The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #89099   Message #1684153
Posted By: GUEST,the celluloid man
03-Mar-06 - 05:23 AM
Thread Name: The Wicker Man
Subject: RE: The Wicker Man
You have to remember that Georgiansilver is a happy-clappy godbotherer who believes that Jesus wants him for a sunbeam - that's why he posts such things. He also believes that the masons are out to sacrifice babies. Anyway, I digress...

As for the film, it was entertaining, but certainly not deserving of a lot of the gushing praise heaped upon it. The versions as generally shown are poorly edited, while much of the acting is frankly laughable. Both Ingrid Pitt and Britt Eckland would have been out-acted by the average plank, while Peter Cook would have made a less hammy Lord Summerisle.
I think one reason for its eduring appeal is because it was of its time; it came out when a large chunk of the population was fascinated by the idea of paganism, and with its bizarre mish-mash of Fraser and Graves the Wicker Man seemed to press the right buttons. As a result it's become the 'house film' of people that like to call themselves neo-pagans. It's also up there on the video shelf with 'If' as an icon of antiestablishment sentiments. 'If', though similarly flawed, is a far, far better film IMNSHO.
It's tosh. Watchable tosh, but tosh nonetheless.