Blood of the Beasts (1949) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
31 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Phenomenally Disturbing
Billy_Crash30 January 2009
Franju's short 1949 documentary of a Paris slaughterhouse is riveting, disturbing and beautifully filmed in black-and-white.

Though the subject matter and their ultimate demise is an eye opener, the manner in which men and women butcher the beasts is the most distressing. The butcher slaughter as calmly and methodically as anyone else doing a day's work. This coincides with Franju's belief that true, genuine horror is found in every day life - not in mad scientists, creepy monsters or wild story lines far removed from reality.

Regardless, the cinematography is outstanding, capturing a moment in time few get to witness.

If you're curious as to how animals were slaughtered fifty years ago, or if you have a taste for the macabre, this is the thought-provoking short for you.
16 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
The silence of the lambs
dbdumonteil3 March 2006
George Franju had one of the strangest careers in the French cinema.His shorts were revolutionary.When he began full-length features ,as contemporary of the Nouvelle Vague,he was drastically different.All his best works ("la tête contre les murs" "les Yeux sans Visage" "Thomas L'Imposteur" even his minor films such as "Pleins Feux sur l'Assassin" and his remake of Feuillade's "Judex) have a sense of mystery you would never find in his peers' works (with the exception of some of Chabrol's ones).

"Le sang des bêtes" has not lost its strength even in 2006.It still stands as one of the best shorts ever done.It depicts horror: inside a slaughterhouse ,where the beasts suffer and man himself risks his life ,there's a world nobody had entered before Franju 's camera let us in.The pictures are sometimes so harrowing,so unbearable,you find yourself looking away.There's this sublime picture of a horse ,bowing before being shot.

The commentary is brilliant,and the two actors who say it are to be commended.

Georges Hubert uses a neuter voice,even when he describes the most terrifying of the scenes: should he depict the riverboat for sightseeing,he would not use a different tone.He makes me think of the commentary in Luis Bunuel's " Hurdes" Nicole Ladmiral,on the other hand has a warm voice ,sometimes verging on tenderness as she describes the urban lugubrious landscapes outside the slaughterhouse.Life goes one ,people fall in love,around the buildings with its sinister "steeple" which is not that of a church . Nowadays Nicole Ladmiral is forgotten:her career was short-lived and very sad.After an important part in "Journal d'un curé de Campagne ",Robert Bresson's classic, she could never find another role worthy of her talent (except for some uninteresting supporting parts on stage)and she threw herself under a train in a metro station.
17 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
One of the most horrifying films of all time - and it's just an ordinary day at a slaughterhouse
debblyst16 December 2005
Luis Buñuel was Georges Franju's favorite filmmaker. Now imagine the shocking eyeball- slicing scene of "Le Chien Andalou" (which, as you may well know, was a dead sheep's eyeball) taken to the goriest consequences: Franju takes his camera to a slaughterhouse in the outskirts of post-war Paris, and the appalling scene from Buñuel & Dali's classic feels like child's game compared to what is shown in this short documentary.

Here, we see -- in all horrifying details, truth and gore -- horses, cows, calves and sheep being matter-of-factly, bureaucratically slaughtered by dexterous butchers with axes, knives, hammers, and they don't even stop their smoking or casual whistling while doing their jobs. Among these indelible, nauseating scenes, we see an employee "caressing" a horse's head seconds before fatally puncturing its skull; the Berkeleyish "chorus line ballet" of decapitated sheep's paws; the still convulsive trunk of one decapitated, blood-drained, paw-less calf; and the gallons of steaming blood serving as an "illustration" of Charles Trenet's famous song "La Mer" ("The Sea"), heartily sung by one of the workers. In "Le Sang des Bêtes" you will see probably the most horrifyingly graphic scenes EVER filmed.

This film brings uncomfortable thoughts: on the one hand, how most of us -- consumers -- implicitly condone with this methodical, "impersonal" slaughtering of domestic, harmless creatures as long as we don't think very much about how meat, leather, soaps, etc "magically" appear at the supermarket or in a store. On the other hand, we wonder how butchers and other slaughterhouse workers manage to sublimate guilt, compassion and repulsion in a totally matter-of-fact, professional manner (they have to earn a living), proving how human beings can adapt to almost ANY circumstance (surely then-recent WW2 Nazi horror in concentration camps is very clear reference in "Le Sang...:").

