User Reviews

Although it felt like a rewarding experience, Van Diemen's Land is not what you would call an easy watch. The viewer is transported back a couple of centuries, and plunged into the harsh and untamed Tasmanian landscape, for a fairly straightforward tale of man v man v the environment.

Despite its' simplicity, it's an affecting tale, helped by the sparse, evocative and apologetic "I'm a quiet man" voice-over that threads its way through the narrative, holding together the otherwise un-holdable. It's very much 'in-your-face' as there's little historical explanation, and only the vaguest sense of any future ahead, which compels you to focus on the here-and-now. The score is haunting, and the film is beautifully shot, with bleached-out greens emphasizing the unforgiving nature of their surroundings and predicament.

The trailer gives a good indication of what to expect, including two of the more iconic sequences that stayed with me long afterwards – one scene where the group are running time-lapsed and ghost-like through the forest trying to escape their pursuers, the other the shockingly swift brutality with which the second inmate on the menu meets his maker. Elsewhere, we experience the messy and protracted depiction of how hard it is to kill a man, and as the numbers dwindle whilst the tension and paranoia mounts, individual camp fires become the order of the night, as the lengths men would go to survive become increasingly desperate.

On the downside, I struggled to hear some of the heavily-accented dialogue (especially when the speaker was off screen), and it was hard to believe that there were no other nutritious animals in a rainforest, bar a solitary snake. Given their limited resources, quite how they would have caught them is another matter, but they'd have sure as hell tried, to save from eating each other.

I came out feeling like I'd been badly mauled after 12 rounds in a ring with an enormous and unbeatable foe. It's a real powerhouse of a film that I would most certainly recommend, even though one viewing is quite sufficient for me in this lifetime. 7/10.

Like another film based on a true story from Australia - Snowtown - this is a grim telling of a very unpleasant tale. The palette of the movie is gritty and washed out with a persevering lack of hope, and just in case you were in doubt the musical score reflects the vast and dark land. There is not one single female in this movie, as it's about a place where none were. Almost like a dream of life lost for the souls there the feminine warmth is a lost memory and song. Seen perhaps a cautionary tale of a hard and man made time it depicts shows how this may have transpired, how it may have come to pass with a stand out line for me being "six pairs of shoes". This is no movie for the faint hearted and the acting is absolutely top notch. Be warned however this is not a study of human spirit over coming anything but rather about the dark slide into the worst aspects of a hopeless humanity. As a horror genre fan no horror movie is anywhere near as horrific and haunting as I found this one, because it's a real story about a terrible thing. All I felt was sadness for the characters, every one. When I curled up in bed that night later I simply felt lucky to be there.

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.

This movie has a terrific, unsettling opening scene. Unfortunately... the rest of the film consists of 100 minutes of actors stumbling through the bush occasionally bludgeoning one another with axes. It's a simple story which makes it difficult to adapt to a feature length film, and this attempt fails dismally.

It is an incredibly dull and flat movie. It has an intrusive and annoying soundtrack. The occasional use of pretentious poetic subtitles is awful and detracts from, rather than adding to the chilling atmosphere.

The cinematography of the bush was OK at best. One or two scenes highlighted the spectacular scale or creepy, alien nature of the central west wilderness of Tasmania. The majority was uninspiring.

Do yourself a favor and listen to the energetic Wedding Parties Anything song "A tale they won't believe" instead.

"Wasn't the devil in you when you brought me here?"

'Van Diemen's Land' opens up a window into the darker chapters of Australia's convict settlement past, when the British penal colony was a harsh, unforgiving wilderness populated by struggling pioneers and convicts sent to the other side of the earth for stealing so much as a loaf of bread. Once there, repeat offenders might be confined to Sarah Island, a hellish prison camp in Macquarie Harbour in western Van Diemen's Land, now Tasmania. Conditions there were so extreme that in 1822, Irish-born malcontent Alexander Pearce and seven others, tasked with felling the surrounding forests to provide shipbuilders with high-quality wood, attempted to escape their exile. When plans to steal a moored whaling vessel fell through, the escapees, without much aforethought, plunged into the harsh Tasmanian wilderness intending to travel east to Hobart, some 225km away. Although Robert Greenhill, one of the convicts, could draw upon his many years as a sailor to provide navigational expertise, none present knew how to survive in bushland so inhospitable even the indigenous Australians largely avoided it, and when food supplies ran out, they turned to cannibalism. Few of the ill-fated expedition would survive to tell the tale. In 'Van Diemen's Land', we join the convicts on the day of their escape attempt and follow the grizzly events that ensue.

