ROTTEN TOMATOES: Who Wants Another Trip to That "Hostel"?

Who Wants Another Trip to That "Hostel"?

by Scott Weinberg | January 10, 2006

It only took one strong weekend to get Lions Gate back in the "Hostel" business, and according to Variety, the studio aims to give Eli Roth's horror hit the quick-turnaround sequel treatment, a la "Saw" & "Saw 2."

"After an opening weekend proving the multiplex is anything but a hostile environment, Screen Gems and Lionsgate are planning a sequel to "Hostel," with writer-director Eli Roth in talks to return and steer the second installment.

Sadist-loving horror film bowed No. 1 at the box office, taking in $20.1 million.

Lionsgate and Screen Gems intend to release the sequel in a year, mimicking Lionsgate's successful quick turnaround of "Saw" and "Saw II."

Lionsgate and Screen Gems will have the same partnership arrangement as on the first "Hostel," whereby Screen Gems will make the movie, while Lionsgate will release it in the U.S."

Related Items

Celeb:	Eli Roth
Movie:	Saw
	Saw II
	Hostel

(1-18 of 18 posts) | Reply

killthemall4444 writes:
on Jan 10 2006 06:51 AM

A sequel? Not surprising in the least.

(Reply to this)

Peter Parker writes:
on Jan 10 2006 07:51 AM

for some reason i don't think Roth will go for this, some other director will take them helm and screw it over

(Reply to this)

dracus writes:
on Jan 10 2006 11:09 AM

I thought Roth would get at least 5 different movies under his belt before running out of steam and succumbing to the cursed sequel. So much for him being the new innovator of the gore genre. Ripoff seems to be Hollywood's buzz word these days. This isn't like Narnia, LOTR or Harry Potter; movies based on a series of books; it's just going to be "Hostel II; This Time, Let's Bleed Our Fans. "

(Reply to this)

South_park300 writes:
on Jan 10 2006 01:21 PM

lets just hope there isn't as much character buildup in the next one and just goes right into the gore. i swear, the first half of this movie was watching a bad cinemax porn

(Reply to this)

Friends_best_show_ever writes:
on Jan 10 2006 02:13 PM

No, I don't agree. Movies shouldn't just be about how gorey can you be? It should be about the quality of the movie. There should be like the first one was in the beginning, or like "Scream" with violence throughout, but not the whole movie.

(Reply to this)

marktron writes:
on Jan 10 2006 05:48 PM

This will suck, much like the original.. what else can you do with the concept?

(Reply to this)

South_park300 writes:
on Jan 10 2006 05:51 PM

of course there should be story. but if i have to pick between gory content and what was passed off as character development in this movie (to unsympathetic characters, so why should i care about them anyways) i would pick gory content.

im just saying as far as this movie series goes, it should go towards the gory stuff, since this is all that was advertised for the film.

now if roth decides to have better characters that we would actually care about in the next one, by all means, have a great story. but seeing boob after boob and drugs after drugs, it loses its effect very fast on film, and gets quite boring.

(Reply to this)

inessalenin writes:
on Jan 10 2006 07:56 PM

Idiots will go there!

(Reply to this)

Scarborough Fair writes:
on Jan 11 2006 01:09 AM

i haven't seen hostel, but i saw cabin fever, and eli roth does this cameo in his movie where he's the 'funny pot smoking hippie guy'. i remember watching it not knowing that and thinking 'who the hell is this guy?' i could tell there was something up with him. then me and my buddy watched the special features, and noticed that this guy was the director. my god, what a loser. he puts himself in the movie as some goofy funny part. 'oh im the funniest, get ready for my on-set shenaningans tommorow guys. bring diapers. seriously, im out of this world hilarious.'

FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCED

(Reply to this)

Blue Arc writes:
on Jan 11 2006 01:18 PM

Because directors don't do cameos ever...right?

If you want to complain about him...how about you complain about something other than the fact that he made a cameo in his film?

