Product Details

• Actors: Nicolas Cage, Ellen Burstyn, Kate Beahan, Frances Conroy, Molly Parker
• Format: NTSC
• Rated: PG-13 (Parental Guidance Suggested)
• Average Customer Review: 1.9 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (252 customer reviews)
• ASIN: B00005JP8R
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #661,129 in Movies & TV (See Top 100 in Movies & TV)
• For more information about "The Wicker Man" visit the Internet Movie Database (IMDb)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

102 of 114 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Bad Film Fans--This Is the One You've Been Waiting For!, October 20, 2006

By 

Rascal Fan "Rascal Fan" (U.K.) - See all my reviews

Oh this film is so very, very bad--totally delicious! You've read the plot line in previous reviews, so my review is more about the essence of the movie. I saw this in a packed cinema--never has one movie given a group of people such unexpected surges of pleasurable hilarity. Everything was fine until Nicolas/Edward almost drowns and then snaps out of his trance to find a dead girl on his lap--the audience couldn't control itself from this point on--the guy in front of me was laughing so hard I thought he'd pass out. I mean, up until now, we only had Exorcist II and Plan 9 From Outer Space to enjoy bad movie-wise--but Wicker Man 2006--thank you Nicolas! Thank you Neil LaBute! The "Bike Scene" the "Rowan and Edward the Bear in the Woods Scene" the "Schoolroom Scene" the "Killing Me Won't Bring Back Your God**** Honey Scene" are all moments to treasure--I can't remember when I've seen such an excellent very bad movie--it makes stuff like Aeon Flux looks like Fellini...my dreams would come true if "Wicker Man II--the Sequel" with Nicolas Cage was announced! Nicolas Cage is at his very best--see him stare...see him punch/slap/kick many of the movie's actresses..see him wear a bear suit...see him come up from underwater with lots of hair dye running down his neck...see him shout out fabulous lines like "Step away from the bike!!!" and "Owww!!! My legs!!!" See him rant and rave and carry on like a maniac. Connoisseurs of really bad movies must see this--you'll totally love it!

22 of 24 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars The Horror! The Horror!, October 12, 2007

By 

Scott T. Rivers (Los Angeles, CA USA) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The Wicker Man (Widescreen Unrated/Rated Edition) (DVD)

In cynical fashion, the major studios churn out needless remakes aimed at young moviegoers who lack imagination to track down the originals. The latest casualty is "The Wicker Man" - writer-director Neil LaBute's desecration of the 1973 British horror favorite. Like most contemporary remakes, it has been justly ignored. Hollywood's creative bankruptcy never ceases to astonish me.

13 of 13 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars The Wicker Man - 2006 vs. 1973 - No Contest, May 7, 2007

By 

Geoffrey Kragen - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The Wicker Man (Widescreen Unrated/Rated Edition) (DVD)

I don't write reviews very often because while I'm a movie buff, I don't usually take the time to pontificate. But having seen the 2006 version of Wicker Man on DVD, I feel the need to make a few observations.

First, on the positive side: certainly the production values of the new version are far superior to the original. It is an extremely well-crafted motion picture. The exterior shots were especially beautiful and made me want to revisit British Columbia.

At the end of the film, Ellen Burstyn's makeup and costume were a lot more convincing than Christopher Lee's getup in the original version! Even back when I first saw it in the theatre, Lee just didn't quite seem believable.

Having said this, I have serious problems with the remake. First, one of the things that made the original such an interesting film was the use of Celtic folk music. (The film takes place on Summerville Isle off the coast of Britain.) While the lyrics certainly qualify as bawdy, they are entirely appropriate to the setting of the story. The total absence of this and the orchestral score in the current version diminished both the intensity and the message of the film.

The real problem however is found in the dialog where Sister Summersisle tells Edward Malus he is to be a martyr. The dictionary describes a martyr as a person who is killed because of his or her religious or other beliefs. But as far as we know, Malus doesn't really have any religious convictions. He may be a sacrifice, but he's no martyr.

This brings us to the thrust of the original picture. The message was the battle between British forms of Christianity and Paganism. Both are done a serious disservice by the current version. In the original version, Sergeant Howie (Edward Woodward) is a passionately devoted conservative Christian. Lord Summerisle (Christopher Lee) is an equally committed pagan.

As in the current version, the police officer is tricked into coming to the island for the purpose of being sacrificed because the crops have failed. He is chosen because of his very commitment to his faith and the fact that, due to this commitment, he remains a virgin. (And yes, I know, no matter how good an actor Cage is, nobody would believe he has remained sexually pure.) So Howie as a believer represents the perfect fool for these pagans and therefore the perfect sacrifice and martyr. Sergeant Howie, unlike Malus, actually dies for a reason. Malus just dies. And while Malus has no answers for Sister Summersisle, Howie certainly has them for Lord Summerisle. As Howie dies for his faith, he warns Summerisle that the next time the crop fails, it will be Lord Summerisle himself burning inside the Wicker Man.

The 1973 version ends with a man of honor dying for his faith and the warning that it is only a matter of time before the meaninglessness of the sacrifice will become apparent. In the `06 revised version's ending, we are left with a dead man and nothing more.

If you have only seen the current version of Wicker Man, I strongly suggest you view the original. If you ignore the picture's dated aspects, you will find a film with great depth which presents a highly compelling and far more accurate picture of people of faith, be they Christian or pagan.