Talk:Hostel (2005 film)

message: The two sections "Reaction" and "Controversy and Criticism" are closely related and actually kind of redundant.  I propose combining them, they're not that long anyway. -Jaardon 23:41, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Combine "Reaction" and "Controvery and Criticism"

message: I don't see any reason for this film to be part of WikiProject Iceland, just because a character in the movie is from there.  By that logic, every single movie should be a part of the respective WikiProjects of any country that gets mentioned in the movie.  If anything, this movie should be a part of WikiProject Slovakia, if there is such a WikiProject. -Jaardon 23:39, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProject Iceland

message: Does anyone know what UL the article refers to?--142.177.120.226 
04:25, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Urban Legend

message: The "themes" section is heavily done in POV manner. 205.238.205.220 02:07, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it's quite legal to have the cast c/p'ed like that onto the page. I'm not going to change it because I'm not sure, but if anyone is, go for it. Jjjsixsix 19:57, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I can't comment specifically on this movie, but the stories of EMTs reviving people at horror films is a fairly common publicity trick. Compare William Castle and Macabre or the news stories of people fainting during the reading of Guts. -Fuzzy 21:19, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup

message: I think there should be something about truly violent and gross this film is. Its not just torture, its much more intense than that. Elleohelle
This movie does sound like it's worse than torture.
Brian
The film was not exceptionally violent.  Compared to movies like saw, there was nothing spectacular about it.
This is a hardly a violent film. What? A drill in the leg, cut tendons, a hanging eyeball (that looks terribly fake), and two lost fingers...that's the only gore, disregarding the usual shootings etc. you see in every movie these days. Oh and the chainsaw thro the leg, but there was a much better chainsaw scene in Dawn of the Dead, and that movie sunk without a trace. 
If the film has been criticized (or lauded) for being exceptionally violent, then notable such criticism could be included. I actually find this more likely than the film being criticized for being an unrealistic portrayal of Slovakia. Demi T/C 21:16, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ... The violence in a film is not judged on its realism or whether other movies are worse. You can't just invent criteria to fit making a movie non-violent. -RannXXV 09:24, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Violence

message: The section talking about a likely sequel call the movie a big success. Is it? There isn't any data on what it cost or what it made, and it's already fallen to #5, below Narnia which has been out a heck of a lot longer. I think if it's going to be called a success, it needs to be sourced at least a little bit with a cost/proft comparison. -RannXXV 04:59, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Success?

message: I found no source for this:
"I made this movie because I want people to think about... where society is going in terms of exploitation and pornography," director Eli Roth explained in an interview. "It's no accident that these guys are American, that they are very sexist in their attitude towards women, and that the things that they feel about the girls in Eastern Europe is very much based in American fantasies and stereotypes. Everything comes back to bite them in the ass though; they definitely pay for it." Elsan 22:38, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources?

message: POV much? Needs to be rewritten in an encyclopaedic style and with a bit more balance I think. Weebs 16:58, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. If these criticisms are from a third party source then they should be cited in the article. Otherwise it sounds to me like the editor inserter a lot of his or her personal opinions. Maybe a NPOV statement should be inserted for that section. Piercetp 06:39, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticism Section

message: Just read the sex and violence subsection, completely violates the Wikipedia NPOV policy. Someone needs to change it.... --Dunlevyd 01:36, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sex and violence section 

message: I don't have a clue why that's there. All i see it as, is advertising the bid on e-bay rather than being informative. Also, the bid expired. Though i haven't watched the film, I dont think this should be there and for the time being i will remove it and if people feel it should be there put it back up. Please post here explaining its relevance before putting back up. Thank You.
Forgot to post my details and this was the original post. "The domain http://www.blatanikov.com (the name of the contact for the Elite Hunters) is being sold on E-bay: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7609793394"    Shoot The Moon 17:01, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, one thing's for sure... either no one wanted it, or no one knew about it... $1.00US starting bid... that's cheap for a domain name... They'll probably put it up again... NetStormer 05:33, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  http://www.blatanikov.com 