"Le Sang..." features as an extra on the DVD that brings Franju's horror masterpiece "Les Yeux Sans Visage" (1959) and it's totally apropos: it's a perfectly macabre pas-de- deux. Impossible not to link the cold-hearted slaughter and skinning of the animals in "Le Sang..." with high-brow-gone-berserk surgeon Pierre Brasseur face-skinning his helpless victims with flawless craftsmanship in "Les Yeux". (Once again, the Nazi concentration camp "scientific" experiments are paralleled).

This is compulsory viewing for animal-rights activists and environmentalists. Don't even think of watching "Le Sang des Bêtes" if you're faint-hearted or after a meal; and beware you meat-eaters, this one may turn you in a vegetarian or at least make your next hamburger taste REALLY bad.
33 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Very shocking,but almost lyrical documentary.
HumanoidOfFlesh22 December 2005
"Blood of the Beasts" by Georges Franju is among the most horrifying documentaries I have ever seen.Its unflinching depiction of animal butchery will certainly upset many potential viewers.The film is set in a Parisian slaughterhouse.We see various butchers slaughtering horses,cows,calves and sheep.This film is very graphic without being exploitative,though-Franju simply documents the activities in a slaughterhouse circa 1949.It's very well done-the images are strong,often disturbing-and the camera acts almost as a neutral observer,seeing all.This is a good film,but I only recommend it with a strong warning about its content.So if you are squeamish don't watch this short.8 out of 10.
12 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An astonishing document.
lissener6 March 2005
An astonishing document.

A documentary shot with a surrealist aesthetic; images of unimaginable horror and violence--all perfectly real and unstaged--filmed with a languid and beautiful poetry. The images in this documentary about the slaughterhouse--the "abattoir," in the language of the narrator--are filmed with an almost cavalier, deadpan, unflinching clarity. The images of the lingering struggles of a decapitated calf; the satiny musculature exposed beneath the skin of a butchered cow, and the horrible but poetic moment when we see that the heart still beats beneath the sinews; the bored whistle of the beret-capped worker tapping the steaming spray of a horse's heart's blood; and then, the canal-concealing camera angle that shows us a barge bisecting a field of grass: "Blood of the Beasts" is a breathtaking celebration of the visual philosophy of surrealism.
21 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Death is a matter-of-fact
p_radulescu29 November 2010
There is a catharsis brought by art works that are painful to watch. In this case the catharsis does not come immediately. It takes time to sublimate the horrible experience, to get beyond it and to understand. To really understand.

A 20 minute documentary made in 1949 by Georges Franju (and scored by Joseph Kosma), calmly depicting the everyday work in the abattoirs from the outskirts of Paris. The animals coming here with serenity, suddenly killed and, that's it, immediately skin and legs and head are apart, it all happens incredibly fast. Sometimes bits of life go on for a few seconds. It's horrible. The slaughters make this matter-of-factly, otherwise you cannot resist there.

And as soon as you leave the slaughterhouse, it's normal life, that quiet poetry of normal life: sun, sometimes clouds, whisks of grass here and there, some debris, a pair of young lovers.

And actually it's about death, about our death: we are always dying innocently, and death is just part of life: death is just that, matter-of-fact.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Materiality of organic life
Polaris_DiB3 April 2008
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is slightly infamous for being the type of movie that makes people want to swear off meat--I can't say I relate to this reaction, as I don't understand where people think their meat came from in the first place if not from situations like this. However, Franju is a surrealist and a poet, and there are indeed methods of real horror induced here. The thing is, the movie is so much more interesting on the material level than on the thematic.

Honestly, Franju's narrative "voice", if you'd call it that, is largely ambivalent. Franju records the destruction of the animals from living beasts we recognize in fields almost every step of the way to the packaged bits we buy at a supermarket. Along the way, he notes the personalities of the people in the slaughter house and notes the proximity to the "civilized" world outside (a slightly over-done montage of set pieces and poses). Love, logic, and creativity go on while literal "whole-sale slaughter" and destruction happens right across the river. This movie shares a lot with "Nuit et Brouillard" in that respect.

