Cannibal Holocaust vs. Men Behind The Sun

[siorai]

Originally Posted by Machete Moonlight

I also stated Im skeptical of human morality branching off in absolutes and including other animal species.

I highly suggest you read Peter Singer's books: The Ethics of What We Eat and Animal Liberation to see just how ridiculous your stance of speciesism truly is.

[Weird Al Fanatic]

XD Ohhhh, boy. I'm gonna have to connect ALL of this into one post, aren't I? Well, here it goes...

Back in the days of birds and bees, the topic of this thread was about the difference in reason for actual animal killings between Cannibal Holocaust and Men Behind the Sun. I personally did not like either of the films. I'm not a little coward or anything. I appreciate the best of the gross-out (as in the most gross) films, such as Salo and Imprint, but Cannibal Holocaust is very hard to let go of the fact that the animals were actually killed. Not reality, actuality. If I was unaware of the film's history, I would love it very much. As for Men Behind the Sun, I do appreciate the challenge that the director put himself into, but the film itself is poorly made. The fact that a cat was pointlessly killed, especially so late in the film, was a cause that only added to the dislike I have towards the film. It was highly insignificant to the plot, and there was enough realism as there was. I'll only give it to the director that he is expansive, but he is also one sadistic psycho.

I also noticed that someone was talking about how the death of the cat was supposed to show how gruesome the history of Unit 731 truly was. As I said before, I do appreciate the courage that the filmmakers had to produce this film. However, the screenwriting was mediocre, the acting was atrocious, and the special effects (not the really special effects, that is) were abysmal. The fact that someone in the film set had the insane mind to use a real cat AND a real corpse in this movie is simply mind-boggling. And my nickname is the CrazyCam, so it's rather hard to boggle my mind. I LOVE Apocalypse Now, Full Metal Jacket, and Platoon, so I am always up for very realistic war films WITH a good budget.

Now as we go through the thread, one may notice how we went into....veganism. Yipes, I better back it up a bit. Okay, so I think everyone missed the entire point, but let's go into this secondary conflict. Apparently, those that hate it when animals are killed in movies are hypocrites if they also devour meat. How does anyone not get this flaw? To actually kill a cat in a film is for ENTERTAINMENT purposes. To actually kill a cow in a slaughterhouse, cut out its body parts into fine pieces of flesh, and cook it thoroughly until it is burnt to a crisp (at least that is how I get my burgers) is for SURVIVAL purposes. If you eat a very good amount, meat is very beneficial for your body. Besides the obvious fact that meat provides a high amount of protein, it also can have a lot of iron, zinc, riboflavin, and I believe it has niacin as well. There are probably other elements and nutrients in meat, but the whole point is that meat is good. In fact, meat is great. Meat is outstanding, masterful. GO MEAT, WOOHOO!!! I will get my jalapeno burger on tonight.

Oh, and I find it especially rude to quote private messages onto a thread. After all, it is private for a reason. I believe that Machete Moonlight was being a decent human being by taking the argument into a more isolated area, but that's fine, you can add fuel to the fire. I mean that is what I am doing right here, haha. The CrazyCam is out.

[ChronoGrl]

Originally Posted by Weird Al Fanatic

To actually kill a cat in a film is for ENTERTAINMENT purposes. To actually kill a cow in a slaughterhouse, cut out its body parts into fine pieces of flesh, and cook it thoroughly until it is burnt to a crisp (at least that is how I get my burgers) is for SURVIVAL purposes.

That's where I stand on the whole killing/eating issue. Ignore the fact that we as a country over-produce our meat industry to the point of swollen gluttony (beyond "survival"), I have to agree.

Then again, if they ate the cat afterwards, that might be a different story.

Also: A cat being eaten by alive by rats? :( Sounds more like "torture" than just "killing" and I really can't stand the concept of animals being tortured, whether it being for entertainment or for food. Yes, I am a meat-eater, which I understand is supporting an industry that treats animals poorly and then slaughters them mercilessly and oftentimes unsanitarily... I object to it. I was vegetarian for two years. But there is still a difference between torture for entertainment and torture for food.

