GAMES: GameSpot GameFAQs MOVIES: Metacritic Movietome Comic-Con
Tuesday, Oct 13, 2009

In 1882, several convicts escaped custody to brave the harsh conditions of Van Diemen's Land in Tasmania. One of the escapees throughout the film is based on the real life convict Alexander Pearce (Oscar Redding). Journeying into the wilderness, Pearce and seven others were faced with the sheer ruggedness of the landscape and limited resources. As some of the men succumbed to injury, the others had no choice but to slaughter their fellow man and then devour them so they would be able to continue on and not starve to death. Much of the tension throughout the film is derived from each man knowing that he is at risk of being the next person to be killed.

The first feature film from director Jonathan Auf Der Heide is a great technical achievement. The cinematography throughout Van Diemen's Land contains some of the most beautiful shots you are likely to see this year. Many of the films images have a painterly-like quality to them and the use of the saturated colour scheme ensures a highly unique and textured depiction of the outback. One of the most haunting images is also its ugliest though, as a close-up shot captures a British guard munching down on something. It is as though this is foreshadowing the evil we are bound to see throughout the film.

Although one can admire the quality of these aesthetics, the films decision to be as objective as possible works to its detriment. Heide previously made the short film Hell's Gate, which shared the same story about Pearce and his escape, and also starred Oscar Redding. It would seem that Heide has not expanded the story from this short film. This is not a full length biopic about Alexander Pearce, nor is there any intention to detail the lives of the other convicts either. Their psychological wellbeing is rarely explored with any personal insights. It is disappointing that despite the verisimilitude and authenticity towards the look of the film, the characterisation and narrative remain utterly minimal. There is no time dedicated towards any of the characters, leaving the film as a passive experience rather than an emotional one. The performances throughout the film are solid with sporadic dialogue, but we needed to get to know these characters well so that we could care about their struggle more.

Perhaps one of the most fascinating elements that can be taken indirectly from the cannibalism is the subversion of the Australian archetype of mateship. The mythology of the Aussie battler, looking after his mates, evaporates rapidly as men are slaughtered like cattle in their sleep, to ensure the survival of others. The murder scenes are intensely staged throughout the film and feel fitting with the films grittiness. Much of the violence is shown off-screen but the audible screams and slaps of the axe ensure that these moments are gruesomely, rather than emotionally, affecting. The film's most damning death occurs before a blow is landed, as a convict is bitten by a snake, inevitably suggesting that he will not be able to continue and will have to be slaughtered.

Van Diemen's Land is a beautiful film to behold but a lot more work was needed on the screenplay. The lack of depth, development and characterisation certainly diminishes much of the films power and its emotion, while the lack of narrative drive will have many questioning the actual point of the film. Despite this, the intense moments of violence and the lack of morality may still provoke some to question what they would have done under the same strenuous conditions and circumstances.

Category: Movies
Posted by biggest_loser, 5:22am
16 Comments | Post a Comment

Comments

Page 1 
« prev  |  next »
A solid review, while I'm not interested in the film entirely, it does show great promise. I acutally did meet Auf der Heide a couple of years ago at a short course I did in Filmmaking. He was one of the supervisors.
Posted Oct 13, 2009 7:28 am PT
great review. maybe i will have to se this movie.
Posted Oct 13, 2009 8:14 am PT
never heard
Posted Oct 13, 2009 8:56 am PT
awesome review the movie sounds pretty good
Posted Oct 13, 2009 11:18 am PT
Cannibalism: Just. Don't. Go. There. Ew. "Sick" review BL.
Posted Oct 13, 2009 12:14 pm PT
Good review! I might add it to my huge list of movies I need to see.
Posted Oct 13, 2009 12:58 pm PT
Nice review! I've actually never heard of this movie, but the concept greatly interests me so I'll probably seek it out!
Posted Oct 13, 2009 3:55 pm PT
How would you compare it to the movie Alive?
Posted Oct 13, 2009 4:31 pm PT
@ 10below : I haven't seen Alive but I'd assume it has more of a narrative arc than this. You'd hope so!!
Posted Oct 13, 2009 9:17 pm PT
@biggest_loser - Definately one of your better reviews since the "Biggest_Loser Overhall" (they're all great though). I hadn't heard of this film, but I may check it out if it's shocking, which I'm into. I think it can be very hard to spin a short film into a feature length film and keep the message, the tone, the setting. It's mainy difficult as short films have a very big shortage of content in the major areas, and whilst they may be brilliant in a short film, stretching these features out can make them subpar. It seems to me that the director focussed on the wrong point to play on (the gruesome shocks) and neglected one of the most, if not the most, part of the process (the characterisation and narrative as well as character building). So in summary it's strong on the outside but weak on the inside (am I right or did I just waste your time?)
Posted Oct 14, 2009 4:15 am PT
@ dijji497 : Thats pretty spot on I guess. I don't think they were doing it to be shocking but just realism I guess. What was the overhaul though?
Posted Oct 14, 2009 6:25 am PT
@biggest_loser - maybe it was because I was reading them at 2AM on my iPod but it seemed to me that since you had that blog about leaving for a few months ur reviews have changed their style a little. (Not in a bad way, they're better now). If no one sees what I mean then compare this review with I Love You, Man review, tell me if I'm crazy, they seem much beter quality now.
Posted Oct 14, 2009 3:14 pm PT
I've never heard of it either.
Posted Oct 14, 2009 6:34 pm PT
@dijji497 : The review for I Love You Man wasn't great, but it was difficult to think of what to say. Some of the reviews before that are better. But it all comes with practice, which was the point I was making by saying to just keep writing before that rube tried to cut me down.
Posted Oct 14, 2009 6:48 pm PT
@biggest_loser - yeah I still liked the review of I Love You Man. It's difficult because it's not an easy film to get thefacts on. I mean, did anyone ctually doubt the quality of the film? It's like reviewing Final Destination 4 or Fast and Furious - you know what your gonna get. Whereas a film like this deserves more detail like Funny People or Inglorious Basterds. Anyway, I still liked the review of I Love You Man because you still made a well written and detailed review of a movie with implied expectations.
Posted Oct 14, 2009 8:07 pm PT
Need to review a Uwe Boll film bud.
Posted Oct 15, 2009 9:54 pm PT
Page 1 
« prev  |  next »
  • biggest_loser
  • Level: 1 (13%)
  • Rank: Mogwai
  • Forum Posts: 676
  • Messages Read: 0


Friends

My Friends