Au pays de l'exorcisme

This is often credited as "the first cannibal horror film", although it has less to do with cannibalism than with Italian shockumentaries such as "Mondo Cane". Viewing it is an often repellent but altogether fascinating experience - one that you will not soon forget. Umberto Lenzi's direction, which is a curious mix of skill and amateurishness, combined with the location shooting, give it a documentary-like feel that compensates for the thin and sloppily set-up plot. (***)

This, Umberto Lenzi´s first cannibal movie, is by far the best of the three he made. Not as gory as Eaten Alive or Cannibal Ferox (well, is any movie really as gory?), but with a better plot and acting. Ivan Rassimov, who is awful in Eaten Alive, is really not bad in this one. Actually, cannibals are really not that important to the plot. This appears to be more of a "Man called Horse" rip-off, Rassimov is captured by some tribe somewhere in Asia and has to go through some harrowing tests to be accepted, later he encounters some cannibals. I don´t recall seeing a better directed Lenzi film, although if you´ve seen a few of his films you´ll know this ain´t no masterpiece. I read in an interview that this is his favorite of the three cannibal flicks he made. Unfortunately there is a bit much real life animal cruelty, which will upset some. Nice score, though.

This is a earlier film directed by Umberto Lenzi in 1972. This is also considered to be the first of a series of many cannibal films. Although, this film dosen't necessarily focus on the cannibalism but more on character development and story.

Basically, a man goes into the amazon and is captured by a vicious tribe. It isn't until he kills one of their own that he is excepted into the tribe.

I just saw this movie and I thought it was a decent film. Nothing to spectacular but enjoyable nonetheless. The main problems with this film is it tends to drag at many points and the gore is very limited. Another problem with this film is (just like almost all other cannibal films) the fact that they have real animals being slaughtered. Just like in my review of Cannibal Holocaust and Cannibal Ferox, I just don't understand the use in killing animals on the screen for shock value.

Altogether, this isn't a bad film but nowhere near as good as some of Lenzi's later work. 6/10 stars

Deep River Savages represents Umberto Lenzi's first steps in the notorious field of cannibalism and jungle adventure movies. This infamous director will gross out entire audiences during the early 80's, with vicious cult flicks like `Cannibal Ferox'; `Eaten Alive by the Cannibals' and `Nightmare City'. This film is more like a pioneer and Lenzi carefully explores the primitive jungle communities and their traditional rites. Deep River Savages isn't half as gross as the title and DVD-cover leads you to believe and it basically is a social portrait mixed with an authentic love-story! …Believe it or not! Actually…the best way to describe this film is: Dances with Wolves…with cannibals! The plots of both movies are pretty much alike, the only differences are the setting and the fact Kevin Costner's film is praised all over the world while nobody has ever heard of Deep River Savages. John – an Englishman – is traveling across Eastern Asia when he gets mixed up in a bar-fight. He accidentally kills a man and flees on one of the many unknown rivers. He ends up as a prisoner in primitive tribe, somewhere deep in the jungle. The aboriginals actually form a rather joyful community! They spend their days watching animal-fights (roosters and snakes versus martens) and swimming naked. Our ‘civilized' friend is tortured at first and he attempts to escape. But, pretty soon he falls in love with the local beauty (Me Me Lai – who looks even better here than she did in Deodato's Jungle Holocaust) and marries her. John feels at home there now and he even helps the tribe in fighting the sadistic enemy-tribe from the across the river.

The film contains very few action sequences and is overall pretty boring. I don't blame Lenzi for this, though. Even though I prefer his later splatter films, you have to keep in mind this movie was made in 1972! Deep River Savages also looks very cheap, amateurish and the cinematography isn't anywhere near as stunning as in other cannibal films. The whole movie depends on Me Me Lai's beautiful naked body and the short (but action-packed) climax. Nonetheless, it stays recommended to Italian horror-admirers who're interested in the roots of `Savage Cinema'.

Though this made it onto the Video Nasties list when it was released and classified as a horror film I must admit to finding little horror in it at all. It is more of a drama, with gore, about a photographer in the Thailand jungle who is captured and subsequently brought into the tribe where he has to marry the chief's daughter to stay alive.

It also isn't a bad movie...

The major trouble with the film is that it's all staged, which means the scene's of animal cruelty are real. With other films of this ilk, most of the cruelty scene's were filmed by a third party for documentary reasons, though added to the movies for entertainment; you can usually notice the difference in film quality. So the cockfight and the snake vs mongoose are real, though I'm unsure at to the decapitation of the monkey skull so they eat the brains, as there is a cut which may indicate they changed out for special effects - one can always hope.

However, at the heart of the film is the change in John Bradley's (Ivan Rassimov) character from being a captive to a reluctant member of the tribe to a fully fledged tribe member, thrown into the mix is the love story between himself and Maraya (Me Me Lai).

It's not a fantastic film though Umberto Lenzi directs nicely, though I think the steady pace is a little too slow at times. It is beautifully filmed and I like that Lenzi filmed it in vivid colour and resisted making it more grimy and gritty. However, this beauty has a downside some of the sets are too clean and structured, not what you would expect to find in the middle of a jungle. The actors aren't too bad either and do a respectful job of bringing the tribe to life and showing their traditions and day to day living habits.

I really wouldn't recommend anybody to watch the film as it falls between the gaps trying to please everybody. For example, for an adventure, it's too slow so if you like adventure films you may not like this. The love story, which is more suited to this pace, at times could have made a decent "chick-flick" in its own right, though I don't think lovers of this style of film would enjoy the torture and cruelty aspects of the adventure.