THE WICKER MAN

[Moviefan02000]

http://us.movies1.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/warner_brothers/the_wicker_man/thewickermanposterbig.jpg

Synopsis: "Police officer Edward Malus travels to the remote island of Summersisle to help his former girlfriend, Willow, find her missing daughter. There, Edward is drawn into a web of ancient traditions and murderous deceit, and every step towards the lost child brings him one step closer to the unimaginable."

Directed by: Neil LaBute (THE SHAPE OF THINGS).

Starring: Nicolas Cage, Ellen Burstyn, Kate Beahan, Frances Conroy, Molly Parker, Leelee Sobieski, and Diane Delano.

Screenplay by: Neil LaBute (POSSESSION).

MPAA Rating: "PG-13," for disturbing images and violence, language and thematic issues.

Feature Running Time: 97 minutes.

Release Date: September 1st, 2006.

Distributed by: Warner Bros. Pictures.

http://us.movies1.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/warner_brothers/the_wicker_man/wicker.jpg

[NightStalkerGtx]

Pass

[Beenthere]

PG-13?


So I guess Britt Ekland will not be running nude in this one. :( :( :(

[daddiefatsacks]

jesus christ, when was the last time leelee sobieski did a movie? Joy Ride?

anyways, Labute doesn't really have any mainstream hits (unless you wanna call Nurse Betty one) so i don't think this movie will do anything for me

[MadsenOMC]

Originally posted by daddiefatsacks
anyways, Labute doesn't really have any mainstream hits

Not sure why this is an automatic negative?

[daddiefatsacks]

Originally posted by MadsenOMC
Not sure why this is an automatic negative?

i wouldn't really call it an automatic negative, but it's not a positive, it just seems like he's doing a studio movie...do you really think labute is suited to do a remake of wicker man?

[MadsenOMC]

Originally posted by daddiefatsacks
do you really think labute is suited to do a remake of wicker man?

Sure. Why not? Apparently he is a huge fan of the original. I don't think it is a necessary remake since really that is an oxymoron almost 100% of the time. Personally, I would hate it if the mainstream success of a director (or lackthereof) had anything to do with my optimism regarding their future work.

[TylerDurden182]

The PG-13 kills it for me.

[MadsenOMC]

Yeah the rating is a real disappointment.

[Joshmo]

Totally looking forward - the rating doesnt mean a thing to me. Trailer looks awesomely creepy, did its job and thats all that counts to get me into the show.

[MadsenOMC]

It is a pretty effective trailer. They aren't screening this for critics where I live though, which could be a bad sign.

[ILuvNachos]

Originally posted by MadsenOMC
It is a pretty effective trailer. They aren't screening this for critics where I live though, which could be a bad sign.

Usually I would agree with you. BUT, any critic worth his or her salt would have seen the original. So to stop from spoiling the ending for those who have not seen the original, not screening for critics would be a good idea.

Is Nicholas Cage still a bankable star? National Treasure made some dough.

[Bourne101]

Doesn't look all that great. Nicolas Cage has had a couple of good ones over the last couple of years (World Trade Center, The Weather Man, Matchstick Men), but this doesn't interest me.

[ilovemovies]

Nurse Betty is such a great movie. I absolutely love and adore it. So much so that because of that movie I always give Neil LaBute's flicks a try.

And when you add the always great Nicolas Cage with a pretty creepy trailer and you have a movie I'm definately looking forward to.

I haven't seen the original though. I'm kinda conflicted on whether I should see the original one first or this remake first.

[Shockwave]

Looking forward to how this stacks up more then anything.

[The Poonchy]

neil labute is a good writer/director, nicolas cage is an amazing actor (in his recent years), the trailer looks creepy... but i must say the poster for the wicker man looks suspiciously like the dvd cover for silent hill. i look at it and think "look, i'm on fire!" or whatever that little girl said. the art for both of the movies don't really look similar, but have the same "creepy" font and colors. and both involve little girls to a degree.

i don't know what i'm trying to say, but i would like to see this. mainly because of nic cage.

[Moviefan1234]

I've never seen the original, but the premise for this does seem interesting. I wasn't all that impressed with the trailer though. I'm intrigued by THE WICKER MAN.

[MadsenOMC]

Originally posted by ILuvNachos
So to stop from spoiling the ending for those who have not seen the original, not screening for critics would be a good idea.


