Pajiba

This is sooooo dissapointing. The original Wicker Man is one of my favorite movies and it sounds like the only thing they've kept the same is an actual Wicker Man at the end (There IS one, right?) It's not as if I was expecting this to be good, but I was at least expecting something that respected the original vision. Ugh.

It says something that, given my rock-bottom expectations for this film, many of the reviews have been worse than my most delirious imaginings.

Nicholas Cage hasn't just been making bag movies lately, he's been making HORRIBLE movies.

Wickerman (the original) was an amazing movie for all the reasons the reviewer itemizes above, and it has held up incredibly well over time. It's worth a rental any day.

The orginal movie kicks epic portions of ass. The final scene actually made TLC (it was TLC, right?)'s 100 scariest movie moments, and for good reason.

And aside from women, its also a-ok to take cheap shots at the suburban middle class without true fear of reprisal(American Beauty, The Quiet, Little Miss Sunshine, Donnie Darko), Republicans (The Day After Tomorrow, Ice Age 2-this own website seems to verify this), and Christianity (that God-awful adaptation of Silent Hill). Did I miss anything? Probably.

This pisses me off, because I'm a big Neil LaBute fan, but I totally believe this is bad. I thought Nurse Betty was lifeless too. I don't know whether LaBute is a one-trick pony who can't do anything but psychological mayhem, or whether it's that he can only do his own material well. Whatever it is. Disappointing and expected.
One thing, though; so he has men in his movies who have a terrible attitude toward women who are obviously supposed to be ogres, but suspicions of misogyny are still raised. Then he has a movie with an evil woman (Shape of Things) and people start to wonder if the people raising the original issues were so far from the truth. I don't get this. Men are portrayed as evil, womanizing assholes all the time but I bet most people don't even know the word for "man-hating" (misandry, btw, with "man-hating" being the noun, not the adjective).

Saw it last night. The review captures it excellently. I try to give Cage a break for his roles in Adaptation and Raising Arizona but he's pretty bad in this. The plot aside, the visuals of the beehives, the beekeepers and the Puget Sound area (where I live) attempted to make the rest somewhat tolerable.

It is a travesty against the original. Ellen Burstyn did a pretty good job of staying creepy but commanding in her scenes, but how could anyone top Christopher Lee as the singing Scottish Brogue, Lord Summerisle? A better movie would have been to cast Christopher Lee as an homage to the original as the square, prudish, sacrifice-to-be police officer!

Actually, Jeremy, "malus" isn't the root for "man" in Latin. It means "evil, bad" and eventually led to words like "malfunction" or "maleficent". The Latin word for man is "vir" (pronounced "weer" in its original Latin form), which leads onto words like "virile","virility", and "virtue". My latin teachers over the years have drilled this into my head...

It probably makes more sense that his name means "evil", foreshadowing what's to come later.

"Why is it still OK in Hollywood to treat women as the malevolent Other when pretty much every other special-interest group has found a way to prevent being so thoroughly demonized? "

I agree, but let's not forget about Italian-Americans. It's apparently also perfectly OK to demonize us.

Ta, JoAnn. For some reason "malus" and "manus" are the most misinterpreted Latin nouns out there--both often thought as root words for "man" nouns in English. Interesting, if you ask me, but I'll avoid the temptation to psychologize it. Wonder what Labute would make of it? [...]

I think one of Pajiba's other critics pseudo-slammed the original TWM the other day in the round-up and it really caught me off-guard. I adore the Woodward version--besides Lee as Summerisle, and Woodward giving it his all, it's such an aesthetic experience visually and musically if nothing else...you can't even get close to recapturing that in the Digital Age. But maybe you have to be a complete nebish like me and have a weakness for ultra-70s scores and European folklore. I can see how some can roll their eyes at this film today.

When I heard Labute was tackling a remake, I was *somewhat* more forgiving than usual re. remakes because, pre-Nurse Betty, he did some fascinating stuff, IMO. But casting Cage--that pretty much shut the door. Damn, Jeremy, I actually want to see it now, after reading the review--it's the car-accident effect--but I can't get past the Cage factor so it will remain eternally unwatched. Probably a good thing.

Excellent review, Jeremy! I'll avoid this one I think.

Is it possible that the Hollywood financiers simply didn't notice the subtext? They don't seem to be sharing too many firing neurons between them, these days. :)

Doesn't surprise me this guy was a Mormon. That church is totally misogynistic. It's a Mormon woman's role in life (and in fact an HONOUR for her) to churn out as many kids as possible, but she is never allowed to be a leader in the church community. Just marry one and birth ten of 'em.

"And aside from women, its also a-ok to take cheap shots at the suburban middle class without true fear of reprisal(American Beauty, The Quiet, Little Miss Sunshine, Donnie Darko), Republicans (The Day After Tomorrow, Ice Age 2-this own website seems to verify this), and Christianity (that God-awful adaptation of Silent Hill). Did I miss anything? Probably."

Ok, yeah. Despite the fact that, as groups, they have the most power and voice in the country, Christians, Republicans, and suburban dwellers are sometimes portrayed as (gasp!) the bad guys. But the mild cultural disrespect those groups sometimes get is one thing; the real problems women deal with (and anticipate) every day are a whole different story. Can you really say that Christians, Republicans, and suburbanites face the same vilification, threats of violence, and life-altering discrimination that women, gays, and minorities face?

I call bullshit.

Well, apparently it also o.k. to demonize Mormons.

Yes, I can say that. This isn't 1950. Rascism and sexism are not the problems they once were. Try cracking a history book. If homosexuals faced real persecution, society wouldn't tolerate them having their own television network. And Christians don't have real political power: those that use the church for their own selfish gains do. Its not the same thing.

However, I will meditate on your opinions, all while keeping in mind that my harmless post including an admission that I left out some groups and the fact that if I had mentioned something about the persecution of democrates you probably wouldn't have said anything. Therefore, I call bullshit on your calling bullshit.

Also Vi, this remake really did suck. Stick to the orginal.

P.S: I am white and am from El Paso Tx, which is 95% hispanic. You are preaching to the fucking choir about persecution. Have a lovely day.

Yeah, I think if Lilith Fair had looked anything like the previews for this movie, I definitely would have skipped it. As it was, the music was good, and the pot-smoking hippie lesbians next to us shared their really good food!

why this Hollywood obsession with remakes? i don't get it. when something has been done and done well, leave it alone. find something else to do. obviously creativity is on the short list of people greenlighting projects.

skip all this crap and go watch something directed by Sam Peckinpah, Robert Aldrich, or John Frankenheimer, et al.

