The Wicker Man


Movies

The Exchange

Anyone know anything about the proposed horror of a remake of this British classic? I've heard Nicolas Cage and bees.


http://thewickermanmovie.warnerbros.com/

Liberty's Edge

Being a fan of all three (orig./Cage/bees), I hope it's not as horrific as you say. I'm frightened, though, Cassandra, that you may be right this time.

Contributor

How can they possibly improve on the original?...And if they can't, why bother remaking the damn thing...

The Exchange

If they don't sing Summer Is A-Coming In at the end, it will just be a waste of time. :-)

As for motive, they probably reckon it will make money. How crude.

Liberty's Edge

Richard Pett wrote:
How can they possibly improve on the original?...And if they can't, why bother remaking the damn thing...

(putting Hollywood hat on)

what this movie really needs is a good long car chase.
(taking Hollywood hat off, soaking in lighter fluid, putting Hollywood hat on wooden anthropoidal effigy)

The Exchange

Chris Manos wrote:
http://thewickermanmovie.warnerbros.com/

Actually, that site makes it look pretty cool! I am starting to get tired of Nick Cage but this has some potential.

FH

Liberty's Edge

Thats it!! I'm makin my own wicker man movie. It'll be popsicle sticks and Star Wars figures all the way.

Scarab Sages

Heathansson wrote:
Thats it!! I'm makin my own wicker man movie. It'll be popsicle sticks and Star Wars figures all the way.

I would pay to see that, probably...especially if you have Princess Leah doin the Britt Ekland nude scene. I love the original, and I will be seeing this one, as well. May wait till it comes out on video, but I'll watch it.

As an unrelated note, the skeps (jug-like beehives) the women are using on the island are illegal for hiving in the US. Because you pretty much have to destroy them to open them up and check for disease and infestation. If that were set in the Pugit Sound, the USDA would have their jackbooted agricultural goons puttin' the smack down on some old cultist woman ass quicker than you can say "Charyou Tree".

Bee-cause knowing is half the battle!

Paizo Employee Chief Creative Officer, Publisher

I just saw this movie last month, and it is frigging awesome.

I can't imagine a Hollywood remake, because the things that made it great (nudity, weird music, Britishness, nudity) are so anti-Hollywood it's not even funny.

Good luck, though.

--Erik


I hear that after "The Wicker Man" Nick Cage is going to star in a film version of "The Equalizer"

All hail Edward Woodward!

Dont laugh. It could happen. . .

The Exchange

Erik Mona wrote:

I just saw this movie last month, and it is frigging awesome.

I can't imagine a Hollywood remake, because the things that made it great (nudity, weird music, Britishness, nudity) are so anti-Hollywood it's not even funny.

Good luck, though.

--Erik

Hooray - nude British people! You've got to be tough to be nude in the UK - it ain't warm.

Liberty's Edge

Here's my gripe about The Wicker Man.
Remember the movie Mall Rats? I used to go to the mall they filmed that in every summer when I visited my grandparents in Minnesota. I got Yoda at that mall, and these kids tried to jack me up for him, and IG-88 and Bossk. But I had me a yellow belt in karate, and I'd have been damned if I was gonna let those bastiches take my Yoda.
Well, watching that movie, I was almost certain that was the same mall. But...due to the overall homogenization of our society, I wasn't sure it was the same mall or not because ALL MALLS IN THE U.S.A. LOOK THE SAME.
We have to homogenize the Wicker Man to make sure Americans can interact with the movie. We have to put Tom Cruise in The Last Samurai to make sure Americans can interact with post-Shogunate Japan. We had to give Mel Gibson a voiceover when Mad Max came out because his Australian accent was too weird.
I just feel like it loses something when we as U.S. Americans give everything the cheese whiz treatment.
O.M.G. they all have British accents. That's just too out there.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

The Wicker Man is one of the great British horror movies (and is directly responsible for at least one 3rd Edition D&D monster; check page 188 of the Fiend Folio to see the result of Matt Sernett's viewing of this movie near the end of a 24-hour film festival).

