Wolf Creek 2 (2013)

Just last month, Stephen King wrote the following on his Twitter page: "Horror is when you know and love the characters, but you also know something very bad is going to happen to them. It's not the monsters!" And you see his point: In order to make horror films truly scary, we must feel afraid for the characters because we truly care for them. We want them to make it out alive. We want them to succeed. This isn't only exclusive to horror films. It applies to every film. If we don't care for the characters, why should we care about the story? What WOLF CREEK 2 and most horror films get wrong is how they couldn't care less for its characters.

In WOLF CREEK 2, director Greg Mclean is all for the monster, and this is unfortunate because the monster isn't the hero of the story. He's just a evil figure lurking in the shadows ready to kill anyone that comes his way with some one-liners to shout throughout the film. He has no depth, no layers and neither do the protagonists, which makes it hard to sit through the film feeling anything but anger. All you're left with are set pieces with gore and gratuitous violence thrown on screen, but you don't feel anything because you just don't care.

This is what separates good recent horror films like OCULUS and THE CONJURING from WOLF CREEK 2. And it's not to say Mclean isn't capable of making quality horror films. After all, he directed ROGUE, a monster flick that actually focuses on its characters and not the monster itself. It is no surprise to learn, then, that ROGUE is enjoyed more considerably than Mclean's WOLF CREEK films (ROGUE currently stands at a rare 100% on RottenTomatoes). Mclean attempts to flesh out the monster in WOLF CREEK 2, but he spends just 5 minutes to establish that Mick Taylor is a bigot and then continuously pounds the audience in the head about this fact through the rest of the film.

As for the protagonists themselves, it doesn't get any better. They are useless, clueless, and uninteresting. I'm sorry, but in this day and age, giving the characters a significant other just doesn't cut it, even when they're heard off screen. More characters appear as the film goes along, but we quickly find out they're there to die a few minutes later, often in gruesome and unpleasant ways. And don't get me started on the female characters. Are we still in the era where all they do is stay on the sidelines and scream helplessly? Aren't we passed that? Or a better question might be SHOULDN'T we be passed that? Regardless, the characters should have been handled better, but it's clear the director was more interested in building a legacy for Mick Taylor to stand beside the likes of Freddy Krueger, Jason Voorhees, and Michael Myers than creating real, sympathetic characters to root for.

I despised this film. I despised the senseless violence, the two dimensional characters, and the villain. WOLF CREEK 2 is a perfectly packaged product of what's wrong with modern horror films. It's a string of bloody set pieces barely held together by a script (if that). It's not even fun to sit through in a so-bad-it's-good kind of way. Well, maybe except for the scene involving CGI kangaroos. However, if you're the type of person who wants to cheer for the monster, then so be it. I just wished director Greg Mclean would make more films like ROGUE than continuing to build his WOLF CREEK franchise.

Fmovies: (62%)Claims made by certain folk that this is an unnecessary sequel appear to be forgetting the fact that by and large all sequels, especially horror sequels, are unnecessary cash-ins on a successful production, and this is no different. The original was a slow burn grisly low budget shocker with a great panic stricken sense of hopelessness from a serial-killer who always appeared to be one step ahead of his prey whilst they trespass on his turf. While the sequel is a bit more of the same only with a swifter pace, and a slightly lighter tone. There's also quite a bit more car chasers, and a degree more humour from the great John Jarratt's character who turns somewhat similar to Freddy Krueger with his perverted view of the world and intense wickedness making this more of a exploitation drive-in movie than the original's softly approach into terror. The movie does twist and turn as it goes along, although most will have some sort of idea what's coming next, but this is still a very entertaining watch with some great gore effects and a good number of dark comedic one-liners. Even if this is a slightly different beast to the original, it's still as welcome addition, and a good slice of bloody outback horror in its own right.

This movie was not amazing but it certainly wasn't bad. It's pretty entertaining with some action, chases, and gore.

The only thing I have against this film was that the main character does really illogical things the majority of the time, which makes it a frustrating watch. I found myself getting upset over some things that seemed really common sense that the character would not catch on (and I usually don't get upset over these types of things). Because of his mistakes and lack of cleverness, the movie lasted as long as it did, or it would have ended within an hour into the movie.

Overall, it is a fairly decent thriller - especially if you're into some violence and gore.

The first Wolf Creek was better in my opinion.

Wolf Creek 2 fmovies. 'Wolf Creek 2' suffers some of the similar problems seen in other horror movie franchises. Like in the later 'Nightmare on Elm Street' films, too much focus is placed on the antagonist, causing the film to lose quite a bit of suspense and tension. In the first 'Wolf Creek', released nearly a decade ago, John Jarratt's Mick Taylor was an enigma to the audience. He didn't make an appearance until nearly halfway through the film, and even then we had no idea what his deal was until he started torturing and murdering the main characters. In the sequel, Mick has been turned into much more of a comedic antihero, with there being a large emphasis on Mick and his pun-laden one-liners, which kills off a bit of the mystery and edginess that defined the first film.

Likewise, this leads to Mick's victims being that little less relatable and sympathetic, as we are much more familiar with Mick than we are with them.

Like the original, 'Wolf Creek 2' is obviously not for the faint of heart, with the gore and sadistic violence being ramped up. The film's car chases and fright scenes are all the more elaborate and effective due to an obvious budget increase. This much more polished look obviously removes a bit of the grindhouse aesthetic present in the preceding film, however makes up for it in terms of sheer scale.

On the whole, 'Wolf Creek 2' is still quite an intense thrill-ride, and one worth checking out, especially if you enjoyed the first. Unfortunately, the creative team's decision to spend more time with Mick and less with the unfortunate tourists who encounter him deprives the film of what could have made it a superior sequel.

I saw the first film during schoolies and it felt like it went for twenty minutes. I don't recall any of it apart from that wicked snicker Mick puts on. Going into the second movie was like going in blind. We all know what Wolf Creek is about but i didn't know what to expect, remembering the premise of the first one, no way could they be the same and they weren't. I was pleasantly surprised as i was hooked from the very start. John Jarret is truly superb in this role, he is menacing and pulls of crazy perfectly. Ryan Corr was another good choice, good actor and also very good looking, which always helps. It was definitely a film of cat and mouse, the cat being Mick Taylor.

The final thirty minutes was definitely a step away from the first film completely. It provides the viewer a more in depth look into the menace and serial killer antics of Mick and a chronicle of his 'hobby'. The ending was also brilliant, simple yet punches you right in the face. Their were parts during the film that were a bit comedic. I found this not to be a bad addition, to lighten up the heavy themes of the film, however it did throw off the pace and unsettling tone. Also the music choices were questionable. I found myself looking over to my friend a few times during these parts laughing awkwardly out of place and saying 'that was a bit weird' or 'interesting song choice, bit lame'.

My main criticism of the movie would probably be the hyper inflated racist Australian character of Mick Taylor. However in saying that, i guess that is why he is so crazy and so easy to hate. I'm glad i saw it, i was thoroughly entertained.

Doesn't match the quality of the first film, but overall still a highly enjoyable film.

I thoroughly enjoyed this sequel. Kept me on the edge of my seat right throughout the film. Having seen Ryan Corr in other things it was easy to have sympathy for him. I felt like I was apart of all the action. Some scenes were obviously added for the international market (flying kangaroo's) but that didn't phase me. Some aspects of the film were barely believable, but you have to remember this is a film, whatever happened to poetic license?

If you want to cringe, scream and get your adrenaline pumping this is a film for you!