The Green Inferno

1988 "The thirst for adventure!"
3.9| 1h30m| NA| en| More Info
Released: 01 May 1988 Released
Producted By: Reteitalia
Country:
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Info

Four friends head into the jungle to locate a lost professor but instead face off against treasure hunters who are torturing and killing natives.

Genre

Adventure, Comedy

Watch Online

The Green Inferno (1988) is currently not available on any services.

Director

Antonio Climati

Production Companies

Reteitalia

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime.
Watch Now
The Green Inferno Videos and Images
View All

The Green Inferno Audience Reviews

VeteranLight I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.
Spidersecu Don't Believe the Hype
Invaderbank The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.
Sarita Rafferty There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.
Stevieboy666 Adventure set in the Amazon, a small band of people go looking for a missing professor but encounter all manner of dangers. I saw this under the title Cannibal Holocaust 2, which is a total con. For a start there is NO cannibalism in this weak movie. Obviously the distributors retitled it from it's original titles, Natura Contro or The Green Inferno, to sell it on the back of Ruggero Deodato's original nightmare classic. This trash plays out like a comedy, only it's dumb, not funny in the slightest. The English version is badly dubbed but I'm sure even in Italian the acting would still be awful. Add to that some annoyingly bad 80's music, ridiculous script and terrible continuity this film really is best avoided. Monkey lovers may be best advised to give it a wide berth too, there's a fair bit of animal cruelty, though nowhere near as much as previous Italian entries.
Helltopay27 I didn't come into this movie with high expectations. I knew it was essentially a spoof of the cannibal genre, I knew there was no actual cannibalism, and I knew that the violence and action was incredibly low. Upon watching it, I realized that those missing elements were the only things that could have saved it. I couldn't believe what I was watching. I was more than disappointed; I was dumbfounded. Antonio Climati, a man notorious for Mondo cinema, which has some of the most disturbing and violent images ever put to celluloid, makes a movie that some high school kids could make. There's hardly any worthwhile action in this movie. It's not toned down; it's non-existent. I've seen more from a PG movie, let alone from the cannibal genre. Not to revel in the violence, but that's what you expect from these movies, and it at least makes for an entertaining movie experience. This, however, leaves you watching a movie with people rowing down the river, laughing, in no real danger (for the most part), strutting in Amazonia with the most clichéd plot and events. Even worse, Climati seems to be attacking Deodato, the same way Deodato attacked him with Cannibal Holocaust, by insulting him for his treatment of animals! That would make more sense if he wasn't a Mondo man! The whole ordeal opens with Jemma getting Pete, Mark, and Fred to come down to the Amazon, because she has a good hunch that some Professor Korenz, who was believed dead, is still alive. They come down to this small town looking for a guide. When he refuses, they go on the search for gas instead. This is where Climati starts his awkward, "animals are our friends" stance. When Pete resuscitates a monkey for a monkey trapper, the trapper decides to give them gas if they get him monkeys. Pretty dumb, but I've seen worse in better movies. Well, once they catch some monkeys, the natives get ticked and decide to "torture" them by making them pretend like they're monkeys and see how it feels. So they offer the natives a tape recorder if they let them go (Cannibal Holocaust, anyone?). When they finally reach this native village they're looking for, they find that gold hunters have been through and tortured the natives for information about the Imas tribe and their treasure. Of course, they must put a stop to this. On the way, they meet a horny river fisherman and child smugglers until they finally face off against the treasure hunters when they find the professor and his tribe. They leave the jungle feeling proud, like they found really themselves in the whole adventure. How incredibly corny can you get?!I'm not going to analyze the faulty animal rights and cannibal genre morality, as it's so self-evident that there's no more discussion needed. That said, if you come into this movie with any expectations at all, you're going to be horribly disappointed, because there is so little substance to this film. As already mentioned, the plot is very cliché, and it's easy to figure out the main characters make it through. What isn't cliché is the array of completely random and confusing events that show up throughout. Instead of sticking with the actual story, you get lost in unnecessary and extremely boring side plots of different struggles and sequences cropping up, and by the time it gets back on track, the movie's almost over! They seem to be looking for this professor, but all the while they encounter child smugglers, gold hunters, and other bad-boys ruining the natives' way of life. These random events makes there very little action at all, because every ten minutes there's something new to focus on. There's no time to gain any interest. As a result, it's a very boring movie experience. A corny one, too, as it has the same set up of an inspiring children's movie. Being the "good-guys," our group has to take a moral stand to stop the "bad-guys," following nothing but their conscience. They're personality consists of everything right, and whatever could be misconstrued as bad they completely avoid. It makes them the stereotypical, happy, and extremely annoying do-gooders just because they have to be (and they're all best friends, how nice). There's no character development or any attempt at twists or turns, and it leaves a very bland aftertaste.Even if Climati was trying to take a jab at Deodato and his genre, he could have still