ANYway, since I can count the good remakes of old horror movies on one hand (The Thing, The Blob, The Fly, The Ring... umm... that might be it, actually!), I have faith that the remake of The Wicker Man will be bad. Add in the fact that it's being released in September, one of Hollywood's traditional dumping months for movies they have little faith in, and presto! Recipie for suck!

I'm still gonna go see it, of course.


Heathansson wrote:
But I had me a yellow belt in karate, and I'd have been damned if I was gonna let those bastiches take my Yoda.

Not good at all. At least you pummeled them.

When I saw the preview for this movie I wailed aloud.

By the pricking of my thumb something wicker this way bombs.


James Jacobs wrote:
The Wicker Man is one of the great British horror movies (and is directly responsible for at least one 3rd Edition D&D monster; check page 188 of the Fiend Folio to see the result of Matt Sernett's viewing of this movie near the end of a 24-hour film festival).

You know it's going to be disappointing going in, and just hope its at least going to be its own thing.

When I saw that page in the Fiend Folio I got it immediately. I'm not a huge fan of when the lifts from pop lit or cinema are overly obvious but I can deal. Except back in 2nd edition. Maybe it was the fighter or ranger handbook but it had a class kit called Beastmaster and suggested the entire plot hook of the movie.

Liberty's Edge

Hey! I just got a great idea for this set of barbarian twins for a critical threat!


Heathansson wrote:
Hey! I just got a great idea for this set of barbarian twins for a critical threat!

::grin::

That lioness they painted black for J.J.'s "Dyn-o-mite!" dad (John Amos) in Beastmaster died as a result of the painting. Niiiice.

Liberty's Edge

The Jade wrote:


That lioness they painted black for J.J.'s "Dyn-o-mite!" dad (John Amos) in Beastmaster died as a result of the painting. Niiiice.

That's just messed up.


The Wicker Man is one of my favorite films I hope they do it justice but somehow watching the trailer for the new movie with Nick Cage fills me with dread (the bad kind).

I truly love the original, which you can now buy the 'uncut-extended-DVD-version-with-bells-on' of by the way.

Anyone recall that scene in which the song 'How Do' is played? I have a very excellent ambient/dub version of that beautiful piece by The Sneaker Pimps, check it out if you like that sort of thing, makes for a great elven ballad or siryn song to draw your players into a unholy fey orgy of doom! ;)


What I find truly distressing about the trailer for the new movie is that it looks NOTHING like the original. The only things I saw that it had in common were an island and a burning wicker man.

Whats with the bees? And where is Christopher Lee? And why are there car accidents and ghosts and . . . why didn't they just change the name altogether?

Now granted, sometimes when a movie is completely different it can still be a good movie. John Carpenter's "The Thing" is hardly a remake of the original. They are completely different (but still very entertaining) movies.

oh and also . . .
---SPOILER----

Maybe this detail has also changed in the remake but. . .

----SPOILER----

I just dont buy that Nicholas Cage is a virgin. that dude has seen more tail than a toilet seat

Scarab Sages

You sayin' you don't think the Equalizer broke him off a li'l sumpin' sumpin' with the ladies? Hohoho, I think you would be called out there!

Grand Lodge

As for the homogenization ting, I'm fearing that the new movie will go the way of the US adaption of the Brit sitcom "The Royle Family" a few years ago. The original is basically about a family of mostly fat, opinionated working-class punters sitting in their living room smoking, drinking and watching TV, launching smart-ass commentary in a thick Northern brogue. In short, it was great. Then NBC ( I think) bought the rights, and decided that the cast had to be a fit and great-looking middle-class suburban family. And shouldn't smoke or drink. And definitly not curse or have controversial opinions. And, come to think of it, not watch TV... Remember that show, anyone?

Somehow, I didn't think so... And that seems to me to be where "The Wicker Man" remake is headed, too. I'll still see it, though...

