Eli Roth is a mixed bag. He’s only directed two feature films and yet, there seems to be an aura of mythology around his name – brought on by Hostel, but earned by Cabin Fever. The fear and hatred toward Hostel is the stuff of legend. There are several camps, those who believe that Hostel is the second coming in horror, those who don’t watch a great deal of horror movies and find it shocking and those who dub it “torture porn.” Truth be told, it’s none of these things. Is it exploitive and perverse? Sure, but what horror film isn’t (to some degree)?
Honestly, it’s amazing the film still generates buzz. The graphic violence is the stuff of B-movie blood and guts and there is absolutely no reason to care for any of the characters nor fear for them. Hostel plays out like sophomoric frat boy horror, as suggested by Roth’s own cameo. Nevertheless, the strength of Cabin Fever continues to be overlooked. Where Roth fails in his humor in Hostel, he triumphs in Cabin Fever, and his cabin-bound characters are more relatable because they aren’t dumb as rocks.
Unfortunately, Roth’s downfall maybe that he’s susceptible to his own fame. Nearly brainwashed by Quentin Tarantino, Roth sees himself as infallible in an interview with 411mania.com.
“I think that the term 'torture porn' says more about the critic than it does about the movie. I think it speaks volumes about a critics' limited capacity to understand what a horror movie can be. It shows how narrow-minded they are and what kind of eyes they watch the movie through,” says Eli Roth. “Someone told me in Chicago last night that they sat next to Richard Roeper during the screening of Cabin Fever, and he was jumping, screaming, squealing, and going crazy during the whole movie. He then trashed it in his review. I think that's just how it is with a lot of these critics. They almost feel guilty giving it a positive review. I think the term is absurd. I also feel like a lot of movies that come out are just violence for the sake of violence. I think it's too bad when you get lumped in with them.”
Granted, Roth has a point about critics with agendas and that many career critics like to have the choice of what is hot and what is not. Roth, however, seems confused as to the reaction of his audience. On one hand, he’s looking to creep you right out of your skin with over-the-top violence. Roth is not a director who creates horrifically atmospheric films; he’s going to show you someone getting their face blow-torched off. On the other hand, he believes that his films are incredibly thematically rich. Unfortunately, this isn’t the case with either Hostel nor Cabin Fever. Cabin Fever succeeds on its cheap thrills and wit. Hostel has a glimmer of depth, but he doesn’t dive deep enough. He doesn’t fully explore why a person would want to torture another, he chops that up to upper class boredom, and he doesn’t even attempt to pull out the parallel between sex and violence, they merely co-exist for the same exploitive reasons.
“I'm making movies that I think will hold up 30 years from now and that horror fans will love. What I've done, few other filmmakers have been able to do on a very, very low budget. The average Hollywood budget is 80 million dollars. 80 million dollars! I made Cabin Fever for 1.5 million dollars. I made Hostel for 3.8 million dollars. I did not make Hostel Part 2 for a lot more than that. Even a low-budget film in Hollywood is 20 million dollars. If you combine all three of my movies, it's still considerably less than that. That's less than one major star's movie salary. I'm so happy and fortunate to be in the position that I'm in that it doesn't matter what those people think. Who cares what they think?” Roth boasts.
Whoa there big fella, let’s not get ahead of ourselves.
Frankly, Roth hasn’t done anything to date that would send him packing into the pantheon of cinematic horror maestros. Being the poster boy for the media’s thirst for controversial “torture porn” doesn’t make you a filmmaker. Roth has, so far, gotten by on his clever exploitation, but there is much room for directorial growth. There are two virtues that do an artist good – honesty and humility.
Personally, I’m rooting for Roth. He has a lot to prove with Hostel Part 2. It will either expand upon the themes of the first and delve into thematic territory that the first ignored or it will buy into it’s own “torture porn” karma. In a perfect world, it would do both, but Roth’s capacity as a director just isn’t there yet. By the sound of his attitude in the interview, it’s not looking too promising. Self congratulatory, and a tad masturbatory, Roth could just be ramping up hype for the Hostel Part 2 release. If he truly believes every word he says, he might have more with his mentor Quentin Tarantino than he thinks. In that he’s a raving ego-maniac who believes he can do no wrong.
