Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: The Wicker Man

  		Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: The Wicker Man Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The Wicker Man - 7/9/2006 12:21:50 PM   
Ali Baba

 

Posts: 37
Joined: 27/3/2006
Remakes are such a common occurrence these days that it’s almost futile debating their existence; perhaps the wisest thing would be to accept that they’re always going to be around, and figure out exactly what it is that makes a good one. Now, I’ve not seen the original Wicker Man but understand that it’s held in the highest regard by those who have – it’s forever being called the best cult film of all time. However, it’s obvious that it’s also dated badly and is not to everyone’s tastes, so it’s at least understandable that a remake sounded like a good idea on paper (particularly with new horror concepts in such short supply of late). What is certain is that they hired the wrong man for the job; with director Neil LaBute at the helm, we’re left with a misogynistic thriller bereft of thrills, but with more unintentional laughs than any other movie you’ll go see this year.

The movie starts with an introduction to Edward Malus (Cage), an unassuming policeman who receives a letter from ex-girlfriend Willow (Beahan), claiming that her daughter Rowan has been abducted and is being kept against her will on the remote island they both live on. Upon arrival, Edward realises he’s literally the top knob on the island: Summersisle is completely populated by pagan women and they don’t take kindly to his presence. The female inhabitants, led by the mysterious Sister Summersisle (Burstyn), insist they have not seen young Rowan, but the deeper Malus gets, the more he’s convinced foul play is afoot. Well duh. Any island full of women who list bee-keeping and laughing at strangers as hobbies are bound to be hiding a few skeletons.

Watching Edward find clues around the island is like watching someone tackling My First Mystery – clues to Rowan’s whereabouts are so obvious they might as well come with a huge blinking arrow pointing at them. Examples? Amongst a collection of all of the island’s children, one picture frame is broken with the photograph missing… could this be a clue? Upon investigating the local schoolhouse, Malus finds Rowan’s name crossed out on the class register – but what could it mean? When checking out the local crypt (always a good place to search for missing people), our poor hero finds a red cardigan with the young girl’s initials stitched into the label. Columbo wouldn’t break a sweat solving this mystery; Jonathan Creek could probably crack this one in a few hours and be home in time for Neighbours. You’ll sit there thinking ‘It can’t be this dumb, it just can’t be,’ but it never gets any more exciting than watching an episode of the Press Gang. Questioning the island’s teacher, Malus asks of the girl’s fate. “She’ll burn to death,” comes the response. Come again? “She burned to death,” is the revised reply. You half expect Crockett and Tubbs to burst out of the bushes and start performing a naked pagan ritual.

Whoever hired LaBute obviously does not know the man’s work. Your Friends & Neighbours, In The Company Of Men and The Shape of Things… all LaBute films and all feature women either portrayed as cold, glacial ice-bitches or getting ripped to shreds by men, so when Neil piped up in the board meeting and suggested that he changes the inhabitants of Summersisle to women, alarm bells should have started ringing. Now we have Nicolas Cage completely at the mercy of an island of she-devils, a hero who takes great pleasure in slugging chicks in the face (it happens more than once) and quite willing to kick young girls in the chest. When the famous ending reveals itself, with Cage being led away screaming ‘You bitches! You bitches!’ you simply will not believe what you’re seeing. Everyone, and I do mean everyone in possession of a vagina in this movie is demonised. If you don’t feel at least a little bit ashamed to have an abundance of Y-chromosomes after this, then you’re probably called Neil LaBute. Hey Neil. How’s the wife?

The ending, then. Although it was inevitable that it wasn’t changed too much (LaBute would have probably been burned alive himself had he tinkered with it), what should be a horrific finale is rendered ridiculous thanks to a dreadful voiceover (during which Edward's legs are comically broken) and some scenes which were aiming for surrealism but come out more like the League of Gentlemen – cue Cage getting chased by CGI bees, running around in a bear costume, punching women in the face and screaming “Killing me isn’t going to bring your goddamned honey back!” Besides, today’s audience are accustomed to seeing women having their faces blowtorched off (now that’s misogyny), so having a gigantic wicker dude as your big reveal isn’t quite the shock it once was – it’s more a WTF LOL thing than a “Oh God! Oh Jesus Christ!” moment.

