The problem is however that I think there's a lot of filler in the lead-up to the group being caught by the tribe.
The film criticizes those who use activism as a PR stunt and how sometimes the good guys and the bad guys are more in-tune than they would like for people to know. They'll remember the cannibalistic tribe and the fairly horrifying way that they disposed of their first victim/meal. Of course, that's not something that the majority of people will remember, or eve completely get, from this movie. The film is fairly meta in the way that it uses its narrative as activism. I'm not saying the film isn't without its flaws, but it also, at the very least, attempts to use this approach in order to shine a light on a much bigger issue. And this is something Roth explained this when the film faced some criticism due to its portrayal as indigenous people as savages. Honestly that, in reality, is the bigger issue. I don't think it's nearly as bad as No Escape, in that at least this film depicts the struggle against the tribe and those that are trying to kill them off in order to exploit the land they live on and its resources. The film, however, much like No Escape, is really retrograde in its approach to how it chooses to portray the indigenous tribe that serve as the main antagonists of the film. This, really, is Cannibal Holocaust for the modern era. Shyamalan has made a better horror movie than Eli Roth and there's nothing wrong with that. But alas today is the day where the impossible is possible. Night Shyamalan, in 2015, would've made a better horror movie than Eli Roth. Never once, in a million years, would I have ever said that M.
0 kommentar(er)
