Wolf Creek was a cracking film, and I gave it a great review, and now the director is talking about a sequel.

Greg McLean said that he was approached by the Weinstein's straight after the film to go for a sequel, and he was asked how much it would cost to get him to do it. However he declined, and apparently still is doing so, until the time is right.

From Moviehole:

"The first I met the Weinstein's, at Sundance, they said ‘How much to do the sequel?' I just said I didn't want to cash in now. It just wasn't right, because what that says is that the first film's not serious – it takes something away from it. I've never been against popping out sequel after sequel – Saw, for instance, has an ingenious plot that you can do it with that – but [Wolf Creek] was designed to be a particular kind of horror film, not the kind of film you can just pop ‘em up. They get trashy. I'm really proud of the film and I don't want to just put out a piece of shit – so if it takes two or three years, it doesn't matter"

Sounds like he has the right attitude, and Creek really was taking advantage of a fear of a time as the backpacking murder trial was still in full swing at the time. Now that it's passed you might think that the feeling has calmed, but we have Turistas and Hostel: Part II on the go, perhaps he doesn't want to try and compete with them and make it feel like there's a glut of tourists on a stick films around - if you've seen Wolf Creek you'll get that comment!

I'm glad of that to be honest. Creek was an excellent film that had some special moments in it, and the killer is a superb character that I could definitely see more of, and be scared more of. I say wait until the director is keen and let him do another film. That way we get the best of the character and the story again.