One of the most.......



Godawful movies of all time!!!!

reply

You are not wrong.

What'd you mean I'm not kind? Just not your kind.

reply

Yes, such a disappointing mess. Badly written, badly acted, badly directed, and the story makes no sense whatsoever, even on an instinctual or mythological level.

The saddest thing about it, to me, is that it appears to demonstrate that Robin Hardy had no idea at all what was good about the first film or what made it work. I began wondering if the brilliance of The Wicker Man was due overwhelmingly to the Shaffer brothers and producer Peter Snell, and that Hardy was mostly just along for the ride.



You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.

reply

Exactly what I was thinking. You could see what appears to be Hardy's contribution in both, but "Man" is a coherent, finished film while "Tree" is all over the place and never quite settles on anything.

Such as how you start thinking the new hook is to make Beth a kick-ass babe (a la Suspiria) when she shoves Sir Lachlan in the fire, but then she gets stuffed and mounted anyway.

reply

Agreed, I couldn't wait till they finished 'Beth Boothby' off.
But to wait 1,5hrs for it....

"Gar nicht so übel, du kleine Schlampe. Man sieht sich immer zweimal, Kleine."

reply

Hardy wrote and directed this and it shows. This was a chore to get through. Nothing worked in this. The script, directing, acting, and editing were all bad. The entire thing felt like a made for TV film. The music didn't go with the film.

The magic, mystery, and otherworldliness present in The Wicker Man was missing here. There was no sense of dread. There wasn't anything menacing. The entire premise was wrong. The ending was anti-climactic.

Christopher Lee wasn't too thrilled about the end product either.

Joan Collins, Sean Astin, and Ewan McGregor should be thankful they didn't make the final cut.

reply