[paperdoll]

It does make me wonder if it's all true. Went to Bulgaria last year and to register you with the local police they take your passports.. my OH and I were a little scared.

I thought that Hostel 1 was better, I think because the premise had never been explored before. I thought 2 was a bit of a rehash but with girls.

[secret agent]

Funnily enough I hated Hostel 1, thought the characters were loathsome and it was really slow. I gave Hostel 2 a chance and really enjoyed it, with a better plot and characters. But christ, that bath scene!!

[ThinBoy]

The first one, although not a particularly good film, was a great idea for a horror film. The second one didn't add anything new and was just gratuitous violence - and was therefore a big disappointment (imo)

[brangdon]

If you are interested in the mechanics then it is worth also watching My Little Eye for a different take:

Spoiler

Although it mentions a client's website, the enterprise is very small scale, and I think it could be a private hobby of a single rich guy, with perhaps a few of trusted colleagues to spread the cost.

[Revelian]

Originally Posted by ThinBoy

The first one, although not a particularly good film, was a great idea for a horror film. The second one didn't add anything new and was just gratuitous violence - and was therefore a big disappointment (imo)

The second one was just gratuitous violence with a silly ending, but it gave many people what they want - to see people being kidnapped, cruelly tortured and murdered in inventive ways. Some people would have loved it. I thought it was boring and like I've said, the ending was rushed and a bit daft.

[GavPowers]

I saw Hostel on C5 the other night and found it very original. Eerie and uncomfortable from the off. Some say the first hour is like a porn film, but I wouldn't agree. The nudity isn't arousing really. In fact, it's the reverse. It's a very uncomfortable film to watch. And while it tests the human psyche for any trace of instinctive murderous lust, it's comforting at the end when you are rooting for the escapee. You really want the villains to die. It's only then that you can even imagine yourself with a chainsaw in hand, or blowtorching someone's eye out. Eli Roth and Tarrantino ARE irresponsible in making/endorsing these films. There are people who will sadly enjoy the gore for the wrong reasons. But it's like the old Alf Garnett argument. Were people laughing at him, or laughing with him?
I downloaded Hostel II and watched three quarters of it. Maybe not a film that should have been made really. There were questions left unanswered by Hostel, but I have to admit I switched the second one off. I've seen some sick sh*t on the net, yet I found it impossible to keep looking at Hostel II.

[Resident Evil]

Both movies are crap, it's that simple

[kingjeremy]

I like the first, it's great. It's got it's tongue firmly in cheek and I like all the trashy euro music and naked girls in the first half of the movie, playing up to the American view of Eastern Europe.

The second film is ok, basically just Hostel with girls but the bath scene is bloody great and it does expand a little on the whole business side of things.

Both films are far better than any entry into the crappy Saw franchise, at least these films (especially the first) know not to take themselves too seriously.

[brangdon]

Saw and Hostel are different kinds of film. Hostel is largely a splatter movie; the eye scene for example is simple gross-out. Saw is more of a psychological thriller. It's not about someone foot being cut off, it's about someone being put into the situation where they have to cut there own foot off. Jigsaw's games are mental torture where Elite Hunting is about physical torture.

I agree the first half of Hostel is artistically stronger, but then for me it degenerates completely. It stops taking itself seriously because it has no-where to go. Perhaps the most interesting and chilling scenes are those with the other client, that involve no gore, but explore the attitudes of the clients a little. I prefer the second film partly because it expands on that aspect (and I don't think you can really criticise it without seeing it all).

Spoiler

One of the ideas I like from Hostel 1 is that the boys see themselves as the exploiters. They are travelling to a poor country where they think their American dollars will buy them girls. "If you have money, you can have anything you want." They fully endorse that view. The twist is that other people have more money then they, and the perpetrators become the victims.

The twist in Hostel 2 is similar but opposite. The girls are initially presented as victims, who are travelling to visit a health spar and not exploiting anyone. But there are hints through-out that one of them is rich, and at the end she becomes a signed-up member of the club and the tables are turned again. I don't think this was rushed or daft, except insofar as the whole premise is daft.

