MovieChat Forums > Tracks (2014) Discussion > Was it really necessary to kill the stra...

Was it really necessary to kill the stray camels?

posted 10 years ago by CoolBrittannia
11 replies | jump to latest

I know she was instructed by the camel rancher that if she sees any stray camels approaching her, she should not hesitate to shoot them in the head. Maybe that would be warranted if she was feeling seriously threatened, but when the situation presents itself in the movie, long before they get anywhere close to her, she practically kills them in cold blood. Was this really necessary? It feels wrong and inhumane to just blow away stray camels, especially if they haven't done anything. How about a warning shot?

[–] LifeVsArt 10 years ago

They weren't stray camels, they were wild camels - wild bulls in mating mode, fully lathering at the mouth - probably the most dangerous creature you can encounter in the Outback. As Robyn was clearly told and shown earlier in the film, this was not a situation to mess around with, she was told to shoot immediately, and to shoot to kill. The wild camels were drawn by Robyn's female camel presence - they're known to be practically unstoppable when in this excited condition, they look to kill any seen obstacle to their goal, whether it be human or another male camel, or baby camel. The castration scene earlier in the film was there, in part, to reinforce the dangerous aspect of wild bulls in mating season.

[–] otter 10 years ago

Yes! Plus, remember how vulnerable she was - she didn't have a cell phone or any way to get help. If the camels fought and she got a stray hoof in the leg, she didn't have any way to get medical help - even a minor injury could have meant dying in the desert. If the wild bull camels frightened away her pack camels, she could have died without the food and water they were carrying. If one of her camels was injured or killed, she'd have to abandon supplies that might mean the difference between life and death later in the trip.

No, she had to shoot the wild bull camel. It could kill her intentionally or unintentionally, slowly or quickly, and she was in a situation where if she made any mistakes or even had any accidents - she died.

" Jack, you have debauched my sloth! "

[–] blaircam 9 years ago

Plus you also have to remember that camels are not indigenous to Australia and cause quite a lot of environmental damage.
Feral camels are vermin so shooting one that was also highly dangerous shouldn't cause you to lose any sleep.

"They who... give up... liberty to obtain... safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

[–] andyd-1 9 years ago

None of the cruelty against animals portrayed in the film was ever necessary, it occurred because of the pathetic ideas of a damaged person and there was no system in place to stop it at the time. Today animal welfare officers would have taken control of the tortured animals and asked the police to have arrested the mentally sick woman, well at least in any civilised country.

[–] matthewcowan91 8 years ago

There was no cruelty to animals in the film you delusional tosser

[–] spookyrat1 8 years ago

Maybe that would be warranted if she was feeling seriously threatened ...

She was being seriously threatened, by wild bull camels in aggressive mating mode. You can't have been really paying attention.🐭

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] aidawolf 8 years ago

I am half Arabic, and I had more than one chance to see an angry camel, and those were domesticated and castrated ones, and they were really scary. Bedouins told me that camels are very stubborn, and can be very aggressive, revenge is not alien to them, they will kill their owner if they get the chance if something bothers them. One even told me that is considered a Devil made creature which was peculiar to me as I am an atheist (In main religions God made every creature on planet Earth, but here it is a camel, devil made it...)

[–] Firefly69 8 years ago

I live in Minnesota and agree that oftentimes you don't see bears or mountain lions. Or wolves.

But about a month ago, a woman was attacked by a bear while sitting on her deck. It does happen

And when animals are in a hyped up aggressive mode, one cant take chances. Like in Yellowstone with the bison. Many people see them as harmless herbivores. But it's the animal most likely to attack in the park.

Life in the wild isn't a Disney movie. You are in their territory and they can be very unpredictable.

[–] primarilycritical 8 years ago

I love this question.

I think if she was more comfortable with guns, then yes, she should have waited. I got the impression that she wasn't that familiar with shooting, so she made the right choice.

Then again, she didn't really miss, did she? Maybe my impressions of her are wrong.

Yes, I have a Podcast. Yes, I'm comfortable with that.
http://www.primarilycritical.com

[–] Seth_Rogue_One 8 years ago

Was this really necessary? It feels wrong and inhumane to just blow away stray camels, especially if they haven't done anything. How about a warning shot?

Well considering that she missed the first shot and they showed no signs in stopping warning shots wouldn't had worked. At least I thought she missed the first shot but I read up here that she didn't so I could be wrong, either way the other camels didn't back down from it so...

And also she probably had a very limited amount of amunition to spare and being that it was 3 big camels coming at them she couldn't afford to shoot and not try to hit them.

Plus remember in the beginning when the wise camel expert told her that a horny camel will do anything and even kill anything in their way when they see a smoking hot camel chick?

Well she of course did not want to risk her, her dog or the other camel males to get killed because those strays wanted some camel poon, so yeah it was pretty necessary.

Why are you keeping this curiosity door locked?