DOCTOR BUTCHER M.D. (aka ZOMBIE HOLOCAUST) -- Blu-ray Review by Porfle

 Originally posted on 7/17/16

 

I really scored this week, getting to see two notorious exploitation titles from the 80s that I hadn't seen before.  Well, not quite, since they're both pretty much the same movie. 

Thanks to Severin Films, both are now available in a 2-disc Blu-ray set under the title DOCTOR BUTCHER M.D. (1980), which includes that noteworthy "video nasty" along with its predecessor, ZOMBIE HOLOCAUST. 

The initial film, an Italian gorefest directed by Marino Girolami (father of Enzo G. Castellari of "Inglorious Bastards" fame) and featuring both loinclothed zombies and ravenous cannibals on a tropical island, was then purchased by ballyhoo master Terry Levene and somewhat "Americanized" for the 42nd Street crowd. 

In addition to some general editing for time and a different score, the main changes consist of the new name (from "Zombie Holocaust" to "Dr. Butcher, M.D.") and an entirely new prologue and main titles sequence with footage taken from an unfinished anthology film called "Tales That Will Tear Your Heart Out" and starring its producer Roy Frumkes as a zombie whose presence is totally unrelated to the original storyline.

What the two versions have in common is the story of a New York hospital plagued by a rash of weird cadaver mutilations that stymie Dr. Peter Chandler (Ian McCulloch) and Lori Ridgeway, a hospital staff member who's also an anthropologist (Alexandra Delli Colli, renamed "Alexandra Cole" for the altered version). 

After catching the culprit actually eating the heart of one of the cadavers and then jumping to his death to avoid capture, Peter and Lori organize an expedition to the man's native island in the West Indies where it is said that primitive tribes still engage in cannibalism.

With Peter's assistant George (Peter O'Neal) and an annoying photo-journalist named Susan (Sherry Buchanan) in tow, they meet up with Dr. Obrero (Donald O'Brien) in his island research retreat and head out for the dreaded Kito Island.  Soon after arriving, their party is attacked by bloodthirsty cannibals who dismember and devour anyone they can lay their hands on. 

Thus, after a prolonged stretch of exposition and build-up, the stage is set for an almost non-stop parade of some of the most grisly and disgusting gore effects that a low budget and ample imagination can provide.  They range from obviously fake-looking to near Tom Savini-quality gore, and even the less convincing stuff displays a sort of giddy showmanship. 

(The main FX fail, in fact, is when a dummy thrown from the hospital roof loses an arm upon hitting the ground, whereupon in the next shot the victim's arm is intact.)

Entrails are strewn, eyeballs plucked out, scalps lifted--and that's before the zombies show up.  It turns out the living dead are the result of Dr. Butcher's mad experiments in his island laboratory, which he soon stocks with the survivors of the expedition in order to include them as additional unwilling subjects in what resembles an even more horrific variation of "The Island of Dr. Moreau."

This guy's a real sadistic bastard, which means that we're in for some more grotesque makeup FX which must've delighted gorehounds over the years while giving anti-"video nasties" crusader Mary Whitehouse and her ilk heart seizures.  The exposed brain effect with its pop-top skull foreshadows a very similar, and much more expensive, one in Ridley Scott's HANNIBAL.

Marino Girolami's direction is serviceable as are the modest production values--the film has the same basic look as other Italian cannibal and zombie pictures of the era by directors such as Lucio Fulci and Ruggero Deodato, as well as later ones by Bruno Mattei (ZOMBIES: THE BEGINNING, IN THE LAND OF THE CANNIBALS, MONDO CANNIBAL).  The dubbing is often amusingly bad, yielding (as expected) some lines of dialogue that are real corkers. 

The acting isn't always top-notch either, but the cast give it their all.  Alexandra Delli Colli shows off her nude body a few times to stunning effect, especially in her big human-sacrifice scene during the film's climax.

