Jump to content
IGNORED

Hostel 3 - Trailer now online - post #192


Goose
 Share

Recommended Posts

They're still trying to push this workprint as a fake and that Roth has changed the ending. I'm still calling bollocks on that. It sounds more like damage control to me.

I honestly can't understand how this getting such good reviews. Even being generous it's just a dull movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Good News! No new Roth Movie for a while!

-----------------------------------------------------

Due to the disappointing box office results for "Hostel: Part II," director Eli Roth has updated his blog asking fans to support R-rated horror films. "Studios feel the public doesn't want them anymore, and so they are only putting PG-13 films into production. The only way to counter this perception is to get out there and support R-rated horror," pleaded Roth.

That's a tough sell, especially, since most of the big blockbusters this summer are PG and PG-13. And it's not only our responsibility to support R-rated flicks, I believe it is up to the filmmakers to provide us with something worthy of watching. "300" was rated R, yet somehow still made a whole lot of money.

While Roth also blames the leaked pirated copy of "Hostel: Part II" as one of the factors for the poor box office results, he still feels adamant that unless the studios believe people are interested in R-rated films, there will be lots of delays and editing done. First victim is his upcoming Stephen King adaptation of "Cell," which has been on his plate for some time now.

"I am not directing Cell any time soon, and I most likely will take the rest of the year to write my other projects," stated Roth. "Which means I wouldn't shoot until the spring and you wouldn't see a film directed by me in the cinemas until at least next fall."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I am not directing Cell any time soon, and I most likely will take the rest of the year to write my other projects," stated Roth. "Which means I wouldn't shoot until the spring and you wouldn't see a film directed by me in the cinemas until at least next fall."

I really hope someone else gets the 'Cell' directing gig.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haven't seen this and more than likely won't, having just tried to sit though the original. Horrible piece of work. What's the point of it? I got to the part where Jay Hernandez gets his fingers chainsawed off and turned it off. There was no tension in it at all, no sympathy for a bunch of fairly dislikeable characters... just a long winding road to a splatterfest which (I'll be honest) turned my stomach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Sorry to drag this back to the front page, but I went to see this yesterday.

Dear Lord, what an absolute steaming pile of freshly discharged gangrenous jizz that was.

Whilst the first one was alright, nothing special, there is absolutely nothing of any worth in this at all. The acting is appaling, there's very little actual gore and it's all so bloody dull. Oh, and it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Rant over, but one to avoid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How they could have done that I don't know. Edited out all the charaters, apart from the cat at the beginning? His performance was by far the best.

The reception guy was awful, though. Especially so.

'He. Won't bother you..........Again' Sinister smile that looks a bit gormless

'Here. Have a........Drink' Friendly smile that looks a bit gormless.

And so on. I can normally overlook bad acting, but this has taken it to new levels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, it's not Roth's fault it's so bad, it's bad because you all downloaded the workprint. It was a really good, really gorey movie before then. But when you all downloaded it Roth had to take all that stuff out. Honest. He said so on his myspace page.

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen a fair few horror films, and for me, Wolf Creek's up there with absolutely anything else in terms of scariness. It put the absolute fear of God into me, I've never been so frightened and unsettled by a film. It's just the atmosphere of the film – the performances and the slightly grainy visuals give the film a genuinely unsettling air, because it puts across just how brutal something like that would be. It seemed real, and reminded me that things like this actually happen in real life. Despite the bad guy behaving like a clichéd horror movie villain throughout, he still seemed real enough to be scary.

Actually, that's what was so effective – the film tangibly puts across the sheer despair you'd feel in a situation like that. It makes Hostel look like the fevered wank-dreams of a sheltered teenager, which is effectively what it is anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More the latter, but there is a fair bit of gore. It's not pointless, ludicrous "dude, his eye like totally popped out of his head" style gore, but there are some quite gruesome bits. It gets right into your head, though - I'd recommend watching it late at night with a jazz fag (if you're that way inclined).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NY Daily News spoke to director Danny Boyle (28 Days Later) during a screening of "Sunshine," who stated that fellow director Eli Roth (Hostel) isn't very good.

"His movies aren't even particularly well done," Boyle explained. "They're not even scary. They're horrible, but that's not scary. It's not suspense. And if you watch my films in detail, there's actually not a lot of violence in them. You get numb with violence very quickly."