"This isn't 1950. Rascism and sexism are not the problems they once were. Try cracking a history book. If homosexuals faced real persecution, society wouldn't tolerate them having their own television network."

Umm, Matt... I hate to point this out to you, because I hate pointing out the obvious, but gays (among others) are still persecuted. Perhaps you will recall the 21 year old boy who was beaten to death for being gay in the very enlightened year of 1998. This is, of course, only one (very extreme) example, but with disturbing frequency I overhear people still using the words 'fag' and 'homo' with utter contempt. And that is to say nothing of the racial epithets I hear slung around daily. But rarely do I hear people hiss 'republican' or 'Christian' in that derisive way.

My point is this: I will grant you that "racism and sexism are not the problems they once were", but things like this do still happen. People are still intimidated by violence and vandalism into abandoning the homes they have worked hard for because of their race or sexual orientation. I have known managers of companies that I have worked for to not hire people based on their race or gender. Now, in the 2000s, just as much as 20 years ago when I first began working.

I'm just saying, is all. Not to pick a fight. Just to let you know.

P.S. I live in suburban NJ, a highly populated, upper middle class area, predominantly democratic, and supposedly well educated and tolerant of differences. And yet.

"And Christians don't have real political power: those that use the church for their own selfish gains do. Its not the same thing."

Oh GAWD. If I hear another Christian complain about how persecuted they are in this country, I'm gonna crucify myself. Seriously, are you nuts? Please stop expecting the rest of us to overindulge your fairy-tale fantasies.

And yeah, as a white guy, I'm sure you're sooooo friggin' persecuted...

Oh, and yeah, this movie looks like a total horrorshow. And not in a good way.

Yes, Matt, I'm sure as a white male you can empathize with the persecution minorities and women face every day.

You say to study history. I say take a women's studies class. Sexism and misogyny are still very real problems that women all over the world face today. The fact that studio executives allowed this film to be made is evidence of the inate misogyny of society.

As for homosexuals not facing persecution...I call bullshit on that. You've heard of the Federal Marriage Amendment? The one that reduces the civil rights of a minority group of people? Yeah, I'd call that persecution. Or maybe you're just one of those people who feel that because the KKK isn't roaming around anymore (save the odd march or public demonstration of the righteous nature of white power), everything's peachy keen with gays and minorities. Yep, racism, homophobia and sexism are gone, scrubbed from our society!

Give me a break.

Jeremy - fantasic review. I'd never even heard TWM before now. Based on what you and some commenters have said, I think I'll have to check out the original somtime - and skip this awful remake.

First person to call me a lesbian feminazi gets a cookie. 'Bitch' doesn't count, because I take that as a compliment.

Ah, the white christian male, so persecuted, so segregated, forced to live in rich ghettos forever forced to enjoy 95% of all the wealth generated in this country, oh, poor poor white guys.
Cry me a fucking river Adolf.

1. None of you idiots read the part about me living in a part of the country that was 95% minority.
2. I never said Christians were persecuted, Candice. The excerpt of my post in your own post says no such thing. Kindly piss off.
3. I never said the issues surrounding homosexuals, minorites, and women were fixed, just not as big as they once were.
4. Charlotte, I recommend a silicon-based lubricant to help scrub the sand out of your vagina. It doesn't dilute in the bathtub the way the water-based stuff does.
5. Posting your own inane opinions on a movie-critic website won't fix these problems.
6. My own inane opinions are, by definition, neither true nor false. They are opinions. It won't do you any good to call me out on them.
7. BarbadoSlim, calling me Adolf? How original. You should see about trying to market that comeback as a catchphrase, since nobody that ever dissented against a liberal point of view has been compared to Hitler before.
8. Feel free to keep bitching over one stranger's opinions, who is only responding because he's had a long weekend off work. It does lots of good!

Matt, you ignorant ass. Don't you even watch movies? Rich white people are always portrayed as misunderstood forces of good in society, particularly if they are very high-up in large corporations. Minorities and special interest groups are dismissed out of hand, no matter how righteous their cause. It's because Hollywood is all a machine to make big business and white folks look good.

Oh shit, I left the sarcasm lock on.

Oh and anybody who thinks that Republicans aren't ridiculed has obviously never heard the term "Red-Stater." Or talked to this guy http://forums.espn.go.com/espn/message?messageID=27644542 Or maybe it's just that you don't notice because you agree. Or because you do it without thinking about it.

I just googled the Federal Marriage Amendment to keep this argument a reasonably intelligent one. Touche`, Charlotte. I don't approve of that particular bit of legislation. Also, my comment towards you was my only personal attack thus far and I apologize. So how about that cookie?
Otherwise, all other rebukes stand cheerfully unretracted. God, I love the internet.

If that picture at the top of the page is really a scene from the movie, then that right there is enough to tell me that the movie is a waste of time. It looks like the cover to miniseries "the 60's" What is that, a scene from woodstock?

And Matt, I happen to agree with some of what you say. Visit practically any college in the Unites States(you know, the ones who discriminate against conservatives by having teaching staffs with an average 9 to 1 liberal to conservative ratio?) and you will find the only people persecuted are the ones who are called Hitler by liberals, gays, or minorities whose opinions they dissagree with.

Matt,

According to Wikipedia, the white population of El Paso is 73.28% WHITE.

Now will you please quit using a movie review site to bitch about how "persecuted" white men are?

Heh, sorry about the two "whites" in there.

You're still stupid, Matt.

fozzy,

A fact. That's all I ask for, a fact. Where are these persecuted collegians? What are their names? What are the specific instances of persecution? And don't cite some student who talked out of his ignorant ass and got called on it. That's not persecution. It's the essence of education.

Candice-

Matt was exaggerating, but El Paso is 76.6% hispanic (presumably not counting illegals, unless they're brazen enough to respond to census takers). http://elpaso.areaconnect.com/statistics.htm and this comes from statistics that include your figure for whiteness. Confusing statistics in that sense--I don't know if it considers some latinos white and others not (the study claims 96.6% of the population are "one race") or what, but in the white vs. black vs. asian vs. native american vs. pacific islander section, which is where your figure comes from, there is no distinction for hispanics. I would take the time to examine and speculate, but I have stuff to do today. At any rate, it would seem that a very small percentage of the population is actually caucasian white, which is pretty well in line with everything that Matt and anyone I know who's been there has said.

