31 reviews
The stuffy provincial atmosphere reminds me of "Requiem" or "Dogville", but the lighting is more like "2046" or "The Matrix". Irene (Franziska Weisz) is the new girl at the movie's eponymous hotel. She isn't the paranoid type, but soon feels slightly claustrophobic nevertheless. In fact, neither Irene nor the camera get to leave the hotel until 20 minutes into the movie. Although her colleagues' disposition ranges from grumpy to openly hostile, she can't be sure she'd be better off outside. We are led to believe the girl Irene is replacing went out and never came back. For there's a witch lurking in the forest. Or something. No matter where Irene goes, there are curtains everywhere to conceal the truth. The fact that there is no music other than from the creaky speaker in the elevator (and Irene's noisy next-door neighbors) adds to the eerie mood. There are obvious overtones of "Lost Highway", especially when Irene discovers she looks almost exactly like the missing girl. Of course, there is no living up to this promise. "Hotel" is probably a little too stylish for its own good, but it's a real pleasure to look at and leaves you feeling agreeably spooked.
- richard_sleboe
- Feb 3, 2008
- Permalink
Irene is the new receptionist in a hotel in the austrian alps. She's not a local and thus is assigned living quarters on-site. She is obedient and pretty, modest and respectful. She likes swimming in the hotel pool, and walking close to the hotel in the foreboding woods.
She is friendly and wants to be a part of her peer group. Her co-workers are either stoic or rude and inconsiderate. Irene is alone and isolated------ and this isolation is the underlying theme of the film.
Irene was hired to replace another young woman, also a boarder, who has gone missing. There is a police investigation underway during Irene's early time at the hotel. We're told that there is a local legend of a Woman of the Woods, a witch who lives in the woods, perhaps inside the ominous cave near the hotel. Are the woods indeed haunted? Is someone stalking Irene?
These factors contribute to the mystery of the film, but do not explain the fate of Irene.
If you view this film as a horror and expect scares or gore, you will be confused and disappointed. The truer description is of a simple mystery involving young, low-paid service workers struggling to make connections in the stark, depressive environment of a mountain hotel.
Irene's emotional health visibly declines as her initial hopefulness about a new job in hospitality fades and becomes lonely and odd. Even the most simple joys she seeks, the friendship of a co-worker, a brief romance, a schedule change to go home, or pool swimming, become disappointments. This is the defining quality of the film, and when viewed as such, the ending makes sense.
This is an interesting, colorful, dark, film with repressed characters and dark hallways. It is relatively easy to watch at 75 minutes. This was a wise decision by the director. The runtime is perfect for the story.
She is friendly and wants to be a part of her peer group. Her co-workers are either stoic or rude and inconsiderate. Irene is alone and isolated------ and this isolation is the underlying theme of the film.
Irene was hired to replace another young woman, also a boarder, who has gone missing. There is a police investigation underway during Irene's early time at the hotel. We're told that there is a local legend of a Woman of the Woods, a witch who lives in the woods, perhaps inside the ominous cave near the hotel. Are the woods indeed haunted? Is someone stalking Irene?
These factors contribute to the mystery of the film, but do not explain the fate of Irene.
If you view this film as a horror and expect scares or gore, you will be confused and disappointed. The truer description is of a simple mystery involving young, low-paid service workers struggling to make connections in the stark, depressive environment of a mountain hotel.
Irene's emotional health visibly declines as her initial hopefulness about a new job in hospitality fades and becomes lonely and odd. Even the most simple joys she seeks, the friendship of a co-worker, a brief romance, a schedule change to go home, or pool swimming, become disappointments. This is the defining quality of the film, and when viewed as such, the ending makes sense.
This is an interesting, colorful, dark, film with repressed characters and dark hallways. It is relatively easy to watch at 75 minutes. This was a wise decision by the director. The runtime is perfect for the story.
Boring Austrian hotel requires boring receptionist to replace previous receptionist (probably also boring) who has disappeared, or been disappeared, into surrounding dark spooky forest; possibly gobbled up in the cave. By our Lady of the Woods. As boredom material.
Actually, I might have assumed too much there – imagined too much drama, or too much haunty horror. Which is no doubt what the director would like me to do: see all the strange goings on she's – deliberately – not been showing. And also reading into the narrative all the story she's not been developing, or even really providing. The new receptionist Irene never says very much; and the other characters don't say much to her either. Is something "funny" going to happen to her? Hopefully yes – otherwise watching this film will have felt like a waste of time.
