Why Quentin Tarantino Should Be Shot...

Rating: 1/10 (14 January 2006)

Hostel is the worst movie I have seen since Cabin Fever, which, ironically, was also directed by Eli Roth.
I'm not sure WHY people rave over Eli Roth, claiming him to be some sort of new-age visionary of the Horror Genre. His movies are horrifically bad - yet another wink-and-nod to the self-aware post-modern crap that the new generation of film goers believe to be the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Hostel is just another example of such mental masturbation. People speak of how effective the movie is, but I failed to see this. The first half of the movie is all exposition, and fails to endear any of the characters to the audience. You feel nothing FOR the characters, and the only character who receives any development is Josh. In fact, his character is the only one who is likable, and yet, even on the most basic levels, I failed to actually care about him.
As the movie continues, only one scene was TRULY "eerie" or "gross." In a near-empty theatre, my friend and I were the only ones laughing at how the audience failed to react to the "gore" effects, brought to us by the oft-acclaimed Greg Nicatero (Land of the Dead).
Which brings me to the special make-up effects. This is where I was surprised to be let down. Greg, a student of Tom Savini, a true MASTER of horror make-up effects, was also on the staff of George A. Romero's Day of the Dead and Land of the Dead. His work on Land was some of the most phenomenal make-up in modern movies. However, I was sorely disappointed in the originality (with the exception of the eyeball) of the effects, the execution of almost every effect, and his amazing lack of ability to make them look in any way realistic. Particularly disappointing was the fact that he comes from Savini's school of make-up effects, which tends to lead to some of the best effects in the industry.
Overall, this movie is a one-star film, over-hyped by an industry in desperate need of a new face for horror. As is tradition in the film industry, whenever something slightly different comes along in the horror genre, it gets marketed as being the great innovation of our age. What makes it more disappointing is the fact that the new generation of film-goers believe it, verbatim. They reel with disgust at scenes of "violence" that are simply banal and old hat. These are the same death scenes we've been seeing for three decades, but no one bothered to catalog them, apparently.
What the industry REALLY needs is a resurgence of the classic horror film. We are re-entering the age of self-assurance. We are going back to what made the eighties a great decade for horror. When we become complacent...when we get too comfortable in our own shoes, we need to be reminded that bad things happen to good people. That is what Halloween, Friday the 13th, Sleepaway Camp, and Nightmare on Elm Street were REALLY about, and that is why they scared us, so much. Now, when we watch them, we think them campy, humorous, and outright laughable. As we near this new age of comfort and security, we need these films to remind us that, when removed from our safety zone, we open ourselves to a whole new world of terror. However, if Quentin Tarantino and Eli Roth are the new faces in this genre, I'm going back to the classics.