You've ignored this film. It will no longer appear as a recommendation. View ignored films.
You've decided to remember Snuff: A Documentary About Killing on Camera for later. You can see all your remembered films here.
Summary: Feature film examining the existence of films in which people are murdered on camera and the culture surrounding them. Through interviews with former FBI Profilers, Cultural Academics, and Film Historians the documentary delves into the disturbing history and myth of Snuff Films. The FBI claims there is no evidence to prove the existence of Snuff and, therefore, Snuff Films are a myth... (imdb)
Nowhere near as horrific as the opening warning would have you believe, and certainly far from an essential documentary on the subject, Snuff still has enough of interest to kill 75 minutes. Many of the talking heads' credentials are questionable and some of the 'big revelations' appear to be nothing more than rumour and heresay, but the real footage of the Juba sniper, the Daniel Pearl execution and the Lake/Ng tapes is disturbing enough to remind you how chilling real death is.
Most of the people interviewed should never be interviewed for what they think because they're not important at all. "What he means by this ... I DUNNO" The editing is atrocious there is no flow at all, I just stuck through it to see GROSS STUFF. Mark L. Rosen's segments were down right chilling, why not just have him talk throughout the movie instead of the other idiots?
Not a very well made documentary. It seems to rely on graphic footage that is condemned by the documentary when others use it in their films. I agree with doctor7 fully. Those interviewed don't seem important and their credibility is questioned bny improper word usage and bad grammar. The editing is also poor. Paul Von Stoetzel seems to drag out interviews to make the film longer. Snuff isn't terrible but it is definitely not the best documentary out there.
In the end I feel like the film relies on it's incredibly graphic subject matter to make it's impact on the viewer. I didn't find it particularily well put together and the interviewees, though candid and from different backgrounds, didn't seem all that important. What does certainly disturb is Mark L. Rosen's final segment in the documentary. It's certainly one of the most unsettling things I've seen, barring of course the actual deaths of people on camera that this documentary shows.