|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() Trade In This Movies & TV Item for $0.30
Trade in The Wicker Man (Widescreen Unrated/Rated Edition) for a $0.30 Amazon.com Gift Card that can be redeemed for millions of items store wide. See more Movies & TV eligible for trade-in
|
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
Nicolas Cage (Actor), Ellen Burstyn (Actor), Neil LaBute (Director) | Rated: PG-13 | Format: DVD
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
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!,
By
22 of 24 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
The Horror! The Horror!,
By
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,
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.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
Tags Customers Associate with This Product(What's this?)Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people.
|
|