Eli Roth's 2005 film "Hostel" takes some getting used to. In fact the first time I watched it I dismissed it as gratuitous, unnecessary and an altogether awful film. It wasn't until I watched the film again, with the commentary on, that I gained a different respect for the film, and it's director. Roth is an intelligent, well informed filmmaker who pulls from a nearly encyclopedic knowledge of horror films to try to surpass what the masters of the genre had done before him.
With the release of Roth's sequel, "Hostel II", I was expecting a slightly deeper exploration into the minds of the kind of men who choose to take part in the Elite Hunting Club, the company that provides the films victims. Instead, what I got was a sort of retelling of the first film, in which the guys from the first film were replaced by girls in this one. And the men who have paid for the chance to murder these girls? They are given a slightly larger roles this time around, though with nowhere near the amount of character depth that would truly flesh them out.
This film is yet another example of unnecessary horror film sequels. It joins "28 Weeks Later" and Rob Zombie's "Halloween"** as films that not only do nothing to further the story of their predecessors, but also lessen the impact of the films on which they are based. Would I recommend "Hostel II"? No. I say, if this film looks like something you're interested in, watch the original. I'll even go one further and say to only watch the original with Roth's commentary on. His excitement and detail over the film and it's production outweigh the performances of the actors anyway.
Score: 2 out of 5
** I know that Rob Zombie's Halloween is not actually a sequel, but you get the point.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment