2/10
SEX...
12 December 2004
Warning: Spoilers
now that I got your attention, lemme make an awful movie with "sex" (or equivalent in a foreign language) in the title in the hopes that will entice more people to see it! And to make matters even worse, let's not even put ANY sex in the film whatsoever.

Contrary to Franco's title, "Sexo cannibal", there is absolutely no sex in this film - only 2-3 topless women. (So those of you waiting for the booty romp, you can try elsewhere.) This film is The Worst Cannibal Film that I have seen out of Deodato's "Cannibal Holocaust" (1980) and Lenzi's "Cannibal Ferox" (1981) in that there is no social commentary, none of the characters go through any change, and it's just pointless.

*** MINOR SPOILERS *** What I find HILARIOUS is how the explorer who goes back into the jungles in search of his daughter who has been "adopted" by a tribe of cannibals hasn't aged a single day. Yet his daughter looks to be about 10 years older than the last time they saw each other! I would think that if your daughter is kidnapped, you'd want to look for her ASAP...and not wait an entire decade.

Another incredulous point is how little attention was paid to the casting of the cannibalistic tribe. Sure, they're extras, but c'mon it shouldn't be THAT difficult to find native-looking people, is it?? The extras that were cast were pure honkey. Plus, their tribal face make-up looked more like that of a clown. Totally BOGUS!

Other than to listen to the usual cool, swanky music that accompanies Franco's films, there isn't a reason to watch this "Sexo cannibal". It's simple a tossaway, wannabe exploitation that doesn't bother to exploit anything. Instead, I would recommend either Deodato or Lenzi as they at least provide crucial, intelligent, social commentary.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed