MovieChat Forums > The Naked Prey (1966) Discussion > cooking in clay scene: more disturbing t...

cooking in clay scene: more disturbing than any modern horror film


Yes that was nasty, the man being cooked is one of the native helpers, and what is most diturbing is that they give him a pipe to keep him alive and breathing through all the clay then cook him out.

also if you slo-mo the scene where one of the native helpers gets chopped with a machete by the tribesmen you can see bright red blood splash up in the air.

for some reason that cook-out scene is more disturbing than any of those modern texas chainsaw/zombie/murder/gangster/horror/alien monster films you get, I could watch all those and forget them seconds after they finish, but this cook out scene stays in your head like a sick nightmare from the depths of raw evil.

reply

I saw the blood spray without slow motion, and yes it was disturbing. The clay thing will also haunt my nightmares for years to come. What a great movie.

What's the Spanish for drunken bum?

reply

I agree -- I've always thought that was one of the most horrible torture/killings I've seen on film. The others died bad deaths -- chased and hacked up by the women, tied down and bitten by a snake (and Cornel Wilde would've been dispatched with a spear if they'd caught him) -- but those were quick and easy compared to the agony inflicted on the "clay man" -- not to mention being continually rotated upside down, over and over, as he's roasted, encased, choking, with sticks rammed down his nose and throat. The disparity between the men's fates is startling. The leader of the group should have been the one encased in clay and rotisseried. The fact that the tribe reserved the worst death for another African rather than a white man is also interesting.

reply

Rather than being horrified the clay man scene at first was more amusing than disturbing to me. Of course you do see yourself in that situation and the other ones the captives were in and it wouldn't be very pleasant for sure. But I don't think compared to more modern torture depictions on film that those scenes even come close. Try watching Tarantino's "Reservoir Dogs" for one. That was a vile pointless exercise and I somehow managed to get through it.

reply

You have a point -- the torture in DOGS was only for one sick guy's amusement. At least the natives in PREY had a grudge. But between having an ear cut off and being doused with kerosene to be set on fire, and encased and roasted...I just don't know which is worse. My claustrophobia leads me to "prefer" DOGS, horrible as that was. Yecch. God, why are we all debating this stuff?

reply

It's the execution (<: of whatever torture is being depicted in a movie that ultimately determines the impact, to me. I feel that a lot of the stuff in Naked Prey is to current tastes pretty subdued/tamer in contrast, and there's more left to the imagination- it's 1966 after all. Whereas in Reservoir Dogs, or the horribly tense Viet Cong Russian Roulette scene in The Deer Hunter (Mao! -slap- Mao! -slap- Mao!) these depictions were very realistic and had a "you are right there with them" vibe. I mean am I really being silly about my initial reaction to the guy encased in clay on the spit? It was at first very cartoonish-looking I thought. I agree that when you start thinking about it it's quite the devilish and diabolical a torture.

reply

I understand what you mean, though -- on one level, the sight of the guy all clayed up and with sticks stuck in his nostrils and mouth does look slightly comical at first blush -- maybe in part because the whole thing is so foreign to us, that is, not in our era or among people we really understand. But when you really stop to think of what he was going through -- plus the fact that unlike the others his death was not only much more gruesome but also prolonged for God knows how long -- then you get a whole different take on it. The torture in RESERVOIR DOGS or THE DEER HUNTER is more accessible, if you will, to our imaginations, and so we might be able to "feel" it more viscerally -- I don't know. Between the three, I have no problem picking my preference if I had to go one way -- the Russian Roulette route. It's psychological, not physical torture (the slaps notwithstanding), if you lose it's over quick, and you do have a loaded gun with which you could take a chance and turn on your tormentors. There's at least that chance, which the others (save Cornel Wilde) never got in their tortures.

reply

I had no idea this board would be so active. Did any of you check this movie out on TCM by any chance? That's where I saw it.

What's the Spanish for drunken bum?

reply

I rented the new Criterion version from Netflix when it was first available. I imagine like a lot of movies that are newly released to DVD their message boards will show some increased activity, just stands to reason. I'm sure it's no accident that TCM scheduled it to air around the time of the new DVD release.

reply

We did see the TCM broadcast, and as you can see there's another thread on this site dedicated to attacking TCM for the prints of this film that they've used -- you should check that one out. I didn't see their February broadcast but judging from the posts on that other thread I gather some sequences were edited (mainly the ones showing the natives' tortures). This problem seems to have been resolved in the showing this week, but they still ran a TV print whose opening and closing credits were not letterboxed and used a 1980s Paramount logo in place of the original. (I complained about this myself on the other thread.) I also don't think it was shown at the correct aspect ratio. TCM will be running it again June 28 so maybe by then they'll have switched to the Criterion print.

