Had potential, but storyline was too hard to follow

Who are these people saying the storyline was hard to follow? Yes the movie has unusual structure but its not complicated, I think some people are looking for answers to questions that aren't important anyway.

By the way I thought this movie was brilliant, very unique and captures lower class Australian life perfectly.

Every gave it 3.5/4

Have a look on You Tube "Criminal Investigations/Australia/ Snowtown" this doco tells all about the case.Read the books. "Killing for pleasure" "Bodies in the Barrels"

They acted like we should've known about these true events, prior.

I believe you had to watch the 45 min documentary on the Snowtown killings on U-Tube, or at least have an understanding of the events, in order to follow the storyline.

Movie was utter crap. Just because people want to see pedos dead, they upvote such a vile piece of crap as this. This movie was terrible. No pacing, no characterization, no nothing. This movie sucked....bad. Don't watch it. It's Netflix idiots up voting crappy horror movies is all. This deserves like a 2.0 rating....it's that bad. The most recent horrors I can recommend is Dead Snow 2(Part 1 sucks...bad), It Follows(surprisingly good), All Hallow's Eve I and II, and Frankenstein's Army.

I didn't know anything other than it was based on a true story and I thought it was one of the most affecting films I'd ever seen. I don't think it necessarily needed to go into that much detail about the sequence of events and the way people just disappeared (and their murders were hinted at in the background of scenes) was part of the overall theme about the banalities of evil and how this kind of awful thing becomes so commonplace it just becomes daily life. I don't think a by-the-numbers docudrama approach to the murders/timeline would have worked so well. It needed that weird, dreamlike quality and muddy narrative.

The internet's always there to find out more of what happened, but it's so squalid and horrible I wish I'd never read up on it.

[deleted]

The only thing I had some trouble with was keeping track of who was being murdered. I had no idea who Fred was, for example.

Also, where did that bearded Meth-looking guy come from?

It was thought-provoking how the murders started out as vigilantism, but descended into mere thrill killing. Also how Jamie's character became a deadened junkie, yet turned state's evidence at the end and got time off for ratting out his cohorts.

I think John also killed some out of jealousy, especially the "good son" at the end.