I’m “biast” (con): nothing
(what is this about? see my critic’s minifesto)
Edge-of-your-seat suspense thriller,” they said. “A young girl’s obsession,” they said. “A nightmarish journey,” they said. I would like to see that movie. Dig Two Graves is not it. Young teen Jake (Samantha Isler) is not obsessed over the accidental death of her brother, just normally sad. When she meets the creepy carnival-esque trickster magicians who offer to bring her brother back from the dead, she mostly runs away from them — maybe that’s the “journey”? — and when she isn’t running away, she’s remarkably matter-of-fact about them. American writer-director Hunter Adams, in his second feature, seems to believe that muddy and muddled 70s-style exploitation imagery of backwoods gothic Americana, with some satanic rituals and gypsy magic mixed it, make a movie, and yet remarkably, even this would-be luridness is yawn-inducing dull: it only comes to bit of life when it rises to the accidentally silly. What a shame to waste such a great actor as Ted Levine (Bleed for This), here playing Jake’s sheriff grandfather, on what is little more than an incoherent showreel. The title doesn’t even make sense. It’s a Chinese proverb, a warning about seeking revenge (ie, you end up dead too), but it’s not clear to whom that title-warning is addressed. Jake is not seeking revenge, nor is her grandfather. It might be applicable to the tricksters, yet if they are meant to be not villainous monsters but somehow sympathetic anti-heroes, then boy oh boy, that does not come across at all. Incoherent may be actually too kind.
Incoherent definitely sums up this under-baked “horror” thriller.
The subplots about the Mother (baby on the way) and the bullying went absolutely nowhere. Remind me, what happened to “Jake’s” Dad?
One of those films that jumps back and forth through time, literally as characters are taking forward steps, for reasons never made clear.
Just a standard, sub-standard nothing film about “the past coming back to haunt” some vile bastard who deserved a comeuppance, his partner “haunted” by his own inaction, and a girl who “comes of age” (as some critics describe this turkey) by watching an Appalachian Romani speak what sounds like Egyptian and bite heads off of conjured up snakes.
Skip this twaddle, and watch “Creep” or “Bone Tomahawk” or even “Gremlins 2.” At least those will keep you entertained, and maybe suspenseful as to what happens next. “Dig” is dull as dishwater.
“The title doesn’t even make sense. It’s a Chinese proverb, a warning about seeking revenge (ie, you end up dead too), but it’s not clear to whom that title-warning is addressed. Jake is not seeking revenge, nor is her grandfather.”
Did you even watch the movie?
Oops, you got me! I never watch the movies. Shhhh: don’t tell anyone!
Why review movies then. You made this movie seem horrible, even the the review above me. People need to take movies for what they are and not try to compare them to movies that are deemed in the “same” category.
Oh dear. You don’t really think that I don’t watch the movies, that I’ve been fooling readers for 20 years, and that I finally reveal my secret to *you*?
Because it *is* horrible.
I didn’t do that. Did you even read my review? Did *you* even see the movie?
You’ve been doing this 20 years and you’re still reviewing movies here. You don’t know what you’re talking about in purely critic terms if you think this movie is horrible. And I said “even the review above me”, like damn ******you****** really have no idea what you’re talking about.
Like damn, why can’t you tell me why you think that movie isn’t horrible, and what the title means?
Also you might want to work on your prose, because I have no idea what “even the review above me” is supposed to refer to, because it clearly is meant to imply something *other* than my review to which you are responding.
And how do you know not understand the title and how it applies if you’ve been doing this for “20” years.
You’re about to get deleted as a troll if you are unable to carry on a grownup conversation.
The title Dig Two Graves, a proverb that warns about seeking revenge. Wyeth, was the little kid from the flashbacks and watched the sheriff kill his parents. He did finally get revenge but wound up digging his own grave too? How did a critic not understand that?
You’re suggesting that the title refers to someone other than the main character(s)?
i just said what the title refers to
It’s definitely a generational thing. People under 30 don’t understand tone. They only want plot with no distractions. Or more precisely. Nothing BUT distractions. If this was a 13 part TV show like ‘The Killing’ where hours go by and nothing happens at all they’d be raving about this. As it is this little gem is a wonderful compact gothic horror tale.
I wish you trolls would make up your minds. Am I under 30, or am I an old hag?
I don’t know, why don’t you enlighten us.
Spoiler: I’m neither!
Now, do you have something intelligent to add to the conversation?
not to you, no. sorry.