The depths which horror directors such as Eli Roth succumb to are so low, that even the deepest pit of Hell is not punishment enough for such a sickening display of filmmaking. Indeed, the horror porn styling of Roth and his peers (Darren Lynn Bousman, Rob Zombie, etc) are all the rage these days. But hopefully with the critical and commercial flop of Hostel: Part II and the like, maybe these filmmakers will learn that it is suspense, intrigue, great characters, and a solid story which makes a horror movie, and not excessive blood, gore, and torture.
The film starts off promisingly when the audience is re-acquainted with Paxton (Jay Hernandez), the lone survivor from the first film who is killed off just as soon as he appears. Yet it quickly becomes apparent that this will be nothing more than a re-tread of the first movie, only made with a slightly bigger budget and with three females instead of males as lambs to the slaughter. Said three young women are Beth (Lauren German), the level headed one; Lorna (Heather Matarazzo), the nerdy one; and Whitney (Bijou Phillips), the promiscuous one. Travelling through Europe, they are convinced by the seductive Axelle (Vera Jordanova) to accompany her to a retreat in Slovakia where they will find romance in an exotic environment.
Yet what the girls don't know is that they have been sold to the highest bidder by a secret underground, yet global reaching hunters club, who cater to the desires of the twisted and depraved wishing to torture and kill their new acquisitions. Among them are American business men Todd (Richard Burgi) and Stuart (Roger Bert), the latter - a conflicted middle age, middle class family man - the only interesting character in the film.
Some say Hostel Part II contains a strong message about American ignorance, and that Roth should be graduated for speaking up on such issues while making a film that will not conform to censorship. (In fact, for a lesson in un-intentional comedy, one should read American attorney Julie Hilden's defence of the movie on the basis of freedom of speech.)
I say, why does a film maker need to show numerous decapitations, the tearing of limbs, exposure of genitalia, and a steady flow of blood and guts to bring such a message across?
A filmmaker is only as good as he or she's influences. In Hostel: Part II, Roth cast infamous Cannibal Holocaust director Ruggero Deodato in the role of a cannibal, no doubt as a tribute to Deodato. For those who don't know, Cannibal Holocaust was a highly controversial horror movie released in 1980, which landed Deodato and his cast in hot water due to the films violent and graphic nature. It featured numerous murders and rapes, and several animals were slaughtered on camera. This is the type of stuff that has influenced Roth and others, so it is no wonder why their movies are nothing more than sadistic, brutal, and twisted tales, where lack for human decency is worn like a badge. A sick movie, created by a sick man, catered to a sick audience.