I highly doubt a critic with a brain in their head (there are a few) would give away the ending in their review, assuming it is the same as the original's. You never know. I love the original. A very creepy and unsettling flick with an excellent ending. Since this was made independently and then picked up for distribution by a studio, hopefully they didn't water it down too much.

[Saitoh]

I'm totally looking forward to the chills in this movie. It looks totally creepy. For some reason evil or weird kids freak me out.

[ThirdOuting]

This is going to be so incredibly shit. I can't wait.

[chinton]

whats up with the creepy kid. I dont remember the missing kid popping up as creepy kid several times in the original.

[imnotcreative]

i'm not really into these kinds of movies, but the premise sounds really interesting to me. i'll probably see it.

[Mr. Fred Krueger]

This flick looks terrible. I'll probably catch it on DVD when it comes out, but only out of slight curiousity. Now, excuse me, I'll go pop in the classic original.

Corn rigs and barley rigs and corn rigs are bonnie!

[Lazy Boy]

The trailer makes this film look terrible. I'm hopeful that it's better than it appears, and it's all a case of bad marketing.

[Shockwave]

..i still think it would have been awesome to bring Christopher Lee back for this if they were going to do it.

It wouldve got my butt in the seat for sure.

[slasherfan]

I just saw this, local theater had a screening and I'm surprised to say this but I honestly didn't think it was that bad.
It might work well for a new generation who haven't seen the original. I feel it's being totally mismarketed though. 13-17 year olds probably aren't going to like this movie, or anyone who's expecting wall to wall jump scares and lots of action.
Now it's not perfect, it has it's flaws, the flashbacks where annoying, the wicker man scene felt very rushed, to many dream sequences also annoyed me. But I was never really bored. Unfortunatly having seen the original I knew where it was going.
I don't think it insults the original, it's just a different take one it. It's not as religious as the original is Nic Cage is not a religious person in it, if I remember correctly the character was very in the original.
There is also some un intensional humor here, I, and the audience, laughed out loud a lot whenever Nic would punch/kick/beat up some of the women, I'm sorry but seeing a big star sucker punch an old lady is hilarious.
Also there is an extended ending I saw coming a mile away, I'm still happy they went with it.
I'd say give Wicker Man a chance, it's really not that bad, it's an engrossing, yet slightly over long little mystery.
2.5/5

[Moviefan02000]

So far what I've heard of this hasn't been promising at all. I think I'll be passing on this until DVD.

[dfd3657]

My boss let me borrow the original on DVD, and I finally got around to watching it earlier today (it's been on my "To See" list for VERY long now). Very bizarre, but I absolutely loved it. After watching the trailer for the remake again, I can't say they look anything alike. What is with the girl turning into bees? :confused: I think I'll stay away from this (until the DVD) and see Crank instead.

[DareDevil]

sucked balls hard. i just got back from the movie and i have to go lay down because of a headache.

[ThirdOuting]

Originally posted by Shockwave
..i still think it would have been awesome to bring Christopher Lee back for this if they were going to do it.

It wouldve got my butt in the seat for sure.

Christopher Lee wouldn't dare. He has too much respect for the film.

[Shockwave]

I know, just wishful thinking.

Cant blame a person for wanting to see Christopher Lee in ANYTHING.:)

[HHH123007]

Totally awful. This film actually works as a parody of Hollywood remakes, I laughed a ton at it....too bad it's a drama, or they could've had something. If you were on the fence about this, let me give you a sentence to ponder.

Nicolas Cage puts on a bear suit and chases a crazy cult across the countryside before randomly exposing himself by running up to the front and punching out an old woman.

Sound like a good thriller to you?

Easily the worst flick I've seen all year...out of about 80-90ish.

[DareDevil]

It really is that bad, this is the 2nd worst movie i've seen this year, and to comment on the above, yeah that scene was laugh out loud bad just like most of the movie, nic cage fights alot of women in this movie, i laughed so hard when he punched the first old lady in the face.

3/10

P.S. after a while it seemed like they only had so much footage so they had to replay it over and over in stupid dream sequences.

[Shockwave]

Nicolas Cage puts on a bear suit and chases a crazy cult across the countryside before randomly exposing himself by running up to the front and punching out an old woman.


...now WHY did u say that?! That makes me WANT to see it!:p

[Mr.Majestyk]

Possible Spoilers!!