The Exchange

Vattnisse wrote:

As for the homogenization ting, I'm fearing that the new movie will go the way of the US adaption of the Brit sitcom "The Royle Family" a few years ago. The original is basically about a family of mostly fat, opinionated working-class punters sitting in their living room smoking, drinking and watching TV, launching smart-ass commentary in a thick Northern brogue. In short, it was great. Then NBC ( I think) bought the rights, and decided that the cast had to be a fit and great-looking middle-class suburban family. And shouldn't smoke or drink. And definitly not curse or have controversial opinions. And, come to think of it, not watch TV... Remember that show, anyone?

Somehow, I didn't think so... And that seems to me to be where "The Wicker Man" remake is headed, too. I'll still see it, though...

So the hero will have a healthy sex life, the natives will be warm and friendly, and at the end he gets the girl and they have a barbeque on the patio. With veggieburgers.


I like independant movies
I like foreign movies

But I am sick of people who think they are in the know bashing hollywood movies - granted there is a lot of crap - but MOST or the foreign stuff is crap - they occassionally get pearls and then the hip moan "oh why can't hollywood make films like that" what bs.

Star Wars
Matrix
Troy
Gladiator
13th Warrior
Conan
Pirates of the Caribbean
Superman

The science fiction fantasy films are predominantly the stuff of hollywood. Faire that most of the people on this board want more of.

And americans do some decent storytelling films as well - the problem with remakes isn't that they are homogenized for americans its that they are remakes - the story has been told, the only difference is the settings and the technology.

As for telling "fat man" stories about beer swilling couch potatoes, "The Simpsons" is better than just about anything out there - and they have managed to keep that fresh for quite a while now.

I am no expert - but I think bashing hollywood when the are the community that (at least try) to produce the films most of us want to see is stupid - what we should really be asking for is for more movies, yeah there would be more crap but there would be more good stuff too.

I just think its silly to be snobbish about it.

You want better film, better, TV, better game content, better art - right on - step up to the plate and make it. To all of the critics of other people who expose their souls, risk their money, and invest their time and sweat and energy - into producing Hollywood crap. Sack up and do better.

-- Doh - should of put this on the rant thread.

The Exchange

Kyr wrote:

I like independant movies

I like foreign movies

But I am sick of people who think they are in the know bashing hollywood movies - granted there is a lot of crap - but MOST or the foreign stuff is crap - they occassionally get pearls and then the hip moan "oh why can't hollywood make films like that" what bs.

Star Wars
Matrix
Troy
Gladiator
13th Warrior
Conan
Pirates of the Caribbean
Superman

The science fiction fantasy films are predominantly the stuff of hollywood. Faire that most of the people on this board want more of.

And americans do some decent storytelling films as well - the problem with remakes isn't that they are homogenized for americans its that they are remakes - the story has been told, the only difference is the settings and the technology.

As for telling "fat man" stories about beer swilling couch potatoes, "The Simpsons" is better than just about anything out there - and they have managed to keep that fresh for quite a while now.

I am no expert - but I think bashing hollywood when the are the community that (at least try) to produce the films most of us want to see is stupid - what we should really be asking for is for more movies, yeah there would be more crap but there would be more good stuff too.

I just think its silly to be snobbish about it.

You want better film, better, TV, better game content, better art - right on - step up to the plate and make it. To all of the critics of other people who expose their souls, risk their money, and invest their time and sweat and energy - into producing Hollywood crap. Sack up and do better.

-- Doh - should of put this on the rant thread.

WARNING: POSSIBLE SPOILERS

OK, the gauntlet is thrown down....

There is a certain aesthetic which predominates in Hollywood. You are right that Hollywood does great "spectacle" movies. But often when it does a remake, particularly of a non-US movie, they don't get the cultural nuance or just go for a lowest common denominator approach to try and appeal to as many people as possible. Hollywood, in short is about making money.

Now, I am the last person to decry money making, but profitability does not necessary equate with artistic greatness. A really good movie can be very successful, but some stuff is more niche. Because of the lowest common denominator approach, when they approach this territory they often get it wrong.

