Hostal

Expected much better movie after i saw Tarantinos name on it but its just boring and disgusting IMHO. First half is long nothing about nothing. Seems like not even single scene was shot in Slovakia so why do they take name of this country to their mouth MM but hey its made by Americans so its all clear. Spend more and i mean much more time in library (place to find that Europe isn't country or Australia isn't in Canada or Germany isn't in Nevada (as i was told by some u.s. guys in one online game)) than in McDonald's!!:)) and BTW we got no children gangs ,no sluts sell able for dollar and those cars there he he whats that?:))

peace out

It would seem from the majority of the comments on this film that very few of the people making these comments have any real insight into film production or what some film makers are attempting to communicate to an audience. With that in mind, here are some things I discovered upon viewing this film: (1) The story is new and unique. Thank goodness for any film that is not a sequel, a remake, or a film based on some decades-old television program. (2) The director uses the Xenophobia most Americans have about Europe and the citizens of those countries to very good effect. He plays on those fears, throws fuel onto that fire, much like Tobe Hooper did with rural areas in the U.S. in "Texas Chainsaw Massacre". (3) I was impressed by the build-up of uneasiness leading up to the torture scenes, the prevading sense of something "off bubble". If the characters had not been tenth-degree horndog party animals intent only on having a good time, they might have been more suspicious of the strange events taking place around them, which - in my mind - justifies the scenes of debauchery to show how oblivious these guys were. (4) A great number of things often have to be done in a film to appease The Studio. I saw several scenes that appeared to be included seemingly at the behest of The Studio for "saleability", and were not necessarily included for story-telling. There is also a desire to "one-up" each other in the Studio System, which publicly decries sex and violence while unofficially tells Producers to "give us more, and make it even more shocking than (fill in the blank)". All-in-all, while this film is not for the squeamish, it does have some things to say that create discussion and dialogue about a number of things, from how we view foreign cultures to how we treat each other. Any film that can generate that kind of thought while providing innovation deserves applause.

This movie is a clear step above most horror movies. It helps raise the bar for all horror movies by simply having a nice mix of movie elements that work well together.

Basically, the movie is about three American college guys who venture out of Amsterdam and into a region of Slovakia looking for more extreme female interaction. Once they arrive, they begin to suspect that everything may not be as good as it seems when one by one they start disappearing.

Although this seems like a typical horror plot, the movie is well-done and believable. The European scenery, interesting characters, decent dialog and fast-moving pace of the movie completely separate it from the typical "waste of time" horror movies.

I also give the director high marks for not making this a gore-fest and overfocusing on nothing but blood and guts. The result is that he has created a real movie - and a good one.

This is a pretty decent horror flick. If you're in the mood for this kind of movie and don't want a mindless slasher-fest, this will do nicely.

Recently I picked up Hostel at my local movie store and decided to give it a try. I finished watching it and had very mixed feelings. First off, this film is not nearly as gory and disgusting as advertised. It is although, very graphic, and NOT for the squeamish, I just expected more out of it. The pop-up scares aren't effective and the first half of the movie is all soft-core porn. So what makes this movie a decent horror movie? The physiological scares. That is what got to me. The overwhelming feeling of being tied and up and tortured to death. Having no escape. For that was very effective and stomach curdling. The sex and nudity was all not needed, but for people looking for that kind of stuff, it's all here. The acting was pretty good. No bad performances. Hostel is a kind of movie where you'll either love it or hate it. But overall, an OK horror film. Not my favorite, but not terrible.

I just got back from an L.A. screening of Hostel. I haven't seen an effective horror film like this in a long time. My stomach was still knotted up after we left the screening. The last time I felt like that was when I saw ALIENS for the first time about 19 years ago. Since then, no other horror film has ever made me feel like that. I certainly didn't expect it from this one. As much as I loved Cabin Fever, I'm not blind to the shortcomings of its script. As such,I was expecting more of the same from Hostel - dark humor, gore, and a sense of dread. I'm happy to see that director Eli Roth has taken a big step forward in becoming a better storyteller and filmmaker.

Admittedly my heart sank when the film began. The scenes introducing the main characters were blandly shot and edited. All I could think was, 'Oh no. Roth succumbed to some unseen studio pressure to make a normal-looking horror flick'. The style was typical of the what you'd see in crap like I know what you did last summer. But in very subtle ways, the blandness gets washed away and as our heroes enter the threshold of Hell, the style of the film changes as well. This, I learned during the Q&A afterwards with Roth, was intentional.

If you've read some of the other reviews posted here from people who saw it at the Toronto Film Festival, you get the general idea of the story. Contrary to what you might've heard, this is not a 90 minute film on torture. The torture scenes are brief and to the point. Roth doesn't wallow in pointless gore. And this is where I think it shows how he's improved as a filmmaker. He's more interested in scenes and ideas that move the story forward. Yes, there is plenty of gore, but it's relevant to the story and doesn't exist just for it's own sake.

One of the aspects of this film that made it so powerful was how Roth created a sense of helpless and inevitability. He provides the dark setup, throws in a sympathetic character, and begins twisting the screws and ratcheting up the suspense. This isn't a movie where you turn off your brain to enjoy it. On the contrary. The more you think about it, the more horrifying it becomes. You begin putting yourself into the character's situation and wondering what you'd do. When you realize that there is no hope for the character, no way to escape, no 'buddy' who's gonna turn up at the last minute to save the hero, and not a shred of humanity or compassion to the antagonists, real fear begins to set in.

Another great element in the script is how the 'survivor' makes moral choices that define their character. Instead of being merely reactive like the characters in Cabin Fever, the survivor makes several decisions which change the course of the story. It's a sign of well thought-out script and a filmmaker who cares about the fate of his characters.

For horror fans, this is an absolute must-see. It's so refreshing to see a horror movie that actually makes you feel uncomfortable and one in which you have no idea what's going to happen next. As for the gore, I was surprised by what they got away with. Although there were no credits at the end of the film, the cut I saw was rated R by the MPAA and according to Roth, he didn't cut anything out.