'Hostel III' to Torture Moviegoers Without Eli Roth?
Filed under: Horror, Deals, Lionsgate Films, Sony, RumorMonger, Remakes and Sequels
You know, sometimes you just want to get your hands on a studio executive and shake them until they see sense. Straight from the 'why bother?' files, Bloody Disgusting has received a tip that Hostel producer Scott Spiegel has been tapped to direct the third installment of the horror series. Not only would Spiegel be behind the camera for the flick, but he would also be in charge of writing the script. Even though I might not be the biggest fan of Eli Roth or Hostel, I do know one thing: if you aren't going to do something right, don't do it at all.After the release of Hostel II, it became clear that Roth had no plans on torturing tourists again in the near future, and fans of the series were given the bad news that a third film could be a straight-to-DVD affair. At least fans can take solace in the fact that Spiegel produced the first two films, and has solid horror cred, so at least he knows his way around some blood-spatter. Spiegel's deal has not been confirmed yet, so stay tuned to Cinematical for any updates that come our way.
What do you think? Should Hostel continue without Roth? Or, is the series better off as the sole property of Roth's sick imagination?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
6-30-2008 @ 9:00PM
K said...
Maybe if someone else directs a sequel, it won't suck as badly as Hostel II. The first was good, but the second was the most andristic P.O.S. I have ever seen.
Reply
6-30-2008 @ 9:33PM
Jonathan Kuhn said...
I'm going to disagree with K above and say that, while not as good as the first film, "Hostel II" had some interesting ideas playing in it.
While the "Hostel" films take things too far to the extreme to really be taken seriously, I do believe that Eli Roth put a lot of good social commentary into the movies.
In Defense of Eli Roth: http://slowclapchildren.blogspot.com/2008/06/in-defense-of-eli-roth.html
My guess is that a direct-to-DVD film will completely ignore that aspect of it and just try to be super bloody, which doesn't interest me in the slightest.
Reply
6-30-2008 @ 10:53PM
Riley Freeman said...
were already getting 2 more saws we dont need another hostel. pls stop this one
Reply
7-01-2008 @ 8:06AM
bongo123 said...
Just cause you dont like a certain genre doesnt mean it should stop being made even if in your eyes its complete shite.. i'd rather gouge out my own eyeballs than watch that meet the spartans bollocks or any of the other crap they produce but i certainly wouldnt stop em, i say bring on hostel 3, i enjoyed the 2nd one, its a total beer and mates movie.
7-01-2008 @ 9:54AM
MosquitoControl said...
I've defended Roth and Hostel II repeatedly on this site.
Not particularly happily. I don't think the Hostel movies are anything terribly good. As for Roth, I think he's a doof, to be nice, and that Cabin Fever was one of the worst theater experiences I've had.
That said, Hostel is not nearly as bad as people claim. Hostel II was not misogynistic, despite claims, and was anything but. Hostel actually had a decent cast (well, a somewhat charismatic lead) and Hostel II was very well shot.
More importantly, Hostel II (in fairness I don't remember 1 well) dealt far more with going into the world of the movie than simply showing tortures. Very, very little screen time was devoted to the torturing.
Compared to all the other pieces of crap that come out in similar genres (turistas, wolf creek, captive, the hills have eyes) these were cinematic glory. Of course, that's comparing it to a very low bar, but the Hostel movies at least played with giving themselves a real plot and real purpose, at least cast likeable actors that knew how to act and had some charisma, and at least were very well shot.
I don't like Eli Roth much. But I think that he is growing. I think that you can watch his three films back to back to back and see a real upward trend. There's a very good movie in him somewhere and I'd like to see it get made.
As for the Hostel series, he's better without it. Much better. Is it better without him? I can't say. While I don't feel we need it, I'd rather a sequel to this than The Hills Have Eyes 3 (heaven forbid.) Someone could certainly take what the first two films set up and create a truly creepy film. Hostel II, I thought, did a pretty good job of this by showing us the other side. That was its true distinguishing characteristic. Finally it gave one of these film series a human antagonist rather than simply deranged evil loners.
Again, not a great film, maybe not a good one, but light years ahead of its competition.
Reply
7-04-2008 @ 10:14AM
Rashad Ferguson said...
Most Hostel More Saw let the people scream. Hostel struck a nerver in the hearts of most people... when the luny killing everyone is some psycho red-neck wielding a chainsaw, some radioactive mutant tribe hidden in the woods or off in the mountains, some supernatural freak in a hockey mask... everything is fine but when that killer become a business man and or woman in Brooks Brothers suit it strikes cord with people...
I wonder why?
Reply