Waiting for them to get it right...now there's a real torture!

reply

Whether TCM has been showing an older version or the DVD one, I'm just saying that their recent showings of the film probably coincide with the new DVD release of the film (and thus increased interest in the film). I don't subscribe to TCM other than see an occasional free Comcast On Demand broadcast of a TCM offering, so I don't really know about their actual standards when showing a film "uncut" or whatever they claim.

reply

Yes, I think you're right, TCM often runs a film recently released on DVD, I would also assume to coincide with increased interest in the movie. But they don't always use the best available prints of a film (newly released, unreleased or otherwise) -- usually, but not always. That aside, almost never have I seen a film "cut", although there have been a couple of instances, but whether the cuts are theirs or are simply in the print they got, we don't know. With TNP now in such a top-notch print from Criterion, I'd hope they'd switch over soon.

Too bad you don't subscribe. It's easily the best channel on TV, and some interesting stuff in between the movies.

reply

Well Comcast in their sly marketing wisdom naturally offers TCM in the next pricier tier which I'm not about to fork over an extra $15+/Mo for. It is the only channel in that tier I would even want to view. I don't have a DVR/Tivo and I've also noticed TCM will show the films I want to see many times at times like 3am, so that's another reason I don't subscribe. Like I said I've actually been able to see quite a few good TCM films on the free Comcast On Demand channel such as Battle of Algiers, It Happened One Night, etc. Netflix is my main source of classic and other films and I'm quite satisfied with the service so far.

Also there's the talk of TCM going commercial like AMC did, that would be the ultimate dagger in the back. Maybe being in effect a pay-channel on cable systems will keep it commercial-free.

reply

If TCM ever went commercial there'd be such an outcry that they'd lose huge numbers of viewers, I think -- certainly if they interrupt the films. If they stick ads between the movies that wouldn't be so good but at least the films would remain clear.

Interestingly, about four or five years ago Fox Movie Channel introduced ads -- but they ran them only between movies, and did not interrupt the films with commercial breaks, unlike AMC. But after around 8 or 9 months or so FMC suddenly dropped all advertising and went back to a straight, non-commercial format.

When AMC started their advertising they interrupted the film only once, and one of their obnoxious and dishonest flaks said that this was all they planned to do. That lie lasted about five months before the multiple breaks we see today began...not to mention cutting, censoring, full-screen-only, etc. From the best to the worst. That's why I don't mind TCM being a premium channel -- if that helps defray costs and keep the ads away, then fine. (Plus, it's only a moderately-priced premium channel.)

reply

>>>>"Yes that was nasty, the man being cooked is one of the native helpers"

No, he is not a native helper, he is one of the white guys (the white guy that refuses to give a gift in an earlier scene). If you watch the part when the chief is deciding their fates, you'll see the white guy sitting in the position that he is cooked in, having wet clay being poured on him by some of the elder tribesman.

>>>>"and what is most diturbing is that they give him a pipe to keep him alive and breathing through all the clay then cook him out."

All of their deaths are of extreme torture and meant to humiliate.



<<(When there is no more room in Hell, the dead will walk the Earth.)>>

reply

The baked victim is a native African, you can see him clearly as they are covering him in clay.

reply

Check again, you'll see the white guy sitting in the position that he is cooked in, having wet clay being poured on him by some of the elder tribesman.


<<(When there is no more room in Hell, the dead will walk the Earth.)>>

reply

There were only three white guys in the safari- Cornel Wilde, then the fat racist slob who was financing the safari and angered the tribesmen by refusing their request for tribute, and then the safari overseer played by Patrick Mynhardt. Mynhardt was trussed up like a chicken and run down and stabbed to death by the village women. The fat slob was staked out in front of the ring of fire and struck by a cobra that was tossed into the ring. So the guy who got clayed and roasted on a spit had to have been a native tribesman. There weren't any other white guys around.

reply

"The baked victim is a native African, you can see him clearly as they are covering him in clay."

Here's the clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Br6L5Bcieas
He looks like a white guy.


<<(When there is no more room in Hell, the dead will walk the Earth.)>>

reply

You know I'd have to watch the dang film again to confirm whether or not the clay guy was black or white because I can't remember, but I'm sorry that little image of the guy in the YouTube clip really doesn't definitely prove anything! Hell he looks like he could be a white guy or a light skinned black and if you notice his skin color looks about the same as several tribal guys right in the background. I'm not saying you are wrong at all but just going by the clip it's not conclusive enough to me.

reply

If there are only three white hunters, the guy must be a native. One white guy is killed by a cobra, another is dressed like a chicken and stabbed to death by the women and children, and the last guy is used for the man hunt.

reply

That sounds right, I'll have to see the dang film again. That guy in the clay sure looked like a native.

reply

YES 100% CORRECT. NATIVE IN CLAY, 1 HUNTER AS CHICKEN RUN, 1 AS SNAKEBAIT AND OTHER IS THE NAKED PREY!

reply

[deleted]

Just to let you know, I have it from many African tribesmen that whitemen cooked in clay taste like chicken...

reply

I wonder about this practice. Was it actually prominent among any (African) tribes?

reply

LOL, no.


I'll PayPal $1 to the first Naked Prey fan who can cite a specific reference of it being anything other than a scene from a movie. Purely fictional embellishment of natives cooking missionaries over a fire.

reply