Does this make you stupid for trusting Wikipedia? I mean seriously. Even freaking Minneapolis isn't 70% white.

Wow, it doesn't get any more concrete than Wikepedia. Check the Federal census records instead bitch, not some site that gets its information from idiots like yourself. And then look up one of those neat graphs that show the population distribution of that part of the country. If it says anything different, then you're looking at an outdated map.

I haven't read the other comments, so forgive me if I repeat anything.

My theory is that you can get away with misogynistic movies as long as nobody raises a stink upon their release. The problem is that the ways in which women raise a stink are usually marginal (e.g. The National Organization for Women). Why? Who knows. Maybe there are just too many of us to get us to agree to all be offended by the same thing.

Or maybe it's the same old story of women fearing the "bitch" label when they raise a stink over something stinkworthy. It can really take the wind out of your sails, as a would-be fighter for what's right, when someone pulls out that word. It's like a magic bullet. Shouldn't be, but seems to be for a lot of women. Probably because we're socialized to be and to make "nice". In other words, to put others first, which is another way of saying "obsess about your impact on others' happiness and comfort level". IMHO, women are engineered by our society to be extremely neurotic in that sense.

What's needed is an uber-feminist role model who is both extremely powerful and supremely kind, such that she crushes misogynists under her heel while engendering universal affection. (The idea is someone so sweet and loving that the word "bitch" as ascribed to her sounds profane.) If we could find that person and get her in the highest ranks of government, everything would take a turn for the better, and Mr. Neil LaBute would lose his access to big budgets and be forced back into the off-off-Broadway business.

That is my vision.

P.S. Speaking as an Italian-American... I-A's aren't demonized... gangers are demonized. And not really. They're more glorified than anything, because this is a nation in love with violence and power.

that was s'posed to say "gangsters"

Dude.

OF COURSE I looked at the El Paso .gov site. It's LINKED from Wikipedia, and that's where the Wiki page gets its statistics. If you can explain to me how these statistics equal 95 percent Hispanic, I'd love to know.

I'd also love to know how this makes you so freaking "persecuted." Last time I checked, white Christian Republicans were running this country. And if you want to see racism in play, look no further than New Orleans.

It's unlikely I will see this film, as my life-long girl-crush on the beautiful Ellen Burstyn is outweighed by the gag reflex which kicks in at the very sight of Nick Cage's face. And Neil LaBute's movies just make me feel bad. I suppose that's the idea, and perhaps the intricacies of sexual cruelty between men and women make fascinating cinema for some people, but it hits too close to the bone for me. I'll admit the idea of remaking TWM with a matriarchal pagan cult is an interesting idea, and I don't think it's totally out-of-line to suggest that such a society might not necessarily be the embodiment of peace on earth. Women are just as capable of cruelty as men; they're just more likely to stab you in the back rather than your face. (However, in this political climate, it is disturbing to see such a blatantly retro portrayal of female leadership.) I think the real misogyny lies in the extremely limited range of female characters in mainstream movies. It's either Hot Babe or Old Maid or Mom. Or Old Babe, Hot Mom, whatever... Jesus, American actresses can't even have one goddamned wrinkle on their foreheads to show they've had a single deep thought, or moment of deep pain... to me, that's where the true misogyny lies.

I can see how "In the Company of Men" can make for uncomfortable viewing--obviously partly the point of the film--but "too close to the bone," as Viv Girl points out, in in fact IMO what's sought out by some film viewers, and not for cheap thrills. Too much film, esp. American film, whitewashes truths--or whatever approximates "truth", as elusive as that is. It's good to see any iota of that explored. The problem with seeing that explored in a visual *human-featured* medium like cinema is that it's damned intense, and people who've experienced something like IRL might get a double-dose effect that makes it simply not worth putting oneself through. But I'll personally sit through anything so long as complexity and nuance and paradox* aren't shortchanged--they are so freaking hard to find in art these days.

* I'm the first to admit ItCoM could have used a bit more of these, however. But A for effort.

My heart sank when I heard that Hollywood was remaking TWM. I suspected that this would be a truly awful film when I learned that it would star Nic Cage - not because he isn't capable of good work, but because he is so absolutely wrong for the part.

Then I saw the trailer. No wonder this dog was released to cinemas without critics' previews.

The original film made a relatively subtle point - that the advocates of fashionable 60s/70s paganism were ignoring paganism's history of irrationalism and bloody sacrifice. Presumably that film could not be made in George W.'s America, because it implies that Christianity and paganism are at root pretty much on a par.

To substitute the crude equation feminism = fascism is just crass. Sounds like LaBute has serious manhood issues.

And for that matter, tell me: has Hollywood ever remade a good British, French or Japanes flick without ruining it? Would they now please, please stop trying?

There wasn't even a distinction for hispanics in the source you used, you idiot. Maybe you should look at Eep's post, the one right above my last one. He even calls me out for exaggerating (good call Eep. Turns out I was. I don't mind being corrected).

And because, Candice, illegal immigrants (or what you probably call 'citizenry-challenged persons' or 'undocumented workers') are not going to be documented in the population. You'll note El Paso's proximity to the Mexican-American border (Mexico is the big space right below Texas, in case you can't read a map). Plus, I never said, not once, that Christians are persecuted. I also never said I was a Republican.

I guess if the facts don't jive with your own biases, you own't consider it and will dig up whatever to make a comeback. This makes you a presumptuous twat. Seriously, do I have to break out puppets to explain this to you? I DARE you to throw those figures at me after visiting that city.

Also, I feel obligated to mention something about Wicker Man again, since this is a forum for that and not my own world view. Ahem: "Wicker is used to make furniture, and I loved Nic Cage in Adaptation." Thank you very much.

Matt,

"I guess if the facts don't jive with your own biases, you own't consider it and will dig up whatever to make a comeback. This makes you a presumptuous twat."

Dude, you're the one that made up the 95% number! If it pisses you off that the government numbers don't jive with your own perception, go freak out on them, not me.

You obviously are quite sensitive about this — if living around Hispanics makes you feel persecuted, I recommend a reality check. (Perhaps a trip to Darfur is in order. Or Uganda. Or Bangladesh. Basically, anyplace where people have to deal with real shit.) And anyone who asserts that Christians don't have significant political power in the U.S. is living in a dream world.

Oh, never mind. Why would you give a shit? It's all about you you you and your sad little persecuted life, isn't it? It doesn't matter what the real world is like, as long as Hollywood isn't hating on anything that reflects your particular worldview.