Come the end something funny does happen to her. But it still felt like a waste of time. There's been too much concealed as opposed to revealed or released dramatic tension. The direction far too mutedly mannered. Far too withheld.
Actually, I might have assumed too much there – imagined too much drama, or too much haunty horror. Which is no doubt what the director would like me to do: see all the strange goings on she's – deliberately – not been showing. And also reading into the narrative all the story she's not been developing, or even really providing. The new receptionist Irene never says very much; and the other characters don't say much to her either. Is something "funny" going to happen to her? Hopefully yes – otherwise watching this film will have felt like a waste of time.
Come the end something funny does happen to her. But it still felt like a waste of time. There's been too much concealed as opposed to revealed or released dramatic tension. The direction far too mutedly mannered. Far too withheld.
- thecatcanwait
- Jan 2, 2012
- Permalink
I saw "HOTEL" at the International Rotterdam Film Festival 2005. It's a minimalistic suspense story that is all about atmosphere and concealed fear. It reminded me of Michael Haneke's "TIME OF THE WOLF" and Nicholas Winding Refn's "FEAR X". Little happens, but there is a constant sense of dread. Tension is built with care and slowly becomes nightmarish as Hausner uses a Lynchian dream-logic.
I don't mind these kind of movies, although i prefer the more engaging type like Kiyoshi Kurosawa's "CURE". It's a matter of taste. Most of the audience sounded frustrated because nothing happened. "HOTEL" is also best suited for smaller theaters. I saw it in a reasonable large room which took away a part of the effect the movie should have.
6.5/10
I don't mind these kind of movies, although i prefer the more engaging type like Kiyoshi Kurosawa's "CURE". It's a matter of taste. Most of the audience sounded frustrated because nothing happened. "HOTEL" is also best suited for smaller theaters. I saw it in a reasonable large room which took away a part of the effect the movie should have.
6.5/10
Irene takes a job as a receptionist at a chilly hotel in the Austrian Alps. She soon learns that the previous employee in her position disappeared from the locale under unclear circumstances, and later discovers a local legend about a witch who dwelled in a nearby cave centuries prior.
This debut from Austrian filmmaker Jessica Hausner is an ominous, at times totally oppressive offering that will divide (and has divided) viewers since it premiered at Cannes in 2003. "Hotel" is the kind of film that employs a storytelling mode that is sparse, at times tantalizingly so. The audience is fed bits of information just as the lead character herself is. We don't necessarily know what to do with it, nor do all of the strands fully converge in the end, but the overall impression that is created stands very strongly.
The location is integral to the film's power, and it also leaves a strong impression on the viewer. The hotel itself appears as a WWII monolith with a newly-fabricated modern millennium sheen. These contrasting elements are most clearly highlighted in the sleek, modern-looking lobby and the crumbly, cavernous, bunker-like basement which comes to take a prominent role in the film.
As is the case with everything else in "Hotel", the performances here are both immediate and distant, with characters that leave strong impressions despite rather threadbare characterization. In the end, the film as a whole will frustrate viewers who wish for more detail and less opaque conclusions--and on one hand, I understand this sentiment. On the other, however, "Hotel" does serve as a haunting, strange film whose power largely derives from the fact that it is comfortably seated in a liminal world. If you yearn for a moderately creepy sort of fable from the realm of the vague, look no further. 7/10.
This debut from Austrian filmmaker Jessica Hausner is an ominous, at times totally oppressive offering that will divide (and has divided) viewers since it premiered at Cannes in 2003. "Hotel" is the kind of film that employs a storytelling mode that is sparse, at times tantalizingly so. The audience is fed bits of information just as the lead character herself is. We don't necessarily know what to do with it, nor do all of the strands fully converge in the end, but the overall impression that is created stands very strongly.
The location is integral to the film's power, and it also leaves a strong impression on the viewer. The hotel itself appears as a WWII monolith with a newly-fabricated modern millennium sheen. These contrasting elements are most clearly highlighted in the sleek, modern-looking lobby and the crumbly, cavernous, bunker-like basement which comes to take a prominent role in the film.
As is the case with everything else in "Hotel", the performances here are both immediate and distant, with characters that leave strong impressions despite rather threadbare characterization. In the end, the film as a whole will frustrate viewers who wish for more detail and less opaque conclusions--and on one hand, I understand this sentiment. On the other, however, "Hotel" does serve as a haunting, strange film whose power largely derives from the fact that it is comfortably seated in a liminal world. If you yearn for a moderately creepy sort of fable from the realm of the vague, look no further. 7/10.
