I liked part two better than 1. it had more depth, a better story, good actresses, more style. so... is 3 just as good? i think removing the eastern europe setting from the hostel series is a bad idea? but, who nose
I think i'll rent it some night. it did look interesting, and i wondered why it wasn't released theatrically, so i thought it must be really low-budget. But I still can't imagine hostel with out any foreign (euro/asian) characters.
I love the 1st and 2nd. I was reluctant to watch this one, simply because it's not Eli Roth, but I was actually surprised. It wasn't bad at all. Definitely not as much torture/gore as the first 2,but worth a watch.
You just might get lucky for once in your miserable life.
As far as you like part 1 and 2, you know that eventually you would watch part 3 anyway, regardless suggestions and comments that you may got from others. Then go watch it.
But IMO, I don't think it's as good as those old parts. Part 3 looks like a misplaced movie, not even in same atmosphere and same theme (and affects your sensation a lot, you don't have feeling that you used to have when watch older ones) with others. It's watchable if you're in this kind of horror movie. But I've to say it's not good enough for what it stand for. It feel very weak compare other parts in this series. Plot and events in movie way too illogical and not interesting, sometime too easy (like WTF the moment bald guy successfully grab the electrical tool from guard who outside the jail, easy in a ridiculous way to happen in horror movie, it like comedy scene)...sometime the chance for character/victim come up badly forced and hardly acceptable. Not a good horror sequel, in my opinion.
Part 1 was the only decent one out of the whole series. Part 2 sucked donkey balls, and Part 3 is even worse. Please save yourself the 2 hours of watching this unimaginative piece of crap.