Review: Hostel: Part II
Filed under: Horror, New Releases, Lionsgate Films, Theatrical Reviews, New in Theaters, Remakes and Sequels
.jpg)
The premise of Hostel: Part II is that life isn't cheap -- it's worth at least as much as a luxury vacation or a new sailboat. Early on, the film introduces us to two American men, both late 30s to early 40s with the look of wealthy dot.com entrepreneurs, and reveals that they are both clients of the sinister network we learned about in the first Hostel. That is to say, along with other successful sociopaths, they take part in secret online auctions where the prize is a captured holidaymaker that they can torture to death at a private facility in Slovakia. Once the credit card clears -- I wonder what it says on the billing statement? -- the client is invited to come to the facility and experience the thrill of unleashing their inner sadist on an innocent. Much like a brothel might try to sell you sex toys while you're there, the Hostel facility is fully stocked with a large array of torture instruments to choose from. You can imagine Aaron Eckhart's character from In the Company of Men loving this place.
The victims this time around are Beth (Lauren German), Whitney (Bijou Phillips) and Lorna (harlequin-faced actress Heather Matarazzo) all of them riding around on a Eurail pass for one reason or another. Although director Eli Roth is mature enough not to clog up the early portions of the film with pointless 'boo' moments, he does give us enough reaction shots from creepy-looking Europeans on the train and around the town square to make it seem like all of Slovakia is in on the scheme to capture these American babes and pack them off to the slaughterhouse. By the time they are finally betrayed by the one person who was nice to them -- a Slovak beauty played by Vera Jordanova -- it's hardly a surprise. Still, the early scenes of Hostel: Part II are sufficiently atmospheric and tense, and there's never a question that you're in the hands of a capable director. Even the slobbering gore-hounds in the first row should be entertained enough during the lengthy set-up to not be checking their watches.
There are lots of opportunities for jokes in these early scenes, and Roth is a very jokey guy in person, so its kind of impressive that there's such a cap on humor -- there are hardly any laugh lines in the opening act, which ends up being a good choice. There is, however, a weird subplot established early on that I can only imagine we're supposed to find funny, although I just found it to be distracting and nonsensical. It involves a gang of little Slovak kids -- called 'the bubblegum gang' in the credits -- who are, if I read things correctly, at odds with the film's bad guys. The bubblegum gang randomly attacks and annoys people in the area, whereas the organizers of the Hostel want things calm and quiet around the vicinity of their murder factory, so that's a problem. It all leads to a questionable scene that some people in the audience will undoubtedly have a problem with, but I didn't -- I was just ready to move on from the whole 'bubblegum' plot by that point.
The question you'd probably most like me to answer is whether Roth eventually 'pushes the envelope' once the main carnage gets going, but I'm not sure I can give you a straight yes or no. There are some gruesome set-ups, for sure, including one in which a visibly nude Matarazzo is hoisted upside down and hacked at with a scythe so that her female 'buyer' can lay down in a tub beneath and writhe in ecstasy as the blood rains down on her. Good acting and the bold sexual element make that one pretty tough, but that's probably the scene that most threatens the R-rating, and it happens fairly early. Eventually you start to notice that the further Roth goes, the more he's constrained by the R -- his cutaways start to get more jarring and the gore becomes more implied than actually witnessed. Roth is a little too keyed into how the MPAA thinks in general -- he's eager to put in scenes of 'victims fighting back' and other little sops towards correct moral thinking, as defined by the ever-vigilant ratings board.
The good news is that he's also really good at working around his limitations -- the best scene in Hostel: Part II ends up not being a scene of straight-ahead physical torture at all, but a weird dance of psychological and sexual torture. One of the two American men that I mentioned up top is positioned in the film as the reluctant one of the pair, never quite sure that this whole 'murder vacation' is such a good idea, but once he actually steps into the torture chamber with his victim, the other side of his 'sensitive man' persona comes barreling out in an impressively sick way. If the rest of the film was as well thought-out as that scene, we'd be looking at a horror masterpiece. As it is, Hostel: Part II is pretty much what you expect -- some cheap thrills and clever gags from the new golden boy and a couple of toes put briefly over the line before being yanked back. And horror fans will really get a kick out of the cannibal who shows up for a cameo.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
6-08-2007 @ 9:52AM
luke said...
Dude, next time you have a review of a movie could you maybe put "spoiler warning" in the begining. thanks for ruining the best parts of the movie. Oh and now I cant be suprised by the cameo.. sure I dont know who it is but now I cant expect to see someone as opposed to be completely surprised
Reply
6-08-2007 @ 10:09AM
Bartleby said...
I consider myself a fan of horror movies but I have to say it's pretty sad when this torture porn subgenre becomes mainstream "entertainment". I think the sickos who get a thrill out of this garbage need some serious therapy.
Reply
6-08-2007 @ 10:12AM
Norm said...
"a visibly nude Matarazzo is hoisted upside down and hacked at with a scythe so that her female 'buyer' can lay down in a tub beneath and writhe in ecstasy as the blood rains down on her." Are you fucking kidding me??
Reply
6-08-2007 @ 10:30AM
luke said...
yea I agree that torture porn is little hard to stomach but I think people have become de-sensitized with traditional slash and gore. We as an audience want the shock value. Violence may not be your bag of tea but either way your gonna be talking about in the same way as the people who are into it. Its the "oh my god" factor!
