Note posts made on our older Talkback system will still show below. However, new posts can only be made via the new system (above). We will export the old comments to the new shortly. You can still comment as a guest on the new system but it also allows you to login using various social network and other accounts.
Other features coming soon.
Talkback
page: 1
IvanApr 18th, 2006 - 00:33:44
Fascinating review but I think I will still check it out due to Tarantino's involvement, his name usually means a pretty good ride. Popular opinion on this one has been split pretty evenly down the middle, with some critics like yourself deeming the film a pale imitation of the hard-core 70's pictures while others seem to be responding better to what Eli Roth was trying to accomplish. There's nothing else you liked in the film besides the f/x work?
I agree with Frankie's review. There is nothing majorly wrong with the movie, but it never really sucks you in the way some of the great horror films of the past could do. The movie takes a while to really get cranking, but it is too little too late when it does. Also, I agree with the fact you just don't care too much about the characters. They are almost completely disposable. Also, I never once thought the movie was scary. There are a couple of 'disturbing' scenes, but again they aren't that bad because we have seen worse in films like Texas Chainsaw Massacre. It is worth watching if you are a fan of Roth or these types of movies. There is nothing really wrong with the movie, but it doesn't really grab you the way you think it would. Still, I will take a 'new' film like Hostel over another crappy re-make of a horror great any day.
Far be it for me to discourage somebody from checking out a movie. My review is only my opinion and certainly with this film, subjectivity plays a big part. That being said, since you asked....I'm a big fan of Tarantino but his name doesn't always mean quality, just look at My Name is Modesty or Little Nicky(heh, kinda stretching here since he only has a cameo) but for the most part I agree that Tarantino usually puts his name on quality products like Hero or Iron Monkey. I also think how much you appreciate this movie will depend on how familiar you are with the films I mentioned in the review, if you have not seen any of those films, then without a comparative, you might come away thinking it's a pretty good, nasty flick. If you do, great, and I would be intrigued in hearing your opinion once you do see it. What I liked besides the f/x work? Well, as I said in the review, there a few enjoyable moments like the scene as two protagonists enter a torture museum and the ticket taker uses a small guillotine to cut the ticket in half, a throw away moment, but it gave me a chuckle and the reference to The Wicker Man (if you rent or buy Hostel, I whole-heartedly recommend the same for this highly superior flick)was a nice touch as was the Takashi Miike cameo (though it only reminded me of what I could be watching). As Patrick said above, there is nothing particularly wrong with the film but with the buzz surrounding this film hailing it as the 'nastiest film you will ever see', I came away shrugging my shoulders.
In general, I agree with the review. However, being someone who spent a year backpacking/bumming around europe with a couple friends, I found I could relate to the characters/experiences in the beginning of the movie.
QT's involvement could have included some cool dialogue and more indie type references or music. However, the only tie to Tarintino I found was the 'one chair' torture rooms, and Pulp Fiction playing on the TV in the Hostile.
All in all, a good movie, definitely not a 'chick Flick'
HOSTEL tells the story of two adventurous American college buddies Paxton and Josh who backpack through Europe eager to make quintessentially hazy travel memories with new friend Oli, an Icelander ...more
USA
Your Talkback on this Story