Oh, there's much criticism thrown towards people who enjoy these "pornographic" flicks that have taken the horror world hostage since the Saw franchise was ushered in nearly four years ago. The bottom line is that Hostel Part II (hereby, Hostel 2), is no more than a pure modern-day exploitation flick. And writer/director Eli Roth might be, with the exception of Quentin Tarantino, the film's executive producer, the best, or at least most consistent, grindhouse director on the market.
This time around we follow Beth (Lauren German), Whitney (Bijou Phillips), and Lorna (Heather Matarazzo), three women who are backpacking across Europe on vacation. They, much like our guy pals of the first film, are looking for a good time and make the mistake of checking into a hostel that serves as a feeder-school if you will, to the underground world of connoisseur-murder (yeah, I just made that up). The film follows the same pattern as the original – a good 45 minutes or so of hanging out with the chicks followed by a good 40 minutes or so of blood, guts and "torture-porn". (I do have to admit that this is one of, if not the most, obscene, violent mainstream films I've ever seen. My only guess is that it was screened by the MPAA first thing in the morning, before they were fully conscious and aware of what exactly they were witnessing.) Anyhow, what makes Hostel 2 instantly superior to the first film is that these women are actually somewhat interesting (I said 'somewhat', Roth is still far from a great writer), and they're adventures are more about experiencing the culture rather than getting high and looking at tits.
Along the way, they meet up with Axelle, a nude model who poses for them in an art seminar in Rome, who talks them into coming with her to Slovakia as their next stop. The plot is, obviously, predictable but it does a pretty good job of stretching things out to build tension for the bloodbaths to come – it doesn't feel too prolonged or too short. Once the gals are registered at said hostel, mass e-mails and text messages are dispersed worldwide to former clients, and a bidding war (much like most of us have experienced at least once on e-Bay) begins. The winners for two of our victims are Todd (Richard Burgi) and Sutart (Roger Bart, both from Desperate Housewives descent).
The sub-plot involving Todd and Stuart is probably the most interesting one. Neither have done this before, but apparently they've gotten word and have had fantasies. Todd is gung-ho, he can't wait and we get the feeling he's stayed up at night planning every second of what he'll do when he gets in that room. He's even paid for Stuart's victim as a birthday present, though Stuart is the type that enjoys the blood and guts in the movies, but doesn't think he can stomach it in real life. Nonetheless, he's dragged along, and there's no turning back now. The "behind-the-scenes" is one of the most interesting aspects of this film in comparison to part one.
Once the violence begins, it doesn't hold back. (There's a scene involving a woman in a bathtub that's easily one of the most disturbing, finger-gnawing things I've ever witnessed.) But not surprisingly, the tables turn and the real money shots will be total crowd-pleasers. Horror films are, above all, about images – the ones you remember over time that make you blink your eyes a time or two. This is where Roth succeeds. He's a good director, there's no denying that, and a true fan of the genre. Hostel 2 is nothing more than exploitation, and there's nothing wrong with thrills for thrill's sake. If you're looking for something disturbing that will stick with you every time you see a pair of bolt cutters, then Hostel 2 is the film for you. And if you like your suspense and violence balls-to-the-wall with no strings attached, then by all means indulge yourself.
Chris Cabin of filmcritic.com says that Hostel Part II "sets the horror genre back a solid decade". I say, so what? If The Grudge 2, The Messengers, and recent Wes Craven productions are the measuring stick of what the horror genre has become then count me out. I'll take ten Hostels if it means I don't have to watch another watered-down remake of some Japanese horror flick about pale ghosts who move like they're wired to a Playstation controller. - Brandon Nease
The problem with most heist films is that the payoff is rarely worth the buildup. Steven Soderberg's Ocean's Eleven dropped like a bomb in 2001 and was smart, sexy, funny, unpredictable and left us wanting to hang out with these guys again. I liked Ocean's Twelve because it didn't fall into the franchise trap of being a cash-grab, it made no attempt to be a carbon copy its predecessor. That film was good enough and different enough that it could nearly have stood on its own had Ocean's Eleven not even existed. I love Ocean's Thirteen because it recaptures the mood and feel of Ocean's Eleven (it's great to be back in Vegas!) with the accelerated humor, sight gags, in-jokes, and self-awareness of Ocean's Twelve.
Reuben (Gould) has landed himself in the hospital, the symptoms – well, he's depressed and has nothing else to live for after Willie Bank (Pacino) screws him over in what was a be a partnership on opening the biggest new casino/hotel on the strip. Like the one-sheet says, "If you cross one Ocean, you cross them all", so Danny (Clooney) and the boys decide to get one over on Mr. Bank for the injustice done to their friend by duping the casino into unprecedented loses on the night of its grand opening.
