Part 1 only had 59% on RT, so 53% isn't a huge difference.

yeah, but there was no reason to point out such a high % from the quote I got in the thread when all the reviews weren't in yet.

Oh, I agree with that completely. It always annoys me when my friends say "Wow, that movie has 96 percent, that's really good!", and there are only 4 reviews listed.

Not to mention that the math of 4 reviews equaling 96 percent makes no sense, heh.

What was the last 10 minutes or whatever mentioned on the ad as being super shocking, I assume it's tied to the scissors death but curious.

Can somebody describe this "shocking" part mentioned on the commercial I won't be seeing this, after not liking the first, so feel free to spoil it in spoilers.

Just saw it with the wife and we basically think we saw part 1 again just with different people and not as good.
I remember seeing the 1st film and didnt really care much for it, although i thought it was pretty good at times. Now this 2nd installment was just bad honestly. The death/torture scenes were nothing to call home about. The acting was terrible and parts that were supposed to be humerous were just annoying. Also, Eli Roth thinks adding things like the kids kicking the head at the end are supposed to be funny, i just think its ridiculous, almost spoof like. What a douche'.

that was hillarious

'

Sounds like the first one. Honestly.......I wouldn't want to be alone in the theater with a person that can enjoy crap like this. I can enjoy violent films. But there is a limit. You reach a point where you have to worry about the mental stability of people that make or enjoy such stuff. I know that'll piss some folks off in here, but that's the way I see it.

saw the first one, it was ok. Saw the 2nd one, it was ok as well

nothing great but then again, nothing sucky about it either. After watching movies like Pirates and Shrek, it's a nice change of scenery every once and a while (and by every once and a while, I think the last movie I went to see like this was the first Hostel .. though I might just go see "1408" as well)

and really if people didn't go mental after the first one, probably won't happen this time either and even if it does you can be assured that even after seeing this they were already wack before they even walked into the theater

Wow, what a shitfest. Judging from what I read, Eli Roth made this movie to complete the series and elaborate more on Elite Hunting. After watching it it honestly seemed like he just made another crappy movie to show off gore, just like they are doing with the Saw franchise and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning. The whole place looked different from the first. The original factory insides had small, dirty looking rooms that looked like secret disgusting deaths would take place there. In the second, it was like Saw III. There are contraptions and all this crap that looks like they put a lot of money into the place. When I first heard news of the sequel I was pumped because original reports said it was gonna follow Paxton right from the get-go. I assumed that meant most of the movie would focus on him, or he would play a key role in exposing the organization or something like that.

SPOILERS:

It was real disappointing that they just killed him off, rendering the first movie pointless. Knowing Paxton from the first movie, he was pretty smart. So you would think he would go to the police or FBI. Obviously, the whole world would not be in on it. It was just stupid that they would make him that dumb and just let him die off easily.

END SPOILERS



Hostel: 9/10 (Intriguing, nerve-wracking story line and realistic characters who I rooted for to live)
Hostel 2: 1/10 (Made the 1st movie pointless. Terrible ending.The only reason I didn't give it a 0 is because the focusing on the two American clients was pretty original)

Oh ya, and one more thing.
SPOILERS:

Would the Organization honestly believe that this girl wouldn't go back to America and tell everyone what happened? No way they would let her go.

Yep,the movie is alot of fun. But it's better in the unrated version if you can find it. And trust me, the unrated Psycho Cop 2 is damn hard to find!

Someday when possible,I'll copy and upload the uncensored scenes onto youtube. But I don't know how to do that at the moment with only a VCR and no dvd-recorder.

Because she was also committed murder for the company.

I completely understand what you are saying and i thought of that also, but don't you think she could just say she was fearing for her life and had to do those things to get out alive? This also reminds me of the ending of Se7en, whereas if Brad Pitt's character went to court for the murder of the killer, would a jury really convict him? It's tough to tell but obviously a jury would have sympathy for them since they had some terrible things done to them.

This movie was an awful piece of shit. I never really understood the popularity of part 1, but part 1 looks like a masterpiece compared to this shit fest. I dont usually wish bad luck on people but i hope this bombs at the box office so this talentless hack gets no more money for future shit fest's. This movie is as bad as The Hills Have Eyes 2 (2007)...and that is saying alot. I cant relay enough how bad this movie was. The "great suprise" at the end is just dumb and very unrealistic. If this guy is the "future" of horror films, i will be forced to move away from my beloved genre.

All these movies that seem to glorify torture...yuck...

I agree with the fact that many of these movies are made with no intentions except that to disgust the audience. I hate those movies and I don't know why anyone would like something like that. Though it may be hard to understand, I really liked the first Hostel. I really find some of it hard to watch and gross but the overall scenario of the film really just scared me. I didn't look at it as, "Wow that was so gory and awesome". I thought it was a really intense movie and scary that something like that isn't too far out of reality these days.

