MovieChat Forums > Deliverance (1972) Discussion > Why not put the hillbilly in the river r...

Why not put the hillbilly in the river rather than bury him?

posted 8 years ago by teresah233
5 replies | jump to latest

It makes more sense to send him to the bottom of the river and easier than digging a grave with their hands.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] teresah233 8 years ago

That's exactly my point. The river was being flooded to become a lake for the power company.
When Lewis says that line, I didn't understand why they didn't put him the the river. Where they buried this guy was next to a stream and they sure didn't bury him very deep.

[–] matt21-690-602571 8 years ago

Yeah, they barely even dug a "foxhole", let alone a grave. And then they just put some dirt and leaves over him, with that big piece of tree bark as the final touch(??). I didn't have a lot of confidence in that plan. I'd expect that body to easily come dislodged and float right on up in the new lake.

[–] janet-conant 8 years ago

Much more dramatic to show four guys carrying him deeper into the woods, digging a grave with their bare hands, showing Drew going through the motions then running to the river to wash up.

[–] InfoBabe 8 years ago

He was in a shallow grave and would start decomposing right away. by the time the water rose, there would be nothing left to float. They certainly did not want the body found very quickly, given the strength of the river it would get to Aintree before them.. They would be suspects right away. Nope. Got to hide the body.