[quote=“Lucio Fulci”]
But it does exist. Case in point would be someone by the name of Ted Bundy - I think everyone knows what he did and how he brutally raped women. Some people take pleasure into that kind of stuff and the way it’s being exploited right now and shown to a generation of young people is disconcerting. I like gore and over the top violence, but only when it’s done right (and by right I don’t mean the special-effects, I mean in the way it’s used) . Romero/Savini blended humor and its completely funny when you see it, but here Eli uses it in a harmful way, he wants to hurt us literally, with the use of gratuitous violence. Still, it doesn’t affect me, but I know someone who watched (female) and she was completely overwrought by it, it’s her fault for seeing it but still, it should have been an NC-17 picture.
[/quote]
If the movie freaks you out when you see it, the movie WORKED! It’s a horror movie! If it doesn’t scare you to the point when you’re trying to unlock your front door at night to get back in the house at night when you came home from watching it because you’re afraid someone is gonna jump outta the bushes to get you, the movie did its job! If you can’t handle it, then maybe you shouldn’t be watching scary movies! If Eli wanted to hurt people literally, it’s a lot easier (and cheaper) to just go out and shoot or stab someone than spending a studio’s money to make a horror movie.
So if it were rated NC-17 it would prevent a lot of people from seeing it? Look, kids are gonna see movies no matter what rating it is. The thing to do is educate kids so they know the difference between fiction and reality! If they can’t differentiate the two, they don’t deserve to be breathing free air! Kick em out of the secular environment!
The real sicko is Dave Poland if you ask me. The mind that could conceive, with his own imagination, that there are people masturbating to Paxton getting his fingers cut off with a chainsaw and a college girl getting her neck cut open with a scythe so her blood can rain down on a woman Elizabeth Bathory-style must be a little sick. Besides, there are more people in the world who watch it and are completely rational who believe everyone else is getting sick pleasure from it than there are truly sick people getting pleasure from it.
Romero/Savini injected humor in their violence? When the zombies are in the basement eating people in Dawn of the Dead, where’s the wink-wink nudge-nudge? Nowhere. It’s visceral and savage.
[quote=“moviemike”]
If the movie freaks you out when you see it, the movie WORKED! It’s a horror movie! If it doesn’t scare you to the point when you’re trying to unlock your front door at night to get back in the house at night when you came home from watching it because you’re afraid someone is gonna jump outta the bushes to get you, the movie did its job! If you can’t handle it, then maybe you shouldn’t be watching scary movies! If Eli wanted to hurt people literally, it’s a lot easier (and cheaper) to just go out and shoot or stab someone than spending a studio’s money to make a horror movie.
So if it were rated NC-17 it would prevent a lot of people from seeing it? Look, kids are gonna see movies no matter what rating it is. The thing to do is educate kids so they know the difference between fiction and reality! If they can’t differentiate the two, they don’t deserve to be breathing free air! Kick em out of the secular environment!
The real sicko is Dave Poland if you ask me. The mind that could conceive, with his own imagination, that there are people masturbating to Paxton getting his fingers cut off with a chainsaw and a college girl getting her neck cut open with a scythe so her blood can rain down on a woman Elizabeth Bathory-style must be a little sick. Besides, there are more people in the world who watch it and are completely rational who believe everyone else is getting sick pleasure from it than there are truly sick people getting pleasure from it.
Romero/Savini injected humor in their violence? When the zombies are in the basement eating people in Dawn of the Dead, where’s the wink-wink nudge-nudge? Nowhere. It’s visceral and savage.
[/quote]
your so right when you say a horror is supposed to scary you, thats why i was waiting till halloween to watch hostel, from what you’ve said about it i think i’m going to be too afraid to now…OMG…QUETIN or some sexy strong hunk is going to have to sit and watch it through with me now for sure
I wonder if someone knows that Quentin just put his name on it to help it attract other producers, and didn’t actually have a hand in writing or directing it what so ever.
He didn’t have to work hard to attract any producers, considering they were the same ones who produced the original, some of which were already close friends of his.
Does the fact QT didn’t write or direct the film lessen the film somehow? Isn’t it enough he endorses the guy who did write and direct it?
The first film was acceptable. But putting women through those situations was over the top and not acceptable by any standards. This film which is now classified as “Gorno” Gore+Porn is a tasteless genre that only sadistic bastards who hate women can enjoy. Again Hostel I ok. Hoste II, bad and harmful.
Films that caused shock and awe have always been lambasted and ridiculed. Back in the seventies, such films were called video nasties, at least in the UK.
