Wolf Creek - A new breed of horror?

RyanAn · 12-28-2005, 07:41 PM

Wolf Creek, the new low-budget looking Australian film from director Greg McClean.

What did everyone think of this movie?

When I say a new breed of horror, I mean, it seems like horror films these days are going to a new point of not going for the gusto and relying more on build-up, without the conclusion. The first part can be perfectly fine, while the second is just not accectable.

The film itself is a meer 99 minutes, with more than half of that not having a remote scary portion anywhere in the film. I loved the establishing bonds between the characters in the beginning, but even they went nowhere. There was literally 45 minutes of nothingness, and only in the last half hour or so remotely scary. The feeling that I leave the movie with is that I forgot that I was watching a horror film in the beginning. Somewhere I started to believe that I was just watching a roadtrip movie with some absouletly astoninshing visuals in the interspliced skyline. Then, we take a turn for an average horror film with below average gore and scaryness and less than eventfull outcome.

It's not that I hated or loved the movie, but feel indifferent. The first half is a great road trip and showcases some amazing locations in South Australia, but for some reason the tail end takes a turn for the worse.

.5/

Ryan

Inspector Hammer! · 12-29-2005, 12:04 AM

IMO, this film isn't horror in the sense of seeing scary things to ease tension and have a good time doing it, it's an assault on the viewer, an exercise in sadism to be endured rather than enjoyed. It falls into the category of films like Seven where the viewer just feels badly about the human condition after it's over.

That

Spoiler:

scene in particular is the cruelest scene i've seen in a film in some time. I guess you can tell that I didn't care for it, it's a morally bankrupt affair that sets out to shock rather than entertain.

Just one man's opinion.

Henry Gale · 12-29-2005, 12:27 AM

My second viewing of Kong didn't work out the other day, talkative people.
So I wandered down the hall I went into Wolf Creek.
A few days before I had happenned to read a lengthy piece on the actual events the movie is based on.
Sorry to tell you this John, the

Spoiler:

So, even though there was a lot of travelogue at the front, there was also a lot of character establishment going on and I was pretty much dreading the rest of the movie.
I was reminded of an experience almost 30 years in the past.
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre seemed much too real to me. The first 10 or 15 minutes consisted of things I was involved in at that time. Central Texas, old dilapidated farm houses. I walked out, NOT going to watch a bum trip about activities I relish.
I've seen it since and actually became close friends with the art director, blah, blah, blah.
But in 1976 I was not prepared for it.
Someday I hope to explore Australia. So, again, do I want to see a drama of a real horrific event there?
It was pretty rough viewing. It was a true story.

Inspector Hammer! · 12-29-2005, 12:39 AM

I knew that it was supposedly based on true events, which did factor in to my opinion of the film.

Quentin · 12-29-2005, 01:16 AM

Nope. Didn't care for it. This is not horror as I like or expect. It is not genre so much as it is just docu-drama-like shock film.

As a case for low budget makeup? Awesome. As a film? Not worth my time.

HOSTEL is much better, much more fun, and much more a genre film for audiences to squirm AND enjoy.

**HTF Ads**

ChrisDixon · 12-29-2005, 11:47 AM

I haven't seen this one yet, but sometimes the ones that creep up on you without being a horror movie at first can be the most disturbing. Audition starts out like a quirky romance and then just punches you in the face. It's one of the most effective movies I've seen in recent years. Open Water is another example of a creepy movie that isn't horror, per se. It's that little feeling of dread in your gut that tells you something is coming.

Chris

Inspector Hammer! · 12-29-2005, 01:24 PM

That's just it, Chris, I don't want to be *disturbed* by a horror film, I can get disturbed by watching the news, I want to be entertained by a horror film.

This film is just ugly, depraved and sick with no redeeming value at all, again, just my opinion.

Quentin · 12-29-2005, 01:28 PM

I was going to compare this film to AUDITION. Another film I loathe and never want to think about again. I'm with John - I don't want to be screwed up by a movie, I want to be entertained.

Romier S · 12-30-2005, 12:05 AM

Quote:

That's just it, Chris, I don't want to be *disturbed* by a horror film

I do thankfully which is why I'm very much looking forward to seeing this soon. I'm not looking to have "fun" when watching a horror film. I don't have "fun" watching The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, but I am most certainly *captivated* by it as a film. It's an assault on the senses, it disturbs, and most importantly SCARES the hell out of me which is what I'm looking for when I sit down to watch something classified as horror.

Afterall, I surely don't think we should be walking out of Se7en with shiny happy feelings about the human condition.

It's not the point of the movie, nor should it be.

As John said, this is just one man's opinion. Hell, comparisons to Audition, and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre make me want to see Wolf Creek even more to be quite honest. This type of film really does come down to preference though and what you expect from a supposed "horror" film. So I can definitely understand your viewpoints in not taking a liking to this movie (or Audition for that matter) for the reasons mentioned.

I'll be sure to post some thoughts on Wolf Creek after I've seen it this weekend.

Bradley Newton · 12-30-2005, 08:53 AM

I have to say that I was absolutely blown away by Wolf Creek. We didn’t know anything about this walking in to it. We thought it was just another cheesy horror movie. It turned out to be one of the most disturbing films I have ever seen. I haven’t felt so shaky and upset since seeing the first Evil Dead in the theater when I was in ninth grade. What makes it even more disturbing is that it’s based on a true story, mostly the Ivan Milat case, and it also borrows from the Bradley Murdoch trial, which just ended last week.
I almost walked out but I am impressed by how well acted and directed it was, while being absolutely repulsed by it. Can you despise a film and admire it at the same time?
What makes it work is the way the first hour is like a documentary and you really get to know and like the characters. I just cannot put into words the intensity that this film has. And it really does fool you. The first hour or more really fools you. You forget that it is a horror movie. And the director does a fantastic job of showing you the geography of the Wolf Creek area of the outback and making you realize just how vast and away from civilization you are. I just cannot tell you the sense of dread that the film builds. Way before anything happens you want to walk out.
There were a lot of walk outs. A lot. And there was (strangely) applause as the credits rolled. I’m glad I saw it. Again, I haven’t had that kind of an experience in a movie theater in decades.
I may see it again, just to admire how technically brilliant it is. And to watch in amazement at John Jarratt’s performance.
I personally recommend not reading too much about Wolf Creek if you're thinking of seeing it, (I’ve tried to be vague) but if you have the stomach for it, I cannot recommend it highly enough. Greg McLean is a director to keep an eye on for this is an unforgettable debut film.