2 recensioni
The Wicker Man is one of the greatest and most original films you will ever see. For years I have anticipated this spiritual sequel, and so it's no surprise that I was very disappointed. It seems as though, despite years of rumours and hard work, once Hardy got around to making it, all the life had been sucked from him and the film. The Wicker Tree sees two born again Christians travel from America to Scotland to preach the word of Jesus. Unbeknownst to them, this is a place of pagan rituals and sacrifice. This film was certainly trying to parody moments from its predecessor at times. With some heavy handed moments of comedy. Unfortunately, The Wicker Man is one of those films where you laugh nervously at it. It may be easy to lampoon, but it also has fear interlaced with the weird. Here, everything seems slightly amateur and repetitive. The score has nothing on the original, and the songs are barely memorable. We are also given two protagonists that we don't care about. They are comedic clichés of how super American Christians are. All they want to do is spread the word of Jesus in a cheesy cornball manor. Unlike Howie, who was a devote Christian fighting to find a missing girl. The Wicker Man seemed to triumph despite its flaws. Those are what added to the memorable quirks which happened organically. Here they are forced into the film, which means that some actors seem unsure as to whether this is a comedy, horror, satire, or thriller. It's none of these. I may revisit it one day without the expectations, but it makes me want to watch The Wicker Man again.
- SnakesOnAnAfricanPlain
- 3 feb 2012
- Permalink
In short: why bother? Yes, the original Wicker Man was a classic. Yes, the remake was completely pointless (and that's being kind). So... here we have a (semi) sequel to the original Wicker Man. And, if you look closely at the promotional material, you'll notice that it even has good ol' Christopher Lee in it. So, it must be good... right? Wrong.
The first thing you should know is that Christopher Lee's 'input' is literally less than a minute long. The film is almost a remake (in as much as there's nothing new in the story, so it's basically a retread of the old version). Two American Christians come to a small village on the Scotland/England border to help spread the word of God.
If you've seen either of the Wicker Man films you'll know what happens. If you haven't, you'll probably guess.
The acting is poor all round, some of it bordering on comedy. The 'horror' is lacking. No gore here and the 'traumatic' scenes from the original are not even nearly repeated here.
Simply don't bother with this. It adds nothing to the original except to cash in on its reputation. Even if you haven't seen the original, don't expect an interesting horror film here. Just don't bother. Did I mention it's not that good?
The first thing you should know is that Christopher Lee's 'input' is literally less than a minute long. The film is almost a remake (in as much as there's nothing new in the story, so it's basically a retread of the old version). Two American Christians come to a small village on the Scotland/England border to help spread the word of God.
If you've seen either of the Wicker Man films you'll know what happens. If you haven't, you'll probably guess.
The acting is poor all round, some of it bordering on comedy. The 'horror' is lacking. No gore here and the 'traumatic' scenes from the original are not even nearly repeated here.
Simply don't bother with this. It adds nothing to the original except to cash in on its reputation. Even if you haven't seen the original, don't expect an interesting horror film here. Just don't bother. Did I mention it's not that good?
- bowmanblue
- 30 nov 2014
- Permalink