If Hostel: Part II pushes buttons, so be it. So did Last House on the Left, and so did I Spit on Your Grave. In all three films, the men guilty of harming those women were taken to task. When a man commits a heinous act towards a woman they are dealt with. These films should be an indictment, a warning to any men who would do such terrible things.
Pornography involves some kind of sexual penetration. I’ve seen the film several times, I didn’t catch any of that.
They were emotionally raped, there is such a thing. No a dick did not penetrate her, but her emotions were fucked with and do you think she’ll ever feel the same about men after her experience? Of course not.
I Spit On Your Grave is a rape/revenge film. Hostel II is not that. And I’m not saying Hostel II sucks or that Eli Roth is a hack. Eli is a brilliant filmmaker but the subject-matter is not appropriate to be deemed with an R rating. Eli even brags that they got away with it in a youtube interview. I’m all for gore when it’s done right. To me Romero, Fulci and Lewis are masters of it. And even in Cabin Fever, that film was funny and Eli got it right. But with Hostel, well let’s just say it’s hostile for any kid out there who saw it and now thinks it’s cool to torture women.
When Roger Ebert saw I Spit On Your Grave, the man in the theater hooted and hollered and rooted for the rapists. Ebert wrote his review in response to the delinquent male pricks in the theater. I wonder how those same men felt when the rapists were hung, castrated, and hacked to death. And what difference does it make that it’s a rape/revenge film? Violence towards women is violence towards women. Let the revenge fit the crime. The women in Hostel: Part II were victimized and the two people directly responsible for this conduct were decapitated and castrated.
Yes a person can be emotionally raped. I know too well. I praise the actresses in the film for their stark, brave as hell performances.
And don’t get me started with Fulci. As much as I love Fulci’s films, Fulci was a misogynist. It’s very well documented how much he mistreated his actresses.
I should add, since this is about the Hostel: Part II commentary – do you know he film was given the NC-17 at one point? It sure did. You know what it got it for? Nope, not the cock snip. It was Heather Mattarazzo’s performance when she was hung up waiting to be sliced up. It felt too real. And it’s true, it’s one of the most powerful moments of the film, if not THE most powerful! (I’m surprised no one’s mentioned the boy who got shot.)
Eli, shocked, said, “So you’ve given the film an NC-17 because Heather’s a good actress? So if she was a terrible actress you would have given it an R right away? Don’t persecute the movie because Heather’s a good actress!” It was this retort that got him his R.
Now if the movie provoked members of its audience, good. Cinema should provoke. But never forget that a movie does not create abhorant behavior. If it did, I’d be a ticking time bomb waiting to go off.
I was three when I started watching horror films. And these weren’t mamby pamby films, these were the worst of the worst. And I’m neither a social deviant or a rapist.
Eli’s talked extensively about the releases of his film in other countries. They have to edit out a lot more than they do in America, and some countries wouldn’t even release it, no matter how much editing would be done. The whole problem with it getting the R rating from the MPAA was because they thought it was wrong that the woman that sliced up Heather’s character was getting sexual pleasure from it. It’s certainly an image that’s burned into my mind for eternity. And I guess that’s the whole point, innit?
[quote=“Geoi”]
The whole problem with it getting the R rating from the MPAA was because they thought it was wrong that the woman that sliced up Heather’s character was getting sexual pleasure from it. [/quote]
this was already there in the first film!!
i think that hostel 2 is a very bad film. As i already wrote, i feel that it was a film Roth didn’t really want to do… just listen to Roth’s director commentary, it’s boring, he has nothing to say about his film (whereas his commentaries on cabin fever and hostel were great)… the edwige fenech scene, the scene in the train, the carnival, the twist… almost everything in this film is just awfull…
having said that, i cannot agree with the porn/gore/eli-roth-is-sick arguments because they remind me a lot of articles from the 70s or the 80s about classics like Texas Chainsaw massacre, Mother’s day, Dawn of the dead or Last House on the left…!!
You know what? I think I may have mixed up the commentaries. I remember the Hostel part one commentary better. I liked the first one more. I don’t want to see Hostel 2 again, not even if it’s just for the commentary.
. . . there’s a producers commentary supplement on the dvd of eli roth’s awesome horror movie hostel part 2 and it features tarantino . . .
. . . tarantino stands out in the commentary. it’s a great insightful performance from the god. he speaks about the process of making some of his movies and he reveals that he was offered a remake of michael crichton’s westworld that he turned down. worth a listen . . .
