O Albergue 2

"Hostel: Part II" follows a group of American art students who are studying in Rome. Among them are good-girl Beth (Lauren German), wild Whitney (Bijou Phillips), and the soft-spoken Lorna (Heather Matarazzo). This group of girls end up on a train to Prauge, where they meet a model, Axelle (Vera Jordanova), who convinces them to go to Slovakia with her to a mineral spring spa. The girls arrive to Slovakia, where they enjoy spending a few days at the youth hostel. Little do they know, the girls have been auctioned off to wealthy tycoons who want to find the thrill in their murder - and at an abandoned warehouse, they can do that. Soon after, the three young women are taken off to the warehouse one by one, where their grisly fates await them - but can they make it out alive?

To be put plainly, I didn't like the original "Hostel". The only reason I saw this was because a friend of mine convinced me to go, I would've rather seen something else. To my surprise, I enjoyed this movie a little more than I did the first, if that means anything. Story-wise, this movie is essentially a complete rehash of the events in the original, minus the fact that our main characters are young women rather than a bunch of hormone-crazed guys. There are some tweaks on the story as well, so it isn't a complete copy. Some of the writing is clever (and I thought there was a small bit more of depth, for instance the exploration of the "businessmen" themselves who were paying to torture), but it has it's fair share of problems as well. I thought the film got off to a decent start, but after sitting through the first thirty minutes my hopes for it diminished. Like in it's predecessor, "Hostel: Part II" contains some utterly ridiculous moments. At times I wasn't sure if the movie was going for a bad comedy or a horror flick - it balances on that line awkwardly, and it doesn't work out well. That was one of my biggest problems with the original, the humor just didn't work. Both of these movies could have been very suspenseful and terrifying, but the attempt at dark comedy and the over-the-top violence ruined it.

As expected, the violence and gore is amped up for this sequel, and I was thoroughly grossed out on quite a few moments. But the problem is that that's basically all Eli Roth knows how to do. Sure, I may have squirmed - but was I scared? Of course not. The idea that the "Hostel" films are based upon is intriguing, but you need some solid suspense and terror to get a good reaction out of me, and this movie failed to do that. Call me old fashioned, but the majority of these gore-filled "horror" movies don't cut it for me. As for the acting, that was one thing I did enjoy about this movie - I personally liked the cast. Lauren German ("Texas Chainsaw Massacre" remake) plays our lead quite well, along with Bijou Phillips ("Venom") who turns in a good performance in the type of role she plays often. And Heather Matarazzo ("Scream 3") was excellent in her role as the quirky and naive Lorna. I have to admit, I did care about the characters in this movie, so in that sense it did something right in my eyes, but that is mainly due to the actors, and nothing else. As for the finale of the film, it ended with another ridiculous gag that was attempting to be funny, but I just thought it made the film seem even more unbelievable and stupid.

Overall, "Hostel: Part II" is one gross flick, but the gore doesn't do anything for the story. It's awkward balance of humor and horror doesn't mesh, and the ridiculous gore gags in this film add to it's stupidity more than it's scariness. The cast was good, I'll give it that - but unfortunately they can't redeem it. I'll admit I enjoyed it a tad bit more than I did the original (and I was "entertained" throughout it), but that's really not saying much. If you didn't like the original, I wouldn't bother seeing this sequel. I could tolerate it, but it's nothing even remotely remarkable. 4/10.

When I first saw "Hostel" back in 2006, I thought it was a solid, entertaining flick, but still full of flaws, so when a sequel was announced, along with its official synopsis and promising cast, I naturally got really excited as I thought it sounded great and had lots of potential to be even better than the original, hence this easily became one of my most anticipated movies of the year. After finally seeing the film I have to admit that I still like the original a tad more, but I'm happy I waited as this is surely one of the better horror sequels I've seen recently.

The plot this time focuses around 3 American college students - Beth (Lauren German), her best friend Whitney (Bijou Phillips), and the sweet Lorna (Heather Matarazzo) who are studying art in Rome for the Summer and plan on going to Prague to explore Europe. However, they cross paths with the mysterious Axelle (Vera Jordanova), a beautiful model from their art class who somehow convinces them to skip their journey to Prague and head to Slovakia where they can relax and enjoy the country. Soon they find a hostel for the weekend and it seems like everything is going to be great, but little do they know that staying at a hostel was the biggest mistake in their lives, and that they are going to pay the price in the worst possible way.

