Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Don't listen to the negative reviews

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

Funny, strange, confrontational and subversive, this is one of the most interesting experiences you'll have at the cinema this year.

Sometimes you start watching a film, persevere and then ponder on some deep questions, such as: Was this made as a tax dodge? How come the dog is the best actor in the film? Why oh why did Claudia Karvan and David Caviezel get involved in this? Did they owe someone a favour?As I write David Caviezel's character has just been attacked by an eagle - providing at least some unintentional humour. I read here that this is a remake of a film from 30 years ago. In Australia, where the film industry is small and actors who elect to stay 'home' and look for work are often relegated to poor television and adverts - to decide to remake a film and then do it soooo badly, is tantamount to a crime. Having taught media at university in Australia, I know there are so many budding young film makers, script writers, camera people and actors out there, so to see precious money spent on this pile of kangaroo s**t made me genuinely angry.Australian films often share a thematic of 'whitey' struggling against a hostile, if stunningly beautiful landscape. ( For example: 'Picnic at Hanging Rock.' ) So, this could have been so much better than it is, drawing on that ambiguous relationship to the bush, the sea and isolation. At some point why didn't someone, ANYONE, connected to this film see the rushes and say: 'We need to rethink this don't we.' Even the bloke emptying the bins could have told them this.DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME ON THIS. IF I COULD GIVE THIS ZERO OUT OF 10 I WOULD.Unless you want proof that some actors really will do anything for a few bob.

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.

I just got done watching "Nature's grave" and just HAD to review it. It was 90 minutes of laughing,crying, pondering the meaning of life itself. No...just laughing. This nagging, bickering couple gets attacked by everything from ants to eagles, from snakes to sea-cows. And because the two main characters are so thoroughly dislike-able, nature's assaults on them will make you giggle and grin with fiendish delight as they get what's coming to them. Add in the stale dialog that would make the Pope weep, and the films low budget feel, this one has immense value as an UNINTENTIONAL COMEDY. The final scene was worthy of "Roadkill of The Year", as the beef was flying! (You'll be certain to replay that scene at least a couple of times.) All of that being said, there were some great performances put on by several animal actors in this one. The animal actors should've gotten higher billing than the humans that were involved in this three-ring circus.

Depressing and pointless remake. The one dimensional characters and clumsy direction soon become a chore to sit through. There is questionable continuity and any moments of tension or suspense are rushed through. It looks like the "suspense" scenes were hacked up in the editing room to try and make it more exciting, as even though this is a short film, it's still padded out with repetitive scenery shots. The eco message is conveyed in a series of cheap clichés that reminded me of a first year film school project. I guess people got paid for making the movie, so it was probably worth it for the families of the crew, but entertainment it is not. Spend the 85 minutes asleep, it will be more beneficial.