In fact, such a movie is very simple. It must have lingering blood, and there must be fancy ways to die. If all these are available, then add a little pornography, a little humor, rely on it, it is simply the best. The first one could almost be regarded as a top-quality B-movie. The clipping of the eyeballs is so exciting. But what about the second part? Does the blood bath count? Anyway, when I look at it, I get bored. The ending is also a bit abrupt. I even suspect that the version I got is a clean version after being reviewed by domestic institutions! God, it's better not to become morally good.
It can be seen that the director actually wants to add some connotations to the film. For example, the seemingly sturdy man flinched after just cutting off a bit of his scalp, while the man who had always been cowardly seemed extremely excited. This comparison is interesting. But, does such a film need connotation? I don't think it is necessary. All that is needed is a stimulation of the senses. Seeing you vomit is the most awesome! Connotation and the like are just concepts imposed by the viewer. Also, that's not what this type of film needs to do. You have to say that this movie is about promoting women's rights, and that's fine. You say yours, I'll see mine.
In addition, living in the village is very boring. Look at other people, they all saw this movie in July and August. It's almost fucking golden week before I get the DVD. Although there has always been a saying of a global village, this village is still a bit big.
View more about Hostel: Part II reviews
