[go: up one dir, main page]

    Kalender veröffentlichenDie Top 250 FilmeDie beliebtesten FilmeFilme nach Genre durchsuchenBeste KinokasseSpielzeiten und TicketsNachrichten aus dem FilmFilm im Rampenlicht Indiens
    Was läuft im Fernsehen und was kann ich streamen?Die Top 250 TV-SerienBeliebteste TV-SerienSerien nach Genre durchsuchenNachrichten im Fernsehen
    Was gibt es zu sehenAktuelle TrailerIMDb OriginalsIMDb-AuswahlIMDb SpotlightLeitfaden für FamilienunterhaltungIMDb-Podcasts
    OscarsEmmysSan Diego Comic-ConSummer Watch GuideToronto Int'l Film FestivalSTARmeter AwardsAwards CentralFestival CentralAlle Ereignisse
    Heute geborenDie beliebtesten PromisPromi-News
    HilfecenterBereich für BeitragendeUmfragen
Für Branchenprofis
  • Sprache
  • Vollständig unterstützt
  • English (United States)
    Teilweise unterstützt
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
Watchlist
Anmelden
  • Vollständig unterstützt
  • English (United States)
    Teilweise unterstützt
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
App verwenden
Zurück
  • Besetzung und Crew-Mitglieder
  • Benutzerrezensionen
  • FAQ
IMDbPro
Snuff: A Documentary About Killing on Camera (2008)

Benutzerrezensionen

Snuff: A Documentary About Killing on Camera

13 Bewertungen
4/10

In-depth? Informative? Hardly.

Man, were my hopes crushed after watching this 'documentary.' It's supposed to be discussing the existence of actual snuff films (films of murders produced for profit), but it fails so miserably at this that it basically turns into a group of random people talking about gory movies (like Flowers of Flesh and Blood, Cannibal Holocaust, Henry, Trouble Every Day, etc.). Also, the 'professional' views seem more like they're just fa group of friends hanging around talking in front of the camera. I mean, their key 'witness' is a 'cinephile and filmmaker' with no real credentials other than he's watched some movies. His role as a filmmaker? He wrote one movie 10 years ago that has 74 votes on this site. So, literally, a single-film maker, I suppose.

Anyway, it could've been an in-depth and intelligent look at the snuff film 'industry,' but ends up being just a bunch of people without real reason talking about gory movies, war, and serial killers. Interesting subjects turned boring by uninteresting speakers on them.

Oh, also, I don't think I could get more annoyed than I do when I hear someone say, "It is very unlikely that ever in the history of cinema was a person killed on a camera for the purpose of profit." Really? Unlikely? Of the billions of people in the world and the many million that could've afforded to pay someone to do that, you have to assume that at no point did some rich guy have a murder fetish and paid someone, say, $100,000 (or more) to film someone getting killed? The odds that that NEVER happened are extremely slim just by the fact that EVERYTHING is done. Rant over.

Final Verdict: 5/10. Simply for the gore scenes and occasional bit of info.

-AP3-
  • Shattered_Wake
  • 20. März 2009
  • Permalink
5/10

An inconsistent collection of anecdotes, as opposed to a serious study

  • Corpus_Vile
  • 20. Mai 2011
  • Permalink
4/10

Not a good documentary, but interesting

This really isn't a good documentary about the topic of "Snuff" but is mostly about movies in the open market that has some realistic looking killings on camera. It's interesting though, for the most part but a lot of it seems to be over done. And I did enjoy it talking about real snuff films around the world, particularly about the Russian crime ring tale even if some claim it to be fake and if it is, it's a interesting lie. But as a whole this really isn't a good documentary and you will not gain that much info about snuff but more about realistic killing in certain films that is in the open market like I said, and I do agree with a lot of what the other reviewers are saying, some of the stories in this does sound a bit fishy. Cause they mention a interesting topic they can really get into, but after mentioning it, they never really get into it. The main flaw with this documentary is how it goes way past it's point and not in a good way either, it should of just stuck with the main topic at hand instead of stretching it. So not a good documentary, but interesting to say the least.