A good example of this is probably the dichotomy between 2001 and Star Wars. The first is a pure slice of 1960's literay SF committed to screen. It divides people (I think it is fantastic, though flawed in places). Made in the UK with a British SF author writing the storyline and an expatriate US director. Star Wars is pure comic book, Hollywood at its best. No subtlety, just a pure adventure romp (that doesn't need even to have an SF setting to work) with special effects and spectacle. I love both, but they are very different films which speak volumes about the different cultures the films emerge from.

Now, the Wicker Man is a weird, British horror movie. The hero is an uptight, Scottish virgin police officer in his 30's. They sing British folk songs all the way through. The plot is convoluted, and you have to remember what is going on because the twist at the end relies on what has gone before. The heroes dies horribly at the end, burned to death as a sacrifice in the Wicker Man of the title as the locals dance merrily around singing aforementioned folk songs.

Imagine slapping that script down in front of a Hollywood mogul and seeing his reaction. So it will be changed, and possibly use the quirky uniqueness that made the original so much fun and interesting. That is why those of us who treasure the original are a bit leery about the imminent remake.


Okay lets list some remakes that worked out okay:

Scarface with Al Pacino
Invasion of the Body Snatcher with Donald Sutherland
Switching Channels with Christopher Reeve (very non-superman)
The Three Musketeers - I like the one with Keifer, though I wouldn't call it great cinema
Dawn of the Dead
You've Got Mail - say what you want about the product placements, and reverence for James Stewart, You've got mail was timely, fun, and still a great date movie
Meet Joe Black - maybe not classic but good
King Arthur - lots of tellings of that story, and I like them

If you want to talk foreign:

The Magnificent Seven
The Birdcage

Look I am not trying to say that all remakes are high art or even a good idea. What I am saying is that they are not NECESSARILY bad because they come out of Hollywood - if they are bad they are bad BECAUSE they are remakes that they are trying to capture something that was specific to the chemistry of the original film - plus they carry the expections for excellence (or at least expectations that they will be more interesting) than the original - else why bother.

My point was people bashing Hollywood because Hollywood fails to make films as good as those of other countries - which is a joke if box office receipts are any indication. The French actually tax american movie receipts to fund French production because French most films don't even interest the French enough to put them in the black.

Yes - much hollywood fare is formulaic. Horror of Horrors!
So are most films from outside the system - yes those that aren't stand out as something special - but most of those special films are special - as in special olympics - rather than special as in better than the norm.

Here is another revelation - some movies are just that movies intended to entertain for an hour and half and provide thhe excuse to get out of the sun, come in from the cold, hold hands with a date, or hang out with friends - they aren't meant and don't pretend to be "FILM" or the even more pretencious "CINEMA". And to people outside the target group, young girls, new couples, testosterone laden teens, thos mvies suck - Just like nieghborhood chow mein suck when what you want is good french cuisine in a bistro with ambience. Thats not the fault of the chinese restaurant.

What I really get peeved about is people who think they are too good to be entertained by plebian fare - whether it is cinema or food or cars or clothes - that somehow what many enjoy is somehow beneath them - and then bash the creators for creating.

Fine go create make something wonderful.

Hollywood films have there flaws - no argument, once and I while they turn out something exceptional - same with independants - but what you usually get is good "moments" with stuff in between them. In general, I think hollywoods ratio of moment to screen time is pretty good and probably better than the indies or foriegn films on average.

I just hate the I'm too cool for Hollywood thing.

- Damn - Again should of been on the rant thread.

BTW I am just posting this because I wanted to illicit a response and was board while waiting for a report to come through at work.

Watch what you like, live as you please, be excellent to each other.