Perhaps more fitting would be to have Cage sacrificed in a huge wicker cock, which the bitches of Summersisle burn down and then start pissing on the ashes. It would be no different to what LaBute has done to the essence of the original.

_____________________________

Movie reviews and features at www.theshiznit.co.uk - updated every week - it's not for losers.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 61
RE: The Wicker Man - 7/9/2006 6:18:48 PM   
superfurry


Posts: 37
Joined: 30/9/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Wilbert

The Wicker Man is just too English a story to move to an island off the West coast of America.



You are aware that The Wicker Man was filmed and set entirely in Scotland?

_____________________________

What can I say? I'm a bad heart motherfucker.

(in reply to Wilbert)
Post #: 62
Sigh - 7/9/2006 11:16:02 PM   
Davechoc

 

Posts: 75
Joined: 18/4/2006
I'd been meaning to see the original Wicker Man for some time, so a friend and myself watched it on dvd and then went off to the cinema for this remake.

What made the original so effective a chiller was the plausibility of the scenario. The islanders and their town were as I'd imagine they would be on a remote Scottish island in the 1970s; seemingly a little quaint and insular, with 'local ways' but otherwise ordinary. Edward Woodward's policeman is a hard, devout Christian who tries to tolerate the islanders' ways but is slowly driven to anger by what he sees as their heathenism and their seeming reluctance to help his investigation. In this awful remake the inhabitants seem to have watched The Village one too many times - they walk round in olde worlde clothes and talk in an odd arcane way, despite being not too far from 21st-century America. Similarly the original's island had a harsh, rugged beauty; it was remote and stark and other-wordly. People have commented that the one good thing in this remake is the cinematography, but that isn't even true: it looks either mediocre or soft-focus - this island is too sunny and pleasant-looking a place for such sinister goings-on.

The whole plot was a Disneyfied version of the classic original. The raw sexuality which so shocks Edward Woodward's Christian policeman is entirely absent here and the violence in the film is either typically-cartoonish American-movie violence or, if it is genuinely shocking, off-screen (Cage's line 'My legs! My legs!' reminded me of Luke Perry in the Simpsons: 'My face! My beautiful face!'). The film was a neutered chiller for a 12A market. I imagine a remake with the nudity of the original and the confrontationalism of the two religious beliefs would be far too shocking for a country as conservative as America. The original, while effectively tense, also made for a biting critique of mass religious belief. On the island children could be used to lie to strangers, to ensnare them, and even to light the bonfire that would kill them (as in this version), if they were indoctrinated in primitive beliefs in a closed community: Edward Woodward's character, himself so convinced of the rightness of his own beliefs, shouts quotes from the Bible from inside the Wicker Man at the end of the film, but his words seem as empty, primitive and pompous as the ritualistic dancing of the islanders watching him burn.

Without this major conflict, Cage's character has been given 'trauma issues' and a pill problem to cope with the anxiety. Similarly, since the reason for Edward Woodward's policeman being lured to the island doesn't apply here, the film-makers were forced to engineer an awful love plot, which plays like a bad daytime soap, and around which the use of men in the matriarchal society revolves: it is also the key to a terrible coda tacked onto the end, which, God forbid, could set up for Wicker Man 2. This return to the modern world would ruin the claustrophobia and tension of the island-set scenes, except that there wasn't any in the first place...

Many things have changed in the remake without any real need. The islanders' crop is now honey, for no other reason, it seems, than having Cage's character have a bee allergy (which he doesn't help by running straight into a field of hives rather than, duh, running out), though even then there appears to be no dramatic plot device that necessitates this allergy. The women are in control in this community, which doesn't add any drama and just makes for lots of floating around, a condescending attitude towards men, and referring to everyone as 'Sister', a tired plot device apparently thought to be shorthand for 'dangerous cult'.  This is just one example of many horror cliches employed which are tiresome and do not add any sense of dread, which include:

- A pair of blind elderly twins who speak in unison and say 'terrifying' things like 'It is he'. After all blind elderly twins who speak in unison always add spookiness to a film.
- a by-the-numbers soundtrack which signposts the 'shocks' as they arrive, and 'scary' whispering sounds in the woods - compare this to the original's clever and unnerving use of folk music
- a dank, dark crypt slotted daftly in the script
- the 'waking up within a dream' device
- the bird flying out from the desk (no beetle tied to a maypole imagery in this version)

Plus the costumes at the end were too bloody good! In the original the costumes were a mix of good and crap, just like you'd expect villagers to make, not ones that looked like they'd be borrowed from a Hollywood film. Oh wait...