I'm so glad you're here to remind us to wash the sand out of our vaginas and protect all those helpless Republicans.

Bye!

Who gives a shit about the demographics of El Paso? Pu-lease.Regarding the debate on who the biggest victim is : you all suck.

Not suprised that the movie sucked as well.

Scrub out the sandy vagina with silicone, Matt? Really? Do you seriously need to resort to vagina taunts to make it seem like you're right? Are you really going to use the last refuge of that sort of rather weak man who can't handle being disagreed with by a woman? Come on.

(and for pity's sake, the vagina is a self cleaning organ. it would be infinitely better to just wait it out and let the mucosal linings of the vaginal canal do their thing than to gum up the works with silicone)

People, it's not Christians that have the power in government, it is CORRUPT POLITICIANS WHO CLAIM TO BE CHRISTIANS AND USE THE "CHURCH" to further their own agenda. For crying out loud, anyone can SAY they are a Christian...shit, anyone can SAY they are anything. What you SAY doesn't mean jack shit, show me how the hell you live your life and I'll tell you what you are. And enough freaking already with the "I'm more persecuted than you" shit. The fact of the matter is, just about every single one of us has a certain amount of prejudice and every single one of us has treated someone else, and more than likely been treated ourselves, with a certain amount of dislike, injustice, or down right hatred for some ethic/sexual/gender bullshit reason. We all make assumptions about each other all the time based on how we look, how we dress, how we vote, blah, blah, blah. That is the nature of the world we live in, so how's about we all chill the fuck out and start respecting each other a little more and stop being so fucking judgmental?? Just an idea.......

Even if Matt were correct and he were the absolute "minority" white guy in a city full of hispanics--how the hell would that make him persecuted? It only makes him outnumbered--and obviously nervous about the fact that everyone around him knows he doesn't deserve his white christian republican boy privilege.

Let me add to that an observation that lot of misogynists seem to writhe in fear and loathing of even the idea of Lilith Fair, as an example of undying misogyny. (I'm hearing that particular festival being slammed an awful lot, lately). So curious, as it was one of the biggest, most successful "Bullshit!" callings ever made in the music industry. I guess all the boys putting it down are still humiliated by the fact that they underestimated women again, and it proved to be a very costly mistake to make.

I'm from Utah. So trust me I know Mormons. This is nothing like Mormons... the guy who made this is a quack, mormon or not. The movie SUCKED BALLS. horrible.

p.s. Matt I dont get why everyone is picking on you in here! There's nothing wrong with a white person being a minority occassionaly. there are several parts of the country where a white man could be considered a minority. People please! This country is not the same as it was back in 1890. Things have changed. There are many more hispanics. Many more african american. blah blah blah. who fucking cares??
If you are a "minority" (aka not white) stop fucking whining about it! For gods sake, have some pride. I didnt know it was such a horrible thing to not be white.

Megan, you nailed it, but I think you should take it one step further. I say, anytime a politician tells you that someone is holding you down or affecting your wellbeing (I'm talking about any politician here), your antennae should go up because that politician is trying to use your fears to get votes and power, and they're going to do it at the expense of the freedoms of the people you're supposed to be afraid or jealous of. That might not concern you now, but someday you're going to be that group on some issue or another and you're not going to like it. And politicians love this because that whets your appetite for taking other people's rights away to "even things out." This is how the politicians (ALL OF THEM) divide us and stay in power.

Candice- You're out of control. Matt was off by a matter of degree because he was making a point, you were off by AT LEAST 65% and you looked at the numbers and said "yeah, that sounds correct and factual." You must have some outrageous bias to think that the caucasians of El Paso are so insular and xenophobic that they would perceive a quarter of the population as 95%.

Whoa - I came to read a Pajiba review and stumbled into an AICN talkback. That's really unfortunate.

This is the dumbest fucking comment section in the history of dumb fucking comment sections. You are all responsible - Matt for baiting the hook, the rest of you for biting.

I'm done.

TK obviously doesnt have a mind or opinion. now thats unforutnate

Elyse - good effort. Work on your material some more, maybe I'll rise to it later.

Oh, and its's u-n-f-o-r-t-u-n-a-t-e.

*sigh*

Nothing worse than trying to be snarky and coming off as simply stupid. Yes, I realize I spelled "it's" wrong, in the same sentence where I corrected someone's spelling. Elyse, my humble apologies, though I still think your comment was silly.

Getting back to the review: Jeremy, I am terribly ignorant of all things "Wicker Man"-related, but this review was hilarious.

"...yet Ed doesn?t catch on until 45 minutes into the movie, when Willow spells it out in bold and all-caps, with diagrams of conception from an old sex-ed book and a sonogram of a fetus with a pointy nose, hound-dog eyes, and one wicked widow's peak."

On Nov. 11, 2000, I was on the team playing against Texas-El Paso (UTEP) in front of a sold out crowd. You heard that correctly, Sun Bowl Stadium was sold out. Their usually pitiable team was respectable that year. If you’re seeking confirmation, here’s a link:

http://www.sunbowl.org/sbstadium.htm

Anywho, my point:

There were 53,304 people in attendance.
There were no more than 3000 cars in the parking lot.

I saw more lawn equipment than automobiles.

In the interest of full disclosure, let me just say that I'm the offspring of an italian-american mother and a black father, who, due to racist attitudes, had to be given up for adoption in 1969.

Never been on welfare, never took anything from ANY affirmative action program, was broght up by hard working, honest, puerto rican adoptive parents. All you white "oppressed" christian bitches can kiss my chocolate ass.

That means you Matt.

As a woman, I couldn't give less of a damn about the misogynistic overtones in this, or any other, film. My guess is I wouldn't even notice them, probably because I am not a) a hardcore feminist looking for a fight or b) a guilt-ridden sensitive 90s-era male. Gross generalization? Fine. It happens to be apt. Virtually every intelligent modern woman I know agrees with me.

I wonder how this review would've read if the malevolent female Others were supplanted by male ones.

My guess? "Bad movie. Don't see it."

Because as we all know, it's totally okay to negatively characterize men in film.

I love this site, but what I am so totally OVER is politically correct nonsense where there's no place for it and where it becomes disingenuous.

Your analogies re: blacks, gays, and Jews are silly at best, woefully overstated at worst; to compare the way women have been treated in history to the way the groups you mentioned have been treated - and are in fact still being treated - is disgusting.

Men may consider me inferior because I have a vagina, but they probably won't strip me naked, tie me to a pickup truck, and drag me down the street until I'm dead. There's a good reason the theoretical films you describe wouldn't be made.