message: This is absurd, bordering on racist. 
Also, begging and looting street children, if any, are or were in reality in the most cases Gypsies in countries like Russia, Ukraine, Romania, but not in any of the current EU countries, including Slovakia.
The criticism section needs a major overhaul, and whilst the film certain did suck, it could do with making slightly less into an "attack" section. Some sources wouldn't be remiss either. - FrancisTyers 02:07, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Having been to Romania and Bulgaria I can tell you that is how gypsies really act. They are a big problem in Eastern Europe. Someone should probably just give them a small amount of land in Russia for them to settle in. Do everyone a favor. Volksgeist 02:56, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wow, generalising a whole ethnic group by a few limited encounters, way to go. Having said that, the only place I was ever spat on was in Romania, and that was by an old gypsy woman 'cos I told this kid she was with to stop bugging me and to get a job — I suppose to a tourist they are a nuisance, but I think the bigger problem is of systematised discrimination. Consider that the "big problem" may have other causes than just the fact that they were born as Roma. Besides, this isn't the place for discussion on this topic. Its for discussion on how to make the page better. - FrancisTyers · 13:01, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah you guys are really genius etnographers. In Slovakia around 80 percent of all Roma adults are unemployed. Why? Because they dont want to be employed genius. When a factory or a industrial park is builded, most of the offers go directly to roma heavily populated regions because of the unemployment problem. However, the Roma are too lazy and stupid to work more than just 5 hours a day. Most of the Roma live in poverty. Why? Because the main income into their family treasury is social cash recievment or petty theft. Then the US (with their native american population crammed into small zoo-like reservations) starts criticizing us for being racist and having a prejudice against them. look at your own minorities! Black, Hispanic, Native, Asian, do they actually get the same chance in life as you do? Is that immigrant worker in your local Wal-Mart happy with his life? Is he glad he works in Wal-Mart? Would You be glad to work in Wal-Mart? - xyz1258 · 22:31, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality

message: I was disgusted at how bad of a movie Hostel is.  Besides being culturally incorrect, the film is filled with very bad plot holes, cliches, unrealistic (and almost cartoon-like in some cases) depictions of gore, and just horrible direction.  I mean, can't anyone criticise the movie for how bad it is (and why nobody should take it or Eli Roth seriously).  As for Quentin Tarantino, it's obvious he had very little to do with the film since he wouldn't put out something so bad.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.188.250.41 (talk • contribs) 
--------
Personal taste has nothing to do with the article, they are created to be unbiased at wikipedia, what you worte was.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.233.156 (talk • contribs) 
:The Critism section appears highly POV and should be cleaned up.  This might be because it was written by an editor who has been heavily involoved in Slovakia articles and might have taken personal offense at the film. -Husnock 17:26, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The "criticism" section has some very definite flaws. "Slovakia is really in Central, rather than Eastern Europe" - arguably true, but how is this relevant? Does the movie even make the claim that Slovakia is in Eastern Europe? "[A]lthough the country has some underdeveloped regions, it hardly differs from any other Central or West European country" - again arguably true, but the claim is very generic. The same could easily be said about both the United States and Venezuela, for example. Further, I can think of a handful of rural places in Sweden (which by no serious measure is considered a poorer country than Slovakia) which are at least as run-down as the ones depicted in the film, and I'm sure you can find places in for example Arkansas or Idaho just like the places depicted in the film. —Gabbe 15:23, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Gabbe - what wartorn regions are there in Sweden and the United States? The answer to this is none and it's exactly the same in Slovakia. The film peddled a rather ridiculous stereotype that is based on nothing but ignorance. If they had chosen to use Bosnia it may have made sense given that the country is actually wartorn, though it would still have been ridiculously inaccurate. There is really no defending the portrayal of Slovakia, even with some pathetic attempt on Roth's part to pretend he was doing it deliberately and it's no wonder that it caused offence in the country. Blankfrackis (talk) 01:10, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Idea for the Criticism Section 

message: Some folks have expressed a need for clarification on what the "war" is that is mentione din Slovakia.  When I saw the film, I at once thought World War II, since thats really the only major war Slovakia has actually been in as a declared party wihtin the past 60 years (I might be missing some Communist conflicts, however, and I am a World War II historian).  I also think the filmmakers probably thought that Slovakia was just "one of those Eastern European countries" or grouped it all together with Yugoslavia which has had plenty of recent wars. -Husnock 18:27, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: When I saw the movie, I thought immediately about the latter case (Slovakia confused with former Yugoslavia or an entirely fictious conflict). I would suggest the removal of the WWII reference as it is (in my opinion) irrelevant in this context. Tankred 20:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's pretty obvious that they're not talking about World War II -- that's just silly. World War II affected nearly all of Europe, so any reference to things being different in Slovakia "since the war" would be nonsensical if World War II were the war in question -- the same would be true of France or the UK or Italy or Austria or anywhere, pretty much. When I heard the line, I assumed it was the filmmakers just being stupid, whether or not they meant Slovenia, but by the end of the movie, when the whole conspiracy had played out, I had a different idea: I thought maybe the "since the war" line was used to feel out exactly how culturally ignorant these stupid Americans were. After all, they were looking for rubes, dumb provincial Americans who would be easily led according to their plans. Other events in the movie back this up, I think (the portrayal of our heroes as only being interested in smoking pot and getting girls, etc.). I don't think this should be listed as necessarily an error. --Masterofzen 04:29, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Before WW2 Czechoslovakia was one of the richest countries in the world. As a consequence of the war it became part of the Eastern block and as a result the two successor states are still poorer than most of Europe, although progress is being made. So the taxi driver's comment makes sense but is unlikely because Slovaks don't have this cultural memory of paradise lost in the same way as Czechs do (see films like Obsluhoval jsem anglickeho krala for their ideas about the Golden Prague of the 30s).
Poorer than most of Europe?! So the Czech republic is poorer than Moldova, Ukraine, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Romania, Montenegro, Serbia, Kosovo, Croatia, Hungary, Poland, Belarus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Greece or Portugal?! Look at any list of countries by GDP per capita and than tell whether the Czech republic is poorer than most European countries.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.176.255.56 (talk) 10:17, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "War" 

