Hostel: Part III (2011)

imagesIt’s not like I’m disappointed or anything. I mean, I’m shocked they managed to somehow take a one note ridiculous concept like “Hostel” and turn it in to one whole movie, let alone two. And now they decided to create a third film that attempts to flip the coin on the premise and fails spectacularly. “Hostel Part III” is a mind numbing, cheap, despicable little mess of a horror film, the last release of excess gas on the festering corpse of the torture porn fad that attempts to build on the hollow premise of the first film.

I could have written a better idea for the third film in my sleep, when all was said and done. What’s never explained is: Why if this is such an elite organization with a legion of millionaires paying to watch people be tortured, and paying to torture people, do they risk being revealed by snaring hapless tourists? Why not buy slaves and immigrants from other countries and have them shipped over to the hostels to be tortured? I’m sure there’s circular logic behind the answer to that question, but I don’t want to hear it. Eli Roth pretended that “Hostel” was a commentary of some sorts on tourism and American exploitation, when really it was a homophobic piece of trash that aped it style from Giallos and HG Lewis. “Part II” had a clever ending, but was misogynistic and just more of the same nonsense. “Part III” ratchets it up and manages to shockingly make this series even more despicable than the first two.

I can’t quite put my finger on it but I loathed “Part III” where in the first two I merely am indifferent toward.  The first two films are trash but it’s merely a lightweight director trying to wear big boy shoes and show he’s a bonafide horror icon. “Part III” has much more bile to it, and it lacks any real atmosphere or suspense in the long run. It cuts all of the pretenses from the first film and really just boils down to the torture, the mutilations, and a hacky sub-plot about two best friend pining for the same girl, one of whom is a member of the hostel. The notion that the hostel is moved to the US is excellent, and I love the idea that the hostel is no longer just an amusement park for millionaires to satisfy their desires for inflicting torture and pain but is a very underground game show for the elite to watch players kill their victims in a set goal.

I also enjoy the opening scenes where a nervous American has a run in with a sexy foreign woman and her over protective husband only for the writer to flip the scene on us. It’s just sad that writer Weiss has nowhere to go once the introduction is over. “Hostel Part III” opens the door for fascinating ideas but does nothing with them. It just offers a hammy story about love and jealousy, and wastes what could have been a gorier and splatterific version of “Running Man.” Scott Spiegel takes the reins for Eli Roth and nothing is changed. “Hostel Part III” is an awful and mean-spirited sequel that has no plot, zero characterization, trite conflicts, and fails to realize the interesting ideas it introduces throughout the film.

Buy It Now!

  • Jarred Kohler

    “Facepalm” someone please explain to me how part 2 was even remotely misogynistic, especially with a scene which could easily be described as a man-hating extremist feminist wet dream? Ugg… At any rate, the thing i don’t care for with either of the sequels is that they just add a twist or two to the original concept, then played it through in pretty much the same way. That gets dull after the first movie. They made it slightly more different with the third one, but it still felt like watching the same movie, though perhaps a little more low budget.