Nature's Grave (2008) User Reviews

Weird Movie

[claudio_carvalho · 6/10 · 28 July 2009]

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")

Decent Film, Though the Message is a Bit Fuzzy

[gavin6942 · 6/10 · 27 July 2009]

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.

Boring!

[aqos-1 · 2/10 · 22 July 2009]

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.

Loved it!

[jcarrie · 24 January 2011]

I actually enjoyed this film. The symbolism of the wife destroying the eagle's egg, mirrors the fact that she had got rid of their baby - the whole cause of the friction and distance between the couple. Their relationship is stretched to the limit, the tension between them, combined with the general unsettling atmosphere of being 'in the middle of nowhere'. Lots of creepy crawlies, the haunting dugong slowly creeping up the beach, the mysterious arrows leading round and round. I really thought the tension was built up well, when Pete goes to see the family in the camper van, you realise that something is seriously wrong and even though you don't particularly like the characters I don't think we actually want them to die. I felt a bit sorry for Peter, he was trying to make an effort to rebuild bridges but she doesn't care. The film builds to a disorientating, but claustrophobic ending, getting lost and feeling alone. Then the 'explosive' ending capped things off nicely. I liked it.

How to defile nature at every turn

[Heislegend · 4/10 · 22 July 2009]

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.

Nature's way

[richard_sleboe · 7/10 · 12 March 2009]

Aristotle taught that if one way be better than another, that would have to be nature's way. He obviously never saw this movie. Mother Nature ain't so motherly in "Long Weekend". Nature isn't anyone's friend. Nature is the enemy: wildlife, weather, and, most importantly, the wayward ways of man (and woman). But there is no need to go ballistic with interpretation to enjoy this movie. It's essentially an old-school drama, despite some of the mysteries. It definitely works on several levels. At face value, it's the story of Peter and Carla who can't make their marriage work, least of all during what is supposed to be quality time, away from home and everyday chores. On another level, it's a tale of an awe-inspiring, yet unwelcoming wilderness conspiring against urban intruders, both by attacking them directly and by bringing out the worst in them. Giving little context and almost no explanation, Jamie Blanks takes us on a very wild ride. "Long Weekend" is not funny, but who says everything has to be? Of course there's no happy ending either. Not a big bang, but explosive enough.

A waste of time

[terrydeanp · 1/10 · 16 August 2009]

Obviously, the director of this picture intended to wrap his environmental message into a thriller, but literally got lost on the way -- just like the characters in the film. Really disappointing.

The acting isn't that bad, but the design of the characters is rather limiting. Especially the role of the nagging wife. The worst thing is that she never stops complaining. And I don't feel like watching a couple arguing and fighting throughout the entire film -- it doesn't add anything to a story that lacks substance.

On the upside, the location is exceptionally beautiful, supporting the underlying environmental theme.

Net, you keep waiting for something to happen, only to be surprised by a sudden radical and totally exaggerated series of events at the end.

Decent enough remake...

[Nightmare-Maker · 7/10 · 22 January 2010]

I loved the original Long Weekend....Very underrated movie.

This remake was literally a scene for scene remake, no new ideas, so I suppose if you have seen the original and remember it fairly well, you are going to no what happens next! But I remember the original fairly well (I have the SYNAPSE DVD) but I still enjoyed Natures Grave. Jim Caviezel and Claudia Cavan play the unhappy couple well.

The film basically is a married couple who are having a rough time go away for a long weekend, and find themselves on an isolated beach. They treat the place with total disrespect (chucking away cigarette butts, litter, shooting bottles)) and shooting the animals...then nature turns on them! Pretty slow but always interesting. Solid acting. Little gore, so not much to offend here.

Tidy little movie. Surprised about the negative reviews really.

7.5/10.

Good acting and nice scenery and that's it

[preppy-3 · 4/10 · 7 March 2013]

An unhappy couple in Australia--Peter (Jim Caviezl) and Carla (Claudia Karvan)--decide to go camping one long weekend in a remote wooded area near the ocean. Along the way Peter (accidentally) hits a kangaroo and casually shoots at birds within range. They argue and he wanders around a lot with his shirt off. That's about it until an abrupt change of events during the last 30 minutes.

This film has goos acting by the leads, Caviezl looks good with his shirt off, has some gorgeous cinematography, nice music...but that's it. This is pushed as being a horror film but it's really just a domestic drama with horror kicking in during the last 30 minutes. The horror itself isn't particularly scary and doesn't make much sense. All this has going for it is acting, scenery and music--nothing else. I give it a 4 just for that.