(Reply to this)

Scarborough Fair writes:
on Jan 12 2006 01:16 AM

[b]FAAAAAAAAAAAACCCCED[/b]
how about the fact that it was the worst cameo ever. look, i haven't seen hostel so i don't know if this guy's actually a really talented director or whatever. i love horror movies, and i appreciate that he loves the classics like evil dead 2 and blah blah blah, but THAT WAS A HILARIOUSLY BAD CAMEO. me and my friend used to say 'faaaaaaaaaaaaced' all the time and then laugh at what a wiener he must be. his performance just says so much about how he carries himself or something. doesnt it? is it just me? am i the only one who hated him? maybe he's like the very man who stood behind hostel, tarantino. tarantino is wildly talented and all, but he'll drop any movie he's working on to take a small role in a film cause he wants be a MOVVVIE STAAR, *AND* he is also possibly the most annoying man in the world. smart as a whip, but you'd like to whip him till it smarts kinda thing. hmmm..but my point kinda doesnt make sense cause at least when he's in his own movies its not so terrible.
its just this eli roth spoiled brat guy. MAN what a dingus.

(Reply to this)

Bane Of Anubis writes:
on Jan 13 2006 12:49 PM

[b]What the HEEEEEEEEELLLLLLLL are you talking about?[/b]
The internet: Portal to the inner workings and worlds of people who otherwise appear normal.

As for sequlitis, who can blame people for wanting money? Profit motive ranks above artistic aspirations (and to imply that horror movie directors have mammoth artistic aspirations is interesting)... Anyway, one man's can o' shit is another man's art (well, really it's a can o' shit, but some people are just really fucked up).

(Reply to this)

cowsfan writes:
on Jan 14 2006 06:51 PM

In reply to this comment (#829726)
It's not the first time a director put himself in his own film as a cameo. Alfred Hitchcock was doing it since the 1930s. Martin Scorsese has done it a few times and he's even put his mother in some of his movies.

I'm just glad that Tarantino stopped putting himself in his own movies. As much as I admire him as a writer/director the guy can't act at all.

Roth also does a little cameo in 'Hostel' as well, but it's a blink and you'll miss it scene.

Cheers,
Kevin

(Reply to this)

cowsfan writes:
on Jan 14 2006 06:57 PM

In reply to this comment (#829728)
QUOTE its just this eli roth spoiled brat guy. MAN what a dingus. END QUOTE

While I've never personally met the guy I did see him and Tarantino being interviewed on Jimmy Kimmel and he was a very funny guy. He did seem a bit arrogant, but when you have Tarantino kissing your ass you'd probably be a bit arrogant too.

Personally I don't find Tarantino annoying. Maybe a little hyper and high strung but give the guy a break. He's pretty much drunk 24/7 and when he's not drunk all he talks about is movies and, well, getting drunk (see his recent interview on Conan O' Brien if they repeat it).

Cheers,
Kevin

(Reply to this)

Scarborough Fair writes:
on Jan 15 2006 10:40 PM

I don't have a problem with directors putting themselves in their movies, think of scorcese's bit in taxi driver, great stuff.
its this eli roth, im just saying i would hate to know this guy. rent cabin fever if you haven't already, wait for the stoner. wait for him to say "faaaaaaaced" and then think of him writing himself this part. maybe i myself was just too stoned and thought about it too much when i watched that movie and its special features. seemed uproarious to me.

(Reply to this)

cowsfan writes:
on Jan 15 2006 11:32 PM

In reply to this comment (#829732)
QUOTE rent cabin fever if you haven't already, wait for the stoner. END QUOTE

That's funny. He also does a cameo as a stoner in 'Hostel'. I haven't seen Cabin Fever yet but I will eventually. It's on all the time on late night cable and I always forget to Tivo it.

The more I think about 'Hostel' the more I don't like it. Sure it was a rush on first screening but if I want an hour of cheap porno I'll rent the latest 'Girls Gone Wild' flick. I just downloaded and watched the last 30 minutes again and it really wasn't all that gory or interesting. I had much more fun watching 'The Devil's Rejects' and the first 'Saw' film. If there's a sequel to 'Hostel', I'll probably download it or wait for DVD.

Cheers,
Kevin

(Reply to this)

international hater writes:
on Jan 16 2006 06:07 AM

[b]why the comparison?. . . . . . .[/b]
HOSTEL had some nice moments, but i was mildly dissapointed in it. CABIN FEVER was what HOSTEL should have been. what tripped me out was why did the last guy go back to save the chinese girl after what he went through to survive the torture and escape?

i agree with you south_park300 . . . . . . . more gore, less whore!

(Reply to this)

bloodangel writes:
on Jan 17 2006 02:16 AM

[b]you guys are missing the point[/b]
"After an opening weekend proving the multiplex is anything but a hostile environment,"

This is the true horror. Who wrote this? "anything but a hostile environment"
The pun! The wit! Oh my sides!

(Reply to this)

Related Links

Eli Roth

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links