BarbadoSlim must be hard as shit to bring down in tackle football.

Barbadoslim-
A friend of mine was in a similar situation to your parents. She was very much in love with a guy who loved her as well, and they were both great kids, I mean he was a great guy and she was the sweetest girl you ever wanted to meet, but he could never tell his parents about her or introduce them because they wouldn't allow him to date a white girl. It's a shame your father's parents felt the same way. Or was it your mother's parents? You didn't specify. Unless your prejudices lead you to assume that "racist" was sufficient to indicate "the white people."

S., if you think you can't be humiliated and killed for being a woman, you obviously don't live in Iran or any of a number of other countries where a woman can legally be stoned to death for adultery, and I'll bet you don't live in an African nation where female genital mutilation is practiced. Just because women in affluent, industrialized western nations have it pretty good these days (they've stopped burning us as witches, too) doesn't mean that women haven't been and aren't still subjected to the same kinds of horrible treatment as black, gay, and Jewish people. Read some history first, and then pick up a newspaper.

how about making the review as simple as this: there was no reason for the film to be made. it didn't need an update, the story doesn't somehow culturally resonate with anything that's happening in society anyway, and the original stands just fine on its own.

yeah, it makes for a lot shorter of a review, but look at it this way--you don't even need to get your knickers in a twist about it.

I was wondering why there were so many comments on a movie that looks as lame as the not scary at all previews. Now I get it.

Sand in the vag sounds WAY more scary than this movie.

I agree totally with the points that ambergris and VivianGirl brought up, so I won't belabor the point. I'll simply add that it's amazing to me the number of people who want to deny that some people in society are privileged based upon physical/psychological characteristics largely beyond their control and NOT due to merit, and some are not for the same reasons. AND they expect the disenfranchised to either not notice or not get pissed off and somehow see how everyone is really equal. Of course, there is always the apologist within the particular oppressed group to remind everyone else that they are just being so very unreasonable (I'm looking at you, S., resplendent in your stripper heels).

As for the movie, having seen the original, I was awestruck when I saw the remake's trailer. I don't think that its possible to choose a worse movie to remake, considering that the reason it worked at all was it's sheer undefinable strangeness. I was glued to the screen the entire time simply due to the "What the fuck?" factor.

Veronica, your points are valid, and had Mr. Fox's review read at all like he was speaking to global torture of women, and not merely Hollywood - via LaBute - insisting upon painting women as shrews with men their hapless victims, my response would have sounded different.

However, the review was clearly speaking to an American audience and calling attention to American issues, and frankly, I don't think that American women in 2006 have much to complain about when held up against (as Fox did) American gays and American blacks. Sorry. I don't. You're welcome to disagree.

And if that makes me an apologist, MaiGirl, well, point me to the nearest stripper pole.

Well, S., kudos on your sense of humor and taking it like a pro.

However, as a female African-American, I disagree. I have dealt with a lot of discrimination related to my gender, almost as often as my race. While I don't enjoy crying victim for myriad reasons, it is simply a fact. AMERICAN women being most likely to die at the hands of her husband or lover, especially if she is pregnant, is also a fact. Look it up if you don't believe me. So is the wage differential, lack of adequate child care, still having battle over reproductive rights when no one's concerned at all about the proliferation of "erectile dysfunction treatments," glass ceilings, paying more for the same producets and services, not being allowed being blamed for everything wrong with the world by the Christian right--I think that's enough. Also, race and gender intersect for any woman of color in a way that white women never experience.

If you still think that women have it so much easier, good luck at Centerfolds.

"Why is it still OK in Hollywood to treat women as the malevolent Other when pretty much every other special-interest group has found a way to prevent being so thoroughly demonized?"

Excellent, excellent question. My theories:

1. Because audiences let them.
2. Because Hollywood is full of unattractive former nerds who are finally in the driver's seat with respect to the ladies.

"Men may consider me inferior because I have a vagina, but they probably won't strip me naked, tie me to a pickup truck, and drag me down the street until I'm dead."

No, sweetheart. They'd rape you first.

Wow. With all the other comments about discrimination, etc., I'm hesitant to jump in here. But that won't stop me:
Matt's original comment was that it's still OK to take cheap shots at suburbanites, Republicans, and Christians (I paraphrase). The difference here is that gender, as with race and sexual orientation, is a fairly immutable characteristic, while lifestyle, politics, and religion are choices. We are--or should be--perfectly justified in criticizing other people's choices when they affect us, as these certainly do.

As far as Samantha T's second theory, I think that one rings the truest, although the first one is also a necessary part of the equation.

And to continue to rise up to Matt's bait, I would like to add these few words: Quit getting so worked up about this subject that you have to resort to a flame war on a very respectable *coughs* website. Save that shit for the MSN messageboards. Instead why don't you try to go out and change these injustices. Actions speak so much louder than words.

Whoa, ScarletKnight - settle down. No one likes a voice of reason.

Whoa, ScarletKnight - settle down. No one likes a voice of reason.

Vive La Revolution!

Quick, everyone get in your hummer and let's kill Hollywood! I've had enough of this disrespectful attitude towards women. This movie put it over the top. Yup. This one crappy movie. All the porn they've been making all this time is totally o.k tho. Come on! Trust me, it's all worth it. Some of you might go to jail, but I'm willing to take that risk. :)

I love seeing everyone argue like this, but, some of you really need to lighten up a bit. EVERYONE (including women, minorities, and gay midgets with erectile dysfunction) has it pretty damn good in America compared to everyone else in the rest of the world. So relax. Smell the roses.

Stop bitching on a movie review site. Get a cat. Jesus ... back on topic to the movie. Looks bad but I won't be seeing it. Made a solemn vow never to see anything made by Nicholas Cage since National Treasure .. o.k .. really .. since Moonstruck. Only good thing about that movie with the fact he only had one hand .. I'm always in favor of him being dismembered in some way :)

On a different note. The Robin Williams is set to star in a movie that might not cause your eyes to bleed ... Man of the Year. Also. He's set to star in Mrs.Doubtfire II. I feel sorry for Pajiba .. I'll go bake you guys a cake or something ...

Vive La Revolution!

Quick, everyone get in your hummer and let's kill Hollywood! I've had enough of this disrespectful attitude towards women. This movie put it over the top. Yup. This one crappy movie. All the porn they've been making all this time is totally o.k tho. Come on! Trust me, it's all worth it. Some of you might go to jail, but I'm willing to take that risk. :)

I love seeing everyone argue like this, but, some of you really need to lighten up a bit. EVERYONE (including women, minorities, and gay midgets with erectile dysfunction) has it pretty damn good in America compared to everyone else in the rest of the world. So relax. Smell the roses.

