Thursday, April 16, 2009
I have a tendency to avoid sequels. This especially holds true when the sequel is based on a film I have already seen and did not like. It was out of character for me to watch Hostel: Part II. I was actually surprised that the second film was better than the first. Although not a film I would go out of my way to see, Hostel: Part II was decent enough to earn a moderate recommendation.
The Hostel films tell of a secret society of wealthy people who travel to Slovakia to engage in sadistic killings. These sick individuals enter into a contract with a group that identifies itself with a mandatory bloodhound tattoo. The contract appears to require three things. First, the members are required to pay for the opportunity to exercise their demented desires. Second, they are required to accept the bloodhound tattoo. Third, they must kill their victim.
The victims are lured to a Hostel in Slovakia , where their pictures are put out to bid. They eventually disappear, their final destination an abandoned warehouse type building which is heavily guarded. The interior has been outfitted with high tech security systems that include cameras, remotely operated elevators and doors, and man-trap doors to control movement. The individual rooms inside this warehouse are outfitted with a wide variety of tools and equipment designed to extract torturous pleasure from the unsuspecting travelers.
In Hostel: Part II the group of travelers are all female art students who decide to take a railroad trip. Their original destination is changed when a nude model (Axelle, played by Vera Jordanova) from the art school convinces them that they should visit the spas in Slovakia . The girls end up at the same hostel from the first film. However, this film introduces the audience to the killers as well as the victims. Interaction between the two groups prior to their arrival in the torture rooms adds another dimension to the story. I thought that there were going to be some parallels between this film and Taken, but was relieved that this film took its own direction.
In indicating that Hostel: Part II was better than the first, this was the point that made the difference. By creating a back story for the killers, the audience becomes tentatively connected to both groups. The character development was ferreted out better in the sequel, which made the film more interesting. The characters were still a bit flat, but the back-story on the killers added some dimension to the overall tale. The plot line in Hostel: Part II was different from the original even though the setting was the same. The ending was flagged far enough in advance that it didn’t really come as a plot twist. The storyline was simple. Eli Roth did a decent job with this script.
Read More About Hostel: Part II