this "Hostel" is little more than a glorified roach motel...

Rating: 3/10 (30 January 2006)

Some critics with delusions of philosophical grandeur have gone the old "cautionary tale" route in justifying the excesses of Eli Roth's tediously grueling sophomore effort, "Hostel." And while I would be inclined to agree that it IS a cautionary tale, it is certainly not in the same context. By my count, we learn 3 important lessons over the course of 90 minutes: 1) Quentin Tarantino will attach his name to any "hot" piece of crap that purports to push the boundaries of genre cinema; 2) Harry Knowles and his ilk are clearly commissioned by companies like Miramax and Lions Gate to provide laudatory blurbs in order to help boost box office; and 3) the hype surrounding Eli Roth and his "craft" is still seriously unfounded.
In spite of the praises of a drunken Peter Jackson and recommendations from several friends, I found Roth's debut feature, "Cabin Fever," to be a maddeningly obnoxious romp lacking in script, redeemable characters, and any sense of style. You might argue that I'm being overly analytical, that I can't "enjoy" a movie for what it is, but you would be wrong--the worst offense of "Cabin Fever" is a total lack of joy in its execution of horrific events and gushing gore.
So, is "Hostel" (a homonym that becomes less clever the more you hear it) an improvement over Roth's previous effort? Not really. While more technically proficient and a bit more developed in story (which isn't saying much), it ultimately remains an experience that is more exhausting and tedious than horrifying and suspenseful, despite the grisly subject matter.
The story, such as it is, follows 2 American fratboy types and their Icelandic buddy on a backpacking trip across Europe. That none of these guys are ever clearly defined as characters leaves us to view them as a trio of sexist, homophobic jocks who would be getting pounded in the pit at Ozzfest. While on a train to Slovakia, our heroes encounter a foreign businessman who eats salad with his fingers (har har), insisting that "Man has lost his relationship with food" (an apparent double meaning is at work here, but I'll be damned if I know how it ties into this movie). Once in Slovakia, our zeroes check into a posh hostel where they are accosted by a duo of Euro-bimbettes; T&A ensues, thus signing away whatever life insurance policy these idiots have. As our fellows gradually and vaguely disappear, it becomes apparent that an underground syndicate of traveling businessmen are paying hefty fees to torture and murder youths in an ugly abandoned warehouse. Or something.
While the setup promises great things for an overachieving gorehound, the reality of "Hostel" is very disappointing. That we care nothing for the characters is the first problem; the clunky, uneven pace that provokes frustration when events should be jetting along is another; and the incredibly awkward attempts at humor (including a gang of renegade Slovak children) are distracting and throw the movie even further from the base of "realism" it so desperately wants to capture.
If Roth has improved his craft on a technical level, it is ironic that this is another factor that works against "Hostel." In a movie going for gritty horror, the settings certainly smack of a 'bowels-of-hell' squalor, but the orchestral score, combined with acting that is too deliberate and studied to convey a mood of real consequence, sinks the intended effect. Whereas the recent "Wolf Creek"--with its unrefined acting, soul-deadening night sequences, and no effort made to explain its madness, heightened the experience to terrifying effect, "Hostel" is constantly reminding us: "It's only a movie...only a movie...only a movie..." "Hostel" does have its gory moments, though they're set against such stark lighting (or encapsulated in momentary edits) that they're sometimes hard to make out; while the violence is plentiful and done in Grand Guignol fashion, it left me feeling cold and indifferent. Compared to, say, "Saw II," which has a justification--no matter how contrived--for its madness, "Hostel" is simply a shock show that condenses its confused 'point' in a speech given by a nattering businessman before he applies a blowtorch to his victim's eye. One can almost imagine Roth emphatically saying, "This is the kind of awful stuff that goes on in the world! See? It's all justified!" Which, of course, is like saying "The Devil's Rejects" was justified...
Perhaps the most savage and nihilistic moment comes at the very end, where our lone surviving hero (minus 'dos dedos') murders the foreign businessman from earlier in the film, thus giving a hollow rush of vengeance that doesn't blur the line between tormentor and tormented, but instead shows the film's hypocritical standpoint on human rights. As if, by killing ONE of the sadists, the black-market torture trade will magically come to a screeching halt. The resulting conclusion I drew from this is that we're pretty much all scum, and have "lost our relationship" with what makes a quality horror film anymore..."Hostel" is a testament to that.
2.5 out of 10