Wow, such harsh reviews for this movie. I guess I am the only one that appreciated it. The original is still the best though. I suppose this movie is a hard sell no matter what. The original wasn't popular till years later too. Imagine if they were to release the Woodward/Lee film in theatres today? What would people think of that?

What I liked about this film was that they included some of my favourite scenes from the original film like the classroom scene right down to Cage berating a student for being cruel to animals. They didn't have any singing but they clearly showed the Maypole in the background for a couple of scenes.

Although I laughed at many parts in this movie, I did the same in the original so thats not new...the movie was still able to make me squirm at the end. Before it was over I felt myself cheering for Cage and I was kinda hoping for an alternate ending where he kicks ass and takes names.

On a sidenote: Anyone notice Aaron Eckart in the diner at the start? Did he just make an appearance because he is friends with Labute? Also, James Franco and Jason Ritter in it for 5 seconds at the end. Why did all these actors agree to appear in this film with basically nothing to do? I would also include Leelee Sobieski in that group. She is barely in it.

[William Munny]

Originally posted by Mr.Majestyk
I guess I am the only one that appreciated it.

You're not alone on this one. I liked it a lot too.

While this new "Wicker Man" doesn't work entirely well as a thriller and it has several laugh-out-loud moments, I am definitely picking it up on DVD.

My sole complaint with the film is its excessive use of musical score, which drowned out nearly all of the other audio elements for most of the picture.

[blankpage]

I really can't believe how anyone involved with this flick could've taken anything going on seriously. Granted, I'm not the biggest fan of the original, but at least it was effective with what it was trying to do. This, however, is just plain terrible. Everything just seemed anti-climatic. There was so much build-up: the random flashbacks, the "what the fuck is going on?" angle, and then "wham!" "boom!", old lady gets punched out and the "big finale" unsues. I knew what was coming, but like I said, at least the original did it effectively.

By the second half of the film, myself and my two friends couldn't stop laughing. This is easily one of the funniest films of the year so far. Of course, that's not what anyone was going for I think, so in that aspect, they completely failed, IMO.

This shit is just all over the place, and never has a sense of direction. It was a pain to sit through, and despite the good laughs, it was like watching a long, long, long trainwreck.

Easily the worst film of the year so far.

2/10

[SkyNet]

this flick sucked so much ass!

The trailer looked awesome.. made me want to see it real bad.. but this movie was 100% crap!

What was the deal with Aaron Echardt in the movie at the very beginning.. he was sitting at th ebar and then walks off... wtf was that about??!

Go see CRANK.. it is a million times better than most movies! And a gazillion times better than this pos flick!

[BadCoverVersion]

I didn't see this coming.

:rolleyes:

Frankly, I'm chuffed to mothballs.

[Psychocandy]

I have nothing against remakes. That said there's more chance of me taking a cheese grater to my cock than there is of me seeing this debacle at the cinema. What the fuck was Neil Labute thinking? Someone should take the studio cocksuckers responsible for this and put them in a wicker man. Douse that motherfucker in gasoline and watch it burn. I'll buy the hot dogs.

[BadCoverVersion]

Originally posted by Psychocandy
Someone should take the studio cocksuckers responsible for this and put them in a wicker man. Douse that motherfucker in gasoline and watch it burn. I'll buy the hot dogs.

Then set killer bees on those twats.

Honey and crumpets for afters.

Silly billys!

[Saitoh]

Completely terrifying, The Wickerman is a must see. I saw this movie last weekend and found the movie a lot better than expected. Nicholas Cage performed magnificently to pull off a sick twist.

Unlike the original movie that took place on a remote mysterious Scottish island, this movie brought to life a sheltered community in the Puget Sound off the Washington coast.

Based on old 70’s flick, a story written by Anthony Shaffer, Neil LaBute (producer) brought this horror to big screen with a thrilling 21st century rollercoaster bang.

Here’s a quick synopsis: The main character goes on a journey to investigate the disappearance of a young girl. He discovers that the locals are weird and unhelpful, and becomes determined to get to the bottom of the disappearance.

[CreeperBEATNGU]

SPOILERS THROUGHOUT



Wow....just..........wow.

This ranges from completely inane, to absolutely pointless, to a train wreck of a combination between them.


