About the end of the movie Wolf Creek

Wolf Creek is a 2005 Australian horror and thriller film directed by Greg McLean.

Wolf Creek refers to a massive crater formed by the impact of a meteorite 50,000 years ago. Three young people plan to visit the location to check it out; on the way, they are attacked by a killer.

The movie didn't win any awards, only receiving a few nominations: in 2005, at the Sundance Film Festival, it was nominated for the Grand Jury Prize – World Cinema, and it was also nominated seven times for American Film Institute awards.

It received some negative reviews and some positive ones. By 2013, a sequel to the film was made, which I haven't seen yet.

Link to the movie's page on the FilmAffinity website: http://www.filmaffinity.com/es/film358657.html

What's interesting about the movie is that it claims to be "Based on True Events." It doesn't just state this at the beginning of the film, but it's also on the movie poster. You see it, you read it, and it's captivating. But... is it really? Or does that "Based on True Events" hide something? Or is it not enough and something missing? In the latter case, what is missing? That's the question one asks oneself—at least, it's what I asked myself after watching it.

On some websites on the internet, they say that it was actually "inspired by real events." They mention the case of the Backpacker Murders, which was actually about a serial killer who killed around seven backpackers, but the movie is not about a serial killer.

Spoiler warning: I am going to talk about the end of the movie below, so do not continue reading if you haven't seen it.

This is not a review of the film itself, but of part of the plot and the ending as such. Basically, it tells the story of three young people who visit a crater in Australia, an isolated place far from the cities; a guy finds them, and then this guy kills two of them.

At the beginning of the film, it states that in Australia, 30,000 people are reported missing every year, and 90% are found within a month.

While it is based on true events, there are things that don't quite add up—which doesn't diminish its quality. The two women were never found, so it could very well have been the killer or his companion, despite him having been investigated, having managed to escape, and being injured.

That is precisely what takes away credibility: almost nothing is said about the young people's backstories. How did he escape? How was everything that happened to the other two girls known? How is it that nothing is said about the other people involved in the story, given such horrific events?

To say it's based on true events, I think, requires a bit more truthfulness in the film's events.
It is intense, but believable at times and unbelievable at others, raising many doubts about its authenticity.