- drownsoda90
- Oct 12, 2024
- Permalink
HOTEL is about a young girl who is hired as a receptionist in an isolated, apparently inaccessible hotel in the Austrian Alps. Her co- workers are not responsive to her arrival, and to make matters worse, the girl she replaced was said to have disappeared. This description reminded me of the only film to truly scared me, Stanley Kubrick's The Shining. Second time director Jessica Hausner however, is no Kubrick.
The characters in this film are very one dimensional. Even the main character Irene, who finds herself in some situations that might scare a normal person, does not react at all. As a direct result, neither does the audience. The environment was also very bland. You would think the director would scout a location with some atmosphere for a psychodrama, but instead we're shown a very boring well kept hotel. This film is shot without any style whatsoever. The director must have thought a few of the scenes were terrifying (walking down a hallway, or looking into the woods), as she showed them over and over again. The conclusion was uninspired and predictable.
Note to amateur filmmakers everywhere ... If I can't put myself in the place of one of the films characters, and the situation isn't unusual or intense, and the environment does not seem unwelcoming, THERE IS NOTHING TO BE AFRAID OF. Your psychodrama will not work. Geez, I thought that would be obvious. (3/10)
The characters in this film are very one dimensional. Even the main character Irene, who finds herself in some situations that might scare a normal person, does not react at all. As a direct result, neither does the audience. The environment was also very bland. You would think the director would scout a location with some atmosphere for a psychodrama, but instead we're shown a very boring well kept hotel. This film is shot without any style whatsoever. The director must have thought a few of the scenes were terrifying (walking down a hallway, or looking into the woods), as she showed them over and over again. The conclusion was uninspired and predictable.
Note to amateur filmmakers everywhere ... If I can't put myself in the place of one of the films characters, and the situation isn't unusual or intense, and the environment does not seem unwelcoming, THERE IS NOTHING TO BE AFRAID OF. Your psychodrama will not work. Geez, I thought that would be obvious. (3/10)
- JohnnyLarocque
- Sep 16, 2004
- Permalink
- Horst_In_Translation
- Jul 4, 2017
- Permalink
I Didn't get it. Okey if there had been a creepy feeling then this movie had been much better, but I felt nothing. This movie was just weird and not good. Felt like It was a home made movie that students have done for the school or something. And I didn't think the acting was any good. Everyone had the same face expression all the time. The best with this movie was the picture of her on the movie. Everyone who wants to see this movie, Don't because you will be so disappointed and you waste money. I really felt I did so. Some people maybe think this type of movies is interesting, but I don't know what it could be thats so terrific? I give it:
3/10
3/10
- too_short5
- Aug 2, 2005
- Permalink
Before I buy a flick on DVD, I read reviews. First, I come here to IMDb to see what other viewers think. Then, I seek professional reviews to help me determine whether or not I should shell out $20.
Had I listened (as I normally do) to these reviews, I wouldn't have gone anywhere near Hausner's "Hotel" and would've checked in at the Motel 6 down the block. It seems, across the board, the reviews of this film call it "technically adept, but dull," or they complain that "Nothing happens! There's no plot!" Indeed, I almost DID listen to these reviews, but something about the premise of "Hotel" intrigued me. So, I decided to buy it, and I just finished watching it ten minutes ago.
Suffice to say, I feel inclined to come to the aid of this much maligned film. First, I agree with many reviewers about how the film is photographed. Without question, it is technically adept. The cinematography is precise and beautiful; carefully crafted (and often static) shots fill this flick, much like a Tarkovsky film. Colors are both vibrant and menacing--especially the void-like blacks (of the night forest) between the gray bark of the bare trees. Also the sterile greens and grays of the hotel interior. And don't forget the blood reds (of the front-desk-clerk's uniform) as she disappears into those horribly beckoning trees...
Now onto the ubiquitous "nothing happens" complaint. The movie depends much more on atmosphere (and brilliantly so) than jump scares or plot turns. So if you are looking for big action, you will not find it in "Hotel." And (NEWS FLASH!) this is precisely the purpose of the film. Like many great films (and I'm not calling this great, just exceedingly well done and marginally upsetting--in a good way), this film does not tell the viewer what to think. In fact, most of time, it doesn't even show the viewer what happens. Imagine that! Indeed, this is where the IMAGINation of the viewer (if the viewer has ever practiced using his or her imagination) fills in the dreadfully empty gaps.