As usual, their tasks are "impossible" – they must rig every house-heavy odds game (blackjack, roulette and craps) all in their, and every other player's, favor – and the speed bumps along the way make them increasingly so. (You know a film is working when you as an audience member throw you hands in the air and say, "What the fuck are they gonna do now?!") With impossible tasks come impossible solutions. Along the way the boys must usher in new card shuffling machines, infiltrate the Mexican factory that makes the dice, and even fake an earthquake. Things get even worse the gang runs out of money and go to Terry Benedict (Garcia) for a loan to finish the job (which he is happy to oblige being that Willie is his biggest competition). But isn't that why we watch – to see characters who are smarter and cooler than you do all the things that you wish you could do?
All of the original cast is back except for Julia Roberts (who hasn't done a film in 3 years and still demands superstar money) and Catherine Zeta-Jones (who, from how I understand it, there wasn't really a part for). Clooney and Pitt are priceless as usual with their best-friend brand of dialogue. Matt Damon gets more comedic screen time (including a hilarious scene with Ellen Barkin which is way too good to spoil here). Virgil and Turk (Casey Affleck and Scott Caan) are as funny as ever as the typical fighting brothers, though I found I wanted more of them. Don Cheadle has a great scene undercover as a black Evil Knievel. Andy Garcia gets just enough screen time to remind you how big of a douche-bag Benedict is. And Al Pacino is a wonderful addition as a menacing villain that wasn't quite present in part two. The ending of the film is sufficient. We feel satisfied as the story seems to have drawn to a close, but there are a couple of lines that tease at the possibility of another sequel. I haven't grown tired of it yet – much like the James Bond franchise, I could watch 20 of these things as long as they feel fresh and are consistently satisfying as they have been.
What has consistently surprised me about these films is their ability to define "cool" and make money without the grotesque violence and vulgarity (Hostel), a gimmicky look (300), or the promise of the new most spectacular event in movie history (Pirates of the Caribbean); in other words, they're keeping it real. Call in self-indulgent, call it ridiculous, whatever. What I call it is clever, well-crafted, good entertainment, and that is what the movies are all about. - Brandon Nease
WAITRESS (2007)
*** (OUT OF FOUR)
Every once in a blue I'll watch a film with a standard audience. I almost always tend to find that most moments of brilliance in a film go largely unnoticed by your average John Q. Moviegoer and most of stuff that I find clichéd and overplayed tend to go over pretty well. About an hour into Adrianne Shelly's indie hit, Jenna (Keri Russell) asks her asshole boss, Cal, if he's happy. His reply: "I'm happy enough. I don't expect too much and I don't give very much. I guess I'm generally excited about most things… yeah, I'm happy enough." This speaks wonders not only for Cal but for every other character in the picture and, for that matter, life itself. It's the little moments like this that make Waitress a good film, but its same type of wannabe moments (particularly, ones that border on the extremely syrupy) that keep it from being great and, I'm fairly certain, ensure marketability for the mainstream.
Jenna is a waitress, and quite the cook, at a pie diner who is married to an overbearing, annoying husband, Earl (Jeremy Sisto, more on Earl later), and has learned that she is pregnant. The baby, she feels, is more of a bump in the road than anything else, making it that much harder for her to run away from Earl and start anew. Set in an undisclosed southern landscape, it's the quirkiness in the comedy that keeps this film on its feet and interesting, rather than the usual seen-that-before garbage that its logline might have you believe. Anyhow, Jenna finds new love, or it may just be excitement or spite of her current situation, or probably a mixture of all three, with Dr. Pomatter (Nathan Fillion), her new gynecologist. All of this is leading up to what makes this picture appealing which is Jenna's desire not to chase some ridiculous fleeting dream (thank God) but hope that maybe by the end of the film she'll be happy enough.
Russell is wonderful as Jenna - you just want the squeeze the shit out of her. She comes across as shockingly realistic, and we genuinely care for her. She turns in one of the best performances I've seen all year. Sisto too is pitch perfect as Earl who is not the typical abusive, manipulating husband but a version of one that we've rarely seen. He doesn't yell much, and he doesn't spend all of his screen time demeaning or beating on her. Our hatred towards him is because of his selfishness and stupidity and Jenna's lack thereof. Cheryl Hines and writer/director Adrianne Shelly are Becky and Dawn, your typical middle-aged southern waitresses, Jenna's co-workers, and best friends, who provide comedic companionship for their friend and serve as a reminder that Jenna can do much better for herself. One of the funnier moments of the film is when one of Dawn's previous blind dates, Ogie (Eddie Jemison), a nerdy, poetry spitting fellow, shows up at the diner to remind Dawn that he loves her and will never take 'no' for an answer.
Waitress will be this year's Little Miss Sunshine - that little independent comedy that audiences love. And I don't think that's too bad. At least it's better than being that over-hyped, overblown franchise action/adventure picture that audiences seek and love because the commercials on television tell them to. – Brandon Nease
No comments:
Post a Comment