Stop bitching on a movie review site. Get a cat. Jesus ... back on topic to the movie. Looks bad but I won't be seeing it. Made a solemn vow never to see anything made by Nicholas Cage since National Treasure .. o.k .. really .. since Moonstruck. Only good thing about that movie with the fact he only had one hand .. I'm always in favor of him being dismembered in some way :)

On a different note. The Robin Williams is set to star in a movie that might not cause your eyes to bleed ... Man of the Year. Also. He's set to star in Mrs.Doubtfire II. I feel sorry for Pajiba .. I'll go bake you guys a cake or something ...

Anything with Nicolas Cage drives me nuts. I won’t be watching Wicker Man…

I wish there were a more articulate way of saying this, but America has become a bunch of whiny little pussies.

Everyone here is a victim...so tragic.

Get over yourselves assholes. Assholes include, but are not limited to: Christians, atheists, whites, blacks, women, men, rich, middle-class, poor, disabled, cat-people, dog-people Republicans, Democrats, and the all encompassing cat-loving disabled woman of (any) color, who must constantly fight off the oppressive Man.

Also, I don’t know who said it, but citing a women’s study course as a source is hilarious. As long as it’s the bullshit propaganda you believe, it’s ok, right? And last time I checked, Wikipedia is not a reputable source either.

Apparently, declaring your ethnic background and sex justifies your opinion. So to back up my claim, I’m according to the U.S. Census, a non-white female…

LaBute — a Mormon convert who eventually left the LDS church but maintained its prudish sexual morality...

And this guy directed "The Wicker Man"? The movie that is famous for its rampant pagan sexuality? I knew the remake was going to be a clunker from the moment I first heard of it, but my gods, it's like someone was doing a "Producers" on this flick and wanted to make it Teh Worst Movie EVAR.

Reading all this is incredibly frustrating because it's so typical. Did MSNBC and FoxNews just take the form of a movie review discussion board? There's so much yelling and name-calling, I'd be surprised if anyone walks away thinking their opinion was heard or feeling like they learned something. It never ceases to baffle me as to why personal attacks go hand-in-hand with disussions about race, sex, religion, politics, gender, sexual preference, etc., seeing that these complaints are based on personal attacks (real or imagined) in the first place. It's a sign of weakness when people resort to insults and name-calling in the middle of a discussion/argument, revealing a lack of confidence, intelligence, self-control, or any number of other issues. Anyway, I'm sure this message will fall on deaf ears without reference to the female anatomy or how much more oppressed I may be than you, so blah, blah, blah . . .

Sumer is icumen in!

You just exhibited judgment by name calling yourself.

ha ha

I've truly learned something.

BOOBIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

In recent attempts to deflect attention away from the been-there-done-that mayo-Net re-tread political debate which has overwhelmed this comment section (and which has threatened to edge Pajiba into just another blah-blog site containing the same carbon-copy insults and expressions and ideas I can pretty much scavenge from a PerezHilton.com feedback thread when the mouth-breathers are having an uncommonly insightful day), I'm afraid I'm going to have to give due praise to A. Ryan's somewhat more allusive/literary effort over the jejeune-yet-retro-cute contribution left above by Julius.

(And I expect some a few lauds for my textbook run-on sentence, in turn.)

Hot damn! It's an internet catfight! Why don't we all just settle this with some mud wrestling and then go out for a drink.

"No, sweetheart. They'd rape you first."

Indeed, sugartits, you have a point. As I am female, it is a given that I will raped at some point in my life, as 100% of the men around me are drooling mouthbreathers without any capacity to control their violent sexual urges.

Well played, sweetcheeks. In my place, you have put me.

(MaiGirl - much love. For the record, I do know a thing or three about spousal abuse.)

I read This Entire Thread. My IQ just dropped 23 points.

I heard they're making This Entire Thread into a movie - starring Nicholas Cage.

Bwah! That's awesome.

"Men may consider me inferior because I have a vagina, but they probably won't strip me naked, tie me to a pickup truck, and drag me down the street until I'm dead."

Fuck being respected! At least I'm not being killed! Hooray for our enlightened present!

S., it's not about who's-more-persecuted-than-who, it's about the fact that racism and sexism both really, really suck, and for some reason, in a movie like this, we as viewers are supposed to applaud misogyny. And while sexism isn't as prevelant as it was, it's still an ingrained part of society. Your very comment:
My guess is I wouldn't even notice them, probably because I am not a) a hardcore feminist looking for a fight is rather sexist, when you think about it. You're saying, "Hey, men, I'm nothing like those boot-wearing hairy dykes who call themselves feminists!" You're dissociating yourself from other women. And you add to it by saying that your view would be shared by all the intelligent, enlightened women of your acquaintance... a.k.a. non-feminists like yourself.

Well, I do consider myself a reasonable, intelligent woman of decent education and a fair amount of common sense, and a feminist, and I read Jeremy's review about the rampant misogyny in this movie and thought, "He's right, that's pretty fucked up. Good thing this movie sucked donkey balls and no one will see it."

I guess what I'm saying is, feminism is going to exist and people like me are going to be a little irked until we are no longer judged by our genitalia. Again, while I sincerely appreciate not being beaten and raped merely for being a woman when I leave my house every morning, I'd like the whole package of respect that comes with being a human being. That's pretty much what every "minority" wants.

I'd say more, but this isn't I Blame the Patriarchy. Heh.

And I posted it twice. What the hell, sorry about that. Um, Pajiba rocks! Jeremy, you're an intellectual dreamboat!

*cough*

Man what a shitstorm, one that gets well away from the movie. Just one point: you needn't be in a minority to be persecuted. Your group may be a majority nationwide, but if you're (say) the only white kid in your school, what good does some nationwide statistical white majority/social supremacy do you? Most people don't or can't live in a way that reflects statistics like these, drawn from millions of examples (too many to even see at once, let alone comprehend)- statistics that your readers seem to think MEAN SOMETHING.
Sexism and prejudice is common to all genders and orientations. Some of the most bigoted people I have ever met have been gay (not, alas, an original observation). Personally, I'm tired of movies that mock or demonise straight, conservative white males, even though I'm not one myself. It's a soft target that shows a lack of courage and imagination, and the opposite of constructive. But most big budget hollywood flicks are, or contain, unsubtle hate propoganda for some group against some other. They are only a stage removed from "Jew Suss" or "Birth of a Nation".