The hinted-at story of the "forest witch" who used to live in the cave near the hotel (and the accompanying tales of vanishing hikers in the thick forest) is anything but fairytale-like. The cold, black crack in the mountain wall (the cave itself) seeps off the screen as it draws in the new young hotel desk clerk inch by inch. There's a lot of pathos here--the nervousness of beginning a new job for our protagonist; the impersonal darkness and dead-end corridors of the angular hotel; generally unfriendly and persnickety (even zombie-like) coworkers (one of which, in an understated dramatic moment, soullessly tells the protagonist to "Leave the hotel" and begins reciting the Rosary while mechanically cleaning a room); the suggestion of a "disappearance" (or perhaps, supernatural murder) of the previous desk clerk and everyone's unwillingness to discuss it. Yes, there's plenty of pathos.
But a warning is in order: This is not "The Shining." Kubrick's great film had a lot of Big Wheel action and Nicholson's drooling and babbling. Hotel has neither. But to create its own sterile, haunting effect, "Hotel" doesn't need Redrum or Scatman Crothers.
The clincher, however, is the ending of "Hotel." (Editorial: It reached valiantly for similar territory as the ending of Tarkovsky's "Solaris," in my opinion--"Hotel" didn't quite make it, but WOW!) Of course, I read many reviews that complained that "Nothing is explained" in the end. Whine, whine, whine! I guess ever since the "big-splashy-ending-that-explains-everything-in-a-surprise-twist" of "The Sixth Sense" and similar films, viewers are spoiled and need everything explained in a way that knocks their socks off. Well, my socks were absolutely knocked across the damn room, and at the same time NOTHING was reduced to a nugget-like explanation! I thought the abrupt, strange, pushed-off-a-cliff feeling invoked by director Hausner was PERFECT! It will stick with me for a while, and I recommend this film because of it.
And to those of you who "want your money back" from this "boring" film, I suggest you relax. Stop watching movies with expectations of having your entire life (and the lives of those on screen) explained away into absolute nothingness. News Flash #2: You don't know everything; you can't know everything. In fact, you may know very little about ANYTHING. (Just like the protagonist in this film; she knows so little--even about herself--that she may in fact BE the dreaded witch who dispatched her predecessor--who knows?)
You want REALLY SCARY? Here's a suggestion: Try existing in uncertainty. That's where "Hotel" lives. It's probably the scariest of all places to be.
Had I listened (as I normally do) to these reviews, I wouldn't have gone anywhere near Hausner's "Hotel" and would've checked in at the Motel 6 down the block. It seems, across the board, the reviews of this film call it "technically adept, but dull," or they complain that "Nothing happens! There's no plot!" Indeed, I almost DID listen to these reviews, but something about the premise of "Hotel" intrigued me. So, I decided to buy it, and I just finished watching it ten minutes ago.
Suffice to say, I feel inclined to come to the aid of this much maligned film. First, I agree with many reviewers about how the film is photographed. Without question, it is technically adept. The cinematography is precise and beautiful; carefully crafted (and often static) shots fill this flick, much like a Tarkovsky film. Colors are both vibrant and menacing--especially the void-like blacks (of the night forest) between the gray bark of the bare trees. Also the sterile greens and grays of the hotel interior. And don't forget the blood reds (of the front-desk-clerk's uniform) as she disappears into those horribly beckoning trees...
Now onto the ubiquitous "nothing happens" complaint. The movie depends much more on atmosphere (and brilliantly so) than jump scares or plot turns. So if you are looking for big action, you will not find it in "Hotel." And (NEWS FLASH!) this is precisely the purpose of the film. Like many great films (and I'm not calling this great, just exceedingly well done and marginally upsetting--in a good way), this film does not tell the viewer what to think. In fact, most of time, it doesn't even show the viewer what happens. Imagine that! Indeed, this is where the IMAGINation of the viewer (if the viewer has ever practiced using his or her imagination) fills in the dreadfully empty gaps.
The hinted-at story of the "forest witch" who used to live in the cave near the hotel (and the accompanying tales of vanishing hikers in the thick forest) is anything but fairytale-like. The cold, black crack in the mountain wall (the cave itself) seeps off the screen as it draws in the new young hotel desk clerk inch by inch. There's a lot of pathos here--the nervousness of beginning a new job for our protagonist; the impersonal darkness and dead-end corridors of the angular hotel; generally unfriendly and persnickety (even zombie-like) coworkers (one of which, in an understated dramatic moment, soullessly tells the protagonist to "Leave the hotel" and begins reciting the Rosary while mechanically cleaning a room); the suggestion of a "disappearance" (or perhaps, supernatural murder) of the previous desk clerk and everyone's unwillingness to discuss it. Yes, there's plenty of pathos.
