|
|
Tristan
|
Posted: October 23, 2007 at 12:00am
A few years back, Eli Roth wrote and directed a movie that pushed the limits of how far a modern torture movie can go. This movie was Hostel. He also created a movie that had no middle ground, that is to say, you loved it or you hated it. Black and white. As you can clearly see by the first movie, my two fellow reviewers have a difference of opinion. As big a difference of opinion as you can get on this site, in fact. Myself? Well, it took me two watches before I fell in love with it. I guess it turned out to be "my thing". When I heard they were making a sequel, I shook my head and sighed, like every other fan. 9 times out of 10, a sequel is a bad move that just ends up ruining the director's good standing. A perfect example being the second Texas Chainsaw Massacre. What I wouldn't give for my 90 minutes and $15 back. Like it or not, the sequel came out, and did quite well for the type of movie. I unfortunately had to pass on a theater viewing, so I've been anxiously awaiting the DVD release. Well folks, it has arrived in the hands of yours truly, and I couldn't be happier.
Beth (Lauren German), Whitney (Bijou Phillips) and Lorna (Heather Matarazzo) are American art students, spending their summer in Rome to study art. Makes sense. Deciding that seeing the country is more inspirational, they pack up and head to Prague to start their European trip. While on the train, they cross paths with Axelle (Vera Jordanova), a model from their art class who convinces them to accompany her to Slovakia where they can spend their vacation relaxing, and enjoying the countryside. I suppose a spa weekend does sound better than backpacking around, getting lost, and harassed by flocks of European men. They check into a, you guessed it, hostel in Slovakia, which bears a strong resemblance to the one from the first film. I can't imagine why. After turning in their passports, the clerk takes them to an underground lair, where he puts their information up online, and the audience is treated to one of the coolest auctions I've ever seen. Every single person you see is bidding thousands upon thousands of dollars to win the right to torture these girls to death. Some of you are thinking this is pretty sick. As for yours truly, I felt like a giddy schoolboy. The first Hostel sure, you've got business men torturing people. But this was pretty twisted, considering half of these men, and a few women, were in the middle of a good golf game, eating breakfast with their wife, or playing with their kids. I guess creeps come in all kinds. One of said creeps is Stuart (Roger Bart), who from the get go, doesn't seem to thrilled by the idea. His friend won the auction for him as a birthday present and after an interesting turn of events, it seems like he might be the only chance the girls have of getting out of Slovakia alive. How's that for a cliffhanger, folks?
My only major gripe: Eli Roth made the same movie, this time with girls. And I really mean the same movie. For anyone who's seen the first one, 5 minutes into this one, and you already know who the bad guy is going to be, and who's a red herring. It's just, ugh. Too much of the film is playing off what you know about the first one. Almost every scene is a, "Oh yeah, I remember that", kind of moment. With a few new elements mixed in, of course.
Okay, now on to the good. Everything else. Roth certainly kicked it up a notch with this one. First of all, choosing an all female cast was a bold move. Torture men all you want, and nobody cares. As soon as it's a woman, that's a horse of a different colour. In the past, the likes of Dario Argento and Lucio Fulci have been slammed for being misogynistic and cruel towards women in their films. I haven't followed the news much around this movie, so I can't say first hand, but it wouldn't surprise me if ol' Eli Roth ran into a bit of trouble now and again. All these leading ladies did an excellent job for both ends of the film. They were great at acting like your typical girls on vacation, and they were great at making you feel awful while they were tortured. But my hat must be tipped to Ms. Heather Matarazzo. Ever since Welcome To The Dollhouse I've loved her in everything, and this was no exception. She might not be the most attractive girl, but she is downright adorable. Seeing her go from the cutesy, teen fluff roles to this is pretty intense. And don't give me that Elisha Cuthbert Captivity bullshit, this is a completely different story. Wasn't she also in the House of Wax remake? Yeah, enough said.
Now, for the gore. Aside from the first few moments, the movie is relatively PG-13 for about 45 minutes or so. Then the audience is treated to the first little taste of the red stuff, and it was well worth the wait. I won't give any of it away, but let me just say that between this first torture scene, and the subsequent torture scenes...you're not left disappointed. Take this from a huge fan of torture and exploitation movies. You get your money's worth.
I will say, that I love it when people say Hostel and Hostel Part II aren't horror films. I'm sorry, isn't the point of a horror film to make you afraid of something? Didn't Jaws make you afraid of the water? Didn't Psycho make you afraid of a shower? By no means am I comparing these films to Hostel, but after seeing these films, I certainly have my doubts about hopping on a plane, and going for a little R&R in one of these places. Eli Roth has found something else out there for us to be afraid of, and put his own spin on it. You might despise all the torture and over-the-top violence that goes along with it, but at the end of the day, he's making a frightening movie about hostels.
Usually, for a sequel to get my endorsement, it must do one of two things. It must either pick up where the original left off, so as to further the story, or it must be a whole different story, with new characters, ideas, and plot twists. Unfortunately, this movie didn't really do either of those things. Hostel wrapped things up pretty nicely, and as far as a sequel with all new ideas, well it kind of fell short in that department. Hostel: Part II lives up to the original, but it does not supersede it. Did this movie entertain me? Absolutely. Did it live up to my expectations? You bet. Did it earn itself a spot in my yearly top 10? Most definitely.