For the people who are giving this a positive rating I would appreciate if you would name us some other horror sequels or remakes you've enjoyed...... There is no way a "SANE" person could consider this movie better than the original.... Are you guys smoking PCP? This movie honestly had the worst acting I've ever seen in a big production film.

This thread is weird...how many of you actually paid to see this movie? And not a ILLEGAL download of an UNFINISHED FILM! and no "from everything I've read this sounds horrible!" comments. As far as I'm concerned if you fit into those categories your opinion is pointless and should be ignored.

I liked the first (didn't love), and enjoyed this one. It was a bit of a retread, but there was enough that was different to keep you guessing. It really seemed like a response to the violence against women complaints that have been becoming a hot topic with the "Captivity" controversy and the first Hostel. I really didn't think the acting was bad and while it was violent/gory, there was more context added this time around...which is why i disagree with much of the criticism here that seem to imply that if I enjoyed this film there's something wrong with me...that's crap and frankly this film and it's predecessor are not the worst out there. At the point that we're paying to see 90 minutes of straight torture you MIGHT have a good point, but this film is a little over 90 minutes with about 20-25 of it with gore and violence the torturers are the bad guys and the film takes a subversive twist at the end that seemed to address the the complaints about the first film. It's not perfect film, but it's not a bad time at the movies.

Instead, why don't you articulate what you didn't like about the performances? aside from you wouldn't want to bang any of them.

But don't you agree you could think of a dozen more interesting ways to torture someone then what was in this film... None of it was shocking/scary. It was just there.... I mean the dog thing was kinda funny, but unbelievable at the same. If you're going to put torture in a film it has to be "interesting/shocking" or it just fails and falls flat like in this picture. Part 1 worked because it was scary. I cringed several times.... During the eye ball scene I believe I even yelled out loud. I wanted the girls in this picture to die... All of them. I wanted every character to die a slow terrible death.
Instead we got laziness. Part 1 worked because it was funny.... If you don't have comedy in a torture film you pretty much just have "smut." Who wants to leave the movies feeling dirty? The humor off sets that. Part 2 wasn't funny or ever the least bit warm hearted other than in the last 10 or so minutes which didn't seem to fit with the rest of the picture. Where was the tension? Was anyone at the edge of their seat while they watched this? I kept looking at my watching wondering how long this piece of shit was...
This movie is the perfect example of what is wrong with "horror" movies these days. Horror used to mean scary. Now what does it mean? Shock value? Distasteful garbage? I guess so...

So just because someone might have a different opinion than you, they are smoking PCP and insane? Right.

Sure:

Lauren German: Very strange performance. It seemed like at the blink of an eye she would change into a different character. It almost seemed as if she didn't know how to play the part. Dumb, Smart, Strong? It was also strange how she didn't ever really seem "scared." More or less had the attitude I'm superman. The last scene with Roger was beyond laughable.
Was she supposed to be a lesbian because I got the feel.

Roger Bart: Is this guy real? When I first saw him I said YAY this should be interesting. Mostly because I liked his creepy character on desperate housewives... He was ok until the end of the flick. Once he switched characters I couldn't help, but laugh because it was beyond unbelievable. I blame that on the script more than him, but because of his performance this scene failed miserably. Possibly one of the worst acted scenes ever.

Heather Matarazzo: Ummmmm...... She didn't fit... Call me a pig, but she was beyond ugly, and kinda made uncomfortable looking at her. To me it would have made more sense to make her a "smart" girl then to make her the dumb one.

Bijou Phillips: I really liked her... But what happened to her? To me she wasn't in the movie enough. It's like she disappeared for half of it. I would have liked to have saw her allot more.

Richard Burgi: Liked him, but yet again the character change was retarded and just came off as terrible acting.

Vera Jordanova- ok I guess... Nothing to talk about. She kinda just played everything dead and bland. Was she supposed to be a lesbian?

The scene in the train was terribly acted by everybody.
The scene in the woods with the children was beyond retarded.

If it pertains to Hostel 2, then yes their smoking PCP, or something very similar...

Touched up special effects and a different score is not going to magically transform horrible acting and a bad script into something not crappy.

I didn't hate everything about it, but this was definitely a disappointment after the first Hostel. Things that Eli thought were going to be 'funny' just weren't, as opposed to the first flick that did have lots of humour as well. The girls were pretty terrible, although I am kind of fascinated by Lauren German because in some scenes she looked great and wasn't terrible and others she looked brutal and acted brutal. The deaths were less impressive and frankly I thought the gore in the first film outweighed this one big time.

The scenes with the kids weren't as good either. Less humour, less nudity and less gore than the first? That isn't what a sequel is supposed to be... the only interesting parts of the movie were the scenes about the 2 American Guys. I really liked that plot thread, up until Eli decided to be 'smart' with it and have the characters turn on a dime and shit all over the movie...Not cool.