Quote:
Originally posted by 42ndStreetFreak
Well in fact it was "Flowers of Flesh and Blood"..not "Cannibal Holocaust".
And to anyone but an idiot that (even though it is made to look simply like one person killing another) is also false due to the fact mutilations are shown from different angles with no camera in shot.
Thus meaning the gore is false or that the woman has the power to re-grow limbs.
Oh...and the fact that the victim went on to make other films of course.
rather like the man who some specimens think had his dick cut off!
But as this Thread proves...idiots come in all shapes, sizes, ages and from many backgrounds!
|
I wish I noticed all this shit before this jackass got banned. What a tool!
Hey douchebag! The film kills live animals and has footage of real executions. It's not absurd to wonder if other parts of it went too far too. They were filming in the middle of the jungle with a bunch of savages in the mid 70s. How hard would it be to cut off one of their dicks and get away with it?
They weren't "actors", they were jungle people. And if you can tell me the name of the "actor" that got his dick cut off and 1 other movie he's been in, I'll send you a fuckin' check in the mail right now because you're full of shit.
In fact, I've got money that says you probably haven't even seen this film and are just preaching from you high horse because a film with 'such major distribution' :rolleyes: couldn't possibly kill a savage in the middle of the jungle. Well, why not? They killed plenty of animals and that isn't exactly a socially acceptable thing to put to film, but they did it anyways. That's why it's called an exploitation film. People got exploited.
If you had actually seen this, you wouldnt be ranting like this because you'd probably be wondering the same things that shanks and I were.
Like urge said, Faces of Death is more mainstream than this and that is loaded with footage of people getting killed.
Jackass. :rolleyes:
That's what I woulda said to him if he wasn't banned already.