The Exchange

Kyr wrote:

Okay lets list some remakes that worked out okay:

Scarface with Al Pacino
Invasion of the Body Snatcher with Donald Sutherland
Switching Channels with Christopher Reeve (very non-superman)
The Three Musketeers - I like the one with Keifer, though I wouldn't call it great cinema
Dawn of the Dead
You've Got Mail - say what you want about the product placements, and reverence for James Stewart, You've got mail was timely, fun, and still a great date movie
Meet Joe Black - maybe not classic but good
King Arthur - lots of tellings of that story, and I like them

If you want to talk foreign:

The Magnificent Seven
The Birdcage

Look I am not trying to say that all remakes are high art or even a good idea. What I am saying is that they are not NECESSARILY bad because they come out of Hollywood - if they are bad they are bad BECAUSE they are remakes that they are trying to capture something that was specific to the chemistry of the original film - plus they carry the expections for excellence (or at least expectations that they will be more interesting) than the original - else why bother.

My point was people bashing Hollywood because Hollywood fails to make films as good as those of other countries - which is a joke if box office receipts are any indication. The French actually tax american movie receipts to fund French production because French most films don't even interest the French enough to put them in the black.

Yes - much hollywood fare is formulaic. Horror of Horrors!
So are most films from outside the system - yes those that aren't stand out as something special - but most of those special films are special - as in special olympics - rather than special as in better than the norm.

Here is another revelation - some movies are just that movies intended to entertain for an hour and half and provide thhe excuse to get out of the sun, come in from the cold, hold hands with a date, or hang out with friends - they aren't meant and don't pretend to be "FILM" or the even more pretencious "CINEMA". And to people outside the target group, young girls, new couples, testosterone laden teens, thos mvies suck - Just like nieghborhood chow mein suck when what you want is good french cuisine in a bistro with ambience. Thats not the fault of the chinese restaurant.

What I really get peeved about is people who think they are too good to be entertained by plebian fare - whether it is cinema or food or cars or clothes - that somehow what many enjoy is somehow beneath them - and then bash the creators for creating.

Fine go create make something wonderful.

Hollywood films have there flaws - no argument, once and I while they turn out something exceptional - same with independants - but what you usually get is good "moments" with stuff in between them. In general, I think hollywoods ratio of moment to screen time is pretty good and probably better than the indies or foriegn films on average.

I just hate the I'm too cool for Hollywood thing.

- Damn - Again should of been on the rant thread.

BTW I am just posting this because I wanted to illicit a response and was board while waiting for a report to come through at work.

Watch what you like, live as you please, be excellent to each other.

I'm not decrying Hollywood as such - they make lots of good films. As a regular cinema goer, I see lots and, frankly, most I would never bother to see again. Lots are quite good. A very few are excellent. I like dumb movies as much as the next person, but at least I recognise them for what they are.

In addition, the Wicker Man is a BRITISH film. It isn't set in America, and the cultural resonances are completely different. A lot of the fun (for me) is the fact that there are no American accents (although the villain is a posh Englishman - Christopher Lee) and the eccentricity that makes it so obviously not a product of Hollywood. Because if America's cultural hegemony in terms of entertainment, virtually everything in English-speaking cinema is American. It's not a problem as such, but I think you fail to recognise that, just occasionally, it would be nice to see something other than an American viewpoint and aesthetic.

I am happy to say that plenty of good movies come out of Hollywood - I never said otherwise. There is a tendency to homogenise the content, because (a) it is a commercial imperative and (b) reflects American culture. But lots of interesting films have come from America and Hollywood. But my perspective as a non-American is different, and as such lacks something.

Yes, I like SF and fantasy movies, like virtually everyone on these boards. But it ain't about the special effects entirely. Take The Matrix - complete drivel. The central conceit that humans can be used as human batteries - complete rubbish, as they have to be fed, which requires more energy in the food production than you get in heat from the body. It is supposed to be SCIENCE fiction, man! Yeah, it looked good, but it is definately style over substance. But that got passed because it was assumed the audience was too stupid to notice (and probably many were). And that sort of sums up my problems: the "blockbuster" movie is what you tend to get, which just seems to be an arms race in the special effects. I haven't seen an SF movie with interesting ideas since, I dunno, Donnie Darko (assuming that even was an SF movie). Yes, an American film, but independent I think.

As for "plebian faire" - well, it exists. Independence Day is, frankly, the ultimate in plebian faire. I'm not actually into arthouse cinema, but I do like to have my mind stimulated by a movie as well as my eyes and ears. Most SF movies are conceived as special effects vehicles, which is why I despair slightly of the genre.