Reply
6-08-2007 @ 10:52AM
Porcalina said...
I absolutely think this was far superior to the first Hostel. Maybe it's becuase of the somewhat girl power mode it shifts into towards the end. Also the cameo scene referred to was great. I also think Eli Roth did a great job in particular with the scene that has the group of kids and the man in the woods (don't want to give too much away). It was the most successfully suspensful scene I've seen in a while.
Reply
6-08-2007 @ 10:53AM
Ron Moses said...
What is it with this site and lack of spoiler warnings? You guys learned nothing from the Sopranos fiasco a few weeks ago? I know of no other movie site that displays the kind of disregard for basic spoiler etiquette that Cinematical does. Ridiculous.
Reply
6-08-2007 @ 11:02AM
juan said...
Well, let me just say that going into a movie looking for thrills and scenes that I want to look away from but can't is enhanced by the fact that I already know about the scene "that's probably the scene that most threatens the R-rating, and it happens fairly early." Super pumped about the cannibal cameo... I mean I'm not a huge fun of horror films, but seriously.. It can only be one person. (I dont want to say it if people aren't on the same wavelength).
Sorry but I was looking for a review, not a synopsis. Thanks for partially ruining it.
Reply
6-08-2007 @ 11:11AM
Ryan Stewart said...
There are no *spoilers* -- what a dumb word -- in the review, obviously. You see the big picture up top of Heather Matarazzo hanging upside down, don't you? Did you think that meant things were going to turn out well for her character? I didn't even discuss the plight of the other two characters at all.
If you want to go into the movie blind, why are you scouring the web for reviews?
Reply
6-08-2007 @ 11:33AM
luke said...
its was teetering on the line of spoiler but you definatly gave an unnecessary synopsis which was bordeline play by play. A good review that leaves room for imagination can be found on slashfilm.com
Reply
6-08-2007 @ 12:59PM
juan said...
Ryan, your right... obviously from the picture posted at the top we can figure out that one of the main girls was, "hoisted upside down and hacked at with a scythe so that her female 'buyer' can lay down in a tub beneath and writhe in ecstasy as the blood rains down on her." I know that was obvious. What wasn't obvious what that it was the most gruesome part of the film. And you just told us all. Call it what ever stupid name you want, but you told us all, plain and simple what scene probably gave the film its rating.
but you are right... you only blew 1/3 of the movie for us. We can still spend 8 bucks to see how the other 2 die/survive. Unless you are writing a follow-up?
Reply
6-08-2007 @ 2:00PM
Anonymette said...
Jesus, is it possible for Cinematical to go a day without mentioning Eli Roth or his torture porn? How much is he paying you?
Reply
6-08-2007 @ 2:15PM
luke said...
Anonymette- maybe you dont know this but people talk about a film and its director in the pre days and weeks of its release. This is controversial so its getting more coverage than lets say oceans 13 (also being released today). 2 weeks from now you be reading page after page of transformers stuff but I'm sure you will ok with that cause its only robots and not torture porn.
Reply
6-08-2007 @ 2:17PM
Stan Heck said...
As bad as the sequels get on the "Halloween" "Friday the 13th" & "Elm St" movies they are not as bad as "Hostel" "Hostel" was the only horror movie I left because I was too grossed out. I have no desire to see this sequel. To me Eli is not a director but a butcher.
Reply
6-08-2007 @ 3:12PM
ThePete said...
That's funny because I read this review because I was *looking* for spoilers. I don't plan on seeing this movie, but I was curious if it would contain scenes that I don't really want to see.
I mean, come on, people--what review doesn't spoil things? I hate reading reviews for that very reason. However, if the movie is something I am not planning to see, but I'm curious about, it's the perfect way to find out what happens in the movie.
Thanks, Ryan!
Seriously, I do appreciate it.
While I do wish critics could review films without having to give beat outlines of the movie, I have no problem sticking to IMDB's little news sections that give mini-meta-reviews of movies. Really, I just want to know if the film's any good. I don't need specific plot elements.
Reply
6-08-2007 @ 3:35PM
Adam Chance said...
So if this is for people who are de-sensitized what happens when they become de-sensitized to this?
Whats next?
Reply
6-08-2007 @ 4:08PM
luke said...
Adam that is a good valid point and I dunno maybe child rape is next... it will just get worse and worse. I dont want to see that kinda of stuff but the line will keep getting re-drawn as we become use to these images
Reply
6-08-2007 @ 4:30PM
josh said...
this is not the end of the world. there was nothing in the first hostel worse/more disturbing than i spit on your grave or last house on the left, and those movies came out 30 years ago.
Reply
6-08-2007 @ 10:15PM
MAC said...
Thanks for an excellent review. It gave me enough info to decide if it was worth me forking over my hard earned cash to see this movie or not. Most reviews don’t provide enough of information and I waste my money on a disappointing dud.
Reply
6-08-2007 @ 10:18PM
kaitlin hess said...
I was disappointed....I felt like i was watching a twisted version of Desperate Housewives.......that one dude was just NOT convincing as a crazy murderer.
Reply
6-09-2007 @ 12:24PM
shawn said...
excuse me......Eli Roth, a capable director? ha!
I guess Uwe Boil is the new Steven Speilberg
and Paul W.S. Anderson is the new Robert Altman
Reply