Wolf Creek

this movie was awesome. definatley one of the better follower of tcm. A must watch.

I'd call it ambitious and derivative. Had potential, but never lived up to it. Just another teen horror movie.

What didn't it live up to? You're expectations?
The spine severing scene alone was worth the money I paid to see it.
Teen horror movie my ass, thats where Scream comes in.

I'd say it's above the typical teen horror, but below the great horrors. It was a bit over the top at times but the gore was nice in some parts.

Yeah it's not up there with TCM or anything but it's alot better than most of the horror stuff that comes out.

Originally posted by deathbycorn
What didn't it live up to? You're expectations?
The spine severing scene alone was worth the money I paid to see it.
Teen horror movie my ass, thats where Scream comes in.

"Scream" is the antithesis of teen horror, bub. It's pure satire, and it views as such. "Wolf Creek" is typical teen horror. Same situation, different bad guy. Kids go on vacation. Kids get stranded. Kids run into seemingly normal guy. Kids die. "Wolf Creek" is about as generic and simplistic as it gets.

Thankfully, my rental was free. So, no, "The Northern Australian Misogeny Massacre" will not be gracing my DVD racks in the near, nor distant future. There have been PLENTY of recent Horror films that surpass this P.O.S. by light years.

Yeah, definately wasn't impressed with this movie. It was like a teen horror movie on crack or something. A bit more extreme, but more of the same.

John Jarret was pretty solid as the killer though.

Originally posted by C-Dic
"Scream" is the antithesis of teen horror, bub. It's pure satire, and it views as such. "Wolf Creek" is typical teen horror. Same situation, different bad guy. Kids go on vacation. Kids get stranded. Kids run into seemingly normal guy. Kids die. "Wolf Creek" is about as generic and simplistic as it gets.

Thankfully, my rental was free. So, no, "The Northern Australian Misogeny Massacre" will not be gracing my DVD racks in the near, nor distant future. There have been PLENTY of recent Horror films that surpass this P.O.S. by light years.

Why? Because I'm replying logically. "Scream" isn't a mindless slasher film. It's a satire, like I said, and only fairweather viewers would suggest such. You even referenced "Wrong Turn" as a "slasher", the best one in years at that, and denied it was a TCM ripoff. Three things are certain here. "Scream" is a smart satire, "Wrong Turn" is another in a long line of TCM decendents, and...okay, two things.

So, in the words of Harrison Ford; "Laugh it up, fuzzball". I gots more where that came from. You've got to be logical when you're talking/debating with me. Anyone who knows me, or has matched wits, knows better.

Scream was average at best.

Your opinion. Not only did it save the Horror genre, it resurrected Wes Craven's career, albeit briefly. It made its mark on a stale genre, and that's all that matters. It was inventive, original, and made it hard for Horror movies AFTERWARDS, because they had to be careful not to fall into the cliches...although now it's trendy to bring back old school horror elements, no matter how shitty or unoriginal *coughelirothcough*

Ahhh theres much better movies that came out in 1996 than Scream.

From Dusk Till Dawn, Children of the Corn 4.

Scream both helped and hurt the genre. It itself was very solid as a fun parody, but then it started the whole shitty teen horror film that dominated and nearly killed the horror genre during the mid-late 90's.

Though, I love the original Scream, really fun movie to watch.

Originally posted by BackFire
Yeah, definately wasn't impressed with this movie. It was like a teen horror movie on crack or something. A bit more extreme, but more of the same.

John Jarret was pretty solid as the killer though.

Originally posted by deathbycorn
Ahhh theres much better movies that came out in 1996 than Scream.

From Dusk Till Dawn, Children of the Corn 4.

Once again, presenting opinion as fact. "From Dusk Til Dawn" was decent, and namely because of the special effects. Otherwise, it's been done 1,000 times before. As for "Children of the Corn 4", nobodies seen it (much less give a shit about that franchise) to be able to contest your opinion.

Theres a big wide world out there for you to explore Cinema Boy, maybe go and rent it sometime.

...advising me to look outside the box, when you've immersed yourself so throughly in a failed direct to video franchise, is so rich, so ironic. Not only are you biased, you're delusional.

Keep stating your opinion as fact. I'm through with you. Considering I'm about 8 years your elder, "boy", I don't think it's worth trying to get through to you anymore. I wouldn't want any of my pith or expertise to be absorbed by you. 😛

Look at this way. "Wolf Creek" failed, but you'll always have the Crocodile Dundee trilogy to be proud of.

Wolf Creek did not fail, keep talking bullshit but mate it makes me laugh...

Crocodile Dundee? I'm more into Steve Irwin The Crocodile Hunter.

I thought it was a decent horror flick. It didn't entertain me as much as 'the greats', like the original TCM, or House Of A Thousand Corpses, or Halloween, but it did get under my skin. It was disturbing and nothing more.

The special features, I must say, were excellent. Mainly because they delve into the technical aspects of shooting on HD, instead of film. This is one movie where the special features were better than the actual movie, but I did respect the movie much more once I watched the special features, which unfortuneatly isn't a luxury you can experience in theaters.