Great eerie movie

[mcatarino · 8/10 · 14 October 2008]

Well, I just saw this movie at a Festival, and really liked it. It's a tour de force for the two actors, which are quite alone in the movie except for the other character, which will be Mother Nature. And a very wicked character she is... I didn't know it was an almost shot-by-shot remake of the 1978 movie, but even though I can't compare since I didn't watch the original one, I would say it's such a great movie that a remake that is able to bring the movie to a new generation of movie-goers can't be a too bad idea. And, even though I certainly sympathize with all those remake-haters out there, didn't "The Departed" just sweep critics and movie-goers alike while being a remake of a very recent masterpiece?... Let's forget about the remake issue, shall we? Why is this a great little movie? It's a low-budget low-profile movie that's just creepy and engaging, and has an eerie feel to it that is just to the point. Any of you city-slickers thinking about going out camping in the long weekend to a secluded beach? Well, don't mess with Nature or else... I did appreciate a movie that's about Nature's revenge without being too eco-conscious, and where in the end all serious wrong being done is done by humans. And all those bits left unexplained, instead of making you feel cheated, are just very intelligent and create a quasi-supernatural feel that's partly "Picnic at Hanging Rock", partly "The Birds", partly "Blair With Project"... It's no masterpiece, whatever that may be, but it's engaging and very scary in a non-conventional way. Some of the images will stick with you for a long time - I had no idea of what a dudong was, but now they scare the hell out of me! Isn't that enough for having a great time watching this?

Re-Make

[kosmasp · 6/10 · 16 July 2009]

When I watched this movie at a festival in Germany (Fantasy Filmfest Nights) I wasn't aware of the fact, that this was a Remake. Unfortunately I haven't watched the Original up to this point, but really want to do so. Especially after being told by many viewers, that the original movie is a subtler option to this version of the subject matter.

Jim Caviezel is a really good actor and he plays it pretty straight here. While he has to do some pretty disgusting and despicable things, you still feel for him (most of the time). And that's why I quite liked the movie (plus it's premise of course, which some people might find more suitable than M. Nights Happening).

While the title might be irritating to some (you could suspect a teen comedy after all), this dark thriller has quit some punches (also visually), that try to hammer the message into your head ... When I get to watch the original, I will know if is a decent approach or not.

Not as predictable as I expected but ...

[wendymareadawson · 6/10 · 8 July 2019]

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?

What a senseless movie.

[tsmithjr · 2/10 · 24 August 2010]

What a senseless movie. What a joke. And boy is it SLOW.

Whoever wrote Nature's Grave had better not quit their day job. They'll never make it as a writer. There's no real effort at a story here. It's not about nature striking back. Nature's Grave is about a miserable arguing couple. After the first half hour, that's all there is. Arguing. Yeah, there's some attempted lame suspense or horror. But it's all contrived.

Nature's Grave is not as much a suspense or horror movie as it is a movie about an irresponsible and somewhat reckless couple, he's insensitive to her wants and needs. She's not happy with him and acts cool to him. Eventually the fighting starts. Was there ever a worse couple? Why would they go to the beach if she doesn't like any of the typical "going to the beach" type activities? Argue, argue, argue, that's all they do. But the acting was great. James Caviezel and Claudia Karvan came across great as a couple who were miserable with each other.

One nice thing to say, the movie was filmed in a beautiful location and is has a number of shots of beautiful scenery. But beyond that, save yourself and don't want Nature's Grave.

Wouldn't watch it again even if it would delay my execution by 88 minutes

[fnj2002 · 1/10 · 7 April 2011]

Two fine actors are roped into making a film for which the description "spectacularly, monumentally, epically bad" doesn't even come close to deriding adequately. If there were a way to rate it zero stars, I would have done so.

Two more unredeemable and unintelligent characters cannot be imagined. It is impossible to relate to either of them even for an instant. By comparison, the Texas Chain Saw killer is someone you can find more common ground with. All you can do is sit with your jaw open, spellbound by the awfulness of the material and the stupidity of the reactions of the two.

The dreadful, unsatisfying repulsiveness of the film is not the fault of the actors. The sad excuse for a plot has no purpose, no logic, and no sense, and most of all there is no possibility of suspension of disbelief.

Baffling why anyone would think this thing is marketable.

Unnerving and fantastic!

[Kashmirgrey · 8/10 · 7 October 2009]

Sometimes I find myself doing a double-take when I read film reviews on IMDb.com. I gauge the stars and ponder the reviews usually basing my decision whether to see the film upon them. Man, am I glad I went against the grain with Long Weekend. Frankly, I am surprised by the contrast between my opinion and the average and I don't usually even care much for man against nature thrillers.

First, let's clear the air. This film is indeed a horror film. Granted there are no chainsaws or neanderthals in hockey masks. There is no torture porn, cannibalism, or any of that other run-of-the-mill garbage they call horror these days. Oh, and yeah, it does slowly simmer to a boil which probably ticks off those with short attention spans. However, this film delivers the chills and the pay-off is worth the time invested.

