10 Spectacularly Wrong Movie Reviews

8. And The Wicker Man, Too

Remakes, on the whole, tend to be a heck of a lot worse than the original. Psycho's actually an exception, since it's more just stunningly unimaginative and unnecessary; most modern redos of old films are simply naff, pale imitations of their source material that nobody should bother watching. That is 100% the case with noted playwright Neil LaBute's take on The Wicker Man, the cult classic British horror film from the seventies which traded more in a subtle, creeping sense of dread - along with a twist ending that everybody saw coming because of the poster - than on gore or shock value. Edward Woodward's repressed, virginial Catholic police man visiting a small Scottish island where a little girl had disappeared was swapped out for Nicolas Cage and bees. No, not the bees! They're in our eyes, and so on and so forth.

It made for a pretty good YouTube video, but not a good movie. Especially in comparison to he original, which was so restrained and disturbing, in favour of Nicolas Cage shouting a lot and some ham-handed political commentary on contemporary gender roles. Most reviewers agreed, making the new Wicker Man a pretty decisive critical failure - except in the eyes of Kyle Smith of the New York Post, who poo-pooed any controversy and labelled it a "profoundly disturbing, blood-chilling suspenser", thought that the feminist critique was pointed and smart (it's not), and claimed that LaBute had "matched" the original. It did not. It's is a load of rubbish.

Contributor
Contributor

Tom Baker is the Comics Editor at WhatCulture! He's heard all the Doctor Who jokes, but not many about Randall and Hopkirk. He also blogs at http://communibearsilostate.wordpress.com/