I've been waiting...and waiting...and waiting for this, for what seems like forever, and finally, yesterday, it was released in the states on DVD - and, amazingly, Netflix decided to stream it the very same day.

Perfect!  Thank you, Netflix!

To say I loved the orignal Wolf Creek is a HUGE understatement.  So, I've been waiting for a sequel since 2005, for God's sake!  You know what usually happens when you wait for something, expecting to love it, right?  Yeah...I know...it happens all the frickin' time to me - like seeing a smoking hot babe in a bar, working my best Brad Pitt imitation, getting her home, planting a wet one on her, and having her rip a belch so repulsive that I have to puke.  OK...sorry...that's a little bit off topic...but...sorry.

Well, I'm extremely happy to say that this is not the case with Wolf Creek 2!  This is a kickass, high energy, highly entertaining, rollercoaster ride that possibly outdoes the awesome original.  Easily one of my favorite movies from the past 5 years, and maybe one of my new faves, period.

It's very different from the original, but also much the same.  Really, it's alot more, as everythign is ramped up, everything looks better, and Mick Taylor is in very rare form.

My hat's off to Greg Mclean, as this sequel had to be difficult to write, based on the structure of the original.  He pulled it off wonderfully, IMO.  Right from the getgo, this is a crazy, wild ride and I advise each viewer to go into this as blind as you can.

Talk about a non standard structure, and you're going to talk about this. Just awesome how things unfold and keep you guessing, or shock the shit out of you.  This is one wild ride that I for one will be taking numerous times.

John Jarratt is fantastic as Mick Taylor.  I'd say much better than in the original even.  This guy oozes character and shows so much with his eyes, his facial expressions, and the words he chooses to use.  Seriously, just a great character/Antaganist.

I'm very surprised this never got an American release, as it's a very well put together film with a $7 Million budget.  It looks more like a $20 Million flick with beautiful shots of the Aussie outback in both day and night and several well put together setpieces.  FX are all on spot and seriously well done!

I'm not going to give anything away, but will say again, this is an awesome horror movie.  It's just too bad and actually rather sad that a great film likes this goes DTV in the states, while garbage like Paranormal Whatever pulls in $100 Million.  Sorry, but the general movie going public has it wrong, and maybe it's just our youth in general that has it all wrong.

Grade - A+

After that glowing of a review I know what I'm watching when I get home from work. I haven't seen the original in years, but I remember being pleasantly surpised by how good it was. Definitely looking forward to it!

Hope you enjoy, Sean!

This thing is downright brutal and unforgiving - exactly the way I like me horror!  

I saw the first one back in 2005 wasn't a big fan, it was just ok imo.

I'll check this out soon.

I liked the original. It was on TV a while ago and stands up well to a repeated viewing. It's pretty good for what it is.

However, this follow up was bloody awful. Nasty and gruesome. Not a patch on the original.

There was little tension and less plot. The character of Mick was far more interesting when the audience didn't know much about him. Finding out he's a bigot and a racist really didn't help much.

I yawned and prayed it would all end soon. It didn't. I'm still sorry I didn't walk out earlier on.

R

As a big fan of the original, I had been anticipating this for some time.
Watched it.
Not bad. 6/10.

The car chases were boring. Seemed like I was playing Far Cry 2 at several points. Just endless driving with no real destination. Fine, you want a car chase, make it exciting. They did about three or four car chases and they were pretty boring because they just went on and on and on...
The gore seemed a bit hokey. Way over the top. Too much emphasis was placed on the violence. In the original, it felt real. Here, it almost feels like satire. Perhaps it was.

Whilst I enjoyed, or tried to enjoy the attempt, in the choice of sticking normal format up the ass, it just didn't work in this films favor. I don't know why they chose to go that route. Be different from the original? Make a statement about horror films? I don't know but as a film, I don't think it works. Plus points for trying something different, but negative points for the terrible execution.

John Jarret is an excellent actor, and plays his role as best he can. All actors are faultless. My gripes come with perhaps expectancy that this would be Wolf Creek 1 over again. But I knew they were gonna ramp it up and especially once the director/writer gained a bigger budget. He said this film would have been what the original would have been. Well, thank God, his budget was cut for the first film.

I don't want to slate this film. It's pretty much the film I always wanted to write. But after seeing it -- I'm gonna have to change my view. There is no one here to care about. No characters at all. One or two pop up, but you don't even know who they are, and once you find out about them, they get done in. Then, the main lead I guess (?) goes on a chase with Mad Mick, gets caught, has a torture scene, you know the rest.