To be honest, I was never too big on Eli Roth before. I thought „Cabin Fever" was very mediocre and full of clichés and pointless nudity, whereas Hostel a big step from "Cabin" with an interesting and original concept, but still full of flaws, so I guessed if Roth continued to improve, this could have even been better than the original. I was wrong though as I actually found myself liking this a bit less than the first one, but still thinking this is definitely one of the better and gorier horror sequels in the last few years, and one of the most entertaining movies this year.

Without a doubt the best thing about the movie is the great acting. Honestly, as much as I'm a HUGE horror fan, even I admit there are really rare horror movies (or even movies in general) in which most of the actors did a great job, but fortunately, that was the case here. Heather Matarazzo, who has really grown up since her debut in "Welcome to the Dollhouse" does an amazing job in portraying without a doubt the sweetest character in the whole movie, and when bad things start happening to her you really feel bad for her as she just gives a great performance. Lauren German, who played the unfortunate hitchhiker in the awesome "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" Remake, gives an amazing performance too and I was happy to see her as a lead in a horror movie as I thought she was great in the Chainsaw remake. Bijou Phillips also does a great job in playing the loyal and tough "best-friend" type of character, and she is surely one of the bets characters in the film, something she didn't have a chance to be in movies like "Venom" for instance. Worth mentioning is also the newcomer Vera Jordanova, even though her character is waisted and should have gotten more screen-time. The other characters are greatly build up and you really do feel bad for them when bad things start happening to them, thanks to both the already mentioned, great acting, and a good script written by Eli Roth who actually surprised me in the movie as I thought he did a pretty good job and didn't put any unnecessary nudity like in "Cabin Fever". I also liked how the movie didn't just center on the 3 girls and their torturing, but also the tortures themselves (played by Roger Bart and Richard Burgi) and their fears and thoughts, which was a pretty fresh add to the plot. No need to say this is way more brutal than the original too, even though the ending could have been less comical and more action-packed.

Of course, there are weak points of the movie though. First of all, I was very much disappointed with the route Eli went with the character of Paxton (Jay Hernandez), our hero in the last movie, as I thought it was very clichéd and already seen before in other horror sequels. The movie also felt rushed towards the ending, as all the action and torture scenes were fairly short and incomparable to the ones in the original. The movie also didn't feel as "dark" as the original, and some scenes were just pointlessly funny, but that's probably why I liked this sequel; it wasn't trying to be a carbon copy of the original, actually quite the opposite -- it was trying to a different, yet loyal follow up.

In some sequels that method never works, but in this one it did. Hostel: Part II isn't as fresh as the original, but it's a solid Horror Sequel and an impressive follow up to the original.

6/10

Apparently, Director Eli Roth has a fetish for "snuff." If fact, in a documentary I watched on the subject recently, Roth is interviewed and becomes visibly "giddy" when he comments on the realism of "Cannibal Holocaust." It is no small wonder that he developed the idea for, and directed the two Hostel films. I don't see that as an admirable quality, but then... I am old school and still believe the best horror isn't in-your-face-gore. I realize I am in the minority these days.

The first "Hostel" was not a great film. It was, in fact, not very good, but what it did have was an intriguing premise: a club whose wealthy members pay to torture and murder abducted people. What worked was that such an idea was not entirely inconceivable. I would argue that such clubs, just like "snuff" films, currently exist, and that was what made the film interestingly creepy for me.

Hostel Part 2, however, offers nothing original. Instead, it robs from various horror films of old. For example, the opening scene mirrors that of Friday The 13th Part 2. In another scene, as I watched a female club-member bathing in the blood of her "purchase", I couldn't decide which vampire film the scene reminded me of most, there are so many. It was at the ending that I actually let a laugh slip. The foiled attempt at irony was followed by a scene reminiscent of "Blood Sucking Freaks". "Hostel" provided solid potential for a redeeming sequel, but instead, "Hostel Part 2" ended up being nothing more than a compilation of already tried and over used gimmicks.

In "Hostel", a group of young men end up at a hostel in Slovakia that kidnaps people for its clients to torture and kill. Now, a group of American girls ends up at the same hostel. Will they meet the same fate, or perhaps they'll have more luck? And what ever became of the kids from the first film?

Full disclosure: I didn't like "Hostel" very much. I loved "Cabin Fever", but grew weary of Eli Roth after his second feature. So "Hostel 2" sat unreviewed for several month before I finally broke down and watched it. Guess what? We have a sequel that eclipses the original in every way -- this one is pretty amazing. Relying far less on torture and excessive nudity (although both are present here), we get an actual plot, likable characters and best of all a glimpse into the other side.

