Des filles cannibales

I saw this movie on it's original release at the Ypsi-Ann drive-in theater, now long gone, replaced by a strip mall on Washtenaw Avenue in the vacuous semi-urban wasteland betwixt Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti Michigan.

When I saw the title on the marquee cruising by in my rusted black '56 Buick Super I just knew we had to see it and WE HAD TO SEE IT STONED.

I wasn't disappointed - except I thought there would be more gory sex... of course I don't remember much, and it's no wonder, given the steamy windows and righteous clouds of smoke and gropes and throbs of randy teens in crowded car. I do remember thinking it was made by hippie freaks, just like us. This was before VCRs and DVDs and once it was gone you figured it was gone forever - no way this could make it back to broadcast TV, even on the late-late show. And to think technology exists to drag this out of it's crypt to yank our psychic triggers...

It's not big budget, it's goofy - but I liked it. A lot of great horror movies (and I use the term "horror" loosely with this film) were low budget, starred nobodies, and shot with a sort of your-hometown look.

Cannibal Girls holds a bit of a Manson feel, as it was the buzz of the time. It was shot in rural parts of Toronto, areas which no not exist as rural any more. And it holds two big Canadian actors, who were nobody at the time - but do a great job of what they would become known for a few years later, great character actors. This is what makes it an alright film, but you have got to drop your standards of horror movies a bit to see this.

The story has a bit of an urban legend idea to it I suppose. The movie also contains something I think any true horror movie buff would think about when entering upon an odd out-of-the-way situation - don't you sometimes wonder if that hamburger, with the funky taste, you are eating at the diner in Tuckedawaytown, pop. 35, is really cow? When the film was first shown, it supposedly had a warning bell to let the "squeamish" know of impending grossness. Seeing it the first time 16 years after its original release, I didn't see any reason for bells' and whistles. I'm sure some people would have wanted that bell more with films like Zombie. However, I still wonder if cannibal girl #2 was eating a man sausage, or a MAN sausage.

Hey man, loosen up, Cannibal Girls is a cheap pseudohorror mouthful any horror buff should sample once.

Guess Charles Manson and his "cult" inspired the movie. What you get is some "reverend" and his cult craving for some blood and flesh, all shot in nice B-movie trash style of the 70s. The story: a young couple (like two years later Brand and Janet in Rocky Horror Picture Show) get in trouble with a lunatic master and his adepts.

What we get are a few "gore" (tame for today's hardened eyes and souls) effects here and there and some beautiful nude 70s ladies who could all be hired from some Boney M or ABBA performance dance group, and some poor guys and gals getting themselves killed and served for food.

Tasty for the lover of bad taste. Everyone else - avoid.

There is an explanation to the disjointed and jumbled storyline. From what I read, the movie was originally made in 1971 as a cheap quickie by producers Reitman and Goldberg, largely depending on improvisation. On seeing the completed footage, they felt that they could get a good distribution deal if they made some alterations... which took about two years to complete!

So it's no wonder that with all this make-it-up-as-we-go-along for two years that the finished product makes little sense - and moves awfully slow as it tries to figure out what to do with itself. It seems to have been intended as a horror comedy, but it doesn't work as such. The comedy, apart from a couple of moments that induce small smirks, is not only bad in itself, it's delivered with almost no energy. Levy and Martin show nothing of the zaniness they brought out later in their careers.

The horror moments are marginally better; the crudeness of the production does give a few of these moments an effective grittiness. There are some other moments that could have also worked had they not been spoiled by some terrible acting (voice and posing) by the actors.

I suspect you might have guessed already that this is a bad movie, considering how the movie has never received a video release or is readily available on cable or TV (at least in the U.S.) despite its association with Levy, Martin, and Reitman. Don't expect a DVD release of it any time soon - even MGM (which now owns the A.I.P. catalog) isn't *that* desperate!

This is a good example of the glory days of the drive-ins and the grindhouses. Everything you wanted in those days was included. Beautiful women and nudity and blood. For those days...If you watch it now it is a funny piece to see. Just look at the clothes, mini shorts, f*** me boots in glorious white up to the knees, smoking in bed, hairstyles you can't imagine. It is even stranger that this flick never had a proper release just until a few months ago. A lot of people did search for a copy because there was something funny about it and luckily on the official DVD you can find it also, the "warning bell". each time that there is a killing you will be warned by some kind of horn of an old car. Once the so-called gore is over, you will here a bell, warning you that you ca open your eyes again. sadly, it never becomes gory, you never see the axe going into the flesh. You do see the red stuff flowing as a result. There is also a bit too much of blah blah. But overall, it's a funny piece to watch. Some of the actors still are in the business others just left it after this flick. But it is also worth watching for the fans of the director Ivan Reitman. He became a famous producer in the seventies of horror (Shivers, Death Weekend, Ilsa,...) and of blockbusters like the Ghostbusters trilogy. I guess the fans will be delighted with it's proper release.