The story of Alexander Pearce is perhaps not unsurprisingly missing from the school curriculum in Australia, and it was only through this film that I myself became familiar with this dark chapter of White Australia. 'Van Diemen's Land' inspired me to fire up my browser and learn more, with the realisation that in movie terms, I was watching the middle part of a trilogy. Part 1 would have dealt with Pearce's repeated offences condemning him to slave labour on Sarah Island. There, he would continue to prove unruly for the authorities, practicing his talent for theft and disruption, ultimately finding himself on work detail felling trees in Macquarie Harbour and seeing an opportunity for escape. Part 3 would have dealt with the consequences of his actions, including one final adventure, which the last sequence of 'Van Diemen's Land' briefly covers. Director and co-writer Jonathan auf der Heide, however, appears to be fixated upon the middle part of the story, and while the moment when Pearce acquired a taste for human flesh strikes an undeniable discord with all but perhaps the Korowai tribe of Papua New Guinea, I can't help feeling that it's a little like telling the tale of Ned Kelly focusing only on the killings at Stringybark Creek. Only a few captions either side of the film quickly fill in the blanks, hinting that there is more to the story. Nonetheless, 'Part 2' is well-crafted for what it is and sheds a memorable, yet gloomy light on this hitherto forgotten saga.

auf der Heide wisely chooses a cast of unknowns to inhabit the fateful eight, which ensures the audience will accept their alter egos at face value. Oscar Redding, perhaps the best-known, creates an Alexander Pearce just possibly capable of redemption, up until the moment he agrees to sacrifice a member of the party for food, while Arthur Angel portrays a Robert Greenhill you wouldn't want to be within twenty miles of when it came time to sleep. The rest of the cast fill out the remainder of the ill-fated group with similarly creditable performances, with the Scottish characters delivering their lines in Gallic alongside the 18th Century English dialect to underscore Australia's role as a dumping ground for convicts all across the British Isles. The string-powered score, often more sound than symphony, meshes well with the bleak, washed-out picture to strongly evoke the dark mood of the piece. There are no archetypal heroes, only desperate human animals hastening the decay of civilisation's thin veneer. Filmed on location in south-central Tasmania, the authentic natural backdrop does much on its own to sell the concept that the escapees are not only at the end of the earth as they themselves suggest, but that the land is cold and unforgiving - just as much today as it was in 1822. If I have issues with the film, therefore, it's the storyline.

By focusing purely upon the escape attempt and the descent into cannibalism, the tale feels reduced somewhat into a B-grade exploitation horror. It doesn't provide suitable build-up to properly explore the choices certain characters make throughout, though the documentation for this does exist. In consequence, I felt the leap to 'the other meat' was a little rushed, reminding me of an early South Park episode where cannibalism is the first rather than last resort. In addition, the full story would be more satisfying than some of the edited highlights 'cannibalised' for the purposes of a thriller. There is far more to the Alexander Drake story than we are witness to in 'Van Diemen's Land'. Undeniably, the issue of runtime comes into play here, however as I suggested earlier, there is enough scope for more than one feature. However, auf der Heide is the first to explore it cinematically, and perhaps this will spark interest in genuine Australian Gothic from here on. It certainly captures the tone and feel of that bleak world, taking strides towards tapping into a rarely explored period of Australian history that perhaps may now be brought to light free of the nationalist veil. Certainly any proud Australian and film fan should see 'Van Diemen's Land' for this purpose, and genre fans everywhere will appreciate what it does achieve. Let's hope it's a taster of things to come.

