Hostel pt. II review (contains spoliers)

*This review contains plot spoilers. I suggest you don't read it unless you've seen the movie, otherwise you will be disappointed

Hostel pt. II essentially followed the same format as the first Hostel. A group of unsuspecting, young, beautiful kids embark on a trip to Europe. Somehow they're misguided from their previous plans and end of in Slovakia (sp). At this point they meet a beautiful native that acts a tour guide. All the while they experience moments of fear, usually the main character notices them the most. Each group has an outcast, a girl or guy that doesn't fit in with the others. That member is the first captured, and first killed. Despite the fact that one of their friends goes missing, they continue on having fun. Ultimately the whole group is killed off except for the main character. He/she is saved at the expense of his/her long time friends.

The difference between the pt 1 and p2 is the second dynamic that Eli Roth adds. This part allows us to see the "behind the scenes" of the killings. We get to meet two businessmen, one who is very masculine and tough; the other who is hesitant and shy.

I honestly believe that some people would participate in something like this. It's sick to think about but I'm sure there are business men who would actually get off killing an attractive woman. I've been around people similar to the characters in the movie. Obviously they aren't murders but that doesn't mean they're not sick individuals. Eli Roth makes a comment about this in the special features; essentially saying the same thing-some men are dogs.

My problem with Hostel pt II and I guess part I, was the ending. Eli Roth leaves us on a total limb. Sort of like a Quentin Tarantino, Death Proof limb, except that was expected. All of a sudden everything just comes to an end. Out of know where, the cute, responsible main character turns around and kills two people with out an ounce of guilt? There's a huge difference between a sad ending and a bad ending. I love ambiguity and all that but I know the only reason why they ended the movie this way was to make a sequel. It's exactly what they did with Saw II and III and IV. If this was the last Hostel, it would have been fine (with a few tweeks) but I know this series isn't finished.

In Eli Roth's defense, the second part of trilogy can somtimes be the worst but only because part three would be the overall resolution. I can't really think of an example in film(godfather 2-the best) but it makes sense theoretically (you can't get to the end with out a middle, sometimes a long, boring middle).

Anyway, I still loved the film cinematically, could have spent more time in the torture chambers but that's only my sick sense of horror.

Enjoy the film,

popGURU