4.6/10
  • KineticSeoul
  • 26. Mai 2010
  • Permalink
1/10

The distinct smell of FAKENESS

There is a really good documentary on the subject of snuff - and it's not this one. The good one, The Dark Side: Does Snuff Exist?, is not only better designed, but has a more sensible look at the subject, too. This one, on the other hand, feels like a bad attempt to shoot a "real horror movie" disguised as a documentary. The main selling point, the segment about seeing supposedly genuine snuff (hey, what do you know, a producer of a documentary on snuff just conveniently happened to have seen a real snuff tape! What an amazing coincidence!), felt like a badly acted lie. In fact, it sounded pretty much like a copy of a story that an Israeli journalist wrote about a few years ago, except of course that the Israeli claimed that he was the one who saw the tapes.

Then there's that Russian crime ring tale that makes up the other half of the documentary and that smells even fishier. If it was true, you'd think there'd be some more sources that wrote about it, other than one English tabloid and one Italian tabloid. In fact, it should be a worldwide sensation present in all media for months (remember Fritzl?), but there's not a word of it in any major newspaper ANYWHERE. Plus, those allegedly real Russians supposedly kidnapped and killed dozens, but they were released after a few years because of "overcrowding"? And then one of them goes and wins a pool contest? All it's missing is a UFO and a crop circle.

And it certainly doesn't help the documentary at all that most of the "experts" interviewed in it look and act like drugged, cackling maniacs. One of them makes Tom Cruise seem calm and collected.

What seemed like an interesting documentary turns out to be either utterly fabricated, or horribly (read: not at all) researched. Skip this and catch "The Dark Side" instead.
  • Croc-O-Dyle
  • 18. Sept. 2008
  • Permalink
7/10

Thought provoking at the very least

It has to be said from the get-go that this is no proper documentary as it's circumstantial and somewhat manipulative (maybe even insufficiently documented for all I know). But while the case studies it brings about certainly have this feeling of tabloid garbage fed to the masses by the teaspoonful, what it all boils down to at the end of it all is that it manages to raise the question of whether or not snuff cinematography is more than an urban myth (again). The answer it seems to convey is a definitive yes and, knowing human nature as I do, I tend to agree.

Sadly though there's just too much beating about the bush. Snuff and mainstream cinematography ('Cannibal Holocaust')? Snuff and war footage? You're missing the point here and stretching the concept way past the rupture point.

That said, if you happen to have a chance to watch this and can put up with its violent content, do not hesitate. And I mean really, really violent 'Saw'-has-nothing-on-this kind of content.
  • razvan_alexandru
  • 16. Dez. 2008
  • Permalink

pretty good documentary that looks at more than just snuff

A pretty good documentary. I had a few problems with it. I had trouble remembering who some of the interviewees were, as they are only captioned once. It's said The Skeptical Inquirer called King Kong vs. Godzilla and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre "snuff movies." Not true: the article says there were urban legends about these movies; that two endings of the former were shot, one with King Kong winning and the other with Godzilla winning, and that The Texas Chainsaw was really based on a true story. It also gives the impression Lake and Ng murdered their victims on camera: they did not. The case of Dmitri is discussed using a single article from The Observer, and the case sounds pretty fishy. Then, the longer of the two trailers included in the special features has Jennifer Bahe saying the filmmakers received a tape in the mail that appeared to be a snuff film, which they turned over to authorities. That sounds pretty fishy too: it's not mentioned in the documentary at all, it's not discussed further anywhere on the DVD. It sounds like something they made up to help sell their movie.

The commentary track is worth listening to, though it's not really a commentary on the movie, it's just further discussion of snuff. The filmmakers and some of the interviewees are gathered panel style. There are some microphone problems at one point.

