Editorials
‘Wolf Creek’ – How the 2005 Horror Movie Brought the Outback Gothic Back to Terrifying Life
Similar to France’s New Extremity, Australia experienced its own significant genre resurgence in the 2000s. Most agree the Land Down Under’s golden days of filmmaking began in the ’70s and then drew to a close around the late ‘80s. This period, better known as the Australian New Wave, soared to new heights after the government issued substantial support for the arts. After a steep decline in the ‘90s, though, homegrown horror made a slow but noticeable comeback in the early 21st century. And no other movie from that era is more responsible for bringing Australia back into the conversation than 2005’s bleak and stylish Wolf Creek.
It wouldn’t be a mid-2000s horror movie without the practically mandatory and hyperbolic “based on true events” promotion. In this case, though, Wolf Creek is indeed inspired by a ripped-from-the-headlines true crime. Several, in fact. Ivan Milat, who died in 2019 after being sentenced to life in prison in 1996, was dubbed the Backpack Murderer by the media. As his nickname suggests, Milat targeted backpackers. To be more specific, he was responsible for the deaths of seven young travelers.
Greg McLean’s directorial debut, however, isn’t a direct adaptation; this is a story reminiscent of the truth. Of course, many Australians would be lying if they didn’t pick up on the similarities as they watched John Jarratt’s character gruesomely dispose of three unsuspecting backpackers.
If not for an ominous foreword placed at the outset — 30,000 people are reported missing in Australia every year, 90% are found within a month, some are never seen again — Wolf Creek might have come across as a travelogue in that first act. On the contrary, McLean wants the audience to forget what they just read and to see Ben, Liz and Kristy (Nathan Phillips, Cassandra Magrath, Kestie Morassi) as they should be remembered. They were people, not just victims, looking for fun, love and adventure. These three friends were on their way to see a famous meteor crater in Western Australia when they were marked by a sadistic killer.
Those first thirty-something minutes of Wolf Creek don’t offer much in the way of excitement or intrigue. Aussie Ben and his two English pals are merely shown driving around in a rust bucket, partying whenever possible, and occasionally hooking up with one another. This approach is so undecorated and bordering on dullness, yet the slice-of-life approach gives the movie an air of credibility. The main characters feel like real flesh-and-blood people. Which is maybe why viewers found the inevitable outcome so hard to watch.
The protagonists don’t fit into the standard character roles so popular in horror. As all on-screen evidence would suggest, Ben is the most extroverted and easygoing of the trio. Unlike so many men his age in the genre, though, his outgoing nature and occasional boldness aren’t offensive. There is no arrogance detected in Phillips’ performance. And acting sociable hardly makes Ben and his friends deserving of their fates. Also, when two people are as close as Liz and Kristy, it makes sense for their personalities to blend. This isn’t like in other movies where audiences ask themselves, “How are these characters friends?” The sheer level of unaffected bonding among these three is so quickly authentic that the movie ultimately wouldn’t work without this foundation. It’s as easy as it is painful to care about these characters.
Wolf Creek doesn’t immediately go from a story of carefree innocence and road-trip romance to a tale of backwoods fright. That deliberate buildup isn’t for everyone — fans of gradually building tension à la The Texas Chain Saw Massacre should be more content than others — but it does make the inescapable reveal more persuasive. Before everything goes to hell, McLean does try to stray audiences from the path placed before them; the characters’ car and watches simultaneously malfunctioning once they reach the meteor site is an obvious red herring in retrospect. That supernatural misdirect is even more transparent as soon as Jarratt finally shows his face.
Oncoming headlights being momentarily mistaken for something like Min Min lights add to the movie’s unearthly quality prior to Mick Taylor’s introduction. However, Jarratt’s suspicious behavior eventually belies the benign nature of that certain local phenomenon. At first Mick comes off as accommodating despite his outdoorsy gruff and exterior. Jarratt’s reputation for playing non-villains, such as the lovable Terry Dodge in the TV drama McLeod’s Daughters, afforded him the benefit of the doubt. Once the mask comes off (and lands with a thud), Wolf Creek more than earns its infamy as a brutal helping of Ozploitation.
McLean didn’t reinvent anything a seasoned horror fan hadn’t seen before, but he did make everything feel fresh by simply not doing too much. The director and writer neither overthought everything nor took a self-aware swipe at his own movie. It’s Wolf Creek’s blunt but straight delivery that made it stand out at the time. After all, mainstream Hollywood had only begun to get into the splatter game when this indie movie premiered in its homeland. Back then, there was nothing quite comparable in a local and contemporary sense. Although, Australian Horror has always had an almost unmatched ferocity when it came to characters stepping foot in the continent’s rural parts.
When a place assembles its own gothic identity over time, more often than not the home is included in that individual definition. Meanwhile, Australia’s own gothic persona has long been associated with the outdoors. Taking that even further is what many call the Outback Gothic. To experience or demonstrate the Outback Gothic on film, a survival story tends to be set in the open air or, in some cases, a domicile found in a rustic area. Another important facet is the recognition of Australia’s darker parts (modern and historical), which involve colonialism and clashing cultures. Wolf Creek checks off multiple boxes: most glaringly Mick Taylor’s xenophobic motivation to kill and the Outback as an eerie and unforgiving landscape.