But a warning is in order: This is not "The Shining." Kubrick's great film had a lot of Big Wheel action and Nicholson's drooling and babbling. Hotel has neither. But to create its own sterile, haunting effect, "Hotel" doesn't need Redrum or Scatman Crothers.
The clincher, however, is the ending of "Hotel." (Editorial: It reached valiantly for similar territory as the ending of Tarkovsky's "Solaris," in my opinion--"Hotel" didn't quite make it, but WOW!) Of course, I read many reviews that complained that "Nothing is explained" in the end. Whine, whine, whine! I guess ever since the "big-splashy-ending-that-explains-everything-in-a-surprise-twist" of "The Sixth Sense" and similar films, viewers are spoiled and need everything explained in a way that knocks their socks off. Well, my socks were absolutely knocked across the damn room, and at the same time NOTHING was reduced to a nugget-like explanation! I thought the abrupt, strange, pushed-off-a-cliff feeling invoked by director Hausner was PERFECT! It will stick with me for a while, and I recommend this film because of it.
And to those of you who "want your money back" from this "boring" film, I suggest you relax. Stop watching movies with expectations of having your entire life (and the lives of those on screen) explained away into absolute nothingness. News Flash #2: You don't know everything; you can't know everything. In fact, you may know very little about ANYTHING. (Just like the protagonist in this film; she knows so little--even about herself--that she may in fact BE the dreaded witch who dispatched her predecessor--who knows?)
You want REALLY SCARY? Here's a suggestion: Try existing in uncertainty. That's where "Hotel" lives. It's probably the scariest of all places to be.
I always am put off by that review. If that's the case, there are hundreds of Worst Movies Ever. How can that be? Should be only one.
I found it creepy, different. Slow moving? Yes, but to me that is a good thing in this age of too many slam bam action adventures. Fights, explosions, car chases, etc. CGI extravagances, ala Marvel flicks. Loved the weird characters, the spooky hotel and woods. A witch? Who knows. But our heroine wasn't "killed" until she ventures into the woods without her protective crucifix necklace she had lent out. To me, a salient, thought provoking point. Not a ten (few are), but a solid seven.
I found it creepy, different. Slow moving? Yes, but to me that is a good thing in this age of too many slam bam action adventures. Fights, explosions, car chases, etc. CGI extravagances, ala Marvel flicks. Loved the weird characters, the spooky hotel and woods. A witch? Who knows. But our heroine wasn't "killed" until she ventures into the woods without her protective crucifix necklace she had lent out. To me, a salient, thought provoking point. Not a ten (few are), but a solid seven.
The idea of the film appealed to me. It seemed promising but I bought the DVD and was disappointed. The film was too obviously pieces from other films like "the Shining", "Picnic at Hanging Rock" and even "A Passage to India" (the kiss in the cave). It could have been a good mix of these mysterious and eerie elements but it did not work.
The film was predictable and not scary in the least. There were too many confusing jumps in time. All of a sudden it was night time, then day. One moment the girl was indoors, the next outside... It was not helped by the one-note performances by the actors. The lead girl had no charisma and I finally did not care what happened to her.
I do not know why it was shown at cinemas in Sweden or even released on DVD! Maybe people thought the photography was arty. A lot of modern photography today looks like scenes from this movie. You can see stuff looking like that in art museums. As a film there was too little worth remembering.
The film was predictable and not scary in the least. There were too many confusing jumps in time. All of a sudden it was night time, then day. One moment the girl was indoors, the next outside... It was not helped by the one-note performances by the actors. The lead girl had no charisma and I finally did not care what happened to her.
I do not know why it was shown at cinemas in Sweden or even released on DVD! Maybe people thought the photography was arty. A lot of modern photography today looks like scenes from this movie. You can see stuff looking like that in art museums. As a film there was too little worth remembering.
- nickrogers1969
- Jul 11, 2009
- Permalink
One of the numerous films that had a great deal of buzz about it prior to its premier at the Cannes Films Festival. The reviews and feelings of many I spoke with about this film were mixed to say the least. This is the first full length film by Hausner and she did a marvelous job. The plot is simple enough...Girl begins working at a Hotel up in the mountains, after her predecessor mysteriously went missing. The eerie shots and mood of the film are relentless. I think what made this movie for me was that it did not give into the temptation to be a Hollywood film. It was not a jump-out-of-your-seat movie, but was enhanced because of that. It broke so many of the typical Hollywood norms, especially the length of the shots. I don't want to give too much away because I want everyone to be able to experience the film in the same unknowing manner in which I was able to. A must see, easily one of the top 3 films at Cannes this year!!!!!