One star for the opening scene - promising, bedazzling view, along with a somewhat mysterious Irish narrative...And that is it. They should have ended it there to save their reputation. What follows is beyond comprehension - slow paced, boring, badly directed one-dimensional flick... There is nothing original about the story... actually there is no story. Eight criminals escape from a labor camp in Tasmania in the early 19th century. Stupidly, and under the circumstances, they don't want to go back, so they proceed with their escape into the uninhabited forest. And begin to kill and eat each other. One is left in the end, winning the cannibalism contest. And why is this story worthwhile a whole feature film? What amazes me is the fascination of the writers and directors with human depravity and degradation which somehow then ends up being glorified through the cinema art form. Of course they will eat each other -- they are criminals after all. Noble things don't come easy to these guys, how much deeper can you go?

To this film's sick fascination with cannibalism we must add such enlightening bonuses as male nudity, foul language, violence and gore, and jokes about it and some god dancing with an ax as a final line... torturous experience for the viewer.

Jonathan auf der Heide may not be the easiest name to remember, but make a mental note of it. File it away for future reference, because this young Tasmanian director has chosen for his first feature film a story so dark and grim, a tale so horrific, that you will want to keep a 'watching brief' on his career to see what he follows Van Diemen's Land up with.

The film first saw light in an early short as Jonathan's Victorian College of the Arts graduation film called, Hell's Gates, which went on to be named Best Student Film at the Melbourne International Film Festival in 2008.

Van Diemen's Land, as every adult Australian would know, is the first name given to Tasmania by British authorities during the early years of white settlement. A dreaded penal colony, with a fearsome reputation, Van Diemen's Land saw more than its share of horror and barbarism meted out to the convicts unlucky enough to end up there.

This film, set in 1882, tells the 'true' story of eight convicts who escape from a working party and head out across the Tasmanian wilderness in search of Macquarie Harbour (the Hell's Gates in the title of the original short), where they believe a ship will be waiting to carry them away from the island.

One of the escapees is Alexander Pearce, a Gaelic speaking Irishman. Pearce, was in fact, the only convict to survive the harrowing trek across Tasmania's wild mountainous peaks and valleys, and following his recapture, told a horrifying tale of murder and cannibalism that still echoes and shocks more than a hundred years after the original events took place.

Filmed entirely on location in Tasmania and Victoria's Otway Ranges, the film has a dark foreboding quality about it that doesn't let up across its entire 100 minute length. Almost all of the colour has been leached out of the film leaving almost nothing else but drab olive greens and grays. We never get a glimpse of clear blue, open sky. The air is constantly heavy with rain and damp, and one can only imagine what these convicts from England, Scotland and Ireland must have thought as they set out on foot to cross one of the harshest and most forbidding environments on earth.

The film is hauntingly narrated by Pearce, who peppers his comments with poetical insights into the human psyche that are often as shocking as they are profound.

"I've looked up at God looking down", intones Pearce in his native Gaelic, "He dances with an axe in his hand." Or this: "Let God have his Heaven. I am blood." Van Diemen's Land is a stunning debut feature from one of Australia's newest and youngest directors. If this film is any indication of the quality of writing and directing coming out of our film schools today, it augers very well for the future of the Australian film industry as a whole.

Making a film set 200 years ago, about a group of escaped convicts in a remote part of the world, and who end up turning to cannibalism is not an easy task, quite obviously. That this film succeeds to the degree it does is a testament to the people behind it.

There must have been a lot of time spent by the writers and director trying to work out the right approach for Alexander Pearce. Depicting him as a psychopathic cannibal from the outset (as per 'For the Term of His Natural Life') would have been wrong, he was surely more nuanced than that. This was a man transported to the colonies for the theft of six pairs of shoes, not any type of violent act.

The need to eat your fellow escapees would have been a slow dawn of horror, and that is captured quite nicely here as these uneducated men stumble off into a world they knew nothing about. It's instructive to remember that most of us would be scared if dropped into this remote wilderness to find our own way out, even if equipped with provisions, warm clothing and a working knowledge of the geography and local flora/fauna. To imagine traversing what was completely unknown to any of them, and literally a world away from their birthplaces, dressed only in old prison rags and with food limited to some flour, is very frightening indeed.