Wolf Creek seems tame when contrasted with more recent horrors. This includes its own sequel and a spinoff TV series. Nevertheless, the moment this movie’s evilness comes into sight, it doesn’t let up until the very end. The unapologetic McLean showed every ounce of pain coming to these wretched characters. Looking back, Wolf Creek had the pleasure of causing walkouts and repulsing film critics left and right, and it had the audacity to be released on Christmas Day in North America. Many still agree to disagree about the actual value of this movie, but there is no denying its impact during a time of horror distinguished by sheer unrest and an alarming degree of violence.
Horrors Elsewhere is a recurring column that spotlights a variety of movies from all around the globe, particularly those not from the United States. Fears may not be universal, but one thing is for sure — a scream is understood, always and everywhere.
Soon after the New Hollywood generation took over the entertainment industry, they started having children. And more than any filmmakers that came before—they were terrified. Rosemary’s Baby (1968), The Exorcist (1973), The Omen (1976), Eraserhead (1977), The Brood (1979), The Shining (1980), Possession (1981), and many others all deal, at least in part, with the fears of becoming or being a parent. What if my child turns out to be a monster? is corrupted by some evil force? or turns out to be the fucking Antichrist? What if I screw them up somehow, or can’t help them, or even go insane and try to kill them? Horror has always been at its best when exploring relatable fears through extreme circumstances. A prime example of this is Larry Cohen’s 1974 monster-baby movie It’s Alive, which explores the not only the rollercoaster of emotions that any parent experiences when confronted with the difficulties of raising a child, but long-standing questions of who or what is at fault when something goes horribly wrong.
Cohen begins making his underlying points early in the film as Frank Davis (John P. Ryan) discusses the state of the world with a group of expectant fathers in a hospital waiting room. They discuss the “overabundance of lead” in foods and the environment, smog, and pesticides that only serve to produce roaches that are “bigger, stronger, and harder to kill.” Frank comments that this is “quite a world to bring a kid into.” This has long been a discussion point among people when trying to decide whether to have kids or not. I’ve had many conversations with friends who have said they feel it’s irresponsible to bring children into such a violent, broken, and dangerous world, and I certainly don’t begrudge them this. My wife and I did decide to have children but that doesn’t mean that it’s been easy.
Immediately following this scene comes It’s Alive’s most famous sequence in which Frank’s wife Lenore (Sharon Farrell) is the only person left alive in her delivery room, the doctors clawed and bitten to death by her mutant baby, which has escaped. “What does my baby look like!? What’s wrong with my baby!?” she screams as nurses wheel her frantically into a recovery room. The evening that had begun with such joy and excitement at the birth of their second child turned into a nightmare. This is tough for me to write, but on some level, I can relate to this whiplash of emotion. When my second child was born, they came about five weeks early. I’ll use the pronouns “they/them” for privacy reasons when referring to my kids. Our oldest was still very young and went to stay with my parents and we sped off to the hospital where my wife was taken into an operating room for an emergency c-section. I was able to carry our newborn into the NICU (natal intensive care unit) where I was assured that this was routine for all premature births. The nurses assured me there was nothing to worry about and the baby looked big and healthy. I headed to where my wife was taken to recover to grab a few winks assuming that everything was fine. Well, when I awoke, I headed back over to the NICU to find that my child was not where I left them. The nurse found me and told me that the baby’s lungs were underdeveloped, and they had to put them in a special room connected to oxygen tubes and wires to monitor their vitals.
It’s difficult to express the fear that overwhelmed me in those moments. Everything turned out okay, but it took a while and I’m convinced to this day that their anxiety struggles spring from these first weeks of life. As our children grew, we learned that two of the three were on the spectrum and that anxiety, depression, ADHD, and OCD were also playing a part in their lives. Parents, at least speaking for myself, can’t help but blame themselves for the struggles their children face. The “if only” questions creep in and easily overcome the voices that assure us that it really has nothing to do with us. In the film, Lenore says, “maybe it’s all the pills I’ve been taking that brought this on.” Frank muses aloud about how he used to think that Frankenstein was the monster, but when he got older realized he was the one that made the monster. The aptly named Frank is wondering if his baby’s mutation is his fault, if he created the monster that is terrorizing Los Angeles. I have made plenty of “if only” statements about myself over the years. “If only I hadn’t had to work so much, if only I had been around more when they were little.” Mothers may ask themselves, “did I have a drink, too much coffee, or a cigarette before I knew I was pregnant? Was I too stressed out during the pregnancy?” In other words, most parents can’t help but wonder if it’s all their fault.
