wolf creek
 

wolf creek has to be the boreinest movie i saw from beginning to end. it stunk. its a poor excuse for a horror movie. i like american horror movies better. just one thing, i thought the killer had a mask on or is that a different movie:mad:

There's already a thread for this movie...

http://horror.com/forum/showthread.p...threadid=17935

and the one with the mask is Cry_Wolf.

I didn't think it was so bad. Better than Hostel.

And if you think it was slow, there's not much hope. You have to get past only enjoying movies that have action in them every second.

would it fucking kill you to search for threads once in awhile....


And this movie was grand, 8.5/10

Totally agree with you. This was way better then Hostel.

movie is ok

good but not great :cool:

Hostel just seemed like a Saw ripoff from beginning to end.

Wolf Creek OWNS Hostel. The 'head on stick' part was brutal.

Yeah, Wolf Creek is a lot better than Hostel. It was an good watch, but I'm sorta growing tired of these "neo-exploitation" flicks that are all the rage right now. Granted, it's a better movement than the teen slasher craze, but I think it's kind of running out of steam.

I'd say influenced rather than ripoff but I agree that Wolf Creek is a good film.

Am I the ONLY one that dug Hostel and HATED Wolf Creek? I looked so forward to Wolf Creek, and couldn't WAIT to see it, and it totally disappointed me! I mean, they spent so much time on the build-up and not enough on the good stuff. I just wanted everyone to die, up to and including everyone responsible for the film's production as well.

Hostel may have had a shit beginning, but at least it delivered more gore and packed more of a punch for your money than Wolf Creek...in my humble opinion, that is.

I feel the same way...except opposite.

Hostel was the one with the big reputation to uphold. I had heard this was so sick and twisted that it was hard to bear. I was told there was so much gore it would make me barf.

Great, there was ONE kill scene they didn't show in the trailer, the acting BLEW, the "kid gang" was flat out dumb, the first half was horrible--and it wasn't even an "almost-porno" like others have claimed! It was a lot of tits. Whoopty-fuckin'-doo. It would be better, if you want the things this movie supposably had, to watch a porno, followed by Cannibal Holocaust.

At least Wolf Creek had good acting/dialogue and it never claimed to be something it wasn't.

I kinda liked them. I mean, imagine, a gang of children you can sic on everyone that pisses you off with only a bag of bubble gum. Thinking over the possibilites makes me light-headed with glee. :-P

I still disagree on Wolf Creek having any good acting or dialogue. It seemed more to me like a really boring Australian version of MTV's "The Real World"...I mean, half the movie was the two girls talking about the guy and who he liked, blah-di-blah. This was why I greatly enjoyed their deaths. But, to each their own, I always say.

I agree with Hostel not living up to its promises, but I thought that was only because I am a bit jaded when it comes to gore. I always want more, more, more. *LOL* But, Greg Nicotero's effects made the movie worth it, for me. Oh, how I love that man... *sigh* And, Cannibal Holocaust, you say? I'm dying to see that (no pun intended, I swear!). It's next on my list.

I agree that I thought Wolf Creek was garbage. I also enjoyed Hostel way better than Wolf Creek. The first half of Wolf Creek was so BORING, and when the action finally begins, the payoff is lacking. The head on a stick is the only halfway cool part.

I agree, that was pretty wicked. It could have been a really good, good movie if only they'd cut down the chatter and amped up the fun. I did enjoy the choice of villain, though. It was funny to see this very American ideal of a stereotypical Australian as a bad guy. That added a bit of a creepier element in the respect that if any American encountered that character, we'd follow him wherever he'd take us just to tell our friends back home we hung out with a guy who was "just like Crocodile Dundee!". :-P

Everyone in the film was Australian. It was an Australian film, much as Haute Tension was a French movie.

When Wolf Creek started production, they probably didn't give a flying fuck about us seeing it here in America.

Not care about us seeing it here in America?! For shame!!!

What am I talking about? My favorite band is German and couldn't give a flying fuck if an American bought their album... :-P

I agree that perhaps for the Australian audience, Wolf Creek was probably pretty hardcore, but in the end, they decided to market it in America, as well. When they made that decision, they agreed to deal with people like me who need more gore, more action. It wasn't entirely horrible, but it could have been much, much better. Again, IMHO.

Hmmm, some of you are nuts.

The girls in the film were English, and the acting throughout was terrific - almost on par with The Blair Witch Project and Open Water, which breathe the same air as Wolf Creek.

The astonishing cruelty of the violence did not overwhelm the subtle suspense of the abduction, as the viewer races ahead with honed abhorrence wondering just how far this film is prepared to go.

Unfortunately the money-spinning 'based on true events' claims are references to the Murdoch and Milat cases, which are totally unnecessary and surely reopen old wounds for the families of the murdered backpackers aware their ordeals have been dramatised and sold as entertainment (barely a decade after they died).

hmm - i doubt that - given the massive Yankee dollar. . .

but, the cultural issues that make High Tension French and Wolf Creek Australian are clearly an issue for some American audiences.

my only objection to Wolf Creek - which was quite brutal and struck me as closer to films like the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre than Hostel - was the stupidity of the two women - they just kept putting themselves back into trouble

but i did think the Aussie Serial Killer was really disturbing and the second woman's death was really a shock

Okay, so I stretched.

What I'm trying to get across is that not every filmmaker in the world is going to pamper to us whiny Americans.

amen! which, sadly, is our loss for not seeking out the more challenging foreign films and instead flooding to the theater to see MI:3 - ugghh

But MI3 came in 10 million below expert predictions.

Either Tom Cruise is losing his box office appeal because of his increasingly odd antics or American moviegoers are starting to get tired of those box office mega-blockbuster FX bonanzas.