However, what's more fascinating is the materiality of the beasts: the patterns left behind on their meat when the skin is stripped away, the separate parts removed, muscle, sinew, and bone. Seeing this movie is seeing organic life as almost an object with shared characteristics of furniture: frames, stuffing, and fluff. In black and white cinematography, blood runs like water, and the two are analogous to each other. Even the unconscious spasms of the dead animals become something of a physics event, an equal and opposite reaction--which can be highly disturbing at the same time as it is honestly beautiful.

5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
20 minutes of unspeakable horror
Galina_movie_fan22 October 2006
The Criterion DVD "Les Yeux sans visage" aka Eyes without a Face" also includes the 20 minutes long documentary by Georges Franju, "The Blood of the Beasts" (1949) about an ordinary day at the slaughterhouse in Paris. This short film is one of the most horrifying ever made. What makes it even more difficult to see – the matter-of-fact efficient way the professional and skilled butchers do their jobs never stop smoking or whistling…. In one of the comments, the author recalls the famous eyeball- slicing scene of "Le Chien Andalou" which was a dead cow's eyeball. That shot only last a second, and it is still shocking. Now imagine much more gruesome and unbearable scenes showing the killing of horses, cows, calves and sheep over and over and over again and that unspeakable terror and fear in their eyes...Paris (or London, or New York City or Rome or any other place in the world) needs their steaks, chops, and burgers
9 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
few things can compare to the horror on display, maybe Night and Fog...
Quinoa198422 March 2009
I should give some disclosure: I eat meat, not every day but enough to consider myself a fan of things like steaks and burgers and hot dogs and the occasional ribs (chicken is another matter). Watching Blood of the Beasts is, basically, enough to make anyone who's ever bitten into any of what I've mentioned completely sick to your stomach. Or anyone for that matter: the bluntness of the camera, of looking straight on and abstracting these images of a slaughterhouse in Paris, is the bravest thing imaginable. I'd compare it to Resnais' ability to keep the audience focused on the horror of the holocaust. So much horror shown right in front of us where it's impossible to look any other way.

It is what it is, and it's all the more shocking. Heads cut off, limbs town, skulls bashed, organs ripped and blood flowing down the concrete into drains, lambs shaking as they're still living, I could go on and on, but it's crucial to experience it. It will make even the most hard-bitten meat lovers nearly come to tears. The film-making is intense because of its objectivity: while Franju is choosing what to show us, it is all what makes up this slaughterhouse. It's an act of surrealism of Bunuel in Un Chien Andalou or even Land without Bread almost by going into such a depth of ultra-realism (maybe the slicing of the eyeball comes closest to recognizing the "ugh" factor that for 5 seconds is made nearly 20 minutes here) that it becomes like something of a work of poetry- dark, hellish poetry that would give Burroughs nightmares.

Staggering work, completely unforgettable. Don't watch this alone if you're a vegan!
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
A hard but poetic documentary about the outskirts of Paris.... and their slaughterhouses
Grégoire "Freak" Dubost28 January 2005
"Le Sang des Bêtes" is a splendid documentary about the life and work of many workers, living just outside the Paris walls after WWII. From the vast and deserted areas that seemed to completely surround the city and its few 'modern' outskirt-constructions, Franju suddenly leads us nearer to the heart of the capital. Where the industrial compounds rise. where, at the fringe of urban and rural worlds, the cattle is being slaughtered. From the horses slaughterhouses of the Porte de Vanves to the huge Halles de la Vilette, where cows, calves and sheep are being prepared to be eaten, this short film is by no means a claim for vegetarianism. Some scenes are certainly hard to watch, but the accurate eye of the director, his tenderness towards the men (and women) doing this very hard work, is the real point here. After all, we've seen animals die before (actually after, from 'Le Cochon' of Jean Eustache and Barbet Schroeder's New Guinea documentaries, to "Benny's Video" and the morbid attraction of Benny towards the film of the cow's death. So let not your prejudices take the better, and let the film deliver its message : that he is the witness of a world not that old, and already so odd to us.
9 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
The real start of "animal liberation"
Dave Godin27 March 2002
This remarkable short documentary stands like a monumental judgement on the human race, and how we, as the supposedly superior species are, at heart, cold and indifferent to the suffering and fate of other sentient beings with whom we share the planet. Franju, with detached simplicity, makes us look at what most of us prefer to either not see or even think about - the precise process by which living animals are converted into food for us to eat. Not only does the film show the plight of creatures, but it also shows the dehumanising effect this work has on the slaughterers for whom slitting the throat of a sheep, or shooting a captive bolt pistol into the forehead of a magnificent horse, has become a routine assignment of little consequence or gravity. I first saw this film in 1952, and went in a carnivore, and came out a vegetarian, and have remained one ever since because of it. Such is the power of this objective and powerful documentary. All too often in life we depend upon others to do our dirty work for us so that we can remain "pure souled" and unsullied by such barbaric degradation, but we cannot look away forever, and whilst Franju doesn't preach, (there is very little commentary, and what there is merely explains what's happening), he makes us see with our own eyes the endless convey-belt parade of slaughter and accompanying horror. Didactic cinema at its most dynamic and memorable, and the true precursor of "animal liberation".
15 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Terrible beauty
mitsukurina5 September 2007
A film of great and terrible beauty.