The cinematography is great, with the washed-out colours emphasising the alien nature of this wilderness. The acting is good as well, and the use of Gaelic for the occasional introspection of Pearce helps to prompt the viewer to think of just how someone can end up so far from home, and in such a horrific situation.

Unfortunately there are a few stumbles as well, forgivable as this is the director's first feature. Some of the imagery is overdone - I'm thinking of the guard chewing at the beginning (yes, we know what's coming ...) - and the characters could probably be better distinguished through a little more talking than they actually do. As there is no back story or wider explanation of their predicament, the film does feel slightly repetitious in the middle section. There was also no attempt to show the men hunting for food, even though there would have been native wildlife all around them. To be fair, though, the depiction of cannibalism as the inevitable outcome of tackling this terrain with limited supplies is the main story, and given the limited budget of the film they were probably wise to focus on that aspect exclusively.

All up, congratulations to the filmmakers for tackling such a tough subject and making it watchable. This is a very grim part of our history, but it needs to be known and discussed more than it is. The film is not easy to stomach (pun intended!) but you cannot watch it and not be affected, and is that not the aim of any movie? Pearce was not a wronged hero, he was a person who twice turned to cannibalism. But this film makes you think about your own response to landing in such an awful situation as these men. If the difference between civilisation and barbarism is three square meals, then these escaped convicts were in a place none of us would want to go.

Mmmm.... I recently purchased this movie from a Sunday markets stall and thought "well that looks interesting, it seems to have received all these awards and prices". Winner this... Winner that... Unfortunately the movie didn't do it for me, or for my partner. It's slow, extremely predictable, uses horrible music, shows subtitles that are so incredible small on the screen that they're impossible to read, but most of all this movie didn't learn anything from Tom Hanks' "Cast Away" movie. If people are without food for a prolonged time they actually loose weight, and the characters as portrayed in Van Diemen's Land, although made to look somewhat dirty, seemed as healthy as anyone can be! So no, the movie didn't feel realistic enough to me, the actors should have lost 20-40 kilos each to make it feel believable. The good part of this movie were the various panoramic shots taken, but even those could have been more dramatic. So, I recommend passing this movie unless you like watching people bashing in each other's brains for no particular reason whatsoever. No prices from me whatsoever, and I'm glad seeing the rating at a level where handing out prices seems based on knowing the right people (friends politics), rather than really understanding cinematographic art.

I really liked this movie. The story builds slowly with layer upon layer of dread, I really felt uncomfortable. The subject matter is such that you are never going scream this movies praises from the rooftops. It is a difficult and uncomfortable story to tell, but nonetheless a story well worth telling, and in my opinion, well told.

I thought the actors we well chosen and played their characters descent into madness with frightening realism.

The director was clever enough to shy away from gratuitous gore, but still managed to tell a very convincing horror story.

I am 40 years old, and watched this with my wife and the in laws who are both in their sixties.

My wife and I both liked the movie, but the in-laws disliked it. perhaps this had a bit to do with their generation.

I watched this movie with an open mind and I was entertained from start to finish, and had plenty to talk about during the after movie coffee.

TL:DR A harrowing (ie violent) dramatisation of the escape by eight prisoners from MacQuarie Harbour prison in 1822 Tasmania (as is) - If only they'd watched 'Bush Tucker Man' first.

EXTERIOR: DAY. A LOGGING CAMP ON THE TASMANIAN COAST, 1822.

It's not fast paced, but then, nor is Tasmania. There are repeated drone shots of the VDL coastal jungle/bush which seems to consist of steep, wooded mountains. These have accompanying, overwrought, Twin Peaks-meets-unrosined-violin-bow droney music and Irish Gaelic mutterings; every time this happens. Instead of reinforcing the tension, this serves to emphasise that not much is happening. I could have done with a lot less of that.

Not unlike 'Deliverance' only in the sense of a bunch of blokes stressing out over getting through the backwoods, though the characters here are less clear cut. Except when they're being butchered.

