Wolf Creek -- what's the point?

Cafe Society
21

Nothing to do with Wolf Creek since I have not seen it but…
I liked * House of 1000 corpses* because I felt it was true horror. An idiot convinces his friends to go offroad and all sorts of bad shit happens in the backwoods. I can even imagine their being such houses in the remotes of the West where fucked up people do nothing but murder people. They are isolated wackjobs out to hurt others, pehaps because they were fucked up as a child. We see this on the news occasionally such as Jeffrey Dahmer. I’d imagine if he were in the backwoods like the Unabomber he might never have been caught.

Problem is, The Devil’s Rejects was just a continuation of more fucked-up-ness with no point beyond the same evil fucks killing more decent people for no reason. It was nothing more than Rob trying to show more inventive ways to kill people. Nothing about the characters is fleshed out beyond the dad issue. On the DVD there is a “special feature” showing a main character beat the fuck out of a tied-up cheerleader and presumably later rape her while she cries out and screams in in pain. After seeing it, I could figure out if it wasn’t some shit put in for sick fucks who dream about beating and raping women. It added zip to the movie. At that point I was wondering what the fuck happened to horror movies.

22

People garnering entertainment out of the torment of others is not a new phenomenon.

There was another movie out not too long ago that depicted brutal torture and murder for it’s own sake, and it too was loosely based on actual events. Was an adaptation from an old book I think, an old cult classic.

The movie did pretty well I’m told, if Mel Gibson is to be believed.
I haven’t seen Wolf Creek, and so can’t justly defend it, but neither can someone who didn’t sit through the entire movie rail against it in any fairness.

23

Then the trailers aren’t doing the movie justice. (Like that’d be a first.)

What prompted you to see it? Are you a horror fan? Did you read any reviews first? Was it what you expected?

24

No, no, and no. I was going to the movies with my sister and a friend and we picked it because it was Australian and we’d seen everything else. It wasn’t anything like we were expecting because we weren’t expecting anything. I wouldn’t say it’s my favourite movie, because it’s just too brutal, but I appreciate it as very effectively accomplishing what it set out to do, and for literally being the scariest movie I have ever seen.

We were talking about it for a few weeks afterwards.

25

Incidentally, I disagree with the Ebert review and think he dropped the ball on this one.

Here’s what he had to say about Aliens (which he gave 3/1/2 out of 4 stars to):

“The movie is so intense that it creates a problem for me as a reviewer: Do I praise its craftsmanship, or do I tell you it left me feeling wrung out and unhappy? It has been a week since I saw it, so the emotions have faded a little, leaving with me an appreciation of the movie’s technical qualities. But when I walked out of the theater, there were knots in my stomach from the film’s roller-coaster ride of violence. This is not the kind of movie where it means anything to say you “enjoyed” it. … I’m giving the movie a high rating for its skill and professionalism and because it does the job it says it will do. I am also advising you not to eat before you go to see it.”

I think exactly the same thing could be said for Wolf Creek for exactly the same reasons.

26

I’m glad I started this thread. I do love horror movies, and everyone’s comments have helped me get some perspective. I know I’ve probably missed out on some good stuff because of my gore aversion.

I wonder if any reviewers will walk out of Hostel. The trailers for that one look pretty raw too.

27

Well, some of the promos for the flick are using the old Roger Coreman trick saying that paramedics had to be called during screenings of the film. Might be true, might be total advertising BS.

28

Sorry to resurrect a slightly old thread, but I watched Wolf Creek for the second time today, at home as opposed to the first time at the cinema a few months back when it came out.

Then, I was absolutely horrified by the story and the scenes. It was all I could do to stop myself running out of the theatre. By the end I was a mental wreck, sweating like a mad thing and palpitating to the buggery.

Today it was still equally shocking. The main difference though is that I was able to look ‘beyond’ the horror and to try to understand the mentality of a man who likes to inflict pain upon unsuspecting victims

And that is, I think, the ‘point’ of Wolf Creek. No matter how hard you try to look for an understanding and possible redemption of the perp, the bottom line is that their actions defy comprehension.

29

I saw Wolf Creek in the theatres when it first came out here in Australia, and felt much the way kambuckta did; it was the scariest move I can remember seeing.

I was interested in the film because, as a student of the forensic sciences who has moved here to Australia to pursue a career, I feel it’s important to know about the major Australian crimes that have occurred. I know Wolf Creek isn’t a literal representation, but the fact that it was based on a true Australian story piqued my interest.

I know this will sound bizarre but I really appreciated the sense of fear, hopelessness, and depravity that the director was able to leave me with. My heart was pounding when I left the theatre. I was torn between a sort of sick fascination with the events (you know, like a really bad car crash?) and the very strong desire to look away from a very emotionally tiring and stressful film.

Not only do you get to know the protagonists, but you also see a lot more of the human side of the antagonist in this movie than in others, so when the antagonist “turns”, it’s really sickening and frightening. It felt very real - I mean, sure, the antagonist is a bit over-the-top in his vileness, but I was able to empathise with the protagonists to a greater degree and this gave the film so much more impact.

Yes, it’s gory - in a couple places. Yes, it’s a terrible situation to be forced into identifying with. Also, it’s not entirely sensical in some respects - the evilness was kicked up a notch too high sometimes. But it’s not often that a movie is able to really affect me that much - I think K-19: The Widowmaker came close, but only because I have a “thing” about radiation poisoning that certainly wasn’t ameliorated by watching that movie!

If you can’t handle gore, I wouldn’t recommend this movie. But if you’re a true-crime buff, or find something interesting in being frightened and disgusted by an exploration of the real depths of human depravity, I’d say it’s a must-see. (Maybe opening the film on Christmas wasn’t a great idea.)

I should clearly never be a film critic … damn it’s hard to describe the emotional impact of a film without referring directly to events in it!