Though it STILL bothers me that the meat industry is so cruel. But that's another topic. :o

Anyway - I completely agree with this:

Originally Posted by siorai

In regards to the animal violence in each film, it was a different time. Getting overly upset about it now is like getting in a snit about the use of the word "nigger" in Tom Sawyer. Today it's unheard of to use the word so blatantly, but at the time it was a common word that didn't have near the connotations and history that it does now. Would I support a movie made now that had real killing of live animals? No. Absolutely not. Will I watch a movie made decades ago that does? Sure. It's not like I payed anything to have a copy of either Cannibal Holocaust or Men Behind the Sun anyway.

I don't condemn the films, I just choose not to watch them, because they would upset me, and I try to avoid movies that upset me (read: Most exploitation movies in general).

But back to the topic of animal violence in Cannibal Holocaust:

I have never seen the film - From what I hear about it, the animal killings are numerous and atrocious... Is that not true? This thread only mentions the one turtle killing... That was then eaten... I don't really object to that... Is its fame more swollen than its content?

[Weird Al Fanatic]

Okay, that is a good point too. We do seem to kill more animals than necessary for meat. I could say it is because of people deciding to turn to veganism and vegetarianism, but that's just silly...like the other arguments in this thread.

Uhhh, if they ate the cat as well, I..I...don't even know.

Oh, yes, I'm surprised I didn't think about that. It probably didn't die until after they stopped recording it. Torture is only good in the sexual aspect. All other forms are definitely evil. How I wish that the conditions of the slaughterhouses, or even transport to it, were pleasant. I do not feel guilt every time I bite down on a juicy steak or pork chop, however. I'll even admit I was a vegetarian for a brief time. I think it was like between 3-6 months, about 4 years ago. I don't want the animals to be tortured; I'd prefer if they could just bring an axe wielder to a farm, you know? Let's get this job over with, okay? Anyway, yes, I'd say that the desire to film such a horrible scene as the cat's actual death is as bad as watching a bullfight. I find no pleasure in watching animals get abused.

As long as the food that is handed to me is clean and healthy....and delicious, I will munch it down without any care in the world. I'd just rather not think about the origins of the cow, pig or chicken.

In regards to siorai's quote, I'd have to disagree for the most part. First of all, I hear the word 'nigger' used all the time to this day. It actually doesn't upset me anymore, because if black people are using it, then why should I care? Even though I hate racism, it doesn't bother me anymore due to overexposure. Now I think you missed the point slightly when it came to the standards for real animal killings. In the 1920's, I'd most likely accept a film that had animal killings in it. But Cannibal Holocaust was made in 1980, and Men Behind the Sun was made in 1988. Seriously, if you think about it, it's not that long ago. There were props, dummies, and animatronics back then. The problem was that both of the film's creators had little budget and could not portray a realistic animal death with props. And so instead, they used actual animals and actually killed them. 1980 and 1988 are too recent for something so crude to happen. And I don't like exploitation films either, since they just seem so mindlessly dumb. But this whole paragraph is another subject.

Oh, there was a pig, a squirrel monkey, a snake, and a coati tortured and killed in the film as well. The turtle stood out the most though. And you bet that fame got gobbled all up. I wonder how the actors feel about starring in Cannibal Holocaust now. Hell, what about Men Behind the Sun as well, for that matter?

[Elvis_Christ]

Originally Posted by Weird Al Fanatic

Oh, and I find it especially rude to quote private messages onto a thread. After all, it is private for a reason. I believe that Machete Moonlight was being a decent human being by taking the argument into a more isolated area

No he was just carrying this shit on further. The unquoted posts by him were deleted so yeh its hard to get the full picture.

I don't give a fuck if it's seen as rude or not. If you don't have the balls to say it where everyone can read it then don't say it.

I do get the whole entertainment/survival deal you mentioned. Both are unnecessary and are as vile as each other (to me) and I do find it hypocritical because they have the same fucked up outcome.

But yeh whatever I'm done with this installment of the annual Cannibal Holocaust cyclic argument.

I'll just agree to disagree and leave it at that.

[milktoaste]

Originally Posted by Weird Al Fanatic

As long as the food that is handed to me is clean and healthy....and delicious, I will munch it down without any care in the world. I'd just rather not think about the origins of the cow, pig or chicken.

Hmmm, interesting, so it's ok if it fits your tastes? Apparently when you're a film maker from (at the time) a relatively poor country with little cinematic background and you have an important story to tell- all be it you may not be the best story teller- extreme measures can be taken to get attention. I have to admit, I learned about Unit 731 from Men Behind the Sun long before it ever came up in a history class, so I'd say the director was successful even if his methods were questionable at times.