The 2-disc Blu-ray from Severin Films is a treasure trove of extras.  The keepcase itself features a reversible cover insert and a barf bag.

Disc one contains the feature film DOCTOR BUTCHER M.D. plus the following extras:

"Butchery and Ballyhoo": an interview with Terry Levene
"Down on the Deuce": Roy Frumkes and Chris ("Temple of Schlock") Poggiali's nostalgia tour of 42nd Street's grindhouse theaters
Roy Frumkes' unfinished segment from "Tales That Will Tear Your Heart Out"
"The Butcher Mobile": an interview with "Gore Gazette" publisher Rick Sullivan
"Calling Dr. Butcher": an interview with editor Jim Markovic
"Experiments With a Male Caucasian Brain": an illustrated essay by Gary Hertz
Theatrical and Video trailers

Disc two contains the feature film ZOMBIE HOLOCAUST and these extras:

"Voodoo Man": an interview with star Ian McCulloch
"Blood of the Zombies": an interview with FX master Rosario Prestopino
"Neurosurgery Italian Style": an interview with FX artist Maurizio Trani
Filmmaker Enzo G. Castellari Remembers His Father/Director Marino Girolami
Interview with Actress Sherry Buchanan
"New York Locations Then vs. Now"
Ian McCulloch sings his hit "Down By the River"
Theatrical trailers

The films are anamorphic widescreen with English 2.0 sound.  No subtitles.  "Zombie Holocaust" can also be viewed with its original Italian soundtrack.  Picture quality is a bit rough at times due to the source material but the films probably look as good here as they're ever going to look.

All in all, DR. BUTCHER M.D. is a gorehound's delight, with its slower first half giving way to a veritable charnel house of hokey horror later on.  Which might truly horrify if it were meant to be taken at all seriously, instead of being such total dumb fun that your main reaction to its ample atrocities may be simply to laugh yourself sick.

Release date: July 26, 2016

DOCTOR BUTCHER M.D. (aka ZOMBIE HOLOCAUST) -- Blu-ray Review by Porfle

Some Thoughts on Cannibal Holocaust

I was just thinking about Cannibal Holocaust recently and some of the thoughts I felt about the movie. In lieu of doing a standard review I decided to list my general observations and thoughts on the film. Feel free to comment on any of these points.

