GamerTab That was an excellent one.

ChicDragon It's a mild crowd pleaser for people who are exhausted by blockbusters.

Micah Lloyd Excellent characters with emotional depth. My wife, daughter and granddaughter all enjoyed it...and me, too! Very good movie! You won't be disappointed.

Kirandeep Yoder The joyful confection is coated in a sparkly gloss, bright enough to gleam from the darkest, most cynical corners.

GL84 Agreeing to travel to Slovakia, a group of friends find themselves disappearing one-by-one around their spa getaway and eventually realize they've been targeted by a deadly criminal organization that's torturing others like them and must find a way to stop them to get away alive.This was a massively disappointing effort. One of the film's main flaws is that much like the original there's way too much time spent away from its actual destination in the titular torture room, and as a result it's pacing is just way too problematic in the first half. It's opening is really troubling which scores this no points at all for what happens there, and once they get on track with the remaining part of the film it's at least another twenty minutes before they even get wind of the idea of going to the country, there's a big search through the city to find the place and takes another half-hour after that before any sort of on-screen torture occurs, leaving it's torture scenes, which are the main body of the film, until almost an hour in. That's way too long for the film to get to it's big spot, and it's beginning is just boring and really hard to sit through. The last real flaw to this one is the fact that there's just no idea behind how anything works in here. There's no knowledge about how the torture group runs business, despite the subplot about the one guy offering to bring the new guy in, but even still, that's just about getting him in, not how it works. From the choice of targets to the way it's spread out among those who are interested to the daily grind, the inner-workings of the hostel itself are complete blanks and nothing at all is explained or given. There is some good stuff in this one, though, which again like the original comes from the blood and gore. This one is much bloodier than the original, with the kills in here being quite brutal and truly inventive here in several graphic scenes that are just chilling in their execution and professional in their lay-out as the manner of brutality not only taken upon by the clients against them as well as their inevitable revenge. That's not to count out the centerpiece kill, where a nude female victim is strung up over a bathtub, the killer gets in and then proceeds to slice up the body with a hand-scythe, which then proceeds to rain torrents of blood down upon the victim in an extended and incredibly graphic sequence that, alone, is better than anything in the original for it's mixture of blood, gore, over-the- top disgust and sleaze, and serves as the highpoint in the film. Also quite fun is the rather well-done forest chase in here, which is creepy, suspenseful and action- packed, making it quite fun to notice the chances of getting away and the overall effect they have. The last plus, though, is the rather colorful and entertaining ritualistic ceremony they attend, which adds a little bit of levity into the film and isn't all-out torturous to get through. In the end, though, this simply ends up feeling like just a remake of the original with the males turned into women but very little change otherwise.Rated R: Extreme Graphic Violence, Graphic Language, Full Nudity, several Sex Scenes and drug use.