What a waste of time and money. I didn't think I'd see a film as bad as Lady In the Water so soon, but I was proved wrong (No stars).

(in reply to Godzilla)
Post #: 63
Hollywood is burning.... - 8/9/2006 10:22:42 AM   
evilpickle4

 

Posts: 39
Joined: 8/9/2006
From: Bristol, UK.
 Why bother remaking one of the most iconic films of all time if you’re going to remove the most compelling element?

In the 1973 version Howie (Woodward) spends most of the movie fighting the temptations thrown at him and thus questioning his own belief system. The ending of this version is ironically uplifting as he succeeds in staying true. The irony being that any other result would most likely have saved him from his fiery death.

The 2006 version has none of this. There is no conflict in Malus (Cage). There is very little conflict between Malus’ views and the views of the islanders. The pace of the script is sporadic and so poorly written that we are not even asked to care about the outcome of Malus or his quest.

I am of a view that if a film is neither entertaining and/or ground-breaking then don’t bother making it. I wish Hollywood had the same view. And that, IMHO, will be it’s downfall.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 64
Hollywood is burning.... - 8/9/2006 10:22:56 AM   
evilpickle4

 

Posts: 39
Joined: 8/9/2006
From: Bristol, UK.
 Why bother remaking one of the most iconic films of all time if you’re going to remove the most compelling element?

In the 1973 version Howie (Woodward) spends most of the movie fighting the temptations thrown at him and thus questioning his own belief system. The ending of this version is ironically uplifting as he succeeds in staying true. The irony being that any other result would most likely have saved him from his fiery death.

The 2006 version has none of this. There is no conflict in Malus (Cage). There is very little conflict between Malus’ views and the views of the islanders. The pace of the script is sporadic and so poorly written that we are not even asked to care about the outcome of Malus or his quest.

I am of a view that if a film is neither entertaining and/or ground-breaking then don’t bother making it. I wish Hollywood had the same view. And that, IMHO, will be it’s downfall.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 65
- 8/9/2006 11:10:21 AM   
Dr Lenera

 

Posts: 3450
Joined: 19/10/2005
Some films out of the recent glut of horror remakes have been good,I still claim that the new Hills Have Eyes is a significant improvement on the original. However,The Omen remake was weak,coming across as a poor cover version of the original. The new Wicker Man is,quite simply,awful.

One can see what they were trying to do. Turn the original,which is afer all a very strange and uncommercial film,into a conventional thriller. However,it just doesn't work. Little happens in the first two thirds of the original,but the wierd atmosphere and fascinating elements of eroticism,the conflict of religions,man's relationship to nature,etc. still make it fascinating and keep one glued. By contrast,this remake removes most of the interesting elements and replaces it with hardly anything. It turns the story into a dull detective tale. Attempts to put in brief moments of excitement are just out of place and sometimes laughable,such as when Cage
{who is quite simply terrible here} is being chased by bees and keeps falling over gravestones.

The original was detailed and believable in it's protrayal of a pagan religion, Here we just have a sketchely developed feminist cult who kill men,and so many things,such as the cult's relationship to bees,are confused. The film looks like it was heavily cut by the studio who may have attempted to turn it into a conventional thriller. However,by all accounts Neil Labute,who wrote the thing {maybe when he was three,as the screenplay is about that level} as well as directed it,had final cut.

The last 20 mins manages a bit of tension,and the wicker man climax isn't badly done,but then we have a pointless coda. Overall,this is a shoddy,boring,pointless mess of a fil that has little reason to exist.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 66
RE: The Wicker Man - 8/9/2006 9:37:01 PM   
Anne Hedley


Posts: 597
Joined: 31/1/2006
From: BEDFORDSHIRE
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jasper

Saw this one today and o my.