We all know Roth to be very outspoken and definitely not one to shy away from retaliating, so we'll probably hear something soon. For now, his people are playing defense, telling the paper: "Eli has a lot of fans out there, and these last reviews he received were really great."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, that's what was so effective – the film tangibly puts across the sheer despair you'd feel in a situation like that. It makes Hostel look like the fevered wank-dreams of a sheltered teenager, which is effectively what it is anyway.

I see 'Wolf Creek' in a similar light. The elements you thought were effective were ruined for me by the tired 'based on a true story' line because it made everything I'd just watched a poor excuse for showing me some torture scenes.

The only survivor saw nothing at all, so effectively the gore and brutality was made up by the film-makers and not 'truth' at all.

It probably wasn't helped by the amount of recommendations I got from friends as to how terrifying it was, I spent the entire film waiting for a punch that never came. Nasty? Yes. Scary? Not at all.

I only watched the original 'Texas Chainsaw Massacre' a few years ago and was amazed at how unrelentingly brutal and bleak it is. That's how to do a punchy, nasty horror tale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't find Wolf Creek scary at all. I was really quite disappointed.

I haven't seen something decently scary since watching The Eye in an almost empty cinema. I couple of those scenes were quite horrible tense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see 'Wolf Creek' in a similar light. The elements you thought were effective were ruined for me by the tired 'based on a true story' line because it made everything I'd just watched a poor excuse for showing me some torture scenes.

The only survivor saw nothing at all, so effectively the gore and brutality was made up by the film-makers and not 'truth' at all.

o/\o

so true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking about the 'torture porn' thing, and how some commentators in the media have stuck up for films like Hostel, because they claim it turns such an unflinching eye on the horror of violence that it forces us to confront what it is we enjoy about such films. Eli Roth for one was regarded as a groundbreaker in that respect, and some critics used the idea as a defence in support of this type of film.

Unfortunately it's complete bullshit, because I listened to the commentary track on Hostel and the entire thing basically boils down to a bunch of guys patting each other on the back for getting away with really disgusting stuff.

Highbrow critic says "Eli Roth turns the tables on the viewer, repulsing them with the very thing they seek. In laying bare the essence of violence and its consequences he creates a moral dilemma for the fan of splatter movies, pointing an accusing finger at three decades of cinematic gore and its advocates".

Eli Roth says "Look at that fucking head come apart, dude!".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had, rather naively it would appear, assumed that Roth could not make a worse horror film than Hostel 2. How very, very wrong I was.

I had the misfortune of watching Cabin Fever on Channel 4 last night. In my defence, I had thought that Roth had made some sort of masterpiece as his first film, that had somehow passed me by. I assumed that he went on to get financing his next films because this film was a work of cinematic genius.

What I can not work out, for the life of me, is how anybody could watch that pile of toss and then think it a good idea to give this man several million dollars to go and play with.

If I was Roth, I would go away and have a long good look at my career, if Hostel is the peak of it. I hope he has another 'talent' to fall back on. Like road sweeping or something. Anything that doesn't allow him anywhere near a camera again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking about the 'torture porn' thing, and how some commentators in the media have stuck up for films like Hostel, because they claim it turns such an unflinching eye on the horror of violence that it forces us to confront what it is we enjoy about such films. Eli Roth for one was regarded as a groundbreaker in that respect, and some critics used the idea as a defence in support of this type of film.

Unfortunately it's complete bullshit, because I listened to the commentary track on Hostel and the entire thing basically boils down to a bunch of guys patting each other on the back for getting away with really disgusting stuff.

Highbrow critic says "Eli Roth turns the tables on the viewer, repulsing them with the very thing they seek. In laying bare the essence of violence and its consequences he creates a moral dilemma for the fan of splatter movies, pointing an accusing finger at three decades of cinematic gore and its advocates".

Eli Roth says "Look at that fucking head come apart, dude!".

Yeah, I often hear that as a defense for violence, that in some way its to force us to question why we would want to watch it. Something that some films do attempt to do, such as Funny Games. I remember watching an interview with the director of that film, and he was very much against the glorification of violence in films.

Eli Roth has never come across as anything other than someone who wants to make the goriest, most fucked up shit possible happen on screen so he can get his jollies off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Only caught this yesterday and was hugely disappointed. The ending was just fucking stupidly silly.

I had read it carried on straight from the first with the guy basically going on a revenge killing spree. But fuck me it wasn't quite like that was it. As has been said, it's just a remake of the first film - only worse!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.