At one point in the film, Frank goes to the elementary school where his baby has been sighted and is escorted through the halls by police. He overhears someone comment about “screwed up genes,” which brings about age-old questions of nature vs. nurture. Despite the voices around him from doctors and detectives that say, “we know this isn’t your fault,” Frank can’t help but think it is, and that the people who try to tell him it isn’t really think it’s his fault too. There is no doubt that there is a hereditary element to the kinds of mental illness struggles that my children and I deal with. But, and it’s a bit but, good parenting goes a long way in helping children deal with these struggles. Kids need to know they’re not alone, a good parent can provide that, perhaps especially parents that can relate to the same kinds of struggles. The question of nature vs. nurture will likely never be entirely answered but I think there’s more than a good chance that “both/and” is the case. Around the midpoint of the film, Frank agrees to disown the child and sign it over for medical experimentation if caught or killed. Lenore and the older son Chris (Daniel Holzman) seek to nurture and teach the baby, feeling that it is not a monster, but a member of the family.
It’s Alive takes these ideas to an even greater degree in the fact that the Davis Baby really is a monster, a mutant with claws and fangs that murders and eats people. The late ’60s and early ’70s also saw the rise in mass murderers and serial killers which heightened the nature vs. nurture debate. Obviously, these people were not literal monsters but human beings that came from human parents, but something had gone horribly wrong. Often the upbringing of these killers clearly led in part to their antisocial behavior, but this isn’t always the case. It’s Alive asks “what if a ‘monster’ comes from a good home?” In this case is it society, environmental factors, or is it the lead, smog, and pesticides? It is almost impossible to know, but the ending of the film underscores an uncomfortable truth—even monsters have parents.
As the film enters its third act, Frank joins the hunt for his child through the Los Angeles sewers and into the L.A. River. He is armed with a rifle and ready to kill on sight, having divorced himself from any relationship to the child. Then Frank finds his baby crying in the sewers and his fatherly instincts take over. With tears in his eyes, he speaks words of comfort and wraps his son in his coat. He holds him close, pats and rocks him, and whispers that everything is going to be okay. People often wonder how the parents of those who perform heinous acts can sit in court, shed tears, and defend them. I think it’s a complex issue. I’m sure that these parents know that their child has done something evil, but that doesn’t change the fact that they are still their baby. Your child is a piece of yourself formed into a whole new human being. Disowning them would be like cutting off a limb, no matter what they may have done. It doesn’t erase an evil act, far from it, but I can understand the pain of a parent in that situation. I think It’s Alive does an exceptional job placing its audience in that situation.
Despite the serious issues and ideas being examined in the film, It’s Alive is far from a dour affair. At heart, it is still a monster movie and filled with a sense of fun and a great deal of pitch-black humor. In one of its more memorable moments, a milkman is sucked into the rear compartment of his truck as red blood mingles with the white milk from smashed bottles leaking out the back of the truck and streaming down the street. Just after Frank agrees to join the hunt for his baby, the film cuts to the back of an ice cream truck with the words “STOP CHILDREN” emblazoned on it. It’s a movie filled with great kills, a mutant baby—created by make-up effects master Rick Baker early in his career, and plenty of action—and all in a PG rated movie! I’m telling you, the ’70s were wild. It just also happens to have some thoughtful ideas behind it as well.
Which was Larry Cohen’s specialty. Cohen made all kinds of movies, but his most enduring have been his horror films and all of them tackle the social issues and fears of the time they were made. God Told Me To (1976), Q: The Winged Serpent (1982), and The Stuff (1985) are all great examples of his socially aware, low-budget, exploitation filmmaking with a brain and It’s Alive certainly fits right in with that group. Cohen would go on to write and direct two sequels, It Lives Again (aka It’s Alive 2) in 1978 and It’s Alive III: Island of the Alive in 1987 and is credited as a co-writer on the 2008 remake. All these films explore the ideas of parental responsibility in light of the various concerns of the times they were made including abortion rights and AIDS.
Fifty years after It’s Alive was initially released, it has only become more relevant in the ensuing years. Fears surrounding parenthood have been with us since the beginning of time but as the years pass the reasons for these fears only seem to become more and more profound. In today’s world the conversation of the fathers in the waiting room could be expanded to hormones and genetic modifications in food, terrorism, climate change, school and other mass shootings, and other threats that were unknown or at least less of a concern fifty years ago. Perhaps the fearmongering conspiracy theories about chemtrails and vaccines would be mentioned as well, though in a more satirical fashion, as fears some expectant parents encounter while endlessly doomscrolling Facebook or Twitter. Speaking for myself, despite the struggles, the fears, and the sadness that sometimes comes with having children, it’s been worth it. The joys ultimately outweigh all of that, but I understand the terror too. Becoming a parent is no easy choice, nor should it be. But as I look back, I can say that I’m glad we made the choice we did.
I wonder if Frank and Lenore can say the same thing.
Dev Patel’s ‘Monkey Man’ Is Now Available to Watch at Home!
‘Infested’ Review – One of the Best Spiders Attack Horror Movies in Years
Five Underseen Vampire Horror Movies to Stream This Week
Limited Edition ‘Creature from the Black Lagoon’ Monster High Doll Releasing This Week!
‘Stream’ – Horror Movie from the Team Behind ‘Terrifier’ Sets August Theatrical Release
You must be logged in to post a comment.