20. Hostel (2005, Eli Roth)
By Eivind Langdal
10th November 2009

…includes spoilers

Despite neither creating nor perfecting it, Eli Roth’s Hostel is the film most cinemagoers will think of when hearing the term “torture porn”. There have been films like it both before and since it was released, but it was for this one the term was applied. Why? Well, for starters, it was a massive success, knocking The Chronicles of Narnia off the #1 spot in the early January of 2005. Secondly, it moved the genre from its basement origins into the mainstream, effectively coming closer to eradicating the memory of the “video nasties” as an underground movement. If this is a good or a bad thing, I don’t know. I’m not going to spend this review praising or criticizing the use of violence in movies. Instead, I thought I’d do something different: look beyond the blood and gore of Hostel and see if there is actually anything beating below the surface.

Two American students, Paxton and Josh, have taken a break from college to go backpacking in Europe. After a creepy credits sequence that makes dripping liquid sound like the most disgusting sound in the world, we get acquainted with them as they race through bars in Amsterdam where they, as you might have guessed, smoke a lot of pot. Having joined them on the trip is the Icelandic partyman Oli, who is the kind of guy you’ll either find very annoying or very funny depending on how much alcohol you have consumed.

If you have a dislike of naked women, you might not like the first part of Hostel, which is drenched in sex. Some critics have shown their distaste with Roth’s decision to favor nudity before character development, and indeed, I found myself thinking the same thing the first time I saw the film. However, when I saw it again, I began to wonder if there might actually be a point to all the sex (intentionally or not). I think there is. This is a film about human beings’ deepest desires, and Roth cleverly twists this theme in the film’s halfway-point, as a terrified Paxton calls Natalia a bitch as he realizes how much he has been mislead. Her response (“I get a lot money for you. That makes you my bitch.”) is a fitting description of how much there is in common between sex and violence.

I’m getting ahead of myself here. After having been somewhat disappointed in Amsterdam, the three of them get what they think is a lucky break when they are told of a place in Slovakia where the women will do anything for them. They are told that their American accents alone will give them some long-sought action. Again, we see how terms are being twisted to have two meanings, as women doing “anything” and the three of them getting “action” can be read two ways. Needless to say, Paxton, Josh and Oli read them the wrong way.

Sooner than you can say, “I’m never ever going backpacking in Europe”, the three of them are on a train to Slovakia, where they meet a Dutch businessman with a strange philosophy about food. He makes what they think is a move on Josh, but little do they know of his true intentions. That Josh meets the businessman not once, but twice again in the movie (first in a bar, then in the torture dungeon) may seem like an odd coincidence, but then again, the town they arrive in isn’t very large, and the idea of having Josh’s torturer be someone he has already met gives the circumstances a terrifying emotional attachment.

For a film that has built its reputation on grisly violence, Hostel shows much restraint in its first half. It doesn’t even use false scares, and the hints it drops about the coming events are few and subtle. Even if you don’t think it is a good movie, you have to admire the fact that it takes its time to get to the rooms with the icky tiles instead of throwing the violence in our faces right in the first frame. Horror fans may notice this is a method that was similarly applied in Takashi Miike’s Audition. Sure, Hostel is not the masterpiece Audition is, but then again, what the hell is? Speaking of Takashi Miike: is that a great cameo or what? It gets even more disturbing when you realize he is listed in the credits as playing himself. It’s possible that this is just a creepy little detail, but would you really be surprised if it really were him?

I mentioned how some critics showed their dislike of the first act. I feel it is important to underline that other critics actually applauded it. However, the film’s portrayal of the main characters being nothing but sex-hungry young adults was met with little positive response. Now, while I agree that they are not most well developed protagonists, I think there is a point here as well. You see, I see this as a film about perception: the Americans are portrayed as less than smart because (and let’s face the fact here) this is how large parts of the world perceive them. Similarly, Europe is presented as a mirror of America, where every corner you turn will either show you the way to great sex or horrible violence. To many Americans, Europe often seems further away than what really is the case. Is this the deepest sub-text ever being read into a film? No, but at least there is a subtext. After all, when Paxton reads the price tag on the back of the hunting club card, it is the Americans that cost the most, and if that isn’t a commentary on xenophobia, I don’t know what is.

If there is one thing I appreciate about Hostel, then it is its use of information. Anyone seeing this film will know before it has even begun that it is not going to be like a walk in the park. So Roth is free to withhold much information for the longest time, and still make the film feel tense. And then he slowly reveals, layer by layer, his true intentions. When the first torture scene comes, it comes without a warning. But when Paxton is driven to what he thinks is an exhibition, the warning has already come. The audience knows what awaits him. But Paxton is unaware (he does have his suspicions, though), and so we have to passively watch without having the ability to stop him. If you paid close attention while watching the scene, you might have noticed how he gets there by his own free will. Sure, he is invited, but he is not forced. It’s a small detail, but it gives the film credibility as it shows the mechanics of the hunting club.

The film also deals with information in another way as well, more precisely in its villains, who are not masked brutes that chase the main characters through forests and suburban neighborhoods, but regular people who, instead of withholding information, exposes themselves to a level that most people in real life never come close to reaching. This isn’t a horror film that is particularly obsessed with mystery. Instead, its scariest moments come when characters reveal too much about themselves, as in the scene where Paxton has an unpleasant conversation with an American torturer. The villains in Hostel aren’t the bogeymen, but your own neighbors.

If some of you thought that because I decided to analyze Hostel instead of doing a review of it means I think it is a masterpiece, you are wrong. The film is not flawless. If its last act is hard to watch, it is because the things it depicts would be hard to watch no matter who made the film. My point is: while Roth is fearless when it comes to how far he is willing to go, he is not exactly skilled when it comes to building tension. Yes, certain parts of the film has an eerie quality, but at a frequent rate, I found myself wondering how much better the film was if the aforementioned Takashi Miike had been behind the camera instead of in front of it. Still, if you are a horror fanatic, you might be willing to look beyond all these flaws and realize that there might actually be more to the film then what is first assumed. There could certainly be less.