Eli Roth, The Internet is in Your Workprint, Downloading Your Movie.

Posted by Peter Hall - May 29th 2007 @ 7:47 pm

IMDB would have you believe the US release date of Hostel: Part 2 will be on June 8th, 2007.  Nerds say the release date was May 29th, 2007 at precisely 10:59:31.

Is it bad that your junior attempt at film is spreading like an STD or is it bad that I’m not even going to bother to waste the bandwidth?*  And if Hostel: Part 2 trickles at the box office, for the love of God, don’t use this as your excuse.

*Granted, I’d never watch a workprint regardless of what the movie was, so I acknowledge I’m just being spiteful, but this is, frankly, too unfortunate not to laugh at.


rss 6 comments
  1. R.J. Sayer
    May 30th, 2007 | 12:37 pm | #1

    yeah, i just love all the fansites that are saying this could cause a poor opening weekend and lead to bad box office receipts for the film.

    hogwash.

    this thing is still going to make a killing.

    and if – by some miraculous act of collective “waking-the-hell-up” – it doesn’t, it’ll be because audiences are just finally over the whole “torture porn” thing and it’s simply time to move on.

    as if eli roth were really worth the time and effort to “protect” anyway.

    if he does a full-length THANKSGIVING, i’ll see it. until then… don’t count on my dollars, buddy.

    and don’t scapegoat piracy (which is wrong, by the way, i’m not arguing that point) to cover up your own lack of vision and tact.

  2. cooke
    May 31st, 2007 | 4:00 am | #2

    hey

    In agreement again.

    I am afraid to say that I still think that the same applies/applied to Gridhouse. There’s been plenty of films longer, and the Titanic managed to be succesful at a very similar length – I assume people left mid way through because they wanted to…

    In fact… did they leave mid way through? Who was counting the number of walkers (who had, anyway, already bought tickets, so NO loss of sales there then)?

    It was all hype. Now the film feels more authentic for being fucked about with. Either way they pulled it because of bad figures. They couldn’t blame pirating – so why not blame the audience… in that case not for stealing the movie, but for being too stupid to know from the extensive advertising and publicity, from the cinema listings etc, that it was a double bill and lasted over three hours.

    Attacking your target audiecne is becoming a fad for producers and directors these days.

    Maybe it makes some members of the audience believe they don’t mean ‘them’ they mean those morons who don’t slavishly appreciate the almightilly talented one!

  3. May 31st, 2007 | 4:14 pm | #3

    I doubt it’ll have an affect on its surely ludicrous haul. Granted, I’m sure there are thousands of people who will download this crappy workprint, but they aren’t the demographic where the dollars are made to begin with. Its off high school junior/seniors and dorm room bound 20 somethings. If there isn’t a “Hostel 3 is Greenlit!” news story next weekend, I’ll be shocked.

    I’ve got no plan to see it in a theater, which is severely testing my new goal of reviewing more mainstream releases the weekend they are released.

  4. R.J. Sayer
    June 1st, 2007 | 5:24 pm | #4

    i’m going to see it simply because i’m starting this “Summer of Hate” thing on my laughable myspace blog…

    the basic theory behind it is that i’m going to absolutely despise every studio release this summer.

    so far, my hypothesis holds up.

    and yes, sadly, that includes 28 WEEKS LATER.

  5. June 2nd, 2007 | 1:20 pm | #5

    I can understand not digging 28 Weeks Later, but absolutely despising it?

  6. R.J. Sayer
    June 7th, 2007 | 2:33 pm | #6

    perhaps “absolutely despised” is a bit too harsh.

    most of my anger with it comes from my expectations. and from the fact that every time a scene started to play out in the right direction (for me, anyway) it would seem to take a sharp turn for the worse at precisely the moment i started enjoying myself.

    almost as if the film didn’t want me to like it.

    plus, the way they brought the infection back? that was just lazy writing, plain and simple.

comment on this article


Recent Comments