influenced by CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST, right down to the title...Cannibal movie fans will immediately recognise the plot devices used in THE GREEN INFERNO from Deodato and Lenzi's past frolics in the jungle. However, it had one main difference- it was made ten years after the "golden era" of the genre. This is greatly reflected in the violence of the movie, which is enormously toned down. Whilst the "westerners captured by natives" plot remains perfectly in line with the most generic cannibal movie, there is no actual cannibalism in the picture and gore is kept to an absolute minimum. Similar to Deodato's CUT AND RUN, THE GREEN INFERNO treads the boards of a cannibal pictures whilst carefully avoiding cannibalism. This isn't the only cannibal convention that has been sacrificed here. One of the most controversial aspects of the genre is the depiction of cruelty against and the killing of animals. Amazingly in THE GREEN INFERNO, these are replaced with scenes of COMPASSION towards animals! In one scene, a monkey is revived by the exploring party... and in total shades of CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST, at another point, a turtle is pulled out of a water tank, only to be replaced unharmed.One has to wonder what Climati's intentions were. The awkward "anti-animal cruelty" stance that the movie seems to adopt would be easier to appreciate if one hadn't seen Climati's previous work. Movies such as SAVAGE MAN... SAVAGE BEAST positively reveled in horrifically drawn-out scenes of animal killing, so what could have changed in the meantime? In honesty, many of the animal scenes are still clearly cruel and putting the subjects under distress. This makes Climati's stance quite transparent. I honestly believe he was attempting to criticise the cannibal genre just as Deodato had damningly and directly criticised him in the past. This was also coupled with the chronological fact that audiences were simply less willing to watch animals being butchered with machetes by the time this flick was made.As a movie, THE GREEN INFERNO is competently made yet somewhat forgettable. It has the same atmosphere as the earlier genre entries, but comes across as being rather watered down. The sound-track, photography and dialogue are all utterly perfunctory, and besides the animal issues mentioned already, a genre veteran can quite easily predict the entire plot after a few short minutes. However, in a way it is a fittingly odd end to an extremely strange genre of exploitation cinema- anaemic, bitter, and self-referentially critical.