King of Beasts

I think you main hunter guy was fairly easy to work out - a bit Trumpy, and convinced he was the good guy who was somehow doing Africa a favour!

What I thought was most interesting was trying to work out what the locals 'actually' thought of the westerners. I always felt there was a bit on a glint in the eye as if to say 'suckers'! Maybe I'm wrong.

All in all - highly recommended.

There is nothing controversial in killing any living creature for 'sport'. It should be charged with 1st degree murder, what it is!

As a documentary, I find this film outstanding .

It's not judging yet observing closely, it is raw, yet well filmed and edited to create an intimate protrayal of the subjects .

As for the topic of trophy hunting in general, and what's going on in Africa in particular, I'm not a fan to say the least .

But even though the great white hunter isn't the brightest candle on the cake, and the pretenious Alpha act of an overweight middle aged American gets old quickly, I couldn't even dislike him . That's how balanced this documentary is .

It's not a scientific approach to the issue , you'd have to look elsewhere for that ; it rather follows and watches closely to engross the viewer and allow him to come to his own conclusions .

So far half of the reviews are bashing this doc for glorifying the hunter. The doc is presented fly-on-the-wall style and it's fantastic b/c the hunter makes himself look like a dumb, jackass all on his own.

It's a shame many people are missing the point. This documentary is actually endorsed by the Humane Society.

I found the documentary interesting as it followed a man who unabashedly slaughters animals b/c "man is the ultimate predator" and claims we all have such an "instinct." But it is admittedly slow b/c the "hunt" in and of itself is slow.

When you watch it, you will see just how ridiculous it is that he takes such pride in his killings when all he does is pull a trigger.

About the documentary --

Highly informative and stays neutral, allowing you to come to your own conclusions. The commentary is by the main subject of the film along with local guides and others that we come to know to be rather like assistants in the endeavor.

I say we "come to know them as" because the documentary avoids captions and narration and leaves the story to the subject's own words and actions. It is well into the documentary that we realize the role the other people actually play. In this way the documentary not only stays neutral but also eliminates what might be considered a source of bias.

All in all, the film is crisp, engaging and informative. I've seen lots of documentaries and yet I had no idea that this is how this sort of trophy hunting is done.

About the subject --

As I said, this is a difficult subject and this documentary allows you to come to your own conclusions.

While I admit that I already felt that trophy hunting was sickening I left the thought there -- as something just not for me. After seeing this film I now feel that this type of hunting also cowardly and a farce. The main subject of the film sees himself as a hero and champion of animal conservation via the money he spends on the hunt and a "man's man" for his choice of recreation.

All of the actual work is done by local African guides and various Caucasian assistants that apparently were brought along. That leaves the hunter with the "full experience" yet not much more work or skill other than being an accurate shot.

I will leave the details for you to see for yourself. But I will tell you that in the end, the hunter gets his trophy -- and at the moment of truth he mutters some words that indicate that he is in awe of himself for what he has just accomplished. The kill, for him is another heroic deed on top of the heroic spending that made it all happen.