Definitely one of the bad Nic Cage films which he just does once in a while. There's simply not a single aspect to his character he manages to make believable. He simply shouts when a scene is supposed to get emotional. Over and over again. Very annoying.  

For someone not familiar with the original I found the storyline a 100% predictable. 

Damn, time's run out.

2 out of 5. Watch only on DVD if bored. Bye.  




I do like Nicholas Cage in films he can be very good he has the right edge for OTT.   But the Wicker Man  - oh this is a classic and you have to be coached and lead down the path he takes not suspecting a thing  - and right at the very end what a shock to my system I could not believe it.    This closing part of the film in glorious technicolour against the stark blackand white - and shadows was a stroke of genius.     Edward Woodward was splendid in this film and his change of character from the beginning to the man at the end was excellant.   Yet another remake that should not have been considered at any cost.   I will watch it on DVD at some point but I will rent it and will not add it to my collection unless I get the biggest surprise in my life of movies.

(in reply to Jasper)
Post #: 67
OH. MY. GOD - 13/9/2006 7:38:58 PM   
Barcck

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 13/9/2006
What the hell were they thinking! This is hilarious! So many classic lines, "How'd it get burned, how'd it get burned, how'd it get burned?!" (last one in high-pitched tone) Somebody push Nicolas Cage of a cliff....please?

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 68
- 14/9/2006 4:53:43 PM   
netapp14

 

Posts: 12
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: salford

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 69
Crap, crap, utter crap! - 15/9/2006 10:20:51 AM   
Empo


Posts: 139
Joined: 24/4/2006
From: The middle of the earth!
 This film! Oh my god! It was terrible! One of the top five that I have seen this year! What were they thinking? What was NIC CAGE thinking?! Me and my friend only found enjoyment out of this film by taking the piss out of it all the way through! For anyone wanting to see this film, just pretent Nic Cage has Flachulance and make farting noises and it will get you through!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 70
RE: Crap, crap, utter crap! - 18/9/2006 3:35:11 PM   
simonmckergan1


Posts: 1263
Joined: 8/11/2005
From: Belfast
 The movie starts with a car crash which aptly what I thought of it!  Worst film of the year for me, and that includes the Da Vinci Code.  All wick and no er.

_____________________________

As you can see, my young apprentice, your friends have failed. Now witness the firepower of this fully ARMED and OPERATIONAL battle station!

(in reply to Empo)
Post #: 71
RE: Crap, crap, utter crap! - 18/9/2006 3:42:16 PM   
Lazy wolf eyes


Posts: 4086
Joined: 9/9/2006
From: Royston Vasey
 I refuse to see it but two of my friends went (they haven't seen the original) said it was crap, and now have no interest in seeing the original. That really pisses me off... That a remake can stop people from wanting to see the incredible original. Damn you Hollywood!

_____________________________

If God had wanted us to walk everywhere he wouldn't have given us Little Chefs.

(in reply to simonmckergan1)
Post #: 72
Just how bad.... - 20/9/2006 12:53:42 PM   
skeletonjack


Posts: 1297
Joined: 30/9/2005
I still haven't seen this but am very curious to know if it can really be as bad as people are saying. I love the original and still might see this, but to try and gauge how bad it is, how does it compare to say the remake of The Fog which was also universally hated?

(in reply to Lazy wolf eyes)
Post #: 73
RE: Just how bad.... - 20/9/2006 9:58:11 PM   
boot

 

Posts: 431
Joined: 24/2/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: skeletonjack

I still haven't seen this but am very curious to know if it can really be as bad as people are saying. I love the original and still might see this, but to try and gauge how bad it is, how does it compare to say the remake of The Fog which was also universally hated?


i thought it was rubbish, but i rarely watch remakes - for this very reason. is it as bad as The Fog remake? i dunno, but its bad, not ok in anyway, and not worth going to see. id check out something that looks good, not something that will be bad...but not as bad...as something else if ya know what i mean.