That was damn well said, tetetetigi. :)

2 things: At least half of all spousal abuse cases are by women against men,

and the real issue here is not the treatment of gays, blacks, women, or the middle class in films, but the unfair depiction of ALBINOS.

Seriously, can you name one movie, besides Powder, where an albino is cast in a positive light? I can't, yet there are over 60 documented cases of films involving albinos as killers, henchmen, and everything else offensive. I know this because the anti-albino-defamation-league told me after davinci code came out.

People give Neil LaBute a lot more credit for being deep than he actually is. My take on his movies isn't that they're representative of society's misogny or the war between the sexes or anything as profound as that, but that they're intensely personal.

He has a recurring theme of men being unheard by women--either she's literally deaf, as in In the Company of Men or she's cut his tongue out, as in this one. I think he was molested as a little boy, told his mother about it and she refused to hear what he was telling her. He hates her for it but at the same time desperately wishes she would've heard him and been good to him. You can see that in ITCOM, where he splits the male into the one who makes a sport of psychologically destroying the woman and the one who genuinely wants her love but can't make her hear him. I think it's good that he works through these issues by making films instead of going out and hurting real women (as far as we know), but I'll pass on being subjected to it.

I'm glad I read this review before going to see the movie. I really liked the original and thought it'd be fun to see it updated, but as soon as I saw it was Neil LaBute I decided against it. That, and it sounds like he took everything that was fun about the original and tossed it out the window. I just can't enjoy LaBute's movies. I'm all for brutally honest examinations of human behavior but he doesn't give you that, he just gives you his own hateful psychological problems. There are artists out there whose fucked up psyches are interesting and enlightening (Bukowski, for example), but peeking inside LaBute's soul makes me want to take a very long, very hot bath and then hug my kids.

THANK YOU.

This was not only the worst remake I've ever seen, it's one of the worst FILMS I can remember. It was obvious practically from the first five minutes that LaBute just did not get the point of the original Wicker Man AT ALL. It's not "Paganism is bad", but rather "Arrogance is dangerous". By removing the fact that the cop is a tight-assed fundamentalist Christian (and thanks for cluing me in to the reason for that stupid change), the script completely upended the whole plot, since that's the reason not only why the inhabitants of Summerisle (and why the extra "s"??) lured the cop there, but also why he fell for the whole thing. He was so busy getting offended by the paganism and so abysmally ignorant of other religious realities that he never saw the Wicker Man coming.

But nooooo. LaBute had to go the tackiest route possible, grabbing his balls in utter hysteria at the very idea that women might have something to say when it comes to religion. And just what is up with that change anyway? Why did he feel it necessary to make this what used to be called Dianic paganism? It's not like the kind of religion seen in the original doesn't exist anymore - I know plenty of American pagans. The superfluousness of the whole concept speaks volumes of LaBute's intense problems with women.

Take for instance the fact that the island he presents is so...grim. Nobody seems to have any fun, ever. In the original, you had a population of happy, hard-working, lusty people, tilling the earth and each other, content in their lives. In this version, the place is utterly joyless. No music, no dancing, no smiling, no laughter. Just frowsy, unwashed hags (old and young) ruled over by a horrid cliche of a wicked stepmother. Dreadful.

And the whole thing about "we came here hundreds of years ago to worship the Goddess". OH BITCH PLEASE. No one makes those kinds of claims anymore. That whole "tradition" thing went out the window years ago. Any pagan worth his/her salt knows that for the self-serving bullshit it is. If LaBute was going to make a film about a particular religion, I'd have expected him to do at least a bit of research first. Besides which, the kind of (un-)community presented here is completely unviable - there's no way it could survive fifty years, let alone five hundred.

I've been a happy worshipper of the Goddess for thirty years now. The original Summerisle is a place I've always longed to visit. But you couldn't possibly pay me enough money to step foot on LaBute's Island of the Fanged Vagina Monsters. (And yes, I am a woman myself.) It's beyond ridiculous - as the reviewer states here, it's insulting and pathetic, telling far more about LaBute and his genital panic than even he probably realizes.

Feh.

One more comment, in case anyone here didn't know:

The worst thing about this whole stupid film is that Robin Hardy (the director of the original Wicker Man) has been trying to get his update made for years now. Originally titled Riding the Laddie, now Cowboys for Christ, it's about a young fundie couple who come to Summerisle to convert the natives, and run afoul of the Wicker Man. It was set to star Christopher Lee in a reprise of his original role, and Sean Astin was going to play the young Bible-thumping dude. (Don't know who they were eying for the woman in the pair.) It sounded like a really interesting update.

But this utter piece of shite has probably trashed any chance of a really good take ever getting made. So that's another thing that TWM fans have to growl at LaBute about.

The albino in "Me, Myself and Irene" was nice, Fozzy. :)

Ok, Matt, honey--not that you'll ever read this, but I know--sometimes white people do get discriminated against by minorities. Bummer! I'm sure it is tough to be a fine, upstanding honky in annexed Mexican land; I'm white in the South, and man, do the darkies have long memories! I feel your pain, friend. And yes, sexism isn't the problem it once was. Now only one-quarter of women are sexually assaulted in their lives, instead of 100%! Now that's progress! Gosh-darnit, it makes me so proud to be an American, I'm'a go vote Republican!

(That last post was brought to you by the Society for Disgusted Irony.)

Here's a link for all you bitches.

http://www.ishkur.com/posters/blogging.jpg

Go spend some time doing something about your gripes instead of posting them in an insignificant (to the topic) forum.

""Hey, men, I'm nothing like those boot-wearing hairy dykes who call themselves feminists!" You're dissociating yourself from other women."

Not true at all. What I am disassociating myself from is the type of woman - in my experience, rarely hairy and rarely gay - who imagines a monster with nefarious motives in every man she sees. I definitely disassociate myself from that. I also don't think it's the norm of feminism, by the way, which is why I included the adjective "hardcore".

Don't kneejerk, please. And for the love of god, don't talk to me like I'm Ann Coulter.

Love,

A liberal girl who shaves, wears boots, votes green, and fucking HATES the term "dyke".

I knew when the previews hit the screen that shit had hit the screen. And I still can't believe I have friends of Mine (though I'd never admit it) looking FORWARD to Ghost Rider? Anyone have a way to save them?