Peter (James Caviezel) and Carla (Claudia Karvan) are a feuding couple one step away from divorce who head towards a secluded Australian beach on a camping trip. The common thread is a disrespect for nature which comes back to haunt them. While Peter is shooting haphazardly at anything that moves with his father's old rifle, Carla is spraying ants and breaking eagles' eggs. Mother Nature finally loses her patience and reminds the two who is boss.

Now I know that sounds like an all too familiar plot, but in Long Weekend the formulas work and you can't help but find yourself feeling the dread that slowly envelopes Peter and Carla as they begin to realize they are not welcome.

If, like me, you're tired of the Saws and backwoods inbreds chowing down on idiot teens, give Long Weekend a chance. You'll be pleasantly surprised and glad you did.

Today we gonna have some fun, at all costs...no matter what..

[xxxxxdarkmoon · 6/10 · 15 April 2021]

I have never seen a more annoying role in a movie than Jim Caviezel in this one.

She: "what are you doing to that tree..?"

He:" ...uhh.. chopping it down"

She: "why?"

He:"...uh....why not..?? ..firewood..." oomph. Facepalm.

________

She: "what is that?"

He: "oh yes, look at that. I bought, I got a spear gun..." picks up the spear gun and smiles to it.

She: "what the hell are you gonna do with that??"

He: "I don't know...... shoot a fish?" points the speargun at her and grins.

She : "be careful where you point at...". Etc. Etc.

If you don't have a problem watching such an obnoxious guy who annoys the viewer every time he is doing something and every time he speaks, then you might like this movie. Because, actually it is not a bad thriller.

. .

another crime in the halls of shame of Australian film funding

[ptb-8 · 2/10 · 17 July 2010]

Quite soon there might be a serious investigation into the club of film funding in Australia. This remake here will be the poster item for the last gasp of funding fees for stale producers to remake their films simply to generate a fee for themselves. Nobody asked for this remake apart from the shysters who produced it and the 'executives' who put taxpayer funds into their pockets. Nobody saw it in a cinema for it was never released in one commercially....but it cost millions of dollars to make and now exists, shelved as a film and released on DVD. The original and excellent production was a staple of the renaissance of 70s cinema. It is a good film. This superfluous remake is a crime, theft from the Australian taxpayer who wastefully funds pointless films like this..and they should be investigated. Look up the production crew of the original and then the remake... any identical names? Have a look. It's all true.

Hateable characters

[teebear817 · 1/10 · 10 October 2020]

For a horror movie to work, you need to root for the main characters. These 2 were hateable, unlikeable, contemptable and you didnt care about them. In fact, you root against them. 90 minutes flushed down the toilet.

Nature killing

[p-stepien · 6/10 · 17 March 2010]

Peter (James Caviezel) and Carla (Claudia Karvan) are off on a long weekend holiday. Supposed to meet up with friends they travel to a secluded surfer's beach in the middle of the outback. The married couple has serious relationship issues and most of the time the trip is a bickering contest. Once there it turns out the friends fail to turn up, so the hateful pair stay on by themselves - at times trying to resolve their issues, but mostly fuelling the anger and divisions between. In the meantime they run over animals, litter, kill sea creatures and squash eggs. Nature is fine with people cannibalising each other, but in this secluded beach shitting on Mother Earth is not accepted...

Cavaziel and Karvan fill in the movie, so basically its their chemistry that is make or break for the movie. Even more so that the characters in question aren't very likable. That said whilst watching the movie you may find their disregard for nature idiotic, but I found it extremely realistic. I wasn't entirely convinced by Karvan, who seemed subdued and uninspired, which basically allowed the macho conceited Cavaziel to steal the show. Convincingly.

In general I liked the movie. Enough to take a peek at the original. There are somes definite flaws with this one however. Some of the initial decisions made were iffy (i.e. deciding to go into the wilderness at night instead of waiting for their friends at a bar - as planned). Additionally Carla just seemed to start getting afraid of nature a bit too quickly and it had no real backing in the events that had occurred up until that moment. Last but not least the end scene was dumb. I understand the director's intent, but he missed that one by a mile. Also the general suspense level is a bit too low and you may feel disinterested somewhere around the middle of the movie. The film never really does pick up, but there are some real intense scenes of interaction between our two heroes.