This short 1949 film by Georges Franju - about 20 minutes or so in length is narrated by Georges Hubert and Nicole Ladmiral and was the winner of the 1950 Grand Prix International du Court Sujet.

Filmed in black and white - I doubt it could be watched by many in colour - this film weaves an effective documentary of Paris's various abattoirs out of startling yet non-contrived surrealist images. The scenes of death are presented coldly, without sentimentality but also, in my view, without lessening the suffering of the animals - an indeed the men.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Mandatory viewing for urbanized carnivores
Macholic3 December 2006
The film opens by showing life in a Paris suburb and the portal to a slaughterhouse with its monument of a bull in brass and then we move inside the slaughterhouse. The camera is like a fly on the wall, it sees everything but never interact or interfere with what's happening. And for anyone not raised on a farm where they did their own slaughtering, this is indeed a shocking document: A horse collapses in 1 second as it is shot with a bolt pistol in the head and a cow tumbles after a hammer with a long pipe on the hammerhead has been buried in its skull. But that is just the starter on this blood feast. The main cause being numerous calves beheaded and a row of sheeps having their throat slit and in between that animals being flayed and gutted. The slaughterhouse has its own stream in the floor, where rivers of blood is running from the slaughter. I can imagine urbanized children having nightmare for weeks after seeing this film..and their parents forsaking the meat for vegetarian delicacies after this remorseless view of the animals demise to satisfy the meat-eaters cravings. I am a vegetarian myself, not out of conviction, but because I was raised that way and as a such, I am thankfully free from dealing with the dilemma of wanting the meat but not wanting to deal with the the killing and butchery. Today death of animals has become a remote affair to most people, out of sight, out of mind. Not so when you see this film. Black and white images can indeed be gruesome, color just wouldn't have made this film worse. Even the squeamish should find the courage to view this film, just once! This is what death looks like when a real artist trains his lens on it, it is beautiful too! 10/10
7 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Vile subject, fascinating treatment
fertilecelluloid24 October 2005
Vile subject, fascinating treatment.

Franju shoots the day-to-day workings of a slaughterhouse on the outskirts of Paris with an unflinching lens. The result is surrealism by default, a black and white study of sanctioned animal murder.

Though the environment is bloody and reminded me of German death camps, the workers go about their business with matter-of-fact professionalism. It was almost comical to see so many workers plying their trade with cigarettes hanging from their mouths

It is a simple, powerful document that is not overstated. Its truth is its virtue.
7 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
So hard to watch
aliceinfaerieland22 October 2018
This was an extra on the dvd for Eyes Without A Face, and it was probably the hardest thing I have ever watched...I applaud it, I truly do, but it's got me thinking twice about being a vegetarian. If this were in color, I don't know if my heart could have taken it.

How far removed are we from our food, in this modern world. Even my visceral reaction is something to think about.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Disturbing Horror Film
framptonhollis3 September 2015
Now, other people seem to find this to be a GREAT film, a MASTERPIECE, but I don't necessarily find it to be either of those things. That doesn't mean I found it to be bad, it was a quite interesting documentary short, that did genuinely disturbed me.

It is a very simple premise, it is just footage that was shot inside a slaughterhouse, with some narration. It is very fascinating, although highly unsettling, although it didn't really change my life. As I said, I was highly disturbed throughout the film, and for a good purpose, but it didn't make me become a vegetarian or a vegan. I guess at this point I'll never become a vegetarian/vegan.

