Robert N EmersonThe Wicker Man - Comparing 1973 to 2006
September 28th 2008 06:11
Today I found myself in an unusual set of circumstances, being able to watch a cult classic movie and then its modern remark in the same day. Perhaps I did a disservice to one or the other, but I doubt it. Even though much of the dialog was intact, as well as some aspects of the basic plot, the Wicker Man from 1973 is above and beyond the remake from 2006. In fact, so similar is much of the dialog that when a line from the original is used in this remake, I winced in pain, as the previous scene was that much better and the new was that much worse.
It is odd, because when you look at the two films on the surface they should be equals, as they both had solid casts, named stars, and the dialog and content of the film is riviting. A law enforcement officer comes to a remote, isolated island to answer a written summons about a missing girl and upon arriving everyone denies that she even exists. It is a powerful, classic concept that is at the heart of the gaslight plot-type. However, the 2006 version not only fails to deliver, it is bumbling (sorry for the pun) in its attempt.
The Wicker Man, in both renditions, is an occult thriller and horror movie where an outside is exposed to a culture that he does not know, understand, or is even aware existed and its unusual and mysterious pagan views. In the 1973 version it is obvious that we are working with concepts of folk beliefs and druidic concepts common to the time period, while the 2006 film hinted heavily toward the similiar Wiccan faith, including a mention of Salem, Mass.. Where the 1973 film did an amazing job with dialog, acting, music, research, and setting, the 2006 film seemed to just give a passing attempt at a movie that was ill fitting for Nicholas Cage.
In fact, I would almost say that the 2006 version was handled by a mysoginist who had an issue with what they saw as a feminine religion, Wicca. Even though you had normally strong female actors, their characters were poorly written and executed, which is sad given their talent and the source material. Even with the potential of Nicholas Cage, whom we have seen play serious rolls, the movie fell flat with a quirky, out of touch hero. At times when he should have appeared strong, he came across as weak, when he should have been funny or witty he was out of place and cruel.
Then you have the female antagonists, all of whom were paper thin man-hating shrews, borderline lesbian stereotypes, that seemed only capable of judgmental snark that was almost disrespectful of the 1973 movie's wit. Scene for scene, line for line, and plot for plot the movie was close, but not the same, as the original picture and while that is to be expected of a remake, or reimaging, it utterly failed each and everytime.
Where the 1973 film had it on for occult research, well executed wit, suspense, thrills, and even horror, the 2006 version was lopsided and with bad timing. Even Nicholas Cage's sock to the jaw of the gruff, female inn keeper seemed out of place and unneeded. The subplot of the males of the island being simpilton drones from a bee hive was also lost, what little development scenes that were had seemed to be tossed in, in case the viewer was not smart enough to get it.
All in all, the 1973 version of the Wicker Man is something that any fan of occult horror and thriller movies should see, it is, as some call it, the Citizen Kane of the genre. It is an excellent acted picture, at all levels, and if all you knee about it was that Christopher Lee and Britt Erkland were in it, that would be enough. But, the 2006 remake is poorly executed, with hollow acting, falling flat in the suspense and, even though I saw it for free, I want my money back.
It is odd, because when you look at the two films on the surface they should be equals, as they both had solid casts, named stars, and the dialog and content of the film is riviting. A law enforcement officer comes to a remote, isolated island to answer a written summons about a missing girl and upon arriving everyone denies that she even exists. It is a powerful, classic concept that is at the heart of the gaslight plot-type. However, the 2006 version not only fails to deliver, it is bumbling (sorry for the pun) in its attempt.
The Wicker Man, in both renditions, is an occult thriller and horror movie where an outside is exposed to a culture that he does not know, understand, or is even aware existed and its unusual and mysterious pagan views. In the 1973 version it is obvious that we are working with concepts of folk beliefs and druidic concepts common to the time period, while the 2006 film hinted heavily toward the similiar Wiccan faith, including a mention of Salem, Mass.. Where the 1973 film did an amazing job with dialog, acting, music, research, and setting, the 2006 film seemed to just give a passing attempt at a movie that was ill fitting for Nicholas Cage.
In fact, I would almost say that the 2006 version was handled by a mysoginist who had an issue with what they saw as a feminine religion, Wicca. Even though you had normally strong female actors, their characters were poorly written and executed, which is sad given their talent and the source material. Even with the potential of Nicholas Cage, whom we have seen play serious rolls, the movie fell flat with a quirky, out of touch hero. At times when he should have appeared strong, he came across as weak, when he should have been funny or witty he was out of place and cruel.
Then you have the female antagonists, all of whom were paper thin man-hating shrews, borderline lesbian stereotypes, that seemed only capable of judgmental snark that was almost disrespectful of the 1973 movie's wit. Scene for scene, line for line, and plot for plot the movie was close, but not the same, as the original picture and while that is to be expected of a remake, or reimaging, it utterly failed each and everytime.
Where the 1973 film had it on for occult research, well executed wit, suspense, thrills, and even horror, the 2006 version was lopsided and with bad timing. Even Nicholas Cage's sock to the jaw of the gruff, female inn keeper seemed out of place and unneeded. The subplot of the males of the island being simpilton drones from a bee hive was also lost, what little development scenes that were had seemed to be tossed in, in case the viewer was not smart enough to get it.
All in all, the 1973 version of the Wicker Man is something that any fan of occult horror and thriller movies should see, it is, as some call it, the Citizen Kane of the genre. It is an excellent acted picture, at all levels, and if all you knee about it was that Christopher Lee and Britt Erkland were in it, that would be enough. But, the 2006 remake is poorly executed, with hollow acting, falling flat in the suspense and, even though I saw it for free, I want my money back.
| 29 |
| Vote |
Shared on
Add Comments
Read More
Comments (1)