Leofwine_draca I absolutely adored the first HOSTEL film so when I heard about the sequel coming out, I knew I had to go and see it at the cinema. Sadly, HOSTEL: PART II is an essentially lacklustre follow up, a film that for the majority of the running time simply reprises the characters, locations, and storyline from the first film without adding much in the way of new stuff to the brew. The twist here is that the protagonists are all females, but sadly the central casting leaves something to be desired. Jay Hernandez, who played the hero, Paxton, in the first movie returns here for a short appearance – and I hate what they did with his character, considering how great he was in the original – and his performance reminds you just how sympathetic a character he was.There aren't really any sympathetic characters here. Of the three main girls, two are stereotypes, with Bijou Phillips acting abominably as the bimbo type. Meanwhile, Heather Matarazzo is a stock nerdy girl, all big teeth and speaking intellectually, and her character quickly grates. Matarazzo goes way over the top and is only really convincing in her inevitable torture sequence. The final girl of the three is also the heroine, as played by Lauren German. German is very attractive but her character is far too tough and never really feels to be in much danger.Here, director Eli Roth decides to blow the lid off the whole kidnap-and-torture plot, showing us how the business works through a plot strand which follows two American businessman from their initial bidding over their mobile phones to their turns as torturers. I was in two minds about this. The idea of following the torturers rather than the tortured allows for some fresh material, and certainly these two guys breathe some life into the production; it helps that both Roger Bart and Richard Burgi are very good actors here. But much of the suspense in the original film was derived from the mystery surrounding the shady goings-on and, of course, there's none of that here. Instead it's all very clinical and many scenes are played for a laugh, which lessens the impact of the horror, although there is one very good twist involving these guys.At the end of the day this is a graphic horror film that revolves around the torture sequences. Here, they're bigger and gorier than before, mixing plenty of dark humour into the brew to keep things moving along (watch for the circular saw scene if you don't believe me). The first is undoubtedly the worst and hardest to watch, a lengthy bloodbath involving a scythe and sickle, in which a Countess Bathory-type character bathes in the blood of her victim. The torture scenes at the film's climax are pretty much lacking in excitement, especially the events surrounding Lauren German's character that are obvious in the extreme. Roth goes out of his way to target the sensitivities of his male viewers with one particular gore effect, but the result is laughable – with the inclusion of the dog – rather than wince-inducing, as the 'eye' scene was in the first. What's missing is the whole adrenaline-pumping climax that we had at the end of HOSTEL; the escape and subsequent punishment of the various baddies. Here, due to a plot twist, we get none of that, just an abrupt ending with black comedy that disappoints. Aside from one particular sequence involving Matarazzo's character, nudity is kept to a minimum this time around.Roth can't resist throwing in plenty of in-jokes and appearances from old actors into the film. Watch out for Quentin Tarantino's head on a stick, a couple of girls from the first film appearing in a photo, and other minor recurring characters. There are also roles for Edwige Fenech, screaming heroine of many a '70s giallo flick, who still looks lovely to this day; '70s Italian action star Luc Merenda, greatly aged and pretty much unrecognisable, and finally Ruggero Deodato, director of the notorious CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST, who cameos in one of the film's funniest scenes as – yep, you guessed it – a cannibal, eating Stanislav Ianevski, better known as Victor Krum in HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE. Despite these fun references, HOSTEL: PART II already feels like the series has had it's time, coming across as both tired and repetitive, a real disappointment considering the freshness and power of the first film. Let's pray they don't make a third...

Wizard-8 I wasn't exactly a big fan of the first "Hostel" movie, so it probably comes as no surprise (especially when you also consider most sequels are inferior to the original) that this first sequel failed to move me as well. Actually, there is one thing about this sequel that I thought was better that the first movie, and that was with its look. This sequel looks a lot slicker than the first movie, from the cinematography to the sets and location. However, this sequel also takes problems the first movie had and increases them. The movie is agonizingly slow at times - it takes forever for the movie to really start going. Is it worth the wait when the blood starts to fly? I would say no. While there are some gruesome moments, they are few and far between (and I saw the unrated version of the movie!) This is a real boring movie for the most part. Needless to say, after subjecting myself to the first two movies of this series, I am in no mood to check out part three.

Spencer Very entertaining. Sick and insane, it appeals to the people who can watch people scream and endure perverse torture as though they were watching the original A Nightmare on Elm Street. Like the first movie, a large portion of Hostel Part II is devoted to character development and lead-up. But, as a sequel should, it also brings some new ideas forth. The most obvious change, aside from the three main characters (victims), who are now women-- if that makes a difference--there are two other characters who take the spotlight (one in particular). These characters are the men who have paid to kill the three girls. So we see this movie from the perspectives of the victims and the culprits, which is an interesting feature. We also see some different ways people who have 'bought' a victim choose to carry out their fantasies. They really can do ANYTHING they want with their victim. Pretty nasty stuff. I was able to enjoy this more after having viewed Part I, since I was better prepared for a campier experience. I'm not particularly squeamish, and nothing in this movie really grossed me out more than my nerves anticipated it would. Not to mislead you, though: this is still a very bloody film with a twisted concept. Gorier than the original (in fact, almost all of the violent scenes in the original are shown again to catch everyone up in the intro), though perhaps a bit less serious. Not a bad experience, though it's quite a silly film. Once more, plenty of entertainment value if you're into it.