However, just because I'm not a vegetarian/vegan doesn't mean that it won't make YOU possibly think of becoming one! I can fully understand why someone would be affected by the horrific imagery in this documentary film would start thinking way more about what they eat and how it's made.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Historical and Surreal
dvarty25 March 2008
This film works on many different levels. As a boy living in a small northern town I remember the Abattoir, on the edge of town, a large imposing Victorian building. Across the road,a playing field, with young people kicking a ball about. In the distance the imposing lake land fells. Inside the Abattoir were scenes exactly like 'Le Sang' except there were no horses and all animals stunned with captive bolt pistols. The skill of the workers was incredible, their humour brilliant, and all of them liked animals, it was only their job that demanded they had to kill and dissect them.

Le Sang depicts exactly what happened in all the Abattoirs of Europe at the time of filming! The trade is ruthless, Skilled, shocking,wet, dirty, smelly but never wantonly cruel, just efficient, but most of all shocking to those who never set foot in an abattoir.

A superb subject for surrealism- but also a historical record, no more do we use the pole axe or the pithing cane when killing cattle!!
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Poetic and beautiful documentary
aldiboronti8 July 2019
A stunning piece of work life and death in the raw. All those reviewers who find this disturbing or horrific need to get their priorities straight. Auschwitz is horrific, the things these same people shown went through just a few years before under the Nazis are horrific. This isn't, it's simply slaughtering animals to feed themselves and their countrymen. Where on earth do people think the meat in their hamburgers comes from?
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Are You Thinking About Becoming a Vegetarian?
boblipton5 May 2019
If you want to give up meat or have trouble remaining on a meat-free diet, then this movie might help you out -- if by "help" you mean fill you with a disgust and horror that makes you swear off meat forever.

It's a documentary about three of Paris' slaughterhouses in 1949: one devoted to horses, the second to cattle and the last to sheep. Each time, we see some peaceful or interesting setting, and then move within the gates of the abbatoir, and watch the animals being slaughtered. Yes, there's lots of blood and twitching and offal, which makes a dedicated carnivore like me raise his eyebrows. But what can you expect from the director of EYES WITHOUT A FACE but something like Grand Guignol?

Franju did not start out as a film maker. While he made his first documentary short in 1934, for the next fifteen years, he worked from Henri Langlois in getting the Cinematecque Francaise started.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
The routines of the world
AbhiMathews13 April 2014
In a suburban outskirt of post-WW2 Paris, we are enamoured by the beauty of one of France's pearls. It's an ordinary day where time seamlessly and relaxingly passes by. We wonder, "what's going on?"

It's only when you search inside the buildings one actually realizes the life (or lack thereof) in the city. Paris, a destination spot for romantics and travellers abroad, has its meat industry displayed--not their biggest attraction. It's not a heinous crime nor an "extreme" act. Yet it's only when peering behind the guarding walls we see the treachery the human race is capable of. Choosing to disregard mass murder is one thing, but the blood on our hands, innocence stolen and suffering caused is something we will take to the grave.

The complete sense of normality is the most sinister aspect of this short film. Rarely do people actively consider what they are consuming. We observe how very regular the acts of slaughter are depicted and it appears to be an outrageous crime. But it's not. It happens in our very own backyard and in the most elegant of places.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Very good, but not for the easily offended
Horst_In_Translation10 October 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Opinions differ on how explicit a film on animal cruelty has to be in order to make the utmost impact. Being a big fan of the documentary "Earthlings" featuring Joaquin Phoenix' voice, I'm usually off the opinion that subtlety is not the solution, but depicting the blatant cruelty as it happens is the key. That's why I also ended up liking Georges Franju's very graphic take on the matter. The parallel to the workers was nicely done, especially the contrast between the early scenes of the amusement park and everything that followed afterward, but the real "highlight" of the film where the scenes from the horse slaughterhouse or those scenes where the hooves get cut off or the cow takes the hammer to head. It's really sad and heartbreaking, especially taking into consideration that not much has changed and the rise of vegetarianism and veganism has been matched, probably surpassed, by the general rise of the world population.

