Cannibal Holocaust vs. Men Behind The Sun
 

Not too long ago I decided to watch 2 of the more controversial horror films out there; Cannibal Holocaust and Men Behind The Sun.
Before I say anything else, both films feature non-simulated animal killings which I feel crosses the line to unacceptable, so I could never, in good conscience, recommend that anyone buy these films.
Anyway, I'll start with Cannibal Holocaust. This is a very well made film. If the idea of having the real animal killings was to make the rest of it seem more real, then the filmmaker succeeded. There seemed to be a (somewhat) legitimate reason behind why he did what he did, so it wasn't pure exploitation.
Which brings me to Men Behind The Sun. This film is reprehensible on many different levels. I realize the filmmaker was trying to make us aware of the horrors that the Japanese inflicted on the Chinese during WWII, but it was done in such a tasteless, exploitative way that I felt his point was lost. The scene of the cat being devoured by starving rats (which occurred rather late in the film) added nothing to the story, and I swear was only put there for the director's own amusement.
If you can get past the animal killing issue, I would say Cannibal Holocaust was worthwhile, but Men Behind The Sun was just exploitative garbage.

I like both films - CH is head+shoulders above everything else in the genre. I love the whole found fottage concept and the way it manipulates the viewer. Though I don't condone the animal killing I don't see it as a big an issue as alot of people make out and apprently the turtle was eaten afterwards...There is a SUpermarket near me (or House of DEath as I like to call it :-) which is filled with the results of animal cruelty (veal or foie gras anyone) and people don't really bat an eyelid.....

Though MBTS is tcheapand exploitative I still enjoyed it - the cat scene is of course reprehensible (made worse as a cat is in the cute and intelligent list of animals unlike the turtle in CH). The 3rd sequal Black Sun: The Nanking Massacre is actually a better film and not as trashy (if you can put up with the buck teeth and jamjar glasses stereotyping of the Japanese). Forget 2+3 as they made by the wonderfully talented Godfrey Ho....

If you do some research most people actually say that the cat wasnt really killed. I'm not sure either way but there are a lot of people that claim it was just trick shooting. Either way its a pretty fucked up movie.

I use to hate Exploitative movies too, but then I learned that it isn't all bad, infact it can be down right fun sometimes (I.E. The Wizard of Gore, Bad Taste, Dead Alive, and other such movies). To me, the anumal thing is not an issue with me, because I much prefer the idea of an animal being killed on screen than a human (and I don't buy into that whole "CH is a snuff film" stuff).

Either way, with a review like that, I have to watch these movies now haha.

I also enjoyed Bad Taste and Dead Alive; I'm not squeamish about movie violence. There is a huge difference between killing an animal for real and having multiple people simulated being run over with a lawn mower.
I have done research on Men Behind The Sun and the cat scene, and get many conflicting stories. Having watched the movie, I would say it looked pretty real.

I'm definitely with you on both films, WickerFan.

Backed.

.........

Oddly enough, I've never actually sat down and watched all of CH. I'll have to do so in the near future.

As for Men Behind the Sun, I've read a couple of books on Unit 731. The movie is pretty spot on. Is it over the top? Is it absolutely disgusting? Is it beyond what many people would think possible for one human to do to another? Yes. Yes. Yes. But it's pretty much well the truth of what happened. Gore-wise, I don't really see much difference between Men Behind the Sun and something like the torture scenes in Hostel, Saw, etc. The only real difference is that with those movies you know there's no truth behind them. It's all make-believe. With Men Behind the Sun though, you know there's some very solid truth behind it. And not "truth" like Texas Chainsaw Massacre or Blair Witch, but actual documented proof. That gives the movie far more weight that can't easily be forgotten.

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.

And like Ferox13 alluded to, if you eat or use animal products, you really have no ground to stand on when it comes to opposing the death of animals in film. You can't have it both ways. You can't realistically sit there eating a bacon double-cheeseburger and also complain about an animal being killed for a movie.

As I said, I thought Cannibal Holocaust was a very well made film. As horrific as it was to watch the animal killings, there was motive and logic behind their use. The cat killing in Men Behind The Sun just seemed gratuitous.

There are lots of films about past war atrocities some good, some bad. Men Behind The Sun falls in the latter category.

The thing is though, I don't think that a movie specifically about Unit 731 could be made and be nearly as effective without going to extremes. It's kind of a sad thing, but for quite a few people out there pain and suffering inflicted upon humans is quite tolerable. Inflict that same pain and suffering upon a cute animal and all hell breaks loose. So the cat scene in Men Behind the Sun isn't really that gratuitous. For the people who watch the film and maybe aren't that fazed by what's being done to the humans, possibly the scene with the cat will reinforce just how cruel the Japanese were. Many people can accept people being tortured in the name of war, but cute fuzzy animals? No way. A soldier torturing an enemy can be viewed as just doing his job as a soldier. A soldier torturing a cute fuzzy cat can typically only be seen as a sadist. That scene again, just a reinforcement of what kind of people Unit 731 were. Is it over the top? For sure, but I wouldn't call it unnecessary or out of place at all in the film.