Don't mess with Mother Nature

[Stevieboy666 · 5/10 · 7 May 2021]

Married couple Peter (Jim Caviezel) and his wife Carla (Claudia Karvan) head to a secluded Australian beach for a long weekend, hoping to solve their marital problems. They take their cute dog Cricket along. Peter is an utter jerk, Carla would be better off without him! When they arrive they completely disrespect the natural environment, Pete in particular, but Nature slowly but surely turns against them to devastating effect. The movie is something of a slow burn, and the fact is that the couple - Peter in particular - are so unlikeable that it's pretty hard to care for them. The film has a couple of shocking moments but overall it's not very scary, it does have some very nice scenery though. As modern remakes go I found this very average, I plan to revisit the far superior 1978 original.

Nothing fancy, but an all round solid suspense movie.

[nickrboyade · 10/10 · 20 July 2009]

Good Acting. Simple but effective plot. Surprisingly good suspense. I don't understand the ratings by users on here. I think most of the ratings are politically motivated which I think is preposterous considering this is a rating site not a personal chat site.

Anyway to the movie.... This movie 's premise is simple. A couple whose relationship is deteriorating decides to go on a camping trip in a remote area where wildlife is rampant. (On purpose or not, we do not know) They have no experience in hiking or nature and are quite ignorant urban people. They do a lot of stupid "hillbilly" stuff (killing animals for fun, polluting, etc...), actually stuff that people do but never realize.

Then karma kicks in. I will leave it at that. There is nothing supernatural about the movie, just an outside look from nature's POV about humans coming into its domain.

You should definitely watch it and then rate ! From my perspective it is a solid "watch it and remember it" movie that definitely reminded me of deliverance (without the rapes and all).

Nico333

The Bickersons

[ctomvelu1 · 6/10 · 27 November 2010]

It's man versus nature and husband versus wife as a bickering couple on the verge of splitting up (Caviezel and Karvan) gets lost on their way to a remote vacation spot and end up spending several nights in the woods near a pretty beach down under. Before it's over, not only are they fighting tooth and nail but nature seems to be on the attack. The environmental message may be safely ignored, and the film enjoyed as a subdued horror flick. She wants to go home, he wants to stay. Big mistake. It all comes to a tragic end. My favorite "jump" moment comes when Caviezel wakes up on the beach, with the corpse of a narwhal staring him in the face. As the story progresses and things go from bad to worse, the movie gets a bit gory, so those of faint heart and weak stomach, beware. This remake of a 1978 flick will best appeal to those who enjoyed "Picnic at Hanging Rock."

Very very weak...

[epoc3000 · 1/10 · 20 August 2009]

I don't have to use many words to describe how bad this movie is. I will just go straight to the point. The plot is not bad. It's just terribly used. There is no thrill, no horror, nothing that makes you jump from your seat. The deaths are stupid. A few mysteries here and there that are never explained and leave you wondering, but not in a way that adds value to the movie. The acting is actually good. Just very poor writing and.. well... horrible everything else.

It's just a pointless movie. It builds very little tension that is not released in the end. There is no climax. There is no threat. There is no caring about the characters. There is just a slight curiosity as to what will happen and the end makes you very disappointed.

Bad Behavior Has Bad Consequences

[LeonLouisRicci · 6/10 · 23 September 2012]

As a force, Nature in its collective can be Super-Nature(al). A power that is paranormal and beyond the laws of physics. This can explain the strange happenings in this edgy film that is good enough to recommend to those not expecting another gore/splatter/torture "horror" film.

This one lies somewhere between the crevasses of suspense and thriller. It is all done with two characters and some imagination. The fact that both of them have committed crimes against nature, he the environment, and her the abortion, are the reason for their extermination.

A respectable indie movie that relies on tension of behavior and situation for the shocks and does so with not much style but a patina of the natural. A solid, satisfying story that is disturbing with a message. Bad behavior has bad consequences. Pure and simple as a sunset.

What Is This?

[JB1865 · 2/10 · 6 September 2009]

Nature's Grave doesn't have much of a plot in the conventional sense; not many of the events are tied together by anything and nothing really pays off. It is pretty much about a husband and wife, who are having marital problems, going camping on a beach. They are trying to make the best of it but weirder and weirder things keep happening, none of which they can explain.

This is one of the most confusing and pointless movies I have ever seen. Almost every scene consists of the same thing; they argue, something weird happens they say "what was that" then on to the next scene. You are given absolutely NO explanation to what any of it means.I'm not sure if the director was trying to make some sort of half baked message about respecting nature or what, but almost nothing in this movie sticks.

The acting is extremely poor as is the writing. I'm not a huge Jim Caviziel fan, but I expected more than this from him.

Worst of all however would be the boredom. I was so miserable halfway through this I couldn't wait for it to be over.

Nature's Grave unfortunately isn't even worth watching for a laugh, because those movies can be even more fun than good movies sometimes, and if there's one thing Nature's Grave isn't it's fun.