Hotel (2004)

What makes it different from others?

Simply A Masterpiece

Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

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.

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.

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

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)