5 of 9

Write now Article Tools

Reviewing any film objectively is a hard enough task as it is, but when that film is a remake of not only a revered and classic movie, but one of your favourites also, that makes such objectivism almost impossible.

So, I'll start out by pretending that Robin Hardy's 1973 classic has never been made while I give an objective review of the remake.

The Wicker Man (2006) is a well written, well directed and original curious thriller that keeps the audience guessing all the way till the

No, this just isn't going to work.

It's impossible to ignore the fact that the original version of The Wicker Man is not only a brilliant example of British cinema but also a cinematic classic in its own right. It isn't outdated, it isn't in another language, it isn't let down by dated special effects, in short it didn't need remaking.

Don't get me wrong Neil LaBute's updating of the original script is professional enough, as is his directing but its unnecessary. Nicholas Cage is excellent in the role of Edward Malus (the updated version of Edward Woodward's Sergeant Howie) and fortunately does not try to emulate the original character in any way. The photography is beautiful, Ellen Burstyn is excellent and the Angelo Badalamenti score is as rich, subtle and yet powerful as you'd expect. However, it's all so unnecessary.

As I said, I'd like to review the film objectively but it's just impossible.

No matter how good Nicholas Cage's performance was, Edward Woodward's was better. No matter how good Ellen Burstyn was as Sister Summersilse, Christopher Lee was infinitely better as Lord Summerilse. No matter how good a job Neil LaBute did at writing the screenplay and directing the movie, the result is not a patch on the work done by Anthony Shaffer and Robin Hardy.

However all this criticism is at the concept of remaking The Wicker Man and not the film itself. So aside from it being well directed, acted and scored what can I say about the film?

Well, I still have a few criticisms.

Ever since the original movie, the word "The Wicker Man" are pretty infamous, most everybody who watch a film such as this already knows what a Wicker Man is and so there are no surprised during the last few minutes of the film (even for those who haven't seen the original). Also, whereas the original film had an air of unease and awkward foreboding about it, the remake suggests outright danger, robbing what little suspense or intrigue may possibly be left.

As with Gus Van Sant's appaling remake of Hitchcock's classic Psycho, the only potential good to come of the film is that somebody who would have otherwise never seen the original might see the remake and on recognising how bad it is, go check out the original just to see what they've been missing.

Learn more about this author, Richie Caldicott.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Movie remakes: Comparing the original The Wicker Man with the 2006 remake?
We want to hear your view. Write now!