I certainly think I'm allowed to be critical if I chose, whether you like it or not. I'm not too cool for Hollywood - jeez, I would never go to the cinema at all if I didn't like Hollywood films since they are inescapable. Probably most other films are formulaic from other countries. The Wicker Man is not one these - though the remake may well be (hence my original concern).

Grand Lodge

What he said...

Ah, British movies... Aubrey, did you like Sexy Beast? While we are on the subject of remakes and all that, what do you think a US remake of that would look like (not that I've heard about plans for any, I hasten to add!)?

The Exchange

Vattnisse wrote:

What he said...

Ah, British movies... Aubrey, did you like Sexy Beast? While we are on the subject of remakes and all that, what do you think a US remake of that would look like (not that I've heard about plans for any, I hasten to add!)?

Haven't seen it - sorry. I'm not a huge fan of gangster movies. But given that it is about British criminals on the Costa - well, Scarface it ain't.


Vattnisse wrote:

What he said...

Ah, British movies... Aubrey, did you like Sexy Beast? While we are on the subject of remakes and all that, what do you think a US remake of that would look like (not that I've heard about plans for any, I hasten to add!)?

Don Logan the man with 150 ranks in intimidate.


Having seen the movie (well the remake. Though I recall having seen the last bit of the original on TV one time which is why I was interested in seeing the film) I guess I can say this much about it. I liked it. It was creepy in a milder more distressing than disturbing or horrifying way than I'm used to. Likewise it's not entirely a film with a "bad guy" or a "monster". There's no Jason or Leatherface or Alien here. It's a society, and that's interesting in the same way movies about WWII are interesting--made more so because the community under scrutiny is a fairly respectful representation of an isolated pagan society. It's less like oooh the scary cultists and more like when a photojournalist gets eaten by cannibal tribesmen. It makes sense in their paradigm so it ends up feeling more like a tragic cultural misunderstanding than an atrocity. I ended up actually kind of admiring the integrity of the culture. Wierd. You don't get that much in horror flicks.

From some of the other posts I can say it's infinitely Americanized, and apparently much more direct in its storytelling than the original must have been.

So on the whole, more unusual and interesting than the typical popcorn horror flick, but probably much more streamlined and less Brittish than the original by a bunch.

Contributor

I saw this movie.

I hated it too much for words.

Neil LaBute hates women. This movie hates us. It is boring, the acting is atrocious, the story makes no sense, and the theme is "woman = bad"

Neil LaBute is a punk. I thought he was just genuinely interested in gender politics after seeing "The Shape of Things" but now I know better.

If you like any women, don't see this movie. If you like Nick Cage, don't see this movie. If you like movies, don't see this movie.

Nuff said.

The Exchange

Nicolas Logue wrote:

I saw this movie.

I hated it too much for words.

Neil LaBute hates women. This movie hates us. It is boring, the acting is atrocious, the story makes no sense, and the theme is "woman = bad"

Neil LaBute is a punk. I thought he was just genuinely interested in gender politics after seeing "The Shape of Things" but now I know better.

If you like any women, don't see this movie. If you like Nick Cage, don't see this movie. If you like movies, don't see this movie.

Nuff said.

So, just to clarify - did you like it or not? :-)

Contributor

Aubrey the Malformed wrote:
Nicolas Logue wrote:

I saw this movie.

I hated it too much for words.

Neil LaBute hates women. This movie hates us. It is boring, the acting is atrocious, the story makes no sense, and the theme is "woman = bad"

Neil LaBute is a punk. I thought he was just genuinely interested in gender politics after seeing "The Shape of Things" but now I know better.

If you like any women, don't see this movie. If you like Nick Cage, don't see this movie. If you like movies, don't see this movie.

Nuff said.

So, just to clarify - did you like it or not? :-)

Best movie evar. ;-)

Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Entertainment / Movies / The Wicker Man All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Movies
Dune - Part 2