Torture clients aren't just faceless monsters in "Hostel 2", but real people with hopes, dreams and fears. There is a depth and complexity to them that allows us to almost sympathize with their angle, no matter how reprehensible they may be. (Some of them are still just ruthless killers, of course.) At one point, a potential murderer raises a philosophical point posed in the past by Hobbes, Rousseau and Locke: without laws, how is man naturally going to respond to others in a state of nature? To some degree, they attempt to answer this question. ("Battle Royale" also addressed this, though the characters in that film were in a more forced and less natural environment.)

Focusing on a female cast rather than male one really helps, I think. Let's assume the audience (mostly male) wants to see beautiful women, which I think is a safe assumption. In the first film, to accomplish this the boys had to come across numerous loose women with no character development. Visually appealing, sure -- but no substance. By having a female cast, the male audience gets to watch the young ladies the majority of the time while also developing a plot and character motivations. Nudity is less prevalent (but still present). Roth is fully capable of telling a story, as this movie shows, and I'm glad he chooses this over the shock value of sex and torture.

The cast is interesting. Rick Hoffman, who was "The American client" in the first film, returns as "the American businessman". He is something of an anti-hero. While we ought to be against him (he's after the protagonists), the film gives us the point of view that he's just being human, no matter how awful he comes across. Another great cameo is Ruggero Deodato, the maestro of Italian cannibal films ("Last Cannibal World" and "Cannibal Holocaust"). He appears, appropriately, as the Italian cannibal. His scene was not initially in the script (Roth showed up on Deodato's set personally to invite him to Prague) but I think it really clinches the deal of providing us a film that is both new and also giving homage to the classic.

Although you have to see "Hostel" to fully understand "Hostel 2", I think the punishment is worth the reward. For everything the first film lacked, the second makes up for it and then some. Romance, comedy, torture... a truly well-rounded horror film, which is a growing rarity in this age of shock cinema. Highly recommended.

An unnecessary re-hash of the original which was already bad. Plot-hole after plot-hole, improbable situations leading only to an anti-climax and an embarrassing ending, this turkey is cold meat instead of gushing hot blood it would have liked to pretend. I thought that the first one was not remarkable, but kind of wished that Mr Roth would've learned for the second. Instead, i just can't comprehend the need for this... "sequel"...

For starters, forget the scenario, there isn't one. I suppose that as the first one set the scene, we needn't embarrass ourselves with a convoluted script, right ? OK, let's assume so (but it doesn't make it right). So this time, let's just introduce the necessary brain-dead bunch, and get to the nasty parts as soon as possible, right ? OK, let's assume i could buy that (but this is already stretching it a bit too far). So we get to meet the girls, don't learn anything about them (except they're brain-dead alright), so let's get to the immoral stuff already, right ? Erm, no. In the quest for going even further, Mr Roth has crossed the line of ridicule, and as such the movie has nothing left ; no script, no characters worthy of existence, and no horror, let alone gore.

He however decides to show a bit more of the machinery of this secret society ; we see the clichéd-to-death mean faces of those who pull he strings, sunglasses and expensive suits obliged, sipping beverages on a town café's terrace, and receiving occasionally a decapitated head in a box delivered by a courier, just as the dude at the next table might get his soda. The most natural thing in the world you might say. Of course he lives in a manor, filled with everything of exquisite taste, art galore. Their men are everywhere. We get the feeling they control the town. In fact i got the impression that they might even control the whole country. OK so they're powerful. So how come all the convoluted plans to trap the girls ? Which, as they never work as planned (i imagine i should've felt for the girls at these moments, but was too amazed by these sloppy amateurs), makes me feel very embarrassed for an organization of that size. I mean, they control *everything*, and they had to empty a whole SPA of people in the middle of a day so that their men can come to capture the girl left alone and in a bathrobe, who, without any effort at all just jumps over the fence and escapes ? And this is just one example but everything is just as air-headed (i could just go on and on), suffice to say the whole film follows this same logic : no logic at all.

So the nasty stuff then ? What could be morally worse than torturing people and then killing them (so as to surpass the first film) ? Mr Roth must've thought that he would surely get there by killing a child for no reason (and another example of a scene which has no reason to exist, it's just there so as to shock, and even there it fails), and making someone bathe in blood (mixing sex and death in a literal sense). Wow. And that's that. The rest is some sloppy gore hacks that aren't even as good as in the first one. Mix into that the two ridiculous "clients" (the torturers), the ridiculous "twists" of the story, and a ridiculous ending, and you've got yourself a sorry-ass ridiculous wanna-be hardcore flop. But still not ridiculous enough to be actually funny, just lame.

You want some good fun, avoid this one and watch Planet Terror another time...

3* out of 10