[Smerph]

Originally Posted by GavPowers

And while it tests the human psyche for any trace of instinctive murderous lust, it's comforting at the end when you are rooting for the escapee. You really want the villains to die. It's only then that you can even imagine yourself with a chainsaw in hand, or blowtorching someone's eye out.

I agree with this. I watch a lot of movies and my chief complaint is that many fail to leave an impression on me or make me feel involved. I found Hostel to be uncomfortable (and, as a result, incredibly effective) in that I was rooting for Paxton to enact gruesome revenge.

I've yet to watch it a second time, simply because the experience wasn't all that pleasant.

I'm surprised that people think that Part 2 is the harder one to watch, though. I thought the first one was far more gruesome, the second verging into black comedy by the end.

[Jeff Albertson]

Originally Posted by Mark A

Drivel for the hard of thinking.

Both films have a satirical edge which is unusual in the so-called "torture porn" genre.

Eli Roth is definitely having his cake and eating it though as many fans of his work are definitely "hard of thinking" if their internet outbursts are anything to go by.

[ClientFan]

For all the hype, not to mention the right-wing tabloid hysteria, they're both a bit crap on the gore front. Part II has the more imaginitive nastiness but in both films, it's surprising just how inept and unconvincing the effects actually are, especially with today's technology and SFX capabilities.

[UltraViolet]

The gore is most definitely hyped up.

[Damaja]

Watched the first Hostel film a couple of years ago and thought it was ok, nothing special. I had more fun listening to my ex ranting about how the film made her home country look bad and despite being set in Slovakia, no one spoke Slovak in the film - everyone spoke Czech.

Never got round to Hostel 2, I might give it a view one day, although I have heard it's more or less the same as the original.

[Ber]

Its quite difficult for me to describe exactly why I thought the first Hostel film was a big pile of plop. I think the only word I can use is "amateurish".

Amateurish in the way that it seemed the storyline was written by a bunch of boozed-up 19 year olds down the pub. "Oooh lets have some tits, and gore and that guy can have his head drilled and wouldn't it be really cool if some geezer, right, had his eye hanging out of his head, right, and then it exploded right, and then, etc. etc."

[Jeff Albertson]

Originally Posted by Damaja

I had more fun listening to my ex ranting about how the film made her home country look bad and despite being set in Slovakia, no one spoke Slovak in the film - everyone spoke Czech.

Not to mention the fact that the makers confused Slovakia with Bosnia with all that talk of war.

Although Roth has claimed later that was a deliberate mickey take lampooning Americans poor sense of geography.

[jules1000]

I think that both films are pretty revolting and quite mysogynistic

[Orangemaid]

Hostel 2 is on tonight at 10.00 on channel 5 ( i think), recorder is set , watched Hostel the other week as that was also on tv lol, and i was hoping they would show it

[stvn758]

I enjoyed them, be watching the second again.

[Aneechik]

I preferred two. The characters in the first one were just obnoxious so I didn't really care what happened to them, whereas I liked the characters in the second even if there was no element of surprise like there was in the first. I also found the feral children to the rescue bollox in the first one to be a dieux ex machina worthy of a Dr Who finale.

I didn't think three was too bad either. There are worse horror movies around, anyway.

[stvn758]

Here we go, about to get gruesome.

[Orangemaid]

i will watch it tomorrow , and shut the curtains

[Orangemaid]

Erugh..i just watched it now..tis gross Will look for the third one in Blockbuster when i next go so i take it that third one will be

Spoiler

the girl surviver who chopped that girls head off at the end, well i take its her, cos she had the tattoo put on her..lol those lads kicking her head around and her neck was gushing out blood on the grass

[Listentome]

The first one had the shocks, but I liked the second one from the reason we see the story from the point of view of the killers too, which makes what they do even more sick. Even though it is overall not a great film.

The second one also lacks the misogynistic and homophobic dialogue of the first one, which I understand is part of the characters overall attitude, but for me made the lead male characters unlikeable.

[stvn758]

Forgot how gruesome it was, loved it.