18th June 2007.

“I suppose you liked Hostel: Part II”, said a Heat magazine film editor to me last week before another screening. When I told him I thought it was a terrific sequel that went beyond the scope of the original, he gave me a withering look and added, “I knew you were a sick individual”. His reaction astonished me actually. I don’t know what people think they see in Eli Roth’s continuation of his pay-for-slay concept, but it certainly wasn’t what I did. If anything it’s far more subdued in the gore department, with cutaways and suggestion being the clear focus so Roth can’t be accused of misogyny. As for the ‘money shot’ - Heather Matarazzo hung upside down being slow bled for a wealthy witch to indulge her Elizabeth Bathory fantasies – all Roth has done is cleverly update the Hammer imagery of Countess Dracula and Dracula: Prince of Darkness for a new generation. What’s so wrong with that?

Not only is Hostel: Part II a frighteningly well-made movie, but it also shows how Roth has matured in directorial style and honed plot focus. Unlike a lot of people I refused to watch the pirate DVD floating around with a few unfinished green screen moments. Significantly, people who did don’t like the movie as much as those who saw it on the big screen where it’s clear modern fairytale aspirations resonate more strongly. Roth is only being a traditionalist with the new arsenal of visual trickery upping the shock ante As for this whole ‘torture porn’ (yawn) label, well, victims of both sexes have been carved up on slabs since the 1931 Frankenstein and sadism was a centre of attraction way back in The Black Cat in 1934. And criticising a horror movie for being too horrific is like moaning about a comedy because it’s too funny. Anyone who truly thinks that deserves to watch every PG 13 horror ever made!

Every five years or so I’m dragged on to television to defend the genre we love and the questions and replies are always the same. How can you watch this trash? Because it’s a film for entertainment purposes and not reality. And you find this entertaining? As much as young children are finding the image of the Silver Surfer in the new Fantastic Four being dragged to a Siberian prison to undergo Russian torture because the US can’t be seen to be condoning such practices. Don’t horror movies promote violence? No, because violence has existed long before cinema was invented. But commercials affect people, why not on-screen gore. Because adverts are about product choice not behaviour patterns that possibly might affect the one person in 50 million with deeply rooted psychological problems.

The one they always fall for is: So you wouldn’t see a story about a man who bakes his kids into a pie and then forces his wife to eat it before he cuts her throat? Absolutely not! Well, that’s Shakespeare’s ‘Titus Andronicus’ and it’s considered a literary classic. And the one comment they always hate is: Why not ban the Bible/Koran because they are the cause of most of the world’s wars, inhumanity to man and society’s ills?

I’ve had to endure these attacks (and I’m about to put up with it again on various news shows) as much as the recurring story about horror being box-office poison, a glut causing over-saturation in the market place. My response there is always the same too - until the next big success that sets it all off again with yet another derogatory catchphrase to accompany the supposed revival. As FrightFest and its audience proves the genre is never going to die and is more popular now than ever before despite pundit predictions to the latter. It was Guillermo del Toro who told me that if he were given the choice of being trapped in a broken down lift with a horror aficionado or a Hugh Grant romantic comedy fan, he’d always choose the former because at least they wouldn’t be so dull.

No other film demographic has to put up with such wrongly judged criticism as us. It’s always a knee-jerk reaction and it’s always a flash in the pan. I feel sorry for Roth taking so much flack over his great film and withstanding personal attacks on his character for daring to be one of the key voices of contemporary horror. True, Roth can sound like a used car salesman at times peddling his wares, and often be his worst enemy. But I like him, what he’s doing and will defend his right to hype himself even though people can find that perpetual promotion off-putting. We’d all probably do exactly the same in his position. Roth has made the sequel of the year in my estimation and I don’t care what anyone thinks, especially those flogging no-talent C-list celebrity fashion secrets to slapper binge-drinkers as hard news. And I’m supposed to be sick!

Until next time…