This isn’t a normal news item or a traditional review like you normally see here on Unreality, but whatever, it’s my site, I do what I want.
I’m writing this post because I recently just wrapped my 10 Best Horror Films of the Last 10 Years list, and recieved numerous comments telling me all the movies I missed. So far, I’ve gotten around to two of them, The Ruins and Wolf Creek. Outside of the fairly goofy murderous vines, I thought The Ruins was decent (but shouldn’t have made the list). Wolf Creek on the other hand? Ugh.
I’ve heard good things about Wolf Creek for a few years now, but after watching it, I’m convinced that people only liked it because A) people talked in funny accents and B) it’s allegedly a true story.
Well, I found the film to be jammed pack full of more cliches and plot holes than you can shake a giant hunting knife at, and I’ll ask for your help explaining them to me. Spoilers ahoy!
Plot Hole #1 - So how exactly did the watches stop and the car die at the Wolf Creek crater? Is it some effect because of the meteor? If that’s the case, you would think it would be common knowledge not to drive there. But later in the film Mick (the killer) says something about “taking the parts out of their car.” Did he mean when they were at his camp? Or did he mean when they were at the crater poking around? Considering he’s done this before with other people stranded at the crater, I would assume the latter, but he’s taking a pretty bold risk that they couldn’t see him doing it or hear his truck. Or maybe he’s just taking advantage of the meteor phenomena, I don’t know, but overall this just didn’t make any sense.
Annoying Cliche #1 - If he’s so damn experienced at this abduction process, how does he manage to tie up two victims that escape within minutes? The first girl gets her gag out of her mouth instantly, and finds herself in a room filled with sharp objects to cut her plastic (plastic!) zip ties. The second guy wakes up with nails in his arms and pieces of twine holding him up. But once he gets his wrists of the nails he’s home free. It’s like the world’s easiest Saw game.
Annoying Cliche #2 – When the girl gets free, she goes to save her about-to-be raped friend. She takes a rifle, and grazes the killer in the neck (missing from about four feet away). Needless to say he collapses. I was about the raise my arms and cheer as she tried to shoot him in the head to make sure he was dead, but when the gun was empty, she didn’t grab any of the myraid of weapons laying around to finish the job, she weakly clubbed him in the back twice with the butt of the rifle. I hate this cliche more than anything else in movies. MAKE SURE. THE GUY. IS DEAD. Unless you’re holding his head on a spit, you can’t be too sure OK?
Plot Hole #2 - The girls assume he’s dead and leave in his truck (not taking any weapons for potential self-defense). They drive through the wilderness and get stopped by an abrupt cliff. Now, instead of turning around and driving until they hit, I don’t know, a road, a building, something. They decide to push the truck off the cliff in order to trick the killer into thinking they’re dead. It’s the greatest plan ever, until he drives out, looks at the truck, and sees they’re not in it.
Annoying Cliche #3 - Now truck-less, one of the girls sneaks back to camp (inexplicably leaving the other girl alone). When she gets there, instead of grabbing keys (or a goddamn weapon) she takes the time to look at the dude’s collection of victim photos he’s amassed. That would be fine, but then she sticks her eye inside two different video cameras to further collect evidence that yes, he planned this, yes he’s done it before. This is all while she’s in his dimly lit camp with zero idea where he is, and he probably got back there first since he had a car and she pushed hers off a cliff.
Plot Hole #3 - After Kangaroo Jack kills both girls, the dude they were with finally wakes up (he’s apparently been passed out for a full 24 hours I guess). He frees himself and does the only smart thing anyone’s done the whole movie, and runs away without dicking around with camcorders or keys or anything. The plot hole is the fact that he’s alive at all. If the killer keeps his victims alive to rape them, presuming he doesn’t swing the other way, why the hell keep the buff young dude alive and poorly restrained? It’s just asking to get revenge killed.
Annoying Cliche #4 - It’s annoying that this has the “true story” badge attached to it, as so many other horror movies do. The “true story” it’s referring to is a guy in Australia who was convicted of killing seven tourists, although the number could have been even higher, like 37, which would have made him the worst killer in Aussie history. That’s actually not that bad of a true story to base this off of, but the problem I have is the end text where they say “police found no evidence of the girls” and the kid who got away “was held for four months under suspicion and released, and the murders were never solved.” In real life the guy was caught and sent to jail, and did not end up wandering the Australian desert as an urban legend.
Sure, Wolf Creek isn’t the worst horror movie ever, but it’s definitely not worthy of all the praise it gets. It’s cool that it takes place in Australia and is somewhat based on a mostly true story. The most original part of the film for me was the killer himself, it’s a personality type you wouldn’t normally associate with a typical horror movie murderous psychopath. I just wish the film didn’t have to be so damn dumb all the time, and it has some of the worst examples of the cliches that seem to permanently plague the horror genre.