I think what went wrong here is also the only thing that worked right. John Jarret's character Mick is the main focus, and whilst the opening is terrific, and he's always in character, we see waaaay too much of this guy. His methods and motives were clear enough in the first film, yet there was an air of something else about him. Here, he's just a bigot. It's made clear several times. This kinda hurts his "aura".

Now, that'a not to say I didn't enjoy the film. I did. It's got some great sequences, some surprises ( not many), and terrific gore if you're into that type of thing. Mick cuts a menacing figure, but seems a lot less like The Hitcher (1985) from the original, and more like a member of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre Part 2 clan. In fact, when we go to Mick's lair, it screams TCM2.

It also has an ending which builds up to something climatic... and ends in something mindboggingly silly.

I appreciated the change of format, but it went nowhere new. In fact, it went nowhere. It was fun to watch. But pointless.

After watching the original, I couldn't stop thinking about it. After watching part two, I'm struggling to remember it.

Pretty much agree with a lot of things you say on this, Scoob.

Wolf Creek - the original, left a lasting impression - it was inventive and scary as hell, (even if it is based loosely on Ivan Milat and the backpacker murders here in Oz.) Number two just did not distinguish itself in any way, for me.  Instantly forgettable.

I commend Ryan Corr for his acting in this though because it would have been tough given it basically ends up being a two-hander with his character Paul and (John Jarrett) Mick Taylor. The problem, as I see it, is that the character of Mick in this follow-up is more caricature than anything else, which is a shame. Also, if you're going to give me gore that's fine, but give me a fully fledged and engaging plot, and edge of the seat suspense - like the first!

Overall I was bored.

Wow...shocking, peeps.

Guess I once again stand on my own little island...but I stand proudly.

Quoted from Dreamscale Wow...shocking, peeps. Guess I once again stand on my own little island...but I stand proudly.

Good on you, Jeff! I'm really happy it met your expectations and then some. I get right behind the OZ film industry so it's nice to hear that one horror aficionado, (at least) loved it.

We have a movie review program here with two stalwart well respected hosts who flat out refused to review it on their show - that really irked me - cause for one we didn't know why,?? and two, they usually get right behind the local product. It really was a bit strange....

Wolf Creek 2 was as usual beautifully shot and I think horror in particular is quite subjective.

I'm still really looking forward to seeing what McLean comes up with next.

I'm worried about Greg's future, actually, as the Weinsteins threw such a HUGE buget at the AWESOME Rogue, which turned out to be a major BO disapointment, and, although well reviewed and loved, disappeared pretty much from memory of the masses, then his follow up to the awesome Wolf Creek went DTV and garnered little to no success.

I honestly believe McLean is a genius who's yet to be discovered by mainstream movie goers...but then again, I honestly believe mainstream movie goers are complete idiots, as evidenced by the successes of such utter shite over the last few years, maybe it will take some kind of crazy fluke to bring him to mind?

Horror ain't horror anymore and it makes me very sad and upset, but maybe it's just the way it is as we/I age and expect something we've come to expect, that will never be again.

Oh, man, oh man... I was not a fan of the original "Wolf Creek." In fact a friend and I use to get into huge debates between "Wolf Creek," "Hostel," and "High Tension." I was big on High Tension compared to wolf creek. Though, I thought Hostel had a great hook that as good as it was creators missed out on an even better story.

But, yeah, I have to check out "Wolf Creek 2," not only because you suggested Dream but so I can renew an old civil war, muhahaha.

BLB

I'm with you on this one, Jeff.

I thought this was excellent.

Great acting, and a good does of humour and gore.

Good to hear!

I watch this flick a couple times each year and still enjoy it every time.

You have to check the series out, if you haven't already.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4460878/

Obviously I wasn't impressed with WC2, so going in I was skeptical what a mini series could/would offer, but I loved this!

Casting is great, cinematography is great, the opening set up is brilliant, the young female protagonist pursuing Mick really has to carry the series single-handedly (a Ripley/Alien type worthy opponent), though not so much that you think it's in the bag.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4867258/?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm

A terrific cat and mouse, suspense, with loads of red and hack for the gore lovers, but a great story as well.

This is class. Check it out.

Don't understand what all the excitement was about regarding either Wolf Creek film. Both were as shit as each other.

Australians really struggle to make good movies considering the amount of talented actors we have.

I'm sure the series will be as much of a let down as the films.

Checked this out after the two yes votes. Glad I did. Nasty, fun, and gory in equal measures -- great flick, for me.

Quoted from Warren Don't understand what all the excitement was about regarding either Wolf Creek film. Both were as shit as each other. Australians really struggle to make good movies considering the amount of talented actors we have. I'm sure the series will be as much of a let down as the films.

Australia struggle to make good movies? Come on, man! Have faith in Australian cinema! We're only little, but we do nudge the movie bizz with our skillz.