It's realistic, except as some morbid types seem to wish, the actors didn't actually starve. They certainly don't look as though they're enjoying themselves, even each other. They get more paranoid as the group thins out, but even this isn't very clear.

You have to wonder, what's the point? Condemnation of the penal colony system? Actors earnestly grunting in the mist? A metaphor for the futility of existence? Revenge of the Aborigines? The Tasmanian Tourist Authority certainly doesn't have much to work with. Even the lush jungle shots are spoiled by droney music. It's such a relief when that stops.

As it goes on and gets more Sergio Leone but with no story, the stars fall away. 4**** at 1:20. Oh, no, it gets supernatural at 1:26; 3*** minus. By the end, you just don't care any more which of the monosyllabic, ragged, dirty, scowling men survives. Perhaps that's the idea. (Spoiler) Alexander Pearce wrote his confession, which has got to be more worthwhile than this. 1*.

FADE TO SLEEP.

I've been wanting to watch this for a few years and finally got around to it last night (on Stan). I didn't know much about the story apart from the setting and that there was some cannibalism involved.

Contrary to what IMDb says about "Australia's most notorious convict", I have lived in Australia for 20 years and had never heard of the main protagonist. That was just as well since I didn't know how the story was going unfold. That I had never seen any of the actors before also contributed to the realism.

While there are plenty of films about the dark ages of Europe and the pioneering days of North America, there are not enough films about the Australia's murky past. It's generally well-known that Irish lads might be sent here for petty crimes, but it's not well understood nowadays - when Australia is one of the most desirable places to live in the world - how inhospitable it was when white men first arrived. That the film depicts this was, in itself, sufficient reason for me to watch it in its entirety. (There are plenty more thoughtful stories that could be told about this era.)

I enjoyed the slow burning pace of the plot, and the fact that it was based on a real story, but what impressed me the most was the cinematography. Scene after scene is beautifully framed and colo(u)red, and often depicts the insignificance of man in the vast wilderness. I'd watch it again just for the scenery.

The acting and story itself were enthralling. I don't envy the cast for filming in such conditions! I only wish that I had had the opportunity to display subtitles for the English as well as the Gaelic as some of the phraseology and accents were hard to catch.

There was a scene in the second half where the picture quality deteriorated for a minute or two but that may have been down to a bottleneck in the bandwidth.

I was in two minds as the credits rolled about the beginning and end of the film. It would have been more "Hollywood" to set up the characters a bit early on so that we could understand their motivations. Similarly, it would have been very "Hollywood" to show how the main protagonist ultimately came out of the wilderness and made his tale public. Having slept on it - short of creating a film twice as long - I'm glad at the choices made by the director. The focus is purely on the survival story. We can only wonder grimly how we too might act in similar straits.

It's a film that shows a rare side of humanity, an unexplored piece of history and features some excellent music, cinematography, acting and an intelligent, believable script. I suspect it didn't make much money at the box office, which is a shame. This is a movie for grown ups. More please.

Just saw this brilliant, grim little piece of Australian Gothic the other day as part of the 12 Perth Annual Revelation Film Festival here in West Australia.

As a Forensic scientist and a horror movie buff I have both a professional and personal curiosity regarding cases of anthrophagy/cannibalism, and the Pearce case is a fascinating one- clearly the Australian public/movie industry think so too- there are currently three films and a book about Pearse, all released within the past few years. Auf Der Heide has crafted the best of all the Pearse projects- stark and uncompromising, the film doesn't shy away from the brutal fates the eight convicts escaping into the Tasmanian outback suffered- the men butchered for meat don't die quick and easy, as in many a Hollywood film. Nor is the film a gratuitous, relentlessly grim affair- there are moments of eerie, quiet beauty- a soon-to-be-victim kneeling and waiting for the axe, stares up and out at the thick, green beauty of the rain forest around him; a sequence filmed on a hillside drenched in torrential rain, and Pearse's Gothic, Gaelic-language narration: "I have looked up at God looking down; he dances with an axe in his hand..." Brilliant film- beautifully directed, filmed and acted- with Mark Leonard Winter, in particular, a real stand-out as Dalton.