- craig-r-francis
- Jul 6, 2004
- Permalink
I saw this "movie" on a movie festival yesterday. The story sounded moderately interesting, so I entered the cinema hall with the feeling the movie will be somewhere around the average level.
Now I'm re-reading the previous review and still can't believe the author founded this movie great... Different people, different points of view, I would say.
I'll tell you what happened at the cinema.
10 or 15 minutes after the beginning, maybe 3 or 4 people already had left the hall, grumbling for what crap they gave their money! Most of the rest (including me) were gazing at the screen, refusing to believe a movie released at 2005 could be so incomparably stupid! When the agony finally finished, this movie, out of a sudden, made most of the people roar with laugher! I would really suggest it for all the people suffering from some sort of depression or inferiority complex;) You feel really dumb? Believe me, yours is nothing... :) I personally found this movie unbelievably boring, with boring storyline (well, I would say no storyline at all), boring characters that are just moving around and do nothing, and totally boring dialogue. After 30 minutes of watching you will just want to get out and stop that pain... However, the average score of the movie shows that it has its audience, and this audience loves it (I can't believe that, but it's a fact). Look, I'm European too, and hearing (and saying) every day how stupid are Hollywood movies these days, expect from an European movie (awarded!) to not be one of the top 3 worst movies ever in my personal list!
Now I'm re-reading the previous review and still can't believe the author founded this movie great... Different people, different points of view, I would say.
I'll tell you what happened at the cinema.
10 or 15 minutes after the beginning, maybe 3 or 4 people already had left the hall, grumbling for what crap they gave their money! Most of the rest (including me) were gazing at the screen, refusing to believe a movie released at 2005 could be so incomparably stupid! When the agony finally finished, this movie, out of a sudden, made most of the people roar with laugher! I would really suggest it for all the people suffering from some sort of depression or inferiority complex;) You feel really dumb? Believe me, yours is nothing... :) I personally found this movie unbelievably boring, with boring storyline (well, I would say no storyline at all), boring characters that are just moving around and do nothing, and totally boring dialogue. After 30 minutes of watching you will just want to get out and stop that pain... However, the average score of the movie shows that it has its audience, and this audience loves it (I can't believe that, but it's a fact). Look, I'm European too, and hearing (and saying) every day how stupid are Hollywood movies these days, expect from an European movie (awarded!) to not be one of the top 3 worst movies ever in my personal list!
The story has potential. The director has not. The movie is praised as a horror movie, but it isn't. I'd like to say something about the story... but I'm sorry, there is no story. There is no suspense. There is one very well actress, but it's not the leading role. It's Frau Maschek alias Marlene Streeruwitz who did a very impressive acting.
During this very bland 80 minutes I've always been thinking: "When does the story begin?". When the movie came to its end, I was thinking: "That's not it! I've paid for a movie, show me one!". This is definitely the worst film ever made in Austria. It's a shame that movies like this are traded the figureheads of Austrian films. Don't waste your money, don't waste your time! Not even for the DVD.
During this very bland 80 minutes I've always been thinking: "When does the story begin?". When the movie came to its end, I was thinking: "That's not it! I've paid for a movie, show me one!". This is definitely the worst film ever made in Austria. It's a shame that movies like this are traded the figureheads of Austrian films. Don't waste your money, don't waste your time! Not even for the DVD.
- michael-zechmann
- Apr 3, 2005
- Permalink
I didn't see much in terms of original thinking by the director.
Much of it seemed hap-hazzardly borrowed from the work of other horror movies directors' devices.
Parts were mind numbingly dull, especially to sophisticated audiences. Namely the hallway scenes that fade to black. More closeups on facial expressions of fear were needed rather mere darkness.
The person in the next chair who nudged me awake said not to worry about it - he wished he could fall asleep too.
I hope that the disappointment of Hotel won't be reflective in "You bet Your Life (2005)" which airs at this years film festival and has the same producer - Antonin Svoboda
Its funny how you can remember parts of a bad movie more than a year after you see so many good ones.
Much of it seemed hap-hazzardly borrowed from the work of other horror movies directors' devices.