The mysterious mother and daughter that get randomly smashed with a truck at the beginning and for some reason have unknown identities connects to the story in no way whatsoever and seemed to be there as a lame plot device(one of many)just to traumatize the main character....much like the film itself does it its audience.

The bees...what the hell? Again, doesn't really connect the story and could've been completely removed without hurting the narrative one bit, and it actually would've helped it. "Let's just say the island is infested with bees, just...because; and throw in that the main character is allergic to them, even though it has nothing to do with anything."

They depict the "Pagans" as seemingly Amish through the bulk of the film, or atleast a hackneyed Hollywoodized version of it, then suddenly turn into Pagans during the final act for the sake of of a horrendously mis-handled ritualistic sacrafice, which doesn't so much mirror the original as show it through a broken, funhouse mirror.

The "Pagans" claim that the main character is dying a as a martyr, even though in this version his beliefs are only very vaguely referenced and they really have nothing to do with his death or his reaction to it.
Furthermore, this was supposed to be the great sacrafice that was going to save their crops, yet the movie ends with the lamest attempt at a clever scare to grace the screen in quite some time where the Pagans send their women to the city to lure in more sacrafices.
So in other words, the filmmakers ideal depiction of Paganism is repetitive, excessive sacrafice even when the sacrafice to appease their gods has already been made, purely out of their love for sacraficing people; and also savagely torture the sacrafice prior to the occasion when it serves no purpose whatsoever in regard to the sacrafice other than making it more excruciating.
There's also very little explanation as to why this man is the ideal sacrafice. In this film, he pretty much is because he is with an excuse tacked onto the end of it that's more of an elaborate "haha we gotcha!" writing scheme by the filmmakers than something that has anything to do with the spirituality of the Pagans.

Basically the entire film can be summed up as the filmmakers coming up with one inane plot device after another just for the sake of driving a story that makes no sense and has no point forward with the answer to why these things are happening being nothing other than "Because we wrote it," and the answer to the question of why they wrote it being, as shown by the film, "We dunno."

[Mr.Majestyk]

Spoilers Again!!!

I agree with you on the woman and the little girl at the start. I was a bit confused as to what the hell was going on. Was he seeing things? Did they get out of the vehicle before it exploded? No clue on that.

As far as the bees goes, I believe the harvest was honey, so the honey bees were sacred to them. In order to have a good harvest they needed a strong person to please the gods. At the end they need to go out and find someone for next years harvest.

I didn't particularly like that ending in the bar, but it made perfect sense to me. Just wasn't completely essential.

[CreeperBEATNGU]

I suppose you can view it that way, but personally I find that a bit of a strech, and just sort of tacked on.

I think this movie just showed the sacrafice while being void of any real meaning behind it.

*spoilers*


They could've come up with something a hell of alot better than a bee-infested island because they're harvesting honey, just feels rather pointless; and him being the perfect sacrafice just because he's a cop and he impregnated one of their women is just as much of a stretch, if not worse.

The ending made sense if they're all about sacraficing as many people as possible, but that really shouldn't be the point.

I think The Children of the Corn films did a better job of respectably representing a religion with more reasonable, well executed motives than this film did, and they just made theirs up.

[anakinsrise]

Ok i was pulled in by the first hour of The Wicker Man.
I found the story involving and engaging as Nicolas Cage
searches for the missing girl,and mingles with the "odd"
women of the cult,and once Ellen Burstyn's character arrives
on the screen it just added to the fun and creepiness

But then it goes downhill from there.Characters start walking around in bear and sheep costumes.Unintended laughter from myself and other audience members followed

scale of 1-10 a 4 1/2

[CreeperBEATNGU]

SPOILERS




Oh yeah, and I forgot to mention how ridiculously stupid it was that the "Pagans" committed blatant, cold-blooded murder in a way that had zilch to do with their beliefs simply because the victim displeased them, especially after stating "We don't murder people here."

[Mr.Majestyk]

In the original movie, Woodward isn't in a bear costume but rather a clown costume. I don't know if that makes it less funny or more. Also, I don't think it was his daughter. One of the women mentions that to him. Also, when the women go out to find sacrifice's it is a long term plan. They spend years searching for the right man to sacrifice. That's why Cage hasn't seen his ex in so long and believes that the little girl is his child. So James Franco might be a sacrifice a few years down the line if he is deemed worthy.

