Review: The Wicker Man -- Scott's Take
Filed under: Horror, Thrillers, New Releases, Warner Brothers, Theatrical Reviews, Remakes and Sequels

What sounded like one of the year's most ill-fitting and head-scratching projects -- Neil LaBute and Nicolas Cage (of all combos) getting together to remake Robin Hardy's 1973 chiller The Wicker Man (a true cult classic if ever there was one) -- ends up being a half-compelling, half-goofy and half-redundant piece of remake revisionism. (Yes, that's three halves, but it's that weird a movie.) That's not to say you won't find a few really strong components in LaBute's (ultimately pointless) revisit ... but it'll take a straight face and a eagle's eye to find the good stuff. And even then, the only people who should bother with the remake are the ones who simply can't be hassled renting the original because it's old and British.
Cage stars as state cop Ed Malus, a hard-working and noble sort of everyman hero, whose story begins with a mysterious, deadly roadside explosion and the malaise that comes only when a cop loses two civilians ... and the bodies are never found. After stewing around in his misery juices for a few days, Ed receives a letter from an old lover: She needs him to make the trek out to a private and very isolated island off the coast of Washington because her daughter's gone missing and there's nobody on the island who can help.
After bribing a local pilot and mildly butting a few heads upon his arrival, Edward settles in with the meat of the mystery. But the off-kilter community of Summersisle, which is composed almost exclusively of unfriendly females, indentured males and billions of bees, does not take too kindly to Eddie's arrival. (It probably doesn't help that he has the word "male" as part of his last name.) Indeed, most of The Wicker Man consists of Cage flaccidly interrogating a series of very sneaky women before the mystery is laid bare with a finale that (thankfully) hasn't been monkeyed with too much.
Basically a forest-based whodunnit with a crafty ending and a strong collection of actresses, LaBute's take on The Wicker Man places significant emphasis on the paganism of its Mother Nature-y female characters. The flick has numerous slow spots and obvious plot holes, but there's still enough in the plus column to prevent it from being a downright disaster. I still contend that the remake didn't need to be made, but then we'd be robbed of a few really colorful turns from the likes of Leelee Sobieski, Ellen Burstyn, Frances Conroy and the wonderfully lovely Molly Parker. (It's a little ironic that the actress with the largest role (Kate Beahan) is the one who leaves the least impression.) Cage might be the anchor of The Wicker Man (and he acquits himself pretty well, all things considered), but this movie belongs to the ladies -- and all the actresses seem to be having some good fun with all the deviousness and duplicity.
To his credit, LaBute presents Summersisle as a locale that's both pastorally beautiful and quietly creepy: Forests are crawling with mute men, willowy young women and dozens of untrustworthy eyes. Cage stands out like a neon sign that's been dropped into a fairy-tale forest, and LaBute seems to delight in portraying the culture shock that accompanies a 'normal' guy who's been trapped in the company of, well, women that seem a whole lot like witches.
One could also choose to jam a lot of socio-political subtext into the proceedings, with Cage as the American gun-waver who invades an alien culture and (almost) forces his enemies to adhere to his will. And those who love to delve into the arena of sexual politics and the place of "mother" nature in our society should find a few choice nuggets to chew upon ... but ultimately the flick's still six kinds of unnecessary.
Aside from the cast and LaBute's fresh infusion of freaky-type feminism (not to mention a warm batch of (frequently unintentional) comedy), there's very little in this new version that's different (let alone superior) to Hardy's original film. It doesn't seem like the filmmaker had a "fresh new approach" to the material as much as he had an "affection for the original" -- and simply wanted to remake The Wicker Man because he happens to like it. LaBute goes way off-base a couple of times, too: A physical brawl between Cage and Sobieski is that special kind of hilarious, while the thru-line to the big finale is laden with goofy make-up and silly animal costumes. To his credit, though, LaBute is able to make the ending sing. His version of The Wicker Man manages to telegraph its surprises more than the original did, but the last few minutes still manage to pack a pretty powerful punch. Hell, all things considered, remake-wise, I'm shocked they even left the ending intact.
But then they go and lessen the impact by adding an epilogue that feels like it was borrowed from the Friday the 13th series, for cryin' out loud.










Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
9-02-2006 @ 8:18AM
Richard von Busack said...
I completely agree with your review. People are going to beat up on this one because it's a horror film, and it's safe to beat up horror films, but this does have a hell of a punchline...unlike so many ostensibly scary movies. It's overproduced as hell though, and that's one problem; another is that it seems drastically out of time--why wasn't it set in the 1970s, in the days of insane communes, and women's separatism?
Reply
9-02-2006 @ 12:16PM
Scott Weinberg said...
Thanks, Rich! I was just looking at the film's sub-15% rating at Rotten Tomatoes and began wondering if I was insane. Guess I liked it just a little bit more than the average movie critic did. Oh well!
Reply
9-02-2006 @ 1:56PM
Jim Gleeson said...
I think the original movie was an example of how horror movies were so campy back then. Folk music added generously throughout the movie? Monty Python like exchanges between the police officer Malus and the Summersisle natives? And yet people praise this as being a screamfest. Maybe it was then, but now its just an effigy which only goes down in flames.
The remake takes away the single powerful motivation of the main character though, his religious sensibilities. The original movie had profound religious undercurrents. He was a devout Christian entering a pagan world and was tempted by the obscure godlessness of that culture. In this remake it is more about the feminization of their society of neo pagans. So what, was my response.
And I thought the remake, like the original, insults the intelligence of the audience. I didn't buy that Malus would go to this island alone, and he certainly would have made provisions for backup if needed. As far as the ending, I think it would have played better if Malus had somehow uncovered the plot inside the plot. Lately there have been too many horror movies where the main character gets it or finds out he has been duped in the end. Sixth Sense, The Others, Skeleton Key they all have something in common: the main characters either deceive themselves or are deceived by others.
After awhile I kept thinking "Malus, think, your being led like a pig to slaughter" and this was before I had seen the original version of this movie. If it's obvious to me, it should be obvious to the main character. I would have loved it if he had been a few steps ahead at the end. I would have liked the ending to be: "That meade you all drank, it has a special ingredient, an old family recipe. It's a mixed drink that you only get one occasion to imbibe. We call it the "Jim Jones."
Reply
9-03-2006 @ 4:52PM
Richard von Busack said...
Remember Hitchcock's Law? "The reason why no one calls the police is it wouldn't be fun." Unfortunately, when the police don't call the police, there's some explaining that needs to be done. I stick with liking this more than any of the horror I've seen recently, but it sure has some plot holes...
Reply
9-05-2006 @ 9:29AM
Kent Corbin said...
There must be an unproportional amount of fondness for the origional here. I can't think of any other reason for the kid glove treatment given to this movie. I didn't find too much compelling material in this movie. Plot holes abound, dialouge is terrible--even with allowences made for the genre, the ending doesn't seem to redeem a thing. Or rather, the plot leading up to the ending builds nothing to be redeemed. I just couldn't get on board. This seems to be another miss in Cages hit or miss catalouge.
Reply