Parts were mind numbingly dull, especially to sophisticated audiences. Namely the hallway scenes that fade to black. More closeups on facial expressions of fear were needed rather mere darkness.
The person in the next chair who nudged me awake said not to worry about it - he wished he could fall asleep too.
I hope that the disappointment of Hotel won't be reflective in "You bet Your Life (2005)" which airs at this years film festival and has the same producer - Antonin Svoboda
Its funny how you can remember parts of a bad movie more than a year after you see so many good ones.
In this "movie" (I don't even think this can be called "movie") almost nothing happens - a girl is walking around and the camera just shows her from different angles - in the hotel, walking in the woods and etc. You expect something to happen (probably something creepy or frightening), but nothing happens till the very end...There is no any story too. This is below any standard - a dumb movie, trying to be strange by being unexpectedly boring...The only good thing - you will feel very clever after walking out, after seeing such a stupidity. It is also trying to imitate some Lynch style, showing red/green curtains and etc...but is far below anything watchable. I'm just wondering how someone can produce and others can release such crap...I can't believe there is a single man, that can enjoy it.
- gaborforro
- Dec 9, 2006
- Permalink
I saw that movie at a film festival in Januray 2005. On my personal record, it was the second best out of the 10 movies I had seen there. The film does polarize very much - either you like it or you hate it. Especially the end is very controversial.
"Hotel" is not a conventional horror movie and it is certainly not meant to be shown at the big block buster cinemas. It is much more a low budget, minimalist, purist version of a scary movie. The film has very subtitle, psychological horror! If you liked "Blair Witch Project", you will enjoy this movie too.
The Austrian accent of the most actors give the soundtrack a special note and make the already very reserved atmosphere between the characters even more chilly.
By the way: No one left the cinema or fell asleep during screening as reported in other comments on this site ... <:
"Hotel" is not a conventional horror movie and it is certainly not meant to be shown at the big block buster cinemas. It is much more a low budget, minimalist, purist version of a scary movie. The film has very subtitle, psychological horror! If you liked "Blair Witch Project", you will enjoy this movie too.
The Austrian accent of the most actors give the soundtrack a special note and make the already very reserved atmosphere between the characters even more chilly.
By the way: No one left the cinema or fell asleep during screening as reported in other comments on this site ... <:
- Daniel_Roos
- Oct 4, 2006
- Permalink
- shadow_ror
- Jun 28, 2006
- Permalink
- two-rivers
- Feb 8, 2008
- Permalink
I saw this "movie" last year and I'm sorry to say that it was the worst movie I ever saw. There is no acting, no story, no suspense, no music, ... There is NOTHING lasting the whole film long. The "highlight" of the "movie" is that a door is shut when the main character returns (of course you don't see how it's shut since the "movie" doesn't contain any action).
I wouldn't call this piece even a "movie" since it is such an unbounded cheek. If i was possible to vote not from 1 to 10 but from -10 to 10 I would have chosen -10 without hesitating!
How can 80 minutes of boredom win a prize?
I wouldn't call this piece even a "movie" since it is such an unbounded cheek. If i was possible to vote not from 1 to 10 but from -10 to 10 I would have chosen -10 without hesitating!
How can 80 minutes of boredom win a prize?
- Catharina_Sweden
- Sep 22, 2012
- Permalink
This film is 100% mood and 0% narration. And that don't work. Now, of course, one can argue that a narrative of sorts exists, but it is deliberately confusing. Things happen for apparently no reason or without proper context, only to never be explained. We literally have no idea what is going on, if anything. Bizarre things happen, and then we get no explanation why, and they seem to have no bearing on the minimalistic plot. As expected, the film ends with zero payoff and zero explanation, with a lazy anticlimax one could predict with ease. As for the horror, it is completely absent. The film seeks to make you feel uneasy, in part by not letting you know what is going on or where the strange events might lead to, but as soon as you as the viewer recognize the pattern, you will rightfully feel cheated and turn your back on a film that scores cheap shots while never doing what you want it to do - namely tell you a story that is worth watching and that one can make sense out of.
A low budget experiment that went awry.
A low budget experiment that went awry.
This is my first review, but there's something about that movie that made me want to share my thoughts about it.
I've seen this movie a few times, and for me this movie is pure masochism, the joy of feeling uncomfortable. The Horror does not come from jumpscares but from the cold distance that comes from the colleagues. Maybe you really need to be an austrian to fully understand the feeling that Irene goes through.