I didn't think this movie was spectacular or anything. I just didn't think it was as bad as everyone says. I'm a huge fan of the original and I know that it is way way better than this movie. I would argue that this movie couldn't be made today and be successful no matter who directed it and who acted in it. The only way it could be done and be successful would be to completely change the movie. The movie stayed true for the most part to the original and some of those scenes that were the same as the original are the parts that people laughed at ie Bear costume, screaming at the girls in the classroom. Someone mentioned somewhere on this board that the soundtrack was what made the original, and I agree that it had so much to do with the film, but what would todays audience think if they actually played out The Maypole scene? Corn Rigs? They would laugh so hard at how dumb the movie is...just like audiences did when the movie was first released.

All I can say about Labute's effort is good try. Maybe people might be interested in the original after this movie who knows.

[CreeperBEATNGU]

SPOILERS

Originally posted by Mr.Majestyk
In the original movie, Woodward isn't in a bear costume but rather a clown costume. I don't know if that makes it less funny or more. Also, I don't think it was his daughter. One of the women mentions that to him. Also, when the women go out to find sacrifice's it is a long term plan. They spend years searching for the right man to sacrifice. That's why Cage hasn't seen his ex in so long and believes that the little girl is his child. So James Franco might be a sacrifice a few years down the line if he is deemed worthy.






I know, I just felt it came off as insanely corny and unneeded. They should only be planning sacrafices when a sacrafice is necessary. The entire religion shouldn't be centered around "gee, who can we burn alive next?" as this film made it appear.



I didn't think this movie was spectacular or anything. I just didn't think it
was as bad as everyone says. I'm a huge fan of the original and I know that it is way way better than this movie. I would argue that this movie couldn't be made today and be successful no matter who directed it and who acted in it. The only way it could be done and be successful would be to completely change the movie. The movie stayed true for the most part to the original and some of those scenes that were the same as the original are the parts that people laughed at ie Bear costume, screaming at the girls in the classroom. Someone mentioned somewhere on this board that the soundtrack was what made the original, and I agree that it had so much to do with the film, but what would todays audience think if they actually played out The Maypole scene? Corn Rigs? They would laugh so hard at how dumb the movie is...just like audiences did when the movie was first released.

All I can say about Labute's effort is good try. Maybe people might be interested in the original after this movie who knows.





I respect that it wasn't precisely the same, which is why I'd say this was probably better than that dreaful Omen rehash that regurgitated the exact same movie with a few minor(and terrible)alterations thrown in.
I just felt the changes they made were poorly executed on so many levels, the representation of Paganism (a real religion that they made out to look like a fantasy land, proposterous, and completely malevolant one) especially.

As for the costumes, watching Cage run around in a bear suit punching out old women was a hell of alot funnier looking than anything Woodward did in the original.
I'm sure this movie will stir up some interest in the original, the original did just get a new dvd release because of it, and until a few weeks, I'd never seen the original; I'm glad this movie, although vastly inferior, came out to bring it to my attention; and despite the films many shortcomings, I did enjoy Cage's performance...plus it was pretty damn funy at times.:)

On a side note, a subtle touch I really liked was showing the main character from the original on a missing poster in the police station.

[Jig Saw 666]

The movie was trash they insulted the remake with this crap. They said the movie didn't need the sex theme but it did and without Christopher Lee this movie couldn't been any better and hat sleed the deal was that it was rated PG-13.

[Mr.Majestyk]

Originally posted by CreeperBEATNGU
SPOILERS







On a side note, a subtle touch I really liked was showing the main character from the original on a missing poster in the police station. [/B]

Good eye, I never noticed that.

I'm really trying to get my hands on the release that came out several years ago in a wicker box. I think it was limited time so I may have to ebay it if I want it.

[ThirdOuting]

I'm going to see this wank this afternoon...

Can't wait!

[ilovemovies]

I enjoyed it. I've never seen the original Wicker Man but this movie did remind me a little of 80's thriller called Spellbinder with Kelly Preston.

It's a very wierd movie at times. There are some funny scenes. The ending does get a silly admittedly, although it didn't bother me TOO much. Atleast not enough to ruin the movie for me as a whole. I was intrigued through most of it. I thought Nicolas Cage really does a good job anchoring the movie. Unlike what Cage said in an interview with Extra, this is most definately not the kind of movie that gets under your skin and creeps you out for days after the movie is over. Most definately not! But it is enjoyable as a whole.