(in reply to skeletonjack)
Post #: 74
- 29/9/2006 8:17:41 PM   
Naweed_1


Posts: 1433
Joined: 7/1/2006
From: Birmingham
 Good production design and cinematography let down by an awful script.
Stick to the original

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 75
i totally agree - 11/12/2006 1:13:41 PM   
devenden


Posts: 12
Joined: 28/9/2006
From: i dont know
 this film was absolute balls it doenst even deserve 1 star !!!
doenst even touch the original!!!!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 76
i totally agree - 11/12/2006 1:13:56 PM   
devenden


Posts: 12
Joined: 28/9/2006
From: i dont know
 this film was absolute balls it doenst even deserve 1 star !!!
doenst even touch the original!!!!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 77
This film is shite!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!... - 11/12/2006 1:18:11 PM   
km2k6

 

Posts: 22
Joined: 6/12/2006
This film as really rubbish the only good bit was when nicholas cage was beating up the manlike women it was fukin hialrious (hahahahahahahaha) this film was a real letdown and totally rubbish.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 78
Genius - 9/1/2007 11:55:19 PM   
Caster


Posts: 5608
Joined: 30/9/2005
Come on, the original was just as laughable. Classic my arse. This is unintentionally funny and thus entertaining for all the wrong reasons. Hilarious.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 79
cut sum out (spoilers) - 13/1/2007 1:47:57 PM   
manny88

 

Posts: 9
Joined: 25/9/2006
i realised that if u watch up until cage gets first stung by the bees, and then cut out until the bit where he is captured for the burning, then its not as terrible as it may be in its entirety. granted i didnt bother watchn that inbetween bit so maybe if i had then i wudnt have the same view, lol. so 3 stars for the first half and the end, but no stars for the middle.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 80
Wicker Crap - 15/1/2007 1:34:32 PM   
premierbaron

 

Posts: 114
Joined: 11/2/2006
From: Boston
 Out of all the films this year, this was near the top of my must-see list. When I went to see it, boy was I disappointed. Not only is it the worse film of the year, (Yes, worse than ultraviolet) but tops the list of the worse film I have ever seen. The acting isn't that bad, the script is dire, and it feels like a 3 hour movie. And they can't even make Cage being burnt alive enjoyable, or laughable.The beginnings not bad though. They just missed a great oppurtunity.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 81
- 22/1/2007 7:16:00 PM   
dj vivace


Posts: 5991
Joined: 28/7/2006
From: plymouth
 This was a terrible terrible film and doesn't even deserve being reviewed. It lacks any substance, any tension, the acting is awful, Nicholas Cage is really REALLY annoying, it's been americanised, it got boring after about 2 minutes. There is nothing good to say about this film, oh, and it wouldn't scare a 3 year old!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 82
Not as bad as people say - 6/2/2007 6:14:58 PM   
02PARSIM

 

Posts: 73
Joined: 6/9/2006
From: Ipswich
 I have never seen the original Wicker Man, a fact I'm not proud to admit as I am aware that it is supposedly an all time classic and containing a great performance from Christopher Lee. A shame that I never manage to catch it on TV as its a movie I desperately want to see. So when I got the opportunity to see the remake I just couldn't resist, I was aware it was hardly going to live up to the original movie, but I just wanted to see the plot and see whether the remake was actually any good at all. Remakes are funny things, for every decent one you get (Ocean's Eleven) you then go and get two along the lines of Planet of the Apes and The Grudge. So as I watched The Wicker Man I wondered what category of remake it would fall into. At first it started off quite well, in fact I was surprised as I was really getting into the movie during the first half an hour. Alas the movie then literally falls flat on its face until the last ten minutes. The dialogue while passable at first descended into horrific territory. The acting was pretty lame, Nicholas Cage practically sleepwalking throughout the movie, in fact only one person showed any sign of an effort and she was rushed off in a couple of scenes (Ellen Burstyn!). Matters aren't helped as we see some of the most ludicrous scenes I have seen in cinema history. Nicholas Cage running through a forest in a bear costume! Oh and did I mention the lamest dialogue in ages from Cage, "I think something terrible is about to happen!". While it might not sound bad written when you hear it you just want to die laughing it is executed so badly. Thankfully the ending redeems the movie quite a bit as the surprise twist and shock finale remain intact from the original (One of the few things I knew about.