A few of my all time favs are Australian made.

Considering most, if not all, of our A-list actors piss off to The States when they make it, we have still produced some fucking banger movies with small time actors. Pretty good for a country of 23 mil peeps.

What movies exactly are you talking about? The Castle, The Dish. Both ancient now, what recent, great Australian movies are there?

I will have faith in Australian cinema when they produce something worthy of having faith in.

Without trying to directly offend you, Brandon, because I know you are trying to break in and are producing your own shorts, but the one stipulation I have on my shorts being produced is that they not be produced by Australians. I'd rather they not be made than have that, at least until there is some sort of game changer.

Well, from reading the replies on this thread I think it's safe to say the Wolf Creek movies are good, haha.

A few from the past 10-15 years are: Animal Kingdom, Mad Max, Happy Feet, Red Dog, Ned Kelly, Looking for Alabrandi, Candy, Gettin' Square, Snowtown, The Great Gatsby, Paper Planes, Kenny, Chopper, Australia, Last Cab to Darwin, Moulin Rouge, Crocodile Dundee 2, Rabit-Proof Fence, Crackerjack, Jindabyne, Rogue... I could go on, but you get the point. These are just the movies I have seen myself. There are many, many more. Not to mention all the blockbusters being filmed here in the past year.. Thor 3, Pirates of the Carribian, Skull Island..

Now if you break it down to the "greats" some of those may not make the list, but how many "greats" has America produced in the last 10 years? If you work out the ratio of people to movies, I'm sure we're kicking their ass.

Quoted Text the one stipulation I have on my shorts being produced is that they not be produced by Australians. I'd rather they not be made than have that, at least until there is some sort of game changer

I respect you as a writer and a person, but this is the problem. An Australian writer of you drive and skill set could just be that game changer... Why not change your standards for your next short and let an Australian producer take it on. I bet ya you'll love it  

10 to 15 isn't really recent.

I guess as with all things cinema it's subjective. From your extensive list I would say there are maybe 2 great films and a few okay ones, the rest I personally think are shit.

I am not talking about films made on Australian soil like Thor, lots of Hollywood blockbusters are made here, I'm talking about more extensive Australian cast, crew and writer involvement. I feel as a whole we can't get it right. I recently watched Hunt for the wilderpeople a kiwi film, they are such a small nation and I thought it was way better than any Aussie film I'd ever seen.

Again, this is all my opinion. I believe wolf creek killed it at the box office but then so did the Twilight Saga haha

My list for American greats over the last 10 year would go on forever, seriously? I'm not trying to break it down into a ratio, I just think something is missing and I don't quite know what it is.

I was born in New Zealand, so yeah. We do kick ass. I'm just trying to defend our older brother.

Warren, you offend every good, and even great Aussie filmmaker with your comment. And I can only imagine you're trying to provoke in some way. Ever heard of Bluetongue productions - Nash and Joel Edgerton? Nash made lots of top class shorts. Look Tropfest up. Hey, look up Tropfest, period. They're all shorts, some of them average story wise, but most are terrific, some standouts.

Joel wrote and directed, starred in and produced The Gift. Does that make it not made by an Australian talent, cause he's now a part of the Hollywood machine?

I could go on about Baz and George, Wan & Whanell et al.

Harvie Krumpet scored Adam Eliot an academy award: best animated.

You stipulate your 'shorts' not be produced by Aussies?! Sounds like a real prejudice to me. So any other country of origin filmmaker is okay?

Spesh's feature was picked up and produced by Aussie film producers. Ask him what he thinks of them and the final product?

Lantana. Seen it?
Two Hands which put Rose Byrne and Heath Ledger on the map. You should watch that if you haven't, though you might give the argument that was made last century. So what? You think they're the only Aussie talent around now?

It's a small industry, granted, and I'd love to see more high calibre, top quality films being produced here. I agree with you on that. But it's usually about money.

I don't know exactly where your views come from but it sounds to me like your confusing the often small independent Aussie films that come out and don't make it onto the world stage compared to U.S. Blockbusters and even the films that don't make big bucks.

Imh however, you're being terribly short-sighted to say the least. And to not give your fellow Aussies even a stab at your work? Flummoxed, and a whole lot of other words I'm too polite to use.

Edit: You seem to be drawing a correlation between great Australian movies and the relative small number of them and Aussie short filmmakers not being equipped enough in talent to make a good fist of your short screenplays. Two different topics, the latter completely unproven cause they'll never get the opportunity.

No, I stand by everything I said. Again my opinion, one you do not have to and obviously don't share. I will still sleep tonight.

I agree that The Gift and Joel are great, I didn't say every Aussie film ever made in the history of cinema was bad. I am saying that in my opinion they don't get it right as a whole.

