jacobjohntaylor1 This movie is badly acted. The story line is awful. The ending is awful. It is very gross and not scary. It is very cheap. It is so cheap that it is found footage movie. And that is cheap. 4.4 is a good ratting. But this is such a bad movie 4.4 overrating it. I give 1. It is awful. I do not why people keep give it a 5. They most like being bored of grossed out. Do not see this awful movie. This is one of the worst horror movies of all time. I only give a 5 to the horror movies that are scary. If you are scared of this then you great scared of you own shadow. If you want to see a good horror movie see Psycho. Do not see this.

afq2846 I saw the release of cannibal ferox on blu ray and in one of the extra features they mentioned this movie. Its supposed to be an homage to the 80s cannibal movies. To call this a bad movie is an under statement. The only positive thing about this film is that it is short. There are 0 scares in this film and more then anything its boring. You will see over 50 minutes before anything happens. Yes you will be watching 4 people argue and fight in the jungle for over 50 minutes before you get any kind of action. Why they have an unrated version of this is beyond me. There is hardly any gore and there is an entire ending scene that is so dark its hard to see what happened. This is a horrendous film that should be skipped at all costs. It is NOT a homage to the cannibal films of old its just a bad film. I repeat skip it at all costs.

Gareth Critchfield This film was not the worst i have ever seen, but any worse and it would have been a real test to make it through the entire movie. Although the director Jonathan Hensleigh is by no means one of my favourite directors i find it hard to believe he wrote die hard with a vengeance and jumanji for example, both action movies that although he didn't direct were full of exciting and very creative ideas. What happened! The characters in this film were so easily dislikable with their endless bickering and one-up-man-ship that their downfall couldn't come fast enough for me. If they portrayed any character i would have been happy to sit for longer and wait for it to appear, but it was like the script was produced by a teenager with an attitude problem. All the main characters were obnoxious and self centred. You may argue that this was to an extent, partly at least the point of the film? like cannibal holocaust and others in same elk which portrayed the white people from privileged backgrounds were actually more sinister and barbaric than the characters who ate humans in the jungle, maybe the idea was that these the main charters were more hateful than the cannibals? Either way, i would argue you could have dealt with that potential idea far quicker and stopped wasting time. I don't know, just not my thing and like other have mentioned it obviously tried to live up to the old classic cannibal films and failed almost before it had started.

Scarecrow-88 Vacationing American tourists decide to leave the beautiful ,lush locale of Fiji to find some Vice President's son, lost in the jungles of New Guinea where cannibals await them, hoping to make thousands of dollars if they can snag an interview with the man..if he's still alive that is. With two camcorders, the two couples record their activities leading up to, during, and the aftermath of their expedition. We watch as the relationships between the two couples disintegrate and what occurs when they do indeed encounter the natives.Mandi(Sandy Gardiner)invites her old pal Bijou(Veronica Sywak)to hang out with her and boyfriend Colby(Callard Harris). Mandi and Colby are those beautiful, privileged kids from wealthy families while Bijou, from a more modest background, has grown into an alcoholic, smoking cigs and weed, without a care in the world. This kind of attitude would be okay in Fiji where Bijou could party hard, but into the heart of the jungle or through the back roads of New Guinea where local village militias and street thugs with guns and rifles are present, her belligerent, care-free nature & drunkenness soon rubs her company the wrong way. Making matters worse is Colby's invite to their jungle excursion for bartender Mikey(Nick Richey), a rowdy, hard-drinking joker, like Bijou(..which is why they hit it off almost instantly)with a short temperament, whose uncontrollable outbursts often almost get the gang into deep trouble. But, Mikey knows where to get the map whose directions lead them to the place the man they're after would be located. Soon, Mandi and Colby find themselves bickering endlessly with Mikey and Bijou regarding keeping with a tact schedule throughout their arduous journey through the jungles of New Guinea. While Mandi and Colby wish to keep a proper schedule in place to save time, Bijou and Mikey wish to drink and smoke, not as serious about the task at hand. Soon Bijou and Mikey take a raft made by natives, and take to the river, while Mandi and Colby discover that their supplies have been removed. Only tragedy awaits when the primitives expose themselves, bodies painted and armed with spears. Before these circumstances, Mikey had removed sacred skulls from a ritualistic shrine of the primitives, and the gang encountered an Aussie who has lived amongst the natives peacefully, forewarning them to leave well enough alone or else.Failed attempt at reviving the cannibal genre, with incredibly stupid characters(..even if there is a possibility for making money with an interview, why leave the picturesque fun & sun of Fiji for such a difficult undertaking as an expedition into the heart of a jungle of cannibals?!)who will undoubtedly annoy viewers. If you do not care for these people, how can we possibly attach ourselves to their plight? And, this film doesn't deliver on the more exploitive elements cannibal fans are accustomed to. The film has little to recommend except some professional camera-work and solid editing, something that's often criticized when a film is mostly shot through the use of camcorders. The violence, by the natives to those who enter their territory, happens out of frame, or shot from such a distance, that they fail to shock you...especially if you've seen "Cannibal Holocaust" which is superior in practically every way. You mostly see the aftermath of those who were killed and ripped apart by the natives, discovered by Mandi and Colby's camera. I guess the most shocking portion of the film is Mandi and Colby's discovery of what happened to Christian missionaries "bringing the word" to the New Guinea natives. That and the horrifying outcome of what the natives do to Bijou and Mikey, two characters who are impossibly grating. I think this was an attempt to add a modern take on Ruggero Deodato's "Cannibal Holocaust" without the very things that film had which people look for in this type of sub-genre.