I didn't have a problem with the atrocities being graphically shown (the stripped flesh off the hands, the intestines shooting out of the anus). I realize this is a very unpleasant, disturbing topic that really needs to be graphically depicted to have full impact. My problem is, that the director REALLY killed that cat and there's a big difference between the scenes I discussed. Real____Fake.

I absolutely refuse to see Men Behind The Sun. I'm a long time cat owner and lover and I could never imagine watching such a scene. I saw Cannibal Holocaust but I wish I never did. killing animals for the sake of a film is disgusting and inexcusable, Joe D'amato should be shot.

Poor Joe D'amato...

I know he's not the best director in the world but shooting him is a bit excessive..

I don't remember any animals being killed in Joe D'amato's flicks.

The Italian porn industry would crumble if he was shot :)

Yeah even in his cannibal entry Trap them and Kill them there was no animal snuff stuff (could be wrong since its along time since i seen it)...

I do remember a horse getting 'hassled' in Emanuelle in America and also in Caligula the untold story (was it the same horse, if so it would lead me to believe the horse was complient in both roles) :-)

Silly me, i mixed up Joe D'amato with Ruggero Deodato. I was drunk when I posted that anyways.

OK so you're now saying that Deodato shoule be shot because they killed a turtle on film that they later ate - how is this different than hunters killing and eating prey or even ordering a big Mac..

I'm a vegetarian and have been for 22 years - my beliefs are obviously not as strong as yours (are u a vegan) but I really can't see why the turtle scene is so removed and wrong from any other abuse of animals that are lower on the foodchain than use..

there's also a scene in cannibal holocaust where they slice open the throat of a cute little furry guy, not sure what animal it was. There was also animal killing in Jungle Holocaust, on my copy of Jungle holocaust, there was an intro from the director. He tried to distance himself from the animal killing in that movie and make it seem like the camera crew had did it without his knowledge or something. fucking bullshit lie. I dont necessarily think he should be shot, that was an exaggeration, I'm just not a fan of the guy. I am not a vegan or a vegetarian but I try to eat organic free range meat and I try to stay away from fast food.

It was prolly a muskrat - they always killing those guys in cannibal films..

Ok sorry I thought you were an ALF guy (not that there is anything wrong with that , in principle, but that is that is another debate).

So its ok to kill and eat the meat but not to film it? Is that the problem? Or its wrong to kill cute animals and not ugly ones (like cows) on film?, You know that Organic, free range piece of meat you got from Wholefoods or what ever - you do know someone needed to kill thatfor you , don't you..

I'm a bit confused here..

Personally I'm a vegetarian and I try not to preach but when some one says kill a director (that i like) but yet condone the killing of countless animals in passing for their means then....

whatever I give up. i honestly hate debating stuff on the internet. poke and prod my statements all you like.

I agree, Mothman.

Not to condone it at all (I'm vegan), but I can see why there is a big disconnect for many people. People don't eat "pig" or "cow," they eat pork and beef. People don't eat "flesh" or "muscle," they eat steaks and porkchops. It's a subtle, but important bit of marketing by the meat industry. Not to mention just how the meat itself is packaged so neat and tidy with that nice little maxipad underneath to soak up not the blood, but the "juices." It's made to be so far removed from a once living being and transformed into just another foodstuff that is produced to be eaten. So people losing touch with just what's on their plate isn't too surprising.

Must be time for someone to talk about incisors and how you don't get enough vitamins from just eating vegetables.... oh yeh and PETA et al. Hey weren't Hitler and Manson vegetarians :rolleyes:

siorai is dead right and it's sickening. The way people think it is their "right" gets me spitting blood.

The "free range" thing cracks me up. There's nothing humane about it at all (as Ferox mentioned). Wake up. Just another get out of jail free card for people who want to feel better about their selfish actions.

We live in a (somewhat) free world it's our own choice what we put into our bodies and it's none of my business what people choose to do but I just want people to see that its not that hard to do the right thing.

If you're bothered by the scenes in these two movies go to a slaughterhouse and check out where you meal comes from and see some really twisted wrong shit.

LOL - never heard it called a 'maxipad'..

But what about....... LOL

Read the thread. It started about real violence in films as in animals being killed for the film then moved into the questioning of people who find that morally repugnant, but still run down to the local McDonalds and grab a cheeseburger.

Now you know!!!!!

Haha what? Someone's taking a Philosophy 101 class.

Good one that's really sharp. Go flip through your textbook and lay some more wisdom on us.

Quit fucking PMing me:

http://www.nottinghamcraftmafia.com/...9/09/twits.jpg

I eat meat(love a good steak), and my wife is a vegan. She won't eat anything with a face, in her words.

We get along fine. Just saying.

Cool :)

I don't mind what people do it's their life (like I said earlier). Most of my friends eat meat.

That guy was the only one with a problem.

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.

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.

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:

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?

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?

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.

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.

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.


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.

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.

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.

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