|
|
Post by Craig Herbertson on Oct 15, 2012 7:45:39 GMT
Wicker Man is one of my brother's favourite films and we've managed to talk for quite a time about the substitution of Britt's ass for that of an extra. I've reached an age where I can safely say its irrelevant to me now - it's a great scene and a great ass.
One of the greatness of the film is the score. the use of the traditional folk song was amazingly effective - although from memory it was an English version.
|
|
|
|
Post by andydecker on Oct 15, 2012 8:11:24 GMT
Wicker Man is a great movie. It was a good take on the madness of religion without being preachy. Normally I´d say a shame that they hadn´t more money, but in this case I don´t know. A lot of its impact comes through the unglamourous sets.
Compared to its brothers and sisters of the time it is a strange one. It was an odd time for a horror movie, on the one hand you had the old-fashioned like And now the screaming starts or Satanic rites of Dracula on the other you had the game-changing Excorcist or stuff like Flesh for Frankenstein. It must have been hard to determine which was the future.
Still havn't read the novel which I have lying around somewhere.
|
|
|
|
Post by pulphack on Oct 15, 2012 9:22:35 GMT
Yes, it is English folk rather than Scots, which always struck me as odd, seeing as the details are otherwise well observed. And I guss it doesn't matter that it's not Britt's backside, except that it'sa rather nice one so I always wondered who it did belong to...
Andy, what you're saying about it being a strange time for horror movies then is very true - in some senses, The Wicker Man could have done with being a few years later, when it wouldn't have been caught up and lost in that changing period. Mind you, the exhibition trade in the UK was just as bad at that point for Brit movies. It didn't really pick up until the big budget successes of Ghandi and Chariots Of Fire, when we had the 'rebirth' of Brit film, which amounted to little more than posh period dramas that got reviewed in the Guardian. I like some of them, but it was hardly a 'rebirth'...
|
|
|
|
Post by Dr Strange on Oct 15, 2012 10:48:35 GMT
I like the film a lot (not least because of the aforementioned arse), but there's just too much of that godawful folk music in it. Sorry, but someone has to say it. Also, I wasn't that impressed by the novelization - though the policeman character is given a rather more complex back story, there really isn't much depth to it. Why is it not better known? What? It is very well known and much written about. Here is good place to start learning more - www.steve-p.org/wm/ I understand the editor of the The Wicker Man was a Christian, who found the film a pagan blasphemy, and tried to destroy as much of it as he could. And where did you get that from, given you've only just discovered that the film exists? |
|
|
|
Post by Knygathin on Oct 15, 2012 12:04:17 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Craig Herbertson on Oct 15, 2012 12:45:36 GMT
Yes, it is English folk rather than Scots, which always struck me as odd, seeing as the details are otherwise well observed. And I guss it doesn't matter that it's not Britt's backside, except that it'sa rather nice one so I always wondered who it did belong to... Good discussion of the folk elements here: www.wicker-man.com/musicofthewickerman.phpMy English fiddler loves the Rattling Bog on it - it's a very dark version as compared to the Dubliners more cheery effort. Corn Rigs is a brilliant Burn's song. Strange to hear it so anglified. |
|
|
|
Post by Knygathin on Oct 15, 2012 20:18:14 GMT
It was an odd time for a horror movie, on the one hand you had the old-fashioned like And now the screaming starts or Satanic rites of Dracula on the other you had the game-changing Excorcist or stuff like Flesh for Frankenstein. It must have been hard to determine which was the future. If you compare with Hammer movies like Curse of Frankenstein or The Horror of Dracula from the late 1950's, that old atmosphere is completely lost, all transformed. It's strange how physical reality can change that much in 15 years. Is it some ultradimensional vibration in the air, or what is it? Even if they had cut the hair of those 1970's actors exactly like in 1957, dressed them up identically, and used the same stage lighting, it still wouldn't have been possible to recapture that old magic shine. I don't understand it. Inexplicable. |
|
|
|
Post by andydecker on Oct 15, 2012 22:42:16 GMT
If you compare with Hammer movies like Curse of Frankenstein or The Horror of Dracula from the late 1950's, that old atmosphere is completely lost, all transformed. It's strange how physical reality can change that much in 15 years. Is it some ultradimensional vibration in the air, or what is it? Even if they had cut the hair of those 1970's actors exactly like in 1957, dressed them up identically, and used the same stage lighting, it still wouldn't have been possible to recapture that old magic shine. I don't understand it. Inexplicable. You can blame the real world.  I guess if you got bombarded every evening on the tv with war footage from Vietnam and lived through a time were everything seemed to change for the worse, the cozy fantasies of yesterday can´t have seem very relevant any longer. Have you ever seen Targets with Boris Karloff? It is a great commentary on how the supposed Innocence ended. (Not that I believe there was an Innocence, only more public lies.) |
|
|
|
Post by Knygathin on Oct 16, 2012 8:17:17 GMT
You can blame the real world. I guess if you got bombarded every evening on the tv with war footage from Vietnam and lived through a time were everything seemed to change for the worse, the cozy fantasies of yesterday can´t have seem very relevant any longer. Good thoughts. Have you ever seen Targets with Boris Karloff? . . . Yes, but I don't want to think about it. I thought it was sad to see Karloff in that disgusting modern light. |
|
|
|
Post by ramseycampbell on Oct 16, 2012 10:47:17 GMT
According to Allan Brown's detailed monograph on the film, Robin Hardy and the editor Eric Boyd-Perkins "maintained an amicable relationship throughout the three months in which The Wicker Man was cut." Boyd-Perkins had already edited several Hammer films and was responsible for the original director's cut of Hardy's film, from which the restored edition was made. The lady on Amazon seems mistaken. |
|
|
|
Post by Dr Strange on Oct 16, 2012 11:28:57 GMT
The lady on Amazon seems mistaken. Or maybe just over-imaginative. |
|
|
|
Post by andydecker on Oct 16, 2012 13:25:15 GMT
The lady on Amazon seems mistaken. I am shocked! No, really. Sadly reading the review-section on Amazon has often become more fun then reading the actual novels. Sometimes one could swear that this is the first book some people ever opened in their lives or that they ´really can´t understand simple written down information. More horrific then some horror novels. Anyway, anybody watched the Wicker Tree, the new sequel/prequel/whatever by Hardy? Is it worthwhile? |
|
|
|
Post by mattofthespurs on Oct 16, 2012 13:37:45 GMT
Do not, under any circumstances, watch The Wicker Tree. It is Poop, with a capital P. In my opinion of course. The re-make with Nic Cage is a classic though. |
|
|
|
Post by ramseycampbell on Oct 16, 2012 14:16:51 GMT
Do not, under any circumstances, watch The Wicker Tree. It is Poop, with a capital P. In my opinion of course. The re-make with Nic Cage is a classic though. "Step away from the bike!" |
|
|
|
Post by Dr Strange on Oct 16, 2012 14:24:04 GMT
Anyway, anybody watched the Wicker Tree, the new sequel/prequel/whatever by Hardy? Is it worthwhile? I haven't seen it. I also haven't heard a single good thing about it - which kinda makes me want to see it. There's also, apparently, a third film planned - called The Wrath of the Gods. |
|
I guess if you got bombarded every evening on the tv with war footage from Vietnam and lived through a time were everything seemed to change for the worse, the cozy fantasies of yesterday can´t have seem very relevant any longer.