message: Perhaps these are additional information for the subject 'Trivia'.
You mentioned that in the film the 'dutch' people in Amsterdam speak German, in the German version the 'dutch' people speak Viennese (it's a dialect of German used by Austrian; in German 'Wienerisch').
In the German version of Hostel 'The German Surgeon' speak Spanish and Paxtons monologue is also in (not-subtitled) Spanish.
Nobody in Amsterdam is positively identified as being Dutch - in fact the boys ask if there are any Dutch people in Amsterdam (rather than just tourists).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.212.36.193 (talk) 14:37, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  German version of this film 

message: I don't think the cops were in on it, why does it say so on the article ?
They were in on it...they stopped traffic when Paxton was trying to escape as they were looking for him....they knew this whole business was taking place - mass numbers of tourists and locals were getting killed and going missing so how could they not know about this place?  Plus, note the attitude of the policeman when (i think it was Paxton, or his American counterpart) when they went to report someone missing...
Tachante
::Also, Paxton sees the police in the carpark of the factory, mingling with the clients. BrianFG 10:59, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The first commentary track for Hostel (there are many) stated that at least one cop was in on it, but Tarantino or Briggs clarifies that it it is unknown. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.243.137.25 (talk) 05:15, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I live in Slovakia and my opinion is that the police were probably not in on it. What tends to happen when you try report something is that the police try to solve the problem informally (e.g. a fight solved by the two parties shaking hands) and not to file an official report as the statistics look bad. So the treatment the American gets in the police station is more "typically East European" than "conspiracy". As for the bit where the police are pulling guys out of cars and beating them up. It's strange (and this is, along with the torture aspect is the only part of the film which is not realistic), but why are they beating up the other people who are not connected to Paxton if he is the point of the roadblock?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.151.218.132 (talk) 15:25, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Police

message: I was just watching the commentary on the DVD and they say there were 9 languages in the film. But Wikipedia lists only 8. Wasn't there Russian in the film? Dose anyone speak russian and can confirm that. I think they were singing a russian song in the sauna. Czech and Slovak, aren't they very similar, how do we know wich one was used? I also wrote down two words from the subtitle: Senoratas, sayonara, are these italian? --Steinninn 06:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I added an example for all the non english languages. Please don't add other languages without bringing an example. At lease leave a message in my usertalk and tell me where it is in the movie and I can provide the audio file. To answere my own question, Senoratas is Spanish and Sayonara is Japanese. Thanks --Steinninn 21:24, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Two of the characters are Russian, but I don't think either of them speak any Russian. BrianFG 11:00, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actualy, since my last post I've gained more information on the language part. Thanks for posting though. The mafia guys say one or two words in Russian. For example Yest problem, wich I am made to believe is Russian. There were more, I can't remeber it. --Steinninn 15:10, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: At all, Spanish is not spoken during all movie at all. Senoratas is not Spanish. "Señoritas" is Spanish. I have not listenned to it in the movie. And it's just a word anyway... I have deleted "Spanish" language from spoken languages section in the movie --Jose Ángel - Spain 87.220.58.239 (talk) 06:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  9 Languages 

message: What proof do we have of the radio interview at the top? I do not see any sources. Where are the other points on the topic that is was based on actual events? No mentioning of it at all? Lame The film itself is based on true events...individuals used to pay or still do, to go to war zones and shoot at anyone and anything....An account of this is found in a book on the Holocaust, can't remember the name????, but the author went undercover to research this sort of thing, and also at one point viewed a snuff film involving the rape and torture of a 12 year old girl!! Think about the Holocaust, serial killers, and this fim does really does not step outside the bounds of reality at all....--68.97.75.170 22:03, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Based on True Events and website? 

