Face à la mort

Currently, I've never given a movie a 1 star rating before. I've given out a 3 star rating before to a movie but never a rating this low. This is mainly because even some of the worst movies I've ever seen had at least a few things good about them. But I have always wondered when I'll be able to find a movie that is so bad that regardless of how hard I try, I would not be able to find anything in it which is even somewhat good or entertaining.

I think that I've found one.

This awful disaster of a movie is distractingly violent, super offensive, and full of shock value. I can safely say that this is one of the worst movies ever made.

This documentary really has no plot. It's just a montage of people and animals dying gruesome and bloody deaths and the narrator also gives disturbing commentary detailing how they died.

The only point to this film is to shock and disturb the viewer. It's a hard movie to watch because the movie featured gruesome deaths just for the sake of it. There was not a single moment in this movie that contained any power and I didn't feel engaged at all throughout its entirety. I enjoyed Come and See because it had power with its massacre scenes and it had intelligent violence which stayed with me long after viewing it. Faces of Death on the other hand is nothing more than just 105 minutes of endless and tiring shock value.

Also, there is one thing that really infuriates me about this movie more than anything else. It is that the movie often plays goofy and uplifting music while it shows footage of people being brutally murdered (also, most of the deaths displayed here are in fact real). Most of those people died brutal deaths here and it downright disgusted me how the movie uses the goofy music to make them sound like some kind of a sick joke. However, the movie actually offended me in this case. It proves that the directors clearly don't care at all for any of the people or animals who brutally died in this movie. This clearly has some of the worst, unfitting music ever in cinema history.

I've actually seen some people give this movie a 5/5 rating. I've read many of the reviews by them but none of them have been able to justify this movie's flaws at all and none of them have been able to convince me that this movie isn't complete garbage yet. For the entirely of this one guy's review, he rambled on for how much of this movie was fake and how much it diminishes the movie's impact because of it. Yet, that idiot gave this movie a perfect rating. I have no idea know what those people see in this movie and I don't know why they think that this movie is a masterpiece. If you think that this is a masterpiece then go watch Come and See. Then tell me that this is a masterpiece.

So in conclusion, this is an awful movie. It's just a montage of shock value and the movie handles them very poorly by throwing in super unfitting music which I found to be highly offensive. There was not a single moment in this movie that even somewhat interested me and I was extremely glad after this movie ended. This is the worst documentary I've seen and this is also the worst movie I've ever seen as well.

Eh, what can you do with a film like this? I didn't like it, yet between seeing this or a Joel Schumacher "Batman" movie, I'd probably watch this. (I hate those Schumacher "Batman" movies.)

I saw this at the impressionable young age of 12. Admittedly, I was WAY too young to see this at the time, but even though I was still at the point where horror films still unnerved me, this film didn't phase me at all. Who knows? Maybe my BS sensor was pretty well-tuned to this one. From a logic standpoint, some of it is pretty laughable, and for a "serious" film, it's pretty darn cheerful at times in its depictions of dismemberment and death. So what is "real" in this film? Is any of it real? The thing that probably has the most validity are the animal deaths. While the acts may still make people squeamish, and as sick as it sounds, people are generally more able to (I hate using this word) accept an animal killing over a person. Ever live on a farm? Well, neither have I, but I know this kind of thing happens.

This is purely low-brow "art" at its most basic. It's disgusting, sophmoric, laughable and outright silly at times. The people who put these films together probably had a blast doing so, and probably enjoyed the fact that they would repulse people the world over with this little nugget. I didn't take "Faces of Death" seriously then, I don't take it seriously now. It's made for shock value, and that's what it achieves. Do I think this is a great film? No. Would I have this in my video collection? Probably not. But it is a curiosity piece, I'll give it that. I probably wouldn't watch one after eating dinner, either.

I first watched this film when I was twelve. I had nightmares for weeks. Nightmares about dying, of course. This film left such an indelible impression in my mind that eight years later, when presented with the option to purchase this movie, I jumped at the chance. After the second viewing I no longer was frightened by the film itself. The thing that scared me was the fact that I paid 15 bucks for it. I somehow felt guilty, disgusted with myself. But I watched the whole thing. No matter how bad I felt, I just kept on watching. Granted, just because you can't turn yourself away from what you're watching, doesn't always mean that what you're watching is quality entertainment. This, by no means, is quality entertainment. This is bottom of the barrel, no doubt about that. But it's still in my collection and it's hands-down, the most borrowed film out of my library.

The movie itself is horrible, but if you look at it from a marketing standpoint it's brilliant! "Faces of Death" is in all of our collective conscience. The infamous "monkey brain scene" has been talked about in this forum ad naseum. Most everyone has seen or at least heard about this movie. It WAS a right of passage from when I was a teenager. "Banned in 46 Countries" made me HAVE to see this as a 15 year old in the late seventies. Look how the country is transfixed by "reality television" of today. This was definitely a precursor. The makers of this movie were not concerned about how the movie looked artistically, they wanted to get your attention, they wanted, no, dared you to watch. I'm sure the people that made this are all retired now and living on private islands with all the money they've made off the FOD series. As well they should! The curiosity of people and the word-of-mouth strategy used worked perfectly for them all over the world (This was well before the internet world we live in today). Masters of marketing they all are. Movie makers today only wish they can get this sort of buzz and interest in a movie. And to all of you that say that the people who watch this are sick and depraved, you know what? They got you too! Your curiosity made you look and watch. That's what the makers of this film wanted all along and you took the bait. It is people's curiosity that got them watching, not their morales. BRILLIANT!

It's really ironic that of all the "shockumentaries" that have turned up on video in recent years the "Faces of Death" series has attracted the most attention (positive and negative), since so much of its "shocking" footage is blatantly phoney. Those with an interest in authentic death and atrocity footage would do better to check out the "Death Scenes" series (3 volumes), "Inhumanities 2" or the British documentary "Executions". (An editorial aside here, since I'm frequently asked why I watch such material: While I wouldn't say that such films are fun or enjoyable to watch, I make myself watch them occasionally to remind myself not to take the best things in life - or life itself, for that matter - for granted.)