done it by making a better movie. Besides, he'd be attacking Deodato by using the same tactics Deodato was condemning! This anti-animal cruelty act would make a lot more sense if he didn't make Mondo films that the highlight of the movies was animal violence. The only way this could insult Deodato is by associating his film with it by naming it Cannibal Holocaust II. Maybe that was the point: he was trying to make the cannibal films look so damn bad that it would destroy the genre, like Deodato was able to annihilate Climati's Mondo world with Cannibal Holocaust. In fact, this wrecks any adventure movie by forcing them to share a genre with it. Besides the technical problems in morality, the movie itself is awful, as there are no noteworthy aspects what-so-ever, and the plot couldn't get any sappier or cornier. What's most disappointing is that it's very obvious that this movie has great potential. New decisions, such as better actors and different events were needed to pull it off. You'll be bored to tears (and frustrated as hell) with Cannibal Holocaust II, so only see it if you're a cannibal completionist (though this isn't a cannibal movie, per-se) or are incredibly curious beyond belief.
dung_rat Anything usually associated Deodato's original Cannibal Holocaust will conjure up images of severe violence, real animal cruelty, and pure visceral shock.When Cannibal Holocaust 2 reached the shops here in the UK (released by the 'weak' VIPCO label) it seemed like a rather intriguing title. Having only been cut by a few seconds (according to the BBFC) I was expecting something rather extreme, to say the least.This film is simply incomparable with Deodato's. Again, no cannibalism is shown whatsoever and what exists is, to quote my title, extremely diluted. The acting and (alarmingly) bad dubbing makes this film seem emphatically laughable. There is nothing worth analysing here and the only reason to review this film is to shame it. A hyperbolic blood-bath would have done the trick more than this!Protagonists driving around in 'monster' trucks...stealing amphibious aircraft...playing trumpets while canoeing down the amazon...sound terrible so far? The problem is, it continues to get worse by the minute. Anyone expecting a crescendo of violence at the film's 'climax' is going to be very disappointed. It makes you question why this film was given an '18' certificate. Blow-darting monkeys...fish swimming up natives rectums...getting worse...and the cherry on top: a vomit inducing 'happy ending' whereby all characters seem to find some form of happiness after parading around the jungle like a prize set of ignorant s**ts! If only I could have returned this and got my money back. It is fair that this sub-genre of film is a marginal one but this is, without a doubt, absolute garbage.
Moshing Hoods Antonio Climati is a man who will be remembered for one thing and one thing only: spectacularly contentious mondo films. During the 70s and early 80s, Climati produced a handful of some of the most unpleasant movies ever committed to celluloid, all in the name of "documentary". It was his 1976 film THIS VIOLENT WORLD that directly inspired some of the scenes in Deodato's exploitation classic CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST, a film which dealt a critical blow to the mondo genre. With the similarities between mondo and the violent jungle travelogue approach of the classic cannibal movie, it seems only fitting that Climati would finally try his hand at it too. Ironically, his film has clearly been strongly influenced by CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST, right down to the title...Cannibal movie fans will immediately recognise the plot devices used in THE GREEN INFERNO from Deodato and Lenzi's past frolics in the jungle. However, it had one main difference- it was made ten years after the "golden era" of the genre. This is greatly reflected in the violence of the movie, which is enormously toned down. Whilst the "westerners captured by natives" plot remains perfectly in line with the most generic cannibal movie, there is no actual cannibalism in the picture and gore is kept to an absolute minimum. Similar to Deodato's CUT AND RUN, THE GREEN INFERNO treads the boards of a cannibal pictures whilst carefully avoiding cannibalism. This isn't the only cannibal convention that has been sacrificed here. One of the most controversial aspects of the genre is the depiction of cruelty against and the killing of animals. Amazingly in THE GREEN INFERNO, these are replaced with scenes of COMPASSION towards animals! In one scene, a monkey is revived by the exploring party... and in total shades of CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST, at another point, a turtle is pulled out of a water tank, only to be replaced unharmed.One has to wonder what Climati's intentions were. The awkward "anti-animal cruelty" stance that the movie seems to adopt would be easier to appreciate if one hadn't seen Climati's previous work. Movies such as SAVAGE MAN... SAVAGE BEAST positively reveled in horrifically drawn-out scenes of animal killing, so what could have changed in the meantime? In honesty, many of the animal scenes are still clearly cruel and putting the subjects under distress. This makes Climati's stance quite transparent. I honestly believe he was attempting to criticise the cannibal genre just as Deodato had damningly and directly criticised him in the past. This was also coupled with the chronological fact that audiences were simply less willing to watch animals being butchered with machetes by the time this flick was made.As a movie, THE GREEN INFERNO is competently made yet somewhat forgettable. It has the same atmosphere as the earlier genre entries, but comes across as being rather watered down. The sound-track, photography and dialogue are all utterly perfunctory, and besides the animal issues mentioned already, a genre veteran can quite easily predict the entire plot after a few short minutes. However, in a way it is a fittingly odd end to an extremely strange genre of exploitation cinema- anaemic, bitter, and self-referentially critical.