Nature's Grave

A couple with severe relationship problems go on a camping trip in Australia with their dog Cricket. Things unravel fast, as the couple bicker and treat nature poorly... and before long, it seems as though the very forest turns against them.

"Nature's Grave" (as the film is called in America) is a good film with wonderful visuals and a steady pace of disintegration. The limited number of characters keeps the development strong, and there is a a decent level of gore for the horror fans. Yet, there's something really fishy about this movie.

Presumably, the message is that we shouldn't abuse Mother Nature. Yet, this is not really made clear. While the couple does mistreat their surroundings, it is largely unintentional, and the bulk of their time is spent yelling at each other. The message is further confused when considering the other group of campers, who end up in dire straits for no reason that we are aware of.

Jim Caviezel is a strong actor, though he doesn't really stand out in this film. His character's wife is equally bland. There is some confusion, at least to me, of their nationality. She seems to be Australian, while he does not have the accent. Yet, when confronted with a beached manatee, it is Peter (Caviezel) who knows the history of the local creatures. This was odd.

Aside from the ending, the manatee was for me the most interesting -- and creepy -- part of the film. If you're interested in good shots of wildlife and scenery, this film has plenty of that. But the acting is average and the plot isn't really clear, beyond a fighting couple. Another reviewer writes, "I would not call this a movie where nature strikes back, I would call it a movie where a moron angry at his wife makes a lot of boneheaded decisions." That really sums it up.

This film is remake, and I unfortunately have not seen the original and cannot compare them. However, as a solo film, I found this one to be for the most part enjoyable and I would recommend it to others. To not see this film would be a crime against nature. Be sure to check it out, because you will not find another like it.

The best actor in this movie and most rational character was the dog. You would never know by watching this movie that Jim Caveizel is an established actor. There is no real logic as to why the couple decided to stay and camp except for the Peters' stupidity. I would not call this a movie where nature strikes back, I would call it a movie where a moron angry at his wife makes a lot of boneheaded decisions. Nothing about the other campers is explained. All we know about them is that the parents seem to quarrel. So is this nature striking back at unhappy couples, or people that disrespect nature. The explanation of what this movie is about really stretches logic. The only parts of it that ring true are that there are people and they are out in nature. I found this movie extremely boring and a grand waste of time.

Peter (James Caviezel) and Carla (Claudia Karvan) have a wasted marriage and constant friction. Peter buys expensive camping apparatuses and despite the protests of Carla, he travels with her and their dog Cricket to camp in the isolated Moondah Beach in the North Coast with his friend Luke and his girlfriend during the rainy holiday. Peter stops in a pub in the Eggleston Hotel and leaves a message to Luke with the owner of the pub. When Peter takes the shortcut to reach the beach, he gets lost and the couple spends the night sleeping in their truck. On the next morning, Peter organizes the campsite and disturbs the nature with his rifle. Along the two days, the couple deteriorates their relationship while the nature revenges the bad treatment.

"Long Weekend" is a weird movie, actually a remake of Collin Eggleston's movie of 1978 that I saw many years ago on 13 March 2001 and also recalls "Lost Things" when the couple finds that it is impossible to leave the spot. The intention would be to show a couple with problems in their relationship that spends the holiday trying to resolve their issues, but they mistreat the nature and find the nature's punishment in the end. There is also a discreet homage to the original director with the name of the hotel where they stop to buy rum and leave a message to Luke. Unfortunately this remake is confused and the objective of the plot is not clear; however the anguishing and claustrophobic condition of Peter and Carla that seems to be in the limbo of their existence trapped in an isolated area and incapable to find a way out is the worthwhile part of this movie. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "Isolados" ("Isolated")

There are very few things in life that are more annoying than feeling like you've gotten the old bait and switch. That's kind of what this movie delivers. I realize it's not the movie's fault that IMDb has "horror" as a tag for this movie, but still...no. No to this being in any way a horror movie. I think calling it a thriller is even a bit of a stretch. There's a few tense moments, but on the whole it's just a drama about two people who can't stand each other.

The premise of the movie follows a husband and wife over a long weekend getaway to the beach in Australia. The problem is that the friends they are trying to meet up with never arrive. Oh...and they hate each other. That too. The whole running thread of them constantly pissing off nature is hardly even a subplot, but somehow manages to be the impetus of all the bad things that happen. I get it...it's bad to litter and be a general prick towards nature. I wholeheartedly agree. But then again I seriously doubt nature has time to waste being a vengeful jackass to two small time folks when there are...say...millions of other people harming the environment in much more serious ways. But I guess that's the point (maybe); if John Everyman isn't kind to nature, nature will quite literally kill him. Or something. Regardless, Long Weekend manages to be middle of the road at best in just about every aspect. There's nothing here I'd even remotely call horror, it fails to foster any sort of paranoia or even cheap jumpy thrills like a good thrill, and pretty much everyone involved is thoroughly unlikeable.

That's pretty much how I would sum up the whole movie...thoroughly unlikeable. Which is really a shame since I really like some of Jim Caveizel's (or however you spell his last name) other work. I wouldn't say you should avoid this movie, but there's certainly better movies with similar themes.

What about the dog??? Why leave it locked in the car, and how did it survive the crazy driving and eventual collision with the (already dead) tree?