1. I think the structuring of the story is just genius. I always expected it to turn into one giant flashback, instead it the viewing room scene was one where the audience is always aware they are in the viewing room and not just dissolved into a flashback. I really kept expecting it to just default to some sort of flashback structure. Deodato was smart in avoiding this easy pitfall, instead the audience becomes another viewing room member with the other characters. It does not feel detached, because we do not become detached from the footage. I just feel the way the entire story and narrative is arranged is quite clever and if it was in a more linear method or used obvious flashback methods (dissolves to, instead of viewing the raw footage) the movie would have not been nearly as good. The care and skill in the structuring of the narrative raises it beyond the simple cannibal movie.
2. Robert Kerman is excellent, he really represents the audience as a sort of moral authority looking in, while not becoming too pandering. He is a decent person, not someone party to the actions, the type of person we would hope to be in this type of situation. He is almost like an avatar for the audience. It's funny Kerman in real life in reference to the movie has become somewhat like his character. I think the debate between him and the interview on the Grindhouse DVD release extras about not including the animal killings, is extremely interesting, a little uncomfortable, but at the same time well argued and similar to his character in the movie. I just felt that Kerman gave a great performance in the film and deserves a lot of praise, for bringing humanity to a movie with almost anything but humanity.
3. In regard to the animal killings, I didn't have so much as a disturbed view as much as an annoyed/pissed off view, with a "Deadato come on what the fuck" approach. I still hold the view that Dedato could have used special effects and was just lazy, with the mondo genre as a way to justify and excuse his laziness, it's no different from the attitude that John Landis had on The Twilight Zone shoot. I mean look what Fulci did earlier in Lizard in a Women's skin. I think it's a shame that the footage was done, because it really detracts so much from the other qualities the movie has and would still have if it was done during special effects. Still, I wouldn't watch it cut, at least not the first time and even after that, the animals are long dead and in a sense its no different than the turtle episode of Iron Chef (which interestingly my wife was never bothered by, but her friend at the time who had a pet turtle was understandably horrified with). It's wrong and cruel and something Deodato should feel like a piece of shit for doing and if made today prosecuted for it. I wouldn't hold it against someone who didn't want to see it. It's not fun stuff to watch, even more so because Deodato didn't have to do it.
4. The final death reel of the crew did not bother me that much. It may sound strange, but we have seen tons of footage of them committing atrocities prior to this that seem like something the Nazi's would do. It may come from watching too much kung fu or Cheng Cheh, but I felt they got a sense of justified vengeance for the horrors they committed (granted rape is not something I'm saying was right or approve of), they brought their own actions upon themselves. I did not find it harrowing, but more of a "die your motherfuckers" approach (once again discounting the rape aspect). I mean I never hear anyone express sympathies for Rhoades in Day of the Dead and he hardly did anything to rival the camera crew.
5. At the same time you don't exactly fall in love with the cannibals, I mean raping a women for adultery with a sharp object is just fucking wrong. You can say cultural relativism all you want, but I'm not buying it, even if they are supposed to be detached from the modern world. Now it is interesting that when the camera crew goes Entzapgruppen, that you never notice any of the villagers doing anything wrong and they also look extremely docile and just terrified. It divorces them from the earlier footage we have seen. In fact and I feel sort of wrong making this comparison, but I can't help thinking that Deodato was drawing thoughts of vengeance that he felt may have been believed after the liberation of concentration camps, both by the Allies and Nazi victims. There are certainly examples of it occurring (though no rape or obviously cannibalism), and it's hard to blame those people. There is just something about the imprisoned and degraded prisoners taking revenge. It's not something limited to the Holocaust, but Deodato is no idiot and certainly not a person without a sense of history. I mean if you think of it on the surface besides the scene with the burning of the tribesmen, the title makes absolutely no sense, may be it means more, but that's more of a hunch than anything I have facts to prove. I know Deodato has gone on record it was more of a look at the media gone wild, but I don't think that excludes anything else from being read from the movie, even if it was made as simply commercial cinema.
6. The movie is wonderfully shot and scored. The contrast of the opening theme, which sounds more at home with of Riz Orlanti's western scores contrasted to the track "Adulteress' Punishment", which is a mixture of an adagio and pervading feeling of electronic dehumanization and death, helps to add to the further contradiction that is Cannibal Holocaust. The cinematography and it's quality should not be surprising considering Deodato's training and the people who he worked with when coming up in the Italian film industry. I think part of the skill is that the movie doesn't suffer from the problem of having something stick out to us as the audience as "oh its fake and they're trying to make us think It's real" which is insulting when its done crappily, say with Imovie adding grain or scratches. You can still think its fake, but if you're not being insulted by it, then you won't mind it. It's why I hate fake news stations, countries, or leaders in movies that are supposed to be realistic, and at the same time reek of fakeness (that is not to infer it is impossible or always wrong to do), it just removes me from the movie, the use of lots of NYC location shooting helped a lot too.
7. One thing to keep in mind is that I saw this with the benefit of knowing it's not real, which a lot of people at the time legitimately had no clue if parts of it were real or such. I've talked to a person who saw it during its initial release and said that's one of the important things to remember if you saw it later on.
8. The movie is in my opinion excellent and one all should see (even if you choose to watch the cruelty free cut), it is more than a simple Cannibal film, it is beautiful, yet disgusting, grindhouse, yet made with skill, it's offensive, yet moral, it's full of damn contradictions, but is still incredible and one people should see at some point.

Some Thoughts on Cannibal Holocaust