I have to admit, this film reminded me of how drab and ugly styles were in 1980, yechh! From that opener, you can tell this film is pretty-dated, but it has a few charms that are worth exploring: namely, an outrageous-script by Margheriti and Dardano Sacchetti that would NEVER get green-lighted today by any studio. Yes, this is another one of Quentin Tarantino's favorites, and it isn't hard to see why. It's just an insane genre-explosion that owes a lot to the Italian "cannibal" genre, and a good-bite of George Romero's "Dawn of the Dead". You might add Jacopeti and Prosperi's "Mondo Documentaries" too, because I think they really opened this particular door. "Zombie" (the Italian title for DOTD) was a hit in Italy in 1979, thanks to the Argento's promotional-campaign and better-editing (I know, a sacrilege, but I have always preferred the Argento-cut, it's more fun!). With that came a wave of imitators, most-notably in Lucio Fulci's "Zombi (USA)/Zombie 2 (Italy & other " and "City of the Living Dead". The worst were the copies by Bruno Mattei, but that's another-story.<br /><br />1980: a drab, miserable year, but a time when the culture was still pretty active and vibrant. Corporate-domination of film and most other media hadn't been-consummated yet, so there were still genuine indie films, and it was a sad thing to watch all this die as a kid. This is really why horror wasn't that good in North America for some-time, and it's still trying to recover (a wait-and-see). The Vietnam war had only been over for five-years when Cannibal Apocalypse was released, so the wounds were still ripe. That's what makes this film so gutsy--pun-intended--and even depressing. At one-point during the production, star John Saxon was so-depressed by having signed-on to such a bleak movie that he contemplated-suicide. Now, how many films can say that? It just wasn't a good-time in America, though in-retrospect, life was better than it is today (2006), which should scare most young-people. <br /><br />There were more outlets for frustration and rage in 1980, and horror went-to-bat, since catharsis is one of its best-features. You have to release those fears and frustrations, and that's what horror is for many people. Horror is healthy people, we know this! Cannibal Apocalypse works-well in this area, so it has some very good-points to it. We should remember that this movie was made at a time when the draft still-existed. The draft is definitely coming-back, you can bet-on-it. Still not scared? John Saxon stars as Lt. Norman Hopper, who leads a rescue-party into a Vietcong camp to recapture some of his own troops. A battle-ensues, and a Vietcong-woman (where were the black-pajamas?!) is torched with a flamethrower, and falls into the pit she and her compatriots have been holding Hopper's men in. All this seems like a normal, low-budget war movie that was shot in Georgia, until...the starving-G.I.s begin EATING-HER. OK, C-rations and Halliburton's catering are pretty- bad, but Jesus Christ. Somehow--because the writers don't tell us how--the soldiers have become infected with a rabies-like virus that makes them cannibalistic. Cut-to 1980: one of Hopper's soldiers is released from a veteran's hospital, disrupting his already strained-life, and wreaking-havoc on American society (or at least Atlanta)! Hopper has already been fighting his cannibalistic-impulses (and winning), but the return of PFC Bukowski (done with charm by the legendary John Morghen) has brought-back flashbacks and memories of Vietnam he thought he'd forgotten. In an early-scene, Hopper bites a flirty neighborhood-girl, and he begins to succumb to the cannibalistic disease.<br /><br />And this is what is so great about Cannibal Apocalypse--it challenges your loyalties to the characters, and coaxes you into siding with a band of cannibals, led by none-other than JOHN SAXON!! For this reason, and the gore, I think this is why the film became so infamous and censored. Yet, these are the things that make is as good as it is! In many areas, it was censored of heavily-edited. Until the release of the 2002 DVD (Margheriti died in November of 2002), Americans have never seen this film in its entirety. Saxon has said he has never seen it, and I doubt he ever will. Who can blame him? Yet, he gives an incredible-performance as Norman Hopper, even one of his best in his entire-career outside of Enter the Dragon. Granted, it's just another in a long-line of exploitation films that Mr. Saxon acted in, but it's a great role that he did justice to. Of course, his own personal-misery didn't hurt either. But, Antonio Margheriti's (Castle of Blood, The Virgin of Nuremberg) direction is excellent, and he didn't have much to work-with here. Sacchetti's theme of a violent-cannibalism spreading by bites is a solid-move, however. It's very primal and hits the audience on a subconscious-level, even though it owes a debt to Romero. It isn't as-developed as it should have been, but this was another rush-production.<br /><br />So, as an anti-war film--not-so-good, the theme gets lost in the action and gore. But that's OK, it's a film that leaves people speechless, and that's what a decent horror-film is about, too. From "Cannibal Holocaust", to Dawn of the Dead, this is a hybrid-film that is unique to the time that made it. But, it is so audacious, so brazen, that it must be seen. It lags in the middle-section--pun-intended--but really picks-up towards the climax, and reminds us that movies about "the infected" are not new. I would even credit Cronenberg's "Rabid" (1977) as being first on this one, and a definite-influence on this film. There was something in the air then, and it seems to have returned. Call it war, chaos, genocide, social-unrest--but it's back. Best-move: just p*ss-on-it, you remember. No-wonder Morghen's character was named-after the American poet Charles Bukowski! If America is good at anything, it is slang.