No need to be condescending because you don't share my veiws. I know what tropfest is and I have watched many of the god awful entries hoping for my veiws to be swayed.

Just because something is picked up and made does not make it good, I include my own shorts in that statement. It means someone saw something in it, that's all.

Is Michael's suicide theory the level we are hoping to achieve? Is that a great Australian film?

Quoted from Warren Is Michael's suicide theory the level we are hoping to achieve? Is that a great Australian film?

I don't know, I haven't seen it. Michael seems pretty pleased with the level of production and I do know he spoke in glowing terms re the filmmakers. Other than that, you'd have to ask him.

I don't think every film that wins awards is great though either.

At this stage I'll be happy to see a final cut of one of my shorts. That doesn't mean I'm not discerning, as much as I can be...

But neither of those things were really the main topic at hand, like I said.

I have no wish to have an ongoing debate with you Warren, nor was it my intention to be condescending though I can now see you interpreted it that way. Granted,  I was offended with the blanket stipulation you have and was merely pointing out my opinion of your opinion, and pointing out what I regard as your flawed opinion full of bias.

I hoped I might encourage you to be more open minded. Sadly not.

And, I'm glad you won't lose any sleep over it.
I won't either. That'd be silly because neither my opinion nor yours will budge.

I'll just be lucky to get any sleep at all in this stinking hot Aussie Summer night.

Quoted from Warren I believe wolf creek killed it at the box office but then so did the Twilight Saga haha.

Killed what at the box office?  Released on Christmas day, 2005, the original Wolf Creek grossed $16 Million at the NABO, and $28 Million WW.  Hardly a killing, but definitely a money maker, based on the low Production costs, which were somewhere around $1 Million, but I've read different amounts, so really hard to say exactly.

Wolf Creek 2 wasn't even theatrically released here in the states.

Many agree with you that the original wasn't anything very special, but those opinions are coming from those who don't really know their horror...because this was true horror - no holds barred, no punches pulled, take no prisoners horror, which you rarely see these days (or those days of 11 years ago).

I don't give a fuck where a movie is made or by who.  Seems kind of strange you do.  If a movie is good, I'm happy.  If a movie sucks balls or arses, I'm not surprised, cuz most do.

Jeff, if you can get it take a look at the Wolf Creek follow up mini-series. I will be interested in what you think of it.

Jeff, that is what is meant. It was a money maker because of the low budget. I was only talking about the original, the second one is an embarrassment.

True horror, not so sure about that. I didn't find any of it horrific but like the last OWC we definitely found out that people have very different ideas of what constitutes horror.

I generally don't care where a movie is made either, my favorite is a Spanish subtitled film. There have been great movies made almost everywhere at some point, including Australia. If people do back to what I originally said it's that as a whole I don't think we do a very good job of it here in Australia for the most part.

Another thing, my shorts are just that, mine. Who I chose to make them, if someone decides to, is completely up to me. That's not prejudice, that is my right.

Like most in Australia I have not seen The Suicide Theory as I don't believe it is even available for viewing on Netflix in it's own country of production. Not sure too many writers are going to say the only feature they had made was crap. It's good that he is happy with it though.

I also know that a few people on SS have seen it and have given it great reviews, problem is there are so many back slappers and ego strokers here that sometimes it's hard to tell.

Also as far as offending every Aussie filmmaker, well that's just ridiculous as I never said that everyone was bad.

I'd say offensive was when Micheal said he was too good for the rest of us amateur hour writters and our useless critiques of his work when Jeff mearly gave him a review. Funnly enough everyone basically ate that one up, pretty sure I was the only one that called him on the insult.

Quoted from Warren I'd say offensive was when Micheal said he was too good for the rest of us amateur hour writters and our useless critiques of his work when Jeff mearly gave him a review. Funnly enough everyone basically ate that one up, pretty sure I was the only one that called him on the insult.

Did he legit say that?  Hahahahahahahahaha

Quoted from BSaunders A few from the past 10-15 years are: Animal Kingdom, Mad Max, Happy Feet, Red Dog, Ned Kelly, Looking for Alabrandi, Candy, Gettin' Square, Snowtown, The Great Gatsby, Paper Planes, Kenny, Chopper, Australia, Last Cab to Darwin, Moulin Rouge, Crocodile Dundee 2, Rabit-Proof Fence, Crackerjack, Jindabyne, Rogue...

To be fair, Mad Max Fury Road, Happy Feet, Australia, The Great Gatsby, Moulin Rouge etc, aren't really Australian films. They have Australian talent involved but aren't really Australian films. They are big budget Hollywood films.

That said, some good movies have come out of Australia, all though nothing great off the top of my head.