7.5/10
|
Crispy
|
Posted: October 23, 2007 at 10:25am
Frankly, I'm amazed that you were surprised that this was just rehash of the original. The first one was so one-dimensional there really wasn't a lot of room for growth.
|
bluemeanie
|
Posted: October 23, 2007 at 10:46am
I had been talking so much trash about "Hostel Part II", having never seen it -- so I thought I wouldn't knock it until I tried it. I watched it. It does nothing but confirm my belief that Eli Roth is the worst director working today. This was terrible, awful and just plain disgusting. Torture horror is so over, evident in a big way back the lackluster box office performances. I am hoping "Saw IV" bombs this weekend too. That would, hopefully, be the final nail in that coffin. "Hostel Part II" was just nauseatingly bad. Poor Heather Matarazzo. 0/10.
|
Crispy
|
Posted: October 23, 2007 at 1:54pm
From what I understand, the Saw series is contracted up to six movies already, so I think it'll have to be horrible before they close that door. That said, I have hopes for the Saw IV, hopefully it will regain the story emphasis from the first two and not just put all the focus on the torture scenes, which is what kept 3 from ranking up there.
|
effin
|
Posted: October 23, 2007 at 9:11pm
Can anybody really say they were suprised this movie would be as bad as the first...or any other of eli roth's films. Using alot of makeup to produce gore isn't a film its a crappy idea. Sicking feathers up your butt doesn't make you a chicken, sitting in a directors chair doesn't make you one either.
|
bluemeanie
|
Posted: October 24, 2007 at 11:40am
I like this guy. Here, here! "Hostel Part II" just furthers my belief that torture horror is pointless, fruitless and to the detriment of the entire genre right now. It's turning people off from horror rather than turning people on to it -- and that's kind of the point. When Eli Roth directs something that doesn't rely on blood and guts for all of its effect, then I might concede that he has some talent. Until then -- I could make a better movie with 1/2 the budget he has.
|
bluemeanie
|
Posted: October 24, 2007 at 11:41am
I mean -- just look the that poster! A girl holding her own head. That poster is designed to disgust people. And it does. It completely turns people off from seeing the film, and horror films, in general. Why use that poster? What does it offer? What does it provide the film?
|
Tristan
|
Posted: October 24, 2007 at 1:49pm
So what if it's supposed to disgust people? At least it's not false advertising. If that poster turns someone off from seeing the film, then it's actually perfect. The kind of people who want to see this film, are the same people who will think that poster is great. That said, I've already ordered a copy of it.
|
bluemeanie
|
Posted: October 24, 2007 at 2:56pm
You have me there. It's not false advertising and the people who want to see it will. In two years, however, I have the immediate feeling that the people who want to see films like this will have them sent straight-to-DVD instead of theatrical. Fingers crossed.
|
Chad
|
Posted: October 27, 2007 at 7:53pm
I love "torture porn" and I loved the first Hostel, but this... this was disappointing to say the least. 6/10, and I'm being generous with that.
|
Chad
|
Posted: October 27, 2007 at 7:54pm
Oh, but I have to admit that I loved the bloodbath scene.
|
grain of sand
|
Posted: October 29, 2007 at 9:44pm
I don't like these movies, but I saw this in rotterdam and it made me nervous to be american.. so I guess it was effective in that sort of way......
I liked cabin fever, so I won't say I hate Roth, but he sucks
|
C L
|
Posted: May 15, 2008 at 5:59am
I literally just finished watching this 5 minutes ago, and I really liked it . Not a classic obviously, but it was cool. Bloodbath was awesome, Lauren German is smokin' hot, I liked the ending...7/10.
|
Shakes
|
Posted: July 8, 2008 at 6:01am
You know, I looked up a Stephen King interview the other night... It saddened me rather deeply to hear him literally compare Roth's \"Hostel II\" to Kubrick's \"The Shining\" displaying great appreciation for Roth and disappointment for Kubrick's classic. He even went as far as calling Eli Roth a \"tremendous talent.\" Whew. I think the ridiculousness factor speaks for itself. No, it fucking cries out loud. Oh yeah, 1/10
|
Edd
|
Posted: July 30, 2008 at 4:03pm
I liked this one better than the first.
|
bluemeanie
|
Posted: July 30, 2008 at 4:04pm
That's like saying I liked my first bowel movement better than my second bowel movement.
|
willowmagic3
|
Posted: August 3, 2008 at 12:34pm
This movie truly was pathetic. For one, people think this is way too \"graphic\" and shit like that BUT really if you compare it to any other torture film it is mild, compared to something like Ichi The Killer this is like PG-13. LAAAAAAME!
|
Nirrad
|
Posted: August 4, 2008 at 6:35pm
Reed, I think it was easy for him to compare this movie to \"The Shining\". I'm not sure, but I think I remember reading an article a few years ago where King said he didn't like \"The Shining\". I've never read the book, but apparently the movie leaves a lot of good stuff out. I personally didn't care for \"The Shining\" either. A lot of people that I know like the mini series a lot better.
|
Tristan
|
Posted: August 5, 2008 at 12:14am
So really, you have no idea what you're talking about. \"You think you remember\" \"I never read the book\". Yeah, King hated the adaptation, because he didn't like what Kubrick did with the end of the film, primarily. The mini-series was god awful, so the \"people you know\" are idiots. The Shining was more than just a book-to-screen adaptation. It was a great piece of cinema. If you knew anything about Kubrick, you'd realize just how brilliant the man was, and how great the film is. It's by no means a decent horror movie - it's barely scary at all - but from a technical standpoint, it's quite an achievement, even on a resume like Kubrick's.
|
Nirrad
|
Posted: August 5, 2008 at 12:44am
Nope, still didn't like the movie. And people on imdb.com like the series as well. Also it's clear I DO know what I'm talking about and you just proved that but confirming that King hated the movie. Thanks.
|
|