Also, American Haunting opened to a nice 5.5 million weekend. I havent seen it yet, but I will probably get around to it this week.




Zero, I'm with you on the TCM analogy. I thought Wolf Creek had a really dark, gritty feel to it. Head on the Stick was brutal. Loved it.

i thought that part was harsh - but i found the medium shot of the shooting of the blonde woman even more disturbing - so matter of fact and heartless. . . the actor who played 'killer' was amazing - so unsettling and unhinged. . . a really top notch performance (much like the male killer in High Tension who, without much dialogue, depicted such a horrificly chaotic sense of evil)

It was good in parts...but for me who's been fed on a diet of TCM, Wrong Turn, Halloween, Friday the 13th-esque type movies, many parts of it seemed like ripoffs...

the first part of the movie dealt dryly with the characters, it was slow alright...and the second part took off like an express train once the teens hit the sh**...

The saving grace of the movie has to be the killer...who looks and behaves like your everyday-next-door-friendly guy, yet when he turns mean he gets REALLY mean...

some sequences really stand out...the head scene, the slashing of the fingers, shootin the second gurl in the head, the guy slowly pulling his hands off the board where its nailed to...

And the oldest con to money making still stands "This movie is based on actual cases"...yeah rite...

The 'based on true events' claim is a morally dubious selling point, fresh in the mind as the Milat and Murdoch cases are.

It sounds like you felt gore was the requisite in this film - a shame, because it has so much more to offer.

The cinematography is excellent, capturing the sparse terrain of the outback in the unsettling raw style of The Hills Have Eyes and The Texas Chain Saw Massacre. Acting is top notch, particularly from the two male Australian leads. The narrative is relaxed, but with enough subtle and jarring twists to throw any complacency right out the window (but no stretched or illogical plot developments that have been thought to blight the likes of, say, Haute Tension).

Wolf Creek is far from a ripoff (the mention of the Jason Voorhees movies is rather unusual) but close to the best horror films of the past decade, expanding on the stark, cinema verite style of The Blair Witch Project and Open Water rather than pandering to Hollywood productions.

Parts of it surely are...if you read all the movies I mentioned together with Friday the 13th, and remember back to the beginning of each movie, the terrorising of young gurls, the slashing, etc. you ll notice the similarities...

I ll admit that the cinematography and presentation of various parts of the movie are quite good, esp the crater shots, long-distance cinematography capturing the essence of the bushy and veld-like terrains. Acting was ok, the killer did the most decent part, and the victims were acceptable.

Come to the scene of the gurl runnin naked-foot on the road looking for help in the glaring hot sunny day, and again you are reminded of the similarity to other movies...granted the shots were craftily done, but most parts of the movie still stand as "influenced" from others...

It's a bit like comparing Aliens to 2001, because there were spaceships in both. The torturing and subsequent pursuit of the victims in Wolf Creek was nothing like The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, Wrong Turn, Halloween or Friday the 13th. These films may share a theme of killers and victims (stalk and slash, if you like), but the only striking familiarity in Wolf Creek is the impressive photgraphy that creates such an uncertain and ominous atmosphere during the whole film - it is less a rip off of TCM than a similarly styled film in terms of aesthetics.

The killer occasionally slipped into OTT 'bogey man' mode, but the three young actors rarely put a foot wrong with their natural and restrained performances (middle class English student types are often irritatingly twittery, and the guy playing Ben was absolutely spot on).

A girl running down a road injured and barefoot during the day might have appeared in a film before... but to call this film a rip off is misplaced (better directed to bigger Hollywood films) and the director ensured its influences were not hammered home with the irony and smug so commonplace in today's horror.

I agree...to an extent...yet the movie aint original...07/10 is the best I ll give to it...

Well put. I back you 100% on that, completely agree.

wolf creek
 

i just wanna thank the people who agree with me on how wolf creek stinks.. it was not scary at all, from start to finish

Re: wolf creek
 

Yes, make sure to thank all the right people who follow your opinion, oh God of horror.

I have to give it a 2/10 cause i fell asleep during it.:rolleyes:

Is it part of a movie's function to stop the viewer falling asleep?

Unlikely - since so many factors can affect the condition of the brain before viewing.

So a film must work harder (something it cannot do) to catch the attention if you are tired.

Try watching it again, not so late at night - maybe on a weekend.

:cool:

No..i think i fell asleep because it....ummmmm..SUCKED!!

Could you be more specific -

What sucked about it in particular?

wolf creek
 

what sucked about wolf creek is that it wasnt scary at all. i thought it was pretty boring. stick to the american made movies

I disagree.

The apprehensive mood that developed during the meeting of the victims and their abductor - particularly between the two lead males - was subtle but very sinister (not least down to some terrific cinematography and acting), the terrorising and torture of the two girls were some of the most nasty episodes in horror film history, the unexpected developments during the pursuit scenes were brutal, jarring and went against the grain of typical Hollywood horror so insistent on providing revenge and retribution.

This is not a Freddy movie (although the scene in the car was a real bogeyman moment) - it is raw exploitation, capable of generating terror like The Texas Chain Saw Massacre and The Hills Have Eyes. It isn't a 'boo! look behind you' picture, the kind which might provide more 'scares' to younger audiences.

Stick to American made movies?

Q: Explain why.

Re: wolf creek
 

Ah yes, the great American-made movies:

Boogeyman, Darkness Falls, and a thousand remakes.




I thought Wolf Creek's atmosphere made it pretty damn good.

Hostel had the most tasteless gore I have ever seen. wolf creek was actually pretty good except the girls were stupid I have ever seen. I was soo mad at them I am glaad that one got her spine stabbed. and he put the other one out of her misery.

Hostel just sucked, at least saw had a plot. hostle was just hey look at my boobs and throw in some shocking gore. just for the purpose of shock. NO CLASS.