The narration is pretty good, especially from the female, although reading about her tragic fate is kinda sad. Nicole Ladmiral wasn't even twenty back then, but shows a great deal of intonation. The film's a bit like "Earthlings" 60 years earlier, equally brutal though much shorter and I recommend this film a lot, especially to people who want to think about their eating habits and consider a change for the better. It's one of my favorite short films and documentaries from Franju and the 1940s. With works like this, especially how early in his career this was made, it's a pity the director has kinda vanished into oblivion to everybody but film history enthusiasts.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Most Honest View of a Slaughterhoue on Film
gavin694215 April 2013
An early example of ultra-realism, this movie contrasts the quiet, bucolic life in the outskirts of Paris with the harsh, gory conditions inside the nearby slaughterhouses. Describes the fate of the animals and that of the workers in graphic detail.

While it is surprising that the animals being slaughtered are horses and not cows or pigs, this no less takes away from the power of the film. If anything, it might add to it (people tend to be more emotionally attached to horses than cows). There is no better way to explain the inside of an abattoir than to show it.

I guess if I had to complain about anything, it is that the narrator refers to the horses as "victims" and seems to have a generally unfavorable view of the whole business. Documentaries should be neutral when possible and not include language that pushes the viewer one way or another. Is it bad to slaughter animals? Is it okay but the methods are just wrong? Or maybe it is not wrong at all, but we have become disconnected from it and therefore more sensitive to its foreign nature.

I am not going to judge a slaughterhouse, at least not in this review. But I do fear that as beautifully shot as this brief piece was, it did not give audiences a fair vantage point from which to draw conclusions.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Enough to Give PETA the Fits And Tremors
bebop63-128 May 2011
This documentary was released as an additional feature on DVD of the horror-film classic "Eyes Without A Face", and in itself could be sub-classified in that genre, if only because of the blood and gore and scenes enough to give animal liberationists and the like months of sleepless nightmares. It depicts a day in the life in a Paris abattoir. Mind you, I was horrified yet transfixed at the process by which cattle and sheep are slaughtered and transformed into carcasses which form the basis of our favorite steaks, chops and casseroles, depicted in an objective manner that neither condones nor condemns the methods used in the slaughter or the workers who practice them - they go about their activities casually in a sort of "it's a dirty job but someone has to do it" manner. Franju manages to combine the essential elements of post-war Expressionism with French-style Surrealism, creating a film in which real-life scenes somehow flit through the screen in a dream-like sequence. Picturesque images like the cattle and sheep being driven along and then the next moment being shown dismembered sans heads and hooves are deliberately juxtaposed to create maximum and ultimate impact on the viewer. And to highlight the surrealistic effect even further, an abattoir worker can be heard warbling "La Mer" while streams of blood from the slaughtered beasts flow through the gutters, perhaps a symbolic reference to the waters flowing through the ocean. The documentary ends with a short narration which pretty much summarizes the gist of the film but in a pseudo-lyrical way, it represents an outsider's conception of the slaughterhouse activities, not someone who has actually witnessed the the reality of what actually goes on inside. Watch, if you can, but not on a full stomach.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
To Make the Viewers Become Vegetarian
claudio_carvalho14 December 2005
In the periphery of Paris, the fate of horses, cows and other animals in a slaughterhouse is detailed in this short documentary. My first comment about this disgusting short is that fortunately it is not in color. I believe that there are two possible views of this short: technically, my opinion is that it is perfect. The shootings of Paris, the cinematography, the camera, the skill of the workers, in this regard everything is perfectly shown. However, the theme is simply awful and of a completely bad taste. I do not know if George Franju was vegetarian, but probably his intention showing the slaughter of animals, inclusive of an offspring, was to make the viewers become vegetarian. I believe most of the pseudo-intellectual readers will not like my review, but that was my impression of this documentary. My vote is five.

Title (Brazil): "O Sangue das Bestas" ("The Blood of the Beasts")
11 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
No veggie politics, just the facts
dmkay1 June 2008
Everyone who wants to see the brutal reality of a slaughterhouse, at least circa 1949 in Paris, should be open to seeing this film. Although some people seem to have come away thinking this is was an anti-meat movie, that is only their point of view. Yes, you see horrific images of horses, cows and sheep butchered. It will likely turn your stomach. But I doubt this documentary was made with the intention of turning people off meat.

The director focuses on the people too: the man whose own leg had to be cut off after an accident, for example. And it is clear that this business is just a job to many of the workers, and there is no moralizing about it.

It is difficult to watch. But it is the truth (I guess); and really, if you think about it, the animals in this film are arguably treated better (killed quickly) than in that recent undercover PETA video of downer cows.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews

Recently Viewed