|
|
Nirrad
|
Posted: August 5, 2008 at 12:45am
*by, not but.
|
Tristan
|
Posted: August 5, 2008 at 12:47am
I'm mainly just going for hits here, but thinking you heard something about King not liking it is hardly \"knowing what you're talking about\". That's reading something in passing, and trying to make a point w/o doing any hard research.
|
Nirrad
|
Posted: August 5, 2008 at 12:52am
Yeah well, gay! Movie is still overrated.
|
Tristan
|
Posted: August 5, 2008 at 1:08am
Besides, I wasn't saying you were wrong. Just that you didn't know what you were talking about. And why is this conversation not moving to The Shining? It is on here.
|
Nirrad
|
Posted: August 5, 2008 at 1:22am
Because Hostel II sucks so much that we have to talk about something else. I haven't seen it, and I know it sucks. Thats Shining right there!
|
George Snow
|
Posted: November 1, 2008 at 2:51am
I HATED the original. The first hour of frat boys acting like asses, then the dumbass horror. I had no desire to see Part 2. Then today I rented Love and Mary with Lauren German, and she was good and hot. So, I looked her up at imdb and Hostel 2 is the only other movie she's starred in that's available.
What a good movie this was. It had depth, humor, good characters. Though I have to admit it was really predictable. You could see a mile away the two guys were going to switch attitudes, and since Beth was so rich... I might actually buy this.
|
bluemeanie
|
Posted: November 1, 2008 at 4:14am
Sorry -- I have to -- you are certifiably fucking retarded. Depth? Humor?
Is that a joke? Please tell me that's a joke.
|
Greg Follender
|
Posted: November 1, 2008 at 11:59am
Down boy... LOL!!!
Why don't you tell us how you REALLY feel, Meanie?
Incidentally, I concur with your assessment... just a bit less vociferously ;)
|
George Snow
|
Posted: November 1, 2008 at 2:46pm
I enjoyed the hell out of this.
Here's the difference (IMO) between the first and the second.
The first is straight forward a bunch of dumbass' go on vacation looking to get laid, and end up being tortured and murdered by a group that pays high stakes to do the killing. That's it.
The second has depth within the process of how the clients get the victims. The general backgrounds of these psychos in suits with families. The girls weren't cardboard cutouts who just did the normal stupid ass shit that most people do in horror movies. They stuck together. They used their brains, and it showed in little ways throughout the movie.
It was easy to see how it was going to play out, but for the average viewer would probably be surprised at the guy chickening out and the other guy going at it.
This was a far superior movie in my opinion then the first.
Plus, the girls were gorgeous, and three find actresses. You can't go wrong there.
|
George Snow
|
Posted: November 1, 2008 at 2:49pm
Oh and one last thing. The chick from Welcome to the Dollhouse, her murder is based on fact. There was a woman in New Orleans that used to murder people and bath in their blood. She believed it kept her youthful. I thought that was a great touch.
|
bluemeanie
|
Posted: November 1, 2008 at 3:18pm
I guess if this type of film is really your thing, then \"Hostel 2\" is probably its \"Lawrence of Arabia\".
|
George Snow
|
Posted: November 1, 2008 at 4:20pm
I wouldn't put it on any best of lists, but it was an entertaining movie. BTW: I'm more of a Casablanca, Roaring Twenties kind of guy.
|
Crispy
|
Posted: November 2, 2008 at 2:03pm
\"that used to murder people and bath in their blood. She believed it kept her youthful. I thought that was a great touch. \"
That was Countess Elizabeth Bathory. In Hungary. In the turn of the 15th century.
|
Shakes
|
Posted: January 23, 2009 at 6:56am
Awful trash. the truth hurts some times, doesn't it? Eli Roth should be shot. Done...
|
Greg Follender
|
Posted: February 4, 2009 at 1:48am
I finally got all the way through this tonight on Showtime in HD...
This isn't Horror... i wasn't frightened or horrified for one second of this film (nor was I surprised or in suspense at any time)... this is simply another exercise in pushing the violence envelope. Even the set-up was a snore...
The first one had at least a bit of novelty to it... this was simply a rehash with pubescent women at the forefront instead of teenage men.
The acting was passable and the cinematography was interesting at times... but other than a morbid curiosity to see what would happen next... nothing was compelling about this film.
At least it had a decent cadence to it... it told a simple enough story and went along at a fairly rapid click... otherwise is was a worthless exercise in puerile violence for violence's sake. Even the death scenes were brutally pedestrian... aside from the Countess Bathory allusion that was an unexpected stand-out. Even that scene was awkwardly done with the girl being slashed from beneath from a supine position without proper leverage...wtf? Bloody unlikely...
Disappointing... but expectedly so...
I remain unimpressed.
4/10
|
Nirrad
|
Posted: June 24, 2009 at 2:53am
Garbage. The only part I enjoyed was the party about 20 minutes or so into the film. This movie was a big waste of time and doesn't even hold a candle to the original. It was so boring and it probably has the dumbest opening I have ever seen. Oh, I guess I enjoyed the bloodbath scene as well. The two men switching attitudes was retarded as well. Apparently Hostel 3 is in the works, so I'm definitely skipping out on that one. 9.5? Please. More like 3.5/10
|
Crispy
|
Posted: December 7, 2009 at 12:44am
This was just a shell of the first movie; and the first movie was garbage. I'll admit I too dug the bloodbath scene, but everything else was a waste of time. And the ending's little twist gave me a headache from my eyes rolling so hard.
|
Ginose
|
Posted: February 21, 2010 at 3:33pm
..."The Shining" mini-series, as well as the book, suck. King is a hack. I've never met a man with such a dedicated fear of inanimate objects in my life, and even Kubrick realized this, thus making the "hotel" less of a chracter in his adaptation and focusing on the crushing lack of sanity that t he hotel (and its history) cause.
Anyway, yeah, this did suck. I only liked the first because it was a good jab at exploitation in the modern era, but I'm starting to see the lack of realized potential in such a revival on modern audiences. This was shallow, thick and tried to provide a narrative that it just didn't need in order to function well-enough. The gore was even more tame than the first and, although I feel Eli Roth is probably a great guy, who I'd get alongwiht immensly, I don't think he knows the difference between a "fun movie that's good" and a "fun movie". He can't seem to direct either terribly well and, aside from "Cabin Fever", his filmography is showing itself to be as one dimmensional as his take on the genre.
Saw a round-table discussion between Takashi Miike, Guilmero del Toro and Roth at the Cannes screening of Miike's "Gozu", and, although roth shows the same type of utter-fanboyism, his obsession with the violence aspect of film is almost insulting to any decent horror filmmaker and I could almost here Miike and del Toro's eyes rolling as he went on. Like I said, I'm sure I'd get along with the guy, but he's not a talented man.
Here's looking forward to a project by him that is at least functioning as a FILM.
2.7/10
|
|