And the scene with the cat, as ridiculous as it was, was a continuation of the reoccurring theme of a large imposing foe being brought down by many-and had little if nothing to do with the ruthlessness of the invading Japanese army.

[ChronoGrl]

Originally Posted by Weird Al Fanatic

In regards to siorai's quote, I'd have to disagree for the most part. First of all, I hear the word 'nigger' used all the time to this day. It actually doesn't upset me anymore, because if black people are using it, then why should I care? Even though I hate racism, it doesn't bother me anymore due to overexposure. Now I think you missed the point slightly when it came to the standards for real animal killings. In the 1920's, I'd most likely accept a film that had animal killings in it. But Cannibal Holocaust was made in 1980, and Men Behind the Sun was made in 1988. Seriously, if you think about it, it's not that long ago. There were props, dummies, and animatronics back then. The problem was that both of the film's creators had little budget and could not portray a realistic animal death with props. And so instead, they used actual animals and actually killed them. 1980 and 1988 are too recent for something so crude to happen. And I don't like exploitation films either, since they just seem so mindlessly dumb. But this whole paragraph is another subject.

So maybe the analogy of the N-word isn't necessarily sound... The point is that, in context, while shocking, the animal deaths at the time wouldn't raise the PETA army as they would now; Animal Cruelty legislation in the US has only been alive since the 1970s, and only in vague terms at the time. I'm not saying that it would have been "acceptable," but it would not be frowned upon, penalized, or brought to court at the time as it was done today.

I realize that looking back at Man Behind the Sun, 1988 seems pretty modern, but also consider that this was made in China. China doesn't have a whole lot of legislation surrounding Human Rights, let alone animal rights (culturally, animals aren't really considered feeling creatures)... Formal federal legislation in China against the cruelty of animals really didn't come into fruition until the 2000s, so even though 1988 seems "modern" in Western standards in terms of animal cruelty, not so much in Asia. Not saying it's right; just a different culture and viewpoint.

Something else to consider. I think that context is crucial here.

Originally Posted by milktoaste

Hmmm, interesting, so it's ok if it fits your tastes? Apparently when you're a film maker from (at the time) a relatively poor country with little cinematic background and you have an important story to tell- all be it you may not be the best story teller- extreme measures can be taken to get attention. I have to admit, I learned about Unit 731 from Men Behind the Sun long before it ever came up in a history class, so I'd say the director was successful even if his methods were questionable at times.

And the scene with the cat, as ridiculous as it was, was a continuation of the reoccurring theme of a large imposing foe being brought down by many-and had little if nothing to do with the ruthlessness of the invading Japanese army.

I agree with all of this. I don't have to enjoy the film - in fact, I don't believe that I would - But it's all about looking at it in context. Honestly, the horrors and atrocities brought on the Chinese by the Japanese were beyond words. Having spent a year in China not too long ago, the inherent pain and hatred in Chinese society against the Japanese still exist because of those events. From that perspective, a filmmaker with very little means trying to express the horror and atrocities brought on to his culture by another people - I can see using any means necessary in order to get that word out. Was it cruel to kill the cat that way? Absolutely. Does it make me sad that it happened? Of course. But do I understand why the director did what he did? I do. I think that more goes into the act than the simple desire for crass exploitation. I think that the Message (with a capital M) is meant to outweigh the means, not just wallow in torture.

I still have no desire to see the film, but I can understand the reason behind the action, especially in context. As it's been brought up, if films like these were made today, I might be more in an uproar about it... But honestly, looking back, they just make me uncomfortable... Which is the intent anyway.

[Elvis_Christ]

Animal killings aside I really like both of these films and they are something everyone should see at least once. At least check out Black Sun: The Nanking Massacre it's a great film.

[ChronoGrl]

Cannibal Holocaust I definitely have to see, though I'm not sure I'd be able to sit through Man Behind The Sun.

On the topic, I've heard that The Rape of Nanking is an amazing and horrifying read - In case you guys are interested. I plan on picking it up sometime in the near future.

[TheWickerFan]

Who would've thought that my criticism of 2 films having non-simulated animal killings would invoke the wrath of so many people.

Questions of ethics, motives, and budgets aside:

Cannibal Holocaust: Good Film
Men Behind The Sun: Complete Crap