Viewers of this film might like to check out The Dark Side of Porn: Does Snuff Exist? and J.T. Petty's S&MAN.
  • FieCrier
  • 13. Sept. 2008
  • Permalink
2/10

Cretinous 'documentary'

When someone describes 'Bowling for Columbine' as a snuff movie to 'all intents and purposes' you are dealing with something that grazes the top of a subject that deserves more honest and in depth inspection. Ironically, the same contributor sings the praises of the book 'Killing For Culture'. Start with Kerekes' book and see the worthlessness of this opinion piece.
  • TheInevitableHulk
  • 5. Juli 2020
  • Permalink
7/10

Good look at a taboo subject. Be warned the film will probably disturb you, if not in its discussion then in the images used

  • dbborroughs
  • 3. Sept. 2009
  • Permalink
3/10

yikes

rosen, who probably was in charge of coffee runs on several film sets, reads a news article and describes something that probably never happened.

they include a crime-scene photo of sharon tate and jay sebring. i can understand why- the whole myth of manson family movies.

video store clerks as experts and old A&E American justice footage doesn't make this a documentary.

it is an interesting movie though.

work harder next time.

also, when someone proclaims that hard that something really happened, it probably didn't happen.
  • markusmcilwraith
  • 20. Mai 2011
  • Permalink
7/10

I hate to break this to you...

...But to all of you doubters out there regarding the authenticity of the pedophile 'snuff' movies, it is hard to argue that the events didn't happen. A couple of reviewers even cite the articles as being referenced by an obscure source. The source is "The Observer". I don't know how to say this delicately but..."The Observer" is the UK's "New York Times". It is one of the most reputable sources in England. As for the reviewer that mentions crop circles...what are you talking about? Are you claiming that "The Observer" is printing the article as a matter of conspiracy? You do know that you can't just throw someone's name out there and associate him with a pedophile ring if it's not true right...? That would be libelous and would cost the newspaper hundreds of thousands of dollars if it was proved to be untrue. I know none of us want to admit that these types of horrific occurrences could happen in the world, but it's another thing to dismiss it entirely. I'm not saying that they do. And, I'm not saying that they don't.
  • mrpendola
  • 21. Jan. 2012
  • Permalink
1/10

This is not a documentary. It's just an excuse

This is not a documentary on snuff movies. It's just an excuse to show clips of killings both human and animals uncensored, all available separately on the Internet.

Presented are several "experts" which includes a video store clerk and others no more qualified. The people tell how they know snuff movies exists although they have never seen one themselves, don't know anyone that has seen one and have no evidence. They early on define a snuff film as a movie where there is a killing and the movie is for profit. Later on they try to fit other clips into the category even though they don't fit the definition.

They include film clips from fictional movies such as Cannibal Holocaust even though they admit the violence was all fake. Not sure what the point was other than to show those clips.

I won't spoil the details but there is a story from one so-called expert that they had seen a killing on film. But the story has a number of holes in it. Especially that they supposedly seen the killing and never reported it to law enforcement.

They show clips like the killings from the Iraq war from both sides of the conflict. Clips that have been all over the free Internet for years. Obviously they are not snuff movies as not for profit or sale. Why show these clips?

Just go watch Faces of Death (which they took a couple of scenes from) if you want to see people die from various means. Otherwise don't expect to learn anything at all from this movie.
  • Musicianmagic
  • 1. Juni 2025
  • Permalink
10/10

This is a fantastic film, and one of the best doc's I've ever seen!

  • guerillaentertainment
  • 20. Juli 2008
  • Permalink

In Depth Look at the Snuff Film Myth

Ever since Michael and Roberta Findlay made their low budget Manson family cash-in Slaughter, and producer extraordinaire Allan Shackleton breathed new life into it by tacking on the post-script death sequence and renaming it Snuff, the term has sparked controversy and debate wherever it appears. Whether it be over the top porn-lobbying feminists, reactionary journalists, or BBFC watchdogs, the (still unproven) phenomena known as the snuff film has been the trigger for many inflammatory headlines and public scandals over the past three decades and I'm sure will be for many to come.

