7/10
Drop your standards and enjoy, it's 1973, man.
13 May 2005
It's not big budget, it's goofy - but I liked it. A lot of great horror movies (and I use the term "horror" loosely with this film) were low budget, starred nobodies, and shot with a sort of your-hometown look.

Cannibal Girls holds a bit of a Manson feel, as it was the buzz of the time. It was shot in rural parts of Toronto, areas which no not exist as rural any more. And it holds two big Canadian actors, who were nobody at the time - but do a great job of what they would become known for a few years later, great character actors. This is what makes it an alright film, but you have got to drop your standards of horror movies a bit to see this.

The story has a bit of an urban legend idea to it I suppose. The movie also contains something I think any true horror movie buff would think about when entering upon an odd out-of-the-way situation - don't you sometimes wonder if that hamburger, with the funky taste, you are eating at the diner in Tuckedawaytown, pop. 35, is really cow? When the film was first shown, it supposedly had a warning bell to let the "squeamish" know of impending grossness. Seeing it the first time 16 years after its original release, I didn't see any reason for bells' and whistles. I'm sure some people would have wanted that bell more with films like Zombie. However, I still wonder if cannibal girl #2 was eating a man sausage, or a MAN sausage.

Hey man, loosen up, Cannibal Girls is a cheap pseudohorror mouthful any horror buff should sample once.
16 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed