Inclubabu Plot so thin, it passes unnoticed.

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Zbigniew_Krycsiwiki Another go round of stock footage of random cultural practices, some interesting, some so obviously fake.Wig makers, Polynesian rituals, hunters, marksmen using cigarettes in peoples mouths as target practice (and mostly hitting them) segues hard into Mexican bug eating. I was eating shrimp fried rice, too, as this scene began. There goes my appetite for that now.Like its predecessor, there is so little to say about this film, other than to just simply list the events depicted, or reenacted, (which should also be obvious, judging by the brevity of the earlier reviews of it) as the film, while competently made, really doesn't have much of a point to make, and occasionally offers an odd choice of flute music.The finale, an elegant and classy looking pianist sits down in front of an audience to play, in concert hall, becomes a slapping symphony, with another who slaps a line of men's faces, in accompaniment to the music being performed. So obviously fake, with multiple camera angles, and every slap on every man's face sounds at exactly the same pitch, and volume. The sound of one single slap, repeated throughout the duration.

stalzz64 The scenes of extreme REAL violence, nudity, animal cruelty and naked African teenage girls being sold into slavery ought to be enough to turn most people off to this sort of film. Yes, this film has what appears to be a lot of 'filler', but....You have to realize that this was different time, and there was no Internet, there were no video games, No 'reality TV'.This was a titillating look at our crazy world though the eyes of early 1960's camera lenses.The two 'official' Mondo Cane films together are, as simply put in hippie language-- 'a trip'.A sick twisted weird crazy mixed up naked look at our world.Not for the faint of heart nor for the viewer who is easily bored by documentary films.Recommended!

christophaskell For those who enjoyed the original ‘Mondo Cane', this is a less violent, more entertaining collection of sequences from around the world. Less focused on animals, we are treated to a birds' eye view of the crazy customs practiced on and by people. For those who haven't ever seen a ‘Mondo' film, please start with ‘Mondo Cane' and then come back and read this. ‘Mondo Cane 2' has some very shocking images; the most intense I felt was when we watched a Buddhist monk light himself on fire. Overall, however, the focus is on customs that to a foreign eye seem silly or ridiculous, not so much on these violent acts or situations. Filmmakers Jacopetti and Prosperi are masters at reporting truth much the same way a muckraker reports ‘truth', and simply by editing sequences together construct a convincing story that we humans are obsessed with pain and death. A great watch if you get the chance, and if you're really interested in these films there was a great box set released recently containing almost all of Jacopetti's work. It will probably be hard to find to rent, but keep an eye out if you're interested in documentaries as this is one of the best. Rating: 33/40

gridoon "Mondo Cane 2" is little more than a quick cash-in on the first film's popularity. The giveaway is the fact that, although the film runs shorter than the original, it somehow contains less interesting footage. Some powerful sequences do exist (the tortured kids, the baby flamingos that die because their waters have been contaminated by a nearby factory), but on the whole the film is much inferior to the original, and the narration is often cheeky, hokey and annoying. (**)