Paul Von Stoetzel's documentary explores the history behind the snuff film myth and tries to discover if there's any reality behind it. Throughout the course of the film ex-FBI agents, policewomen, film producers, directors, cinephiles, and even an Iraqi war correspondent are interviewed and put forward their opinions on snuff films. Interwoven with the interviews are clips from many of the exploitation films that have at one time or another been considered "the real thing" and/or have snuff themes including; Snuff, Emanuelle in America, Flower of Flesh and Blood, Cannibal Holocaust, Faces of Death, Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer, etc.

The majority of the interviewees state that they consider a snuff film - i.e: the actual killing of a human being recorded on film for monetary or entertainment purposes - an urban legend. Although one subject, onetime Texas Chainsaw Massacre producer Mark L. Rosen relates a couple of emotional anecdotes that, depending on your point-of-view, are rather disturbing: the first is regarding the investigation of a Russian internet child pornography ring that supposedly produced made-to-order kiddie snuff porn in October, 2000. This was all over the internet when it happened and judging from the sensationalised anti-Semitic (they were Russian Jews) articles that are rather ambiguous about the facts, plus the reality that all but the leader of the group were released from prison due to overcrowding(?!), it sounds a little dubious to me but if it is indeed true then it must be the first documented case of an actual snuff film.

The second story is Rosen's account of how in the 70s when he was a porno distributor he was approached by some dudes from the Philippines who said they had an adult film they wondered if he'd be interested in, what he ends up witnessing is some authentic snuff-porn that traumatises him for life. Now, I gotta say I'm very sceptical about all this as there are plenty of stories floating around about people who've seen a "real" snuff film, but who am I to say if they're telling the truth or not? I mean sure, Rosen's story sounds realistic enough, but why didn't he contact the authorities immediately afterwards and have something done about this "horrific" snuff film? When it comes down to it, I think it's a lot to pin on one man's (melodramatic) words and I personally need more than that, like corroborated facts.

The second half of the film covers the misogynist serial killing duo of Leonard Lake and Charles Ng - the two men who built a torture chamber / snuff film studio in their remote Northern California ranch - and even shows some clips from their home videos which depict them verbally & sexually humiliating their victims for the camera. The duo did indeed kill women on film and this is probably the closest any footage has come to actual snuff film-making. The last segment focuses on the war in Iraq: specifically the Abu Ghraib prisoner torture case and the beheading / execution footage that is constantly leaking onto the internet. This section is intercut with many of the actual clips including the decapitation of US soldier Eugene Armstrong and scenes from Abu Ghraib.

All in all this is a competently put together doco that takes an in depth look at all the elements surrounding the snuff film myth and our societies ongoing obsession with death. It is obviously impossible to say whether snuff actually exists or not but Von Stoetzel presents all the possible situations, including one man's tearful testimony and leaves it up to you to decide.
  • Rapeman13
  • 13. Dez. 2008
  • Permalink

Mehr von diesem Titel

Mehr entdecken

Zuletzt angesehen

Bitte aktiviere Browser-Cookies, um diese Funktion nutzen zu können. Weitere Informationen
Hol dir die IMDb-App
Melde dich an für Zugriff auf mehr InhalteMelde dich an für Zugriff auf mehr Inhalte
Folge IMDb in den sozialen Netzwerken
Hol dir die IMDb-App
Für Android und iOS
Hol dir die IMDb-App
  • Hilfe
  • Inhaltsverzeichnis
  • IMDbPro
  • Box Office Mojo
  • IMDb-Daten lizenzieren
  • Pressezimmer
  • Werbung
  • Jobs
  • Allgemeine Geschäftsbedingungen
  • Datenschutzrichtlinie
  • Your Ads Privacy Choices
IMDb, ein Amazon-Unternehmen

© 1990-2025 by IMDb.com, Inc.