Filed under: Horror, Celebrities and Controversy, Politics, Remakes and Sequels
Before I present you with the situation, here's a question to think about: Is it okay for someone to label Hostel: Part II "disgusting" prior to seeing the film? Think about that; we'll get back to it. The always-opinionated Nikki Finke recently wrote a story for her Deadline Hollywood site which talked about the various bootleg copies of Hostel: Part II that are showing up on streets and online. Now, in reporting on this story, Finke said the following: "I say, fine: Lionsgate deserves to feel the effects of piracy (not to mention the wrath of mankind) for distributing such a disgusting film." It's her belief that no business should profit off the "uber-violence" apparently featured in the Hostel sequel.
Okay, everyone has the right to their opinion -- except, when you dish it, you need to be able to handle whatever backfire heads your way. Case in point: Brendon from Film ick wasn't happy about how Finke called Hostel: Part II "disgusting" when she hadn't even seen the film yet. During an odd back-and-forth between Brendon and Finke (in which all of Finke's emails were subsequently removed and summarized at her request), it appears Brendon's biggest problem is that Finke "a) declared a film 'disgusting' and insinuated it is without merit, without even seeing it first, and b) attempted to prejudice other people similarly." Finke, on the other hand, felt she had every right to "be offended by 'torture porn'" and shouldn't be persecuted for urging people not to watch the film. Following that exchange, it appears emails were blocked, filtered into spam folders and the call went out for readers to send Finke an email telling her why she's wrong.
In defense of Finke, calling Hostel: Part II "disgusting" (which, in all reality, it probably is -- and even director Eli Roth wouldn't disagree with you there) is no different than assuming the latest Lindsay Lohan film sucks because she's in it. I'm not saying it's right to assume things, but those of us in the movie blog business do it all the time. It's our job to assume; we get paid to offer an opinion. And so it goes. Should Finke have re-worded it to read, "Hostel: Part II is probably disgusting," just as Brendon said Prince of Persia "sounds like quite a dreadfully dull film?" Probably. Then again, Finke urging people not to see it will probably help the film more than it hurts -- "Finke said not to go. I'm there!" What do you think?
Permalink | Email this | Comments