message: In the film, there's a train station called something like 'Podicany'. Does anyone know if this was a real train station? If so, where is it? I know that most of the film was shot in Prague, Czech Republic but I'm just curious to know if this station was just staged or it actually exists. -Tachante
:(If you mean the train station in the end of the film) Yes, there is such a train station. In the windows of the train you can read the name 'Praha'. It's the czech name for 'Prague', so this train station exists, but the commercial and advertising on this train station is a little bit mixed. At the top of the staircase is a german commercial 'Jetzt auch 'am' DVD' and at the bottom of the staircase is a czech commercial for Coca Cola. I don't think that the Open/Closed-Sign (at the toilet) in Prague is only in german (Geöffnet/Geschlossen), englisch (Open/Closed) and french (ouvrez/fermez?),too. There should be also the czech words for 'open' and 'close'.
It's the train station where the japanese girl committed suicide and jumped in front of the train. It reads 'Podicany' reading it again... Tachante
These places exist dont fool yourself
Yes, that was definately hlavni nadrazi in prague; the newer part of the station, especially the ticket windows which are very visible in the scenes, is highly recognizable. As for the other station, the name on the sign Poříčany, also in the czech republic near the larger city of kolin and about 35 km from Praha. from this map http://www.mapy.cz/?query=Podicany&portWidth=1098&portHeight=615&zoom=11&mapType=base¢erX=134458880¢erY=136178176#centerX=134222224@centerY=136032272@typ=ophoto@zoom=16@vizType=none@vizIds=none you can see that its configuration matches the one shown in the movie. 147.32.97.51 20:57, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Train Station 

message: From the article: "The film scored a 59% “Rotten” rating at Rotten Tomatoes[2] and an initial B- at Yahoo! Movies,[3] a good showing for a horror film (By comparison, Saw only received a 45% “Rotten” rating,[4] but also has a B- average at Yahoo![5])."
A "good showing"?  28 Days Later got 89% "Fresh" and even 28 Weeks Later got 70% "Fresh".  59% is a lousy showing even for a horror film.  I'm not even sure I'd agree it's a good showing for a slasher film (The Descent got 84% "Fresh") or grindhouse (Grindhouse got 81% "Fresh").  -- Mike Blackney 04:15, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reaction - "good showing"? 

message: The plot section is way, way longer than necessary, and is clearly completely 'original research'. There are no citations at all. Please can people also stop discussing the role of 'gypsies' and ethnicity on this discussion board - it's not the place, if there even is such a place for the frankly racist opinions expressed here. --Pipedreambomb 02:44, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  SPOILER PLOT 

message: :Image:Hostel chinese poster.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 04:54, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Hostel chinese poster.jpg

message: Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't this movie also receive a lot of criticism for the fact that it depicts torture for the purpose of entertainment? Am I the only one who thinks this should be mentioned in the criticism section of the article? --Jml4000 04:40, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism for assigning entertainment value to torture 

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 15:51, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: According to the articel Paxton kills the Dutch businessman in the toilet, however in the Directors Cut, the Dutch businessman meets up with his daugther and they both go to the bathroom, male and female respectivly, on hes way out the Dutch man ses a surgents knife on the sink and then goes to wait for his daugther out side the womens public toilets, when she dosent come he goes in and looks for her and comes out with only her teddybear, looking around in horror trying to find her, then he starts to running around looking for her but dont find her.
Shouldnt this be added somehow or somewhere ? --> Halmstad, Charla to moi 17:09, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternative ending 

message: Space between the last link in ==External links== and the succession box.  Remove.96.53.149.117 (talk) 15:41, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extra 

message: The film is basically a big homage to Takashi Miike, with Miike even making an appearance in it. While I don't care enough to look for direct sources, it's fairly common knowledge. I think it should definitely at least be mentioned in the article. Thoughts?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dumpydooby (talk • contribs) 03:17, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Make more mentioning of Takashi Miike? 

message: All of his work and input on this movie seems to have been underplayed a bit. The movie probably wouldn't even have existed without Tarantino. Roth came up with an idea, wrote a draft script, and then he and Tarantino then developed the idea, to create a screenplay. Tarantino then worked on post production, and then helped get it widlely distributed in the United States
The film almost certainly wouldn't have been shown in America or Europe without Tarantino. And almost certainly wouldn't have been any sort of hit
totally right...this film has got Tarrantino written all over it, so to speak..... 
Cjmooney9 (talk) 12:28, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Tarantino

message: Please read WP:FILMPLOT.  If anyone disagrees, feel free to address it here so that we can establish consensus. Millahnna (talk) 17:22, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent plot edits are way too long 

message: This article has little information on the film's production including information on the film's development. I've also read from multiple sources in books about the film's popularity overseas by American troops who use it as a way of catharsis for the war, this should be mention in the film's reception section.--Paleface Jack (talk) 22:15, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Production and Missing Information 

message: The whole section has been copied almost word by word from one of the cited sources, http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art43785.asp --2A01:C23:6041:3A00:50ED:50B7:6EA9:FF4D (talk) 13:31, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slovak reaction to setting