Okay then the plot of The Wicker Man follows Edward Malus, a police officer who receives a message from his ex-fiancé. She lives on an old fashioned island called Summers Isle. Her daughter has gone missing and she wants

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 83
RE: Not as bad as people say - 24/4/2007 8:23:39 PM   
Newander


Posts: 2172
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Spain
 Saw this yesterday and what a shoddy remake it was. Admitedly i havn't seen the original for years, but i can just remember it being a lot more dark and brooding than this one. This however was laugh out loud bad. The acting was bad and the script and dialogue terrible, it all looked like a well financed panto.

It could have been so much better.
For me it gets about 3/10

_____________________________

To indeed be a god!

(in reply to 02PARSIM)
Post #: 84
- 1/8/2007 3:54:23 PM   
tallaght24

 

Posts: 734
Joined: 20/2/2007
I watched this having already seeing the original. Obviously not a patch on the 70's version, but good in it's own right.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 85
RE: - 8/7/2008 1:47:01 PM   
skeletonjack


Posts: 1297
Joined: 30/9/2005
Well I finally got round to watching this on TV last night and yeah it's pretty awful. However, it is unintentionally hilarious with many scenes cracking me up, mainly Nic Cage punching out old women and ranting hysterically.  Rubbish, but moderately entertaining in places if you look on it as a comedy.
1 star.

(in reply to tallaght24)
Post #: 86
RE: RE: - 9/7/2008 8:21:34 PM   
jonny unitus

 

Posts: 142
Joined: 23/12/2005
From: staffordshire
 I agree with Skeletonjack,seeing Nick Cage punch that woman added a 1 star to a 0 star film for me. Oh and seeing him Kung Fu kick Lele Sobeskie(sp) into a wall was another high point,who said Labute had a mysoginistic streak

_____________________________

www.stubgun.com

(in reply to skeletonjack)
Post #: 87
RE: The Wicker Man - 9/7/2008 10:36:46 PM   
Wilbert


Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: Dublin: Ireland
quote:

ORIGINAL: superfurry

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wilbert

The Wicker Man is just too English a story to move to an island off the West coast of America.



You are aware that The Wicker Man was filmed and set entirely in Scotland?


Apologies, most people here in Ireland use English as a euphemism for British.




_____________________________

You're killing Independent George!!!!

(in reply to superfurry)
Post #: 88
RE: The Wicker Man - 11/7/2008 10:17:24 AM   
Kazuya


Posts: 7953
Joined: 23/8/2006
From: The Eighth Dimension c/o Buckaroo Banzai
 Astonishingly, outrageously bad film. The film is so inept, so cringeworthy and so stupidly executed that it almost becomes so bad it's good. In the end it's just shit. What in the fuck was LaBute thinking? To take one of the finest thrillers ever made and turn it into a tasteless, abysmal, unintentionally funny freakshow ? The fucker should be forced to watch the bullshit film over and over again, Clockwork Orange style. 1 star for Cage's hilarious overacting.

"Oh no! Not the bees! Not the bees! Aaaaaahh! They're in my eyes! My eyes! Aaaahhh!!"

_____________________________

"Bleed, bastard."

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 89
RE: The Wicker Man - 11/7/2008 10:44:07 AM   
zcarstheme


Posts: 703
Joined: 4/1/2006
Absolutely hilarious.

I've been meaning to watch it again for months.

Personal favourite was Cage's reaction to the ridiculous double-fake dream. He sees the rotting child floating in the water, jumps in, sees her face and wakes up. Then looks down, sees the rotting child in his arms and wakes up again.

His reaction?

A pissed-off and self-loathing 'Goddamnit'; in a kind of 'can't believe I fell for the old rotting-child-under-the-pier-then-you-wake-up-twice gambit again' way.

Gold, absolute gold.

That, and the bit with the bike


_____________________________

http://www.jinx.co.uk - Fiercely independent horror filmmaking

(in reply to Kazuya)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: The Wicker Man Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.125