When i was somewhere around the same age like Irene, i moved to eastern Austria close to the location this movie was filmed, at the same time when to movie was released. I also got a job in a kinda old fashioned Business that aimed the upper classes. The distance between colleagues themself and the bosses was huge and cold. Something i never experienced before. And this movie is so honest and good in portraying this distance, that i always can identify myself with Irene. I am the opposite of a shy person, but this tension at work makes you a shy mouse like Irene is. You're trying to create a friendshipy like relation to your colleagues, whom you see every day, but for an outsider it's nearly impossible to join the "inner circle". For an open minded person this is hard to accept, that it needs many months, if not years, to join the inner circle of the staff, that makes you feel welcome into the business you spend every day in. And theres no other movie, wich i saw so far, that is so good in transporting that feeling of cold Austrian distance between co-workers.
I especially want to mention the great work of Marlene Streeruwitz who did a brilliant job in acting one of the bosses, Frau Maschek. For me she is the austrian counterpart of Robert de Niro - An actor who loves to play the kind of person she hates like the most in real life. She keeps in all good manners, but lets you know that she doesn't trust you by the way she speaks to you in a bored and slightly annoyed way.
The work of the actors and how they are portrayed is brilliant and couldn't be performed better. The story itself has some weak parts, but in my opinion this movie isn't about the story, it's about what you feel while you're watching how Irene tries to become part of people who may be forced (?) to keep a distance but still sometimes show a little spark of sympathy that gives Irene the hope to become a real part of the team someday.
Allthough the story on itself isn't that thrilling i love the feelings that this movie is able to transport. If the story itself would be a bit more demanding this movie would get 10/10.
I've seen this movie a few times, and for me this movie is pure masochism, the joy of feeling uncomfortable. The Horror does not come from jumpscares but from the cold distance that comes from the colleagues. Maybe you really need to be an austrian to fully understand the feeling that Irene goes through.
When i was somewhere around the same age like Irene, i moved to eastern Austria close to the location this movie was filmed, at the same time when to movie was released. I also got a job in a kinda old fashioned Business that aimed the upper classes. The distance between colleagues themself and the bosses was huge and cold. Something i never experienced before. And this movie is so honest and good in portraying this distance, that i always can identify myself with Irene. I am the opposite of a shy person, but this tension at work makes you a shy mouse like Irene is. You're trying to create a friendshipy like relation to your colleagues, whom you see every day, but for an outsider it's nearly impossible to join the "inner circle". For an open minded person this is hard to accept, that it needs many months, if not years, to join the inner circle of the staff, that makes you feel welcome into the business you spend every day in. And theres no other movie, wich i saw so far, that is so good in transporting that feeling of cold Austrian distance between co-workers.
I especially want to mention the great work of Marlene Streeruwitz who did a brilliant job in acting one of the bosses, Frau Maschek. For me she is the austrian counterpart of Robert de Niro - An actor who loves to play the kind of person she hates like the most in real life. She keeps in all good manners, but lets you know that she doesn't trust you by the way she speaks to you in a bored and slightly annoyed way.
The work of the actors and how they are portrayed is brilliant and couldn't be performed better. The story itself has some weak parts, but in my opinion this movie isn't about the story, it's about what you feel while you're watching how Irene tries to become part of people who may be forced (?) to keep a distance but still sometimes show a little spark of sympathy that gives Irene the hope to become a real part of the team someday.
Allthough the story on itself isn't that thrilling i love the feelings that this movie is able to transport. If the story itself would be a bit more demanding this movie would get 10/10.
- meinemailist
- Oct 9, 2020
- Permalink
- steez-o-mat
- May 21, 2006
- Permalink
I usually don't comment what fellow critics on IMDb write, but giving this little masterpiece only an average of 4,2 is bad taste indeed. In short; it's been a while since one saw a movie there so much happens, even if you don't see all of it on the screen. Franziska Weiss is really great, with a face which tells you a lot, with just a small correction of the glimpse in her eyes.
This is creepy, but in a way you might be rather familiar with from your own life. That life is here, by very small means, a nightmare. Maybe the end doesn't really fulfill what is promised, not really. Maybe the camera spotlights in the forest surrounding the hotel are too sharp.
But still this is supposed to give you much worse dreams than for example "The Grudge", which is made by amateurs.
This is creepy, but in a way you might be rather familiar with from your own life. That life is here, by very small means, a nightmare. Maybe the end doesn't really fulfill what is promised, not really. Maybe the camera spotlights in the forest surrounding the hotel are too sharp.
But still this is supposed to give you much worse dreams than for example "The Grudge", which is made by amateurs.