And just because I have this insane NEED to be part of the crowd I'll bite too. Wouldn't it just be easier to call each other crackers, whores, kykes, nigs, waps, pollaks, micks, cunts, twats, fags, heebs, towel heads, wappy-nigs, gooks, chinks, japs, zipperheads, honkeys, whitebread, tar baby, REPULICAN, liberal!, et al.??? The stream would be shorter and I wouldn't feel like I just sat through a red0bull fueled episode of crossfire while I was the OTHER guy watching Jon Stewart and the dick in the bowtie go back and forth.

Now I await the genius who will, no doubt, skewer me for using more racial epithets than gendered or political...to which note i will undoubtedly be called a racist. Kill Whitey! BTW...the review for the new National lampoons movie is lighter fare fopr those who need to decompress!

If i were going to talk to you like Ann Coulter, I would... well, actually, I would never seriously respond to Ann Coulter. I'd walk away. Maybe I'd throw garbage. And, um, I'm not particularily fond of the term dyke, either.

So maybe you claim you were dissotiating yourself from... writes movies for the Lifetime movie network. ("Beaten with a Tire Chain: The Mary Jean Flanagan story!") Ok, go ahead.

I mostly got annoyed by your assertion that I should be okay with the present state of things because at least I'm not getting killed for being a woman. Again -- let me go back to my original point -- racism and sexism both suck, they're both ingrained in this culture, they're both something a lot of people have strong opinions on, and for some reason, the present state of affairs is supposed to be "acceptable" because it ain't as bad as it was. Everyone quit complaining!

It's NICER, it's just not the final product some of us are working towards. A movie like this, we say, "Well... ok, so there's some work left if movies like this are still being made. Good thing it's gawd-awful."

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to find snarky things to say about Matt in El Paso, A.K.A The Only White Man in Texas.

No hard feelings,
Tigi

This will teach me to drink on cold medication:

"Maybe the woman you claim to be dissociating yourself from writes for the Lifetime Movie Network."

Man, I'm everything I hate in a commenter this week.

Oh tete, I spit my tea when I read:

writes movies for the Lifetime movie network. ("Beaten with a Tire Chain: The Mary Jean Flanagan story!")

That's the whole Lifetime network in a nutshell!

"I mostly got annoyed by your assertion that I should be okay with the present state of things because at least I'm not getting killed for being a woman."

To be fair, I wasn't really asserting that you should be okay with the present state of things; I was proclaiming that *I* am.

But then, I'm a caucasian female who lives in a relatively progressive large city and who has spent her life pointedly and intentionally avoiding people with regressive attitudes - whether they be backward 'redneck'-types, ass-smacking old boys in business, or affluent frat boys with entitlement issues (the most dangerous of the lot, in my opinion) - so I suppose I'm not confronted with a lot of bullshit on a daily basis. I have the capacity to bristle; I just don't need to very often.

And to be honest, the times I HAVE been confronted with those types (which is how I know to avoid them), I've gotten pissed, but I haven't painted the entire gender with that brush. Maybe I should have, but I didn't. There are a lot of decent decent, forward-thinking men in the world, and the assholes are - in my experience - in the above groups. So I avoid those groups. Even if it means turning down a job I'd probably like to have, or not spending a lot of time in my hometown, or, when I was a lot younger, turning down invites to college parties.

The thing is, and I'll tell you this because I like you, I was raised in a violent home with an alcoholic stepfather who beat the shit out of my mother periodically over the course of ten years. So I know a thing or two from assholic men who take advantage of women. They're out there.

I made a decision when I was very young to always avoid men like my stepfather, and once I figured out where to watch out for them, and what cues to heed, the rest was pretty easy. My sister did NOT make the same decision, did not pay attention to the same cues, and ended up with a guy pretty much like my stepfather.

And I guess here's the way I look at it - and you won't like this at all, because it's a very unpopular viewpoint, and by the way, my comment is turning out to be much longer than I'd intended:

My mother and my sister were both ultimately responsible for their situations. I love them both and I've cried more tears for them both than you can imagine, but at the end of the day and if one is honest, they were ultimately responsible.

My mother knew when she married my stepfather that he was an alcoholic. And she knew, because she knew very well his former wife, that he was violent. Yet she married him anyway. And stayed married. She kicked him out a few times and always let him back in. She believed his threats that he'd kill me if she left, even though he was never anything but sweet with me; never laid a hand on me, never yelled at me. He'd threaten to kill me if she left, and then pull me aside later and tell me he'd "never ever do something like that to me" because he loved me and "was just trying to talk sense into" my mother.

In the end, when she finally had enough, she got rid of him by giving him money.

In my sister's case, she too knew her boyfriend was a violent alcoholic drug addict - before she started dating him. Yet she moved in with him anyway. And even after he tied her to a chair one night, beat her bloody, and held a gun to her head, and even though she escaped after he passed out - half-running, half-walking 25 miles to a friend's house, and then flew to California to escape him - even though all of this, she went back six months later and stayed with him for eight more years.

When SHE finally left was after *he* dumped *her* so he could fuck her eldest daughter, who was 17 at the time. (My sister is much older than I am. Also: hooray for Jerry Springer!)

Now, I know my family's stories are not everyone's stories. Some guys out there are fucking psychos. Some guys kill their women, either during the relationship or after. Many women cannot escape. I know it happens, and I know it happens a lot, and I know the system often isn't fair to these women. (The cops never did ANYTHING to help my mother, incidentally. Small town; it was a husband's right to keep his wife in line. I know from this stuff, I'm telling you.)

BUT - what I do maintain is that more often than people care to admit, women are usually - not always, but usually - given very clear signs very early on that something ain't quite right with their men. If you're on your third date and he loudly ridicules you in front of the waiter when you mispronounce 'escargot', you've probably got a guy who's going to eventually hit you. A guy who yells at and/or patronizes women is nearly 100% of the time an eventual abuser. I've probably avoided a half-dozen abusive relationships by recognizing this trait before the age of 15.

So yes - many times women can't get out. But I maintain that sometimes they *reach* that point in the relationship because they ignored dozens of warning signs along the way. By the time the first blow lands, it's usually too late.

My problem with the feminist movement is that it very often disempowers women. A man hits you? You're a victim. You get passed over for a promotion? Victim. A frat boy date rapes you? Victim.

The thing about it is, by waving the flags of women's victimization at the hands of the cockmaster, the movement is stripping them of their power. That's my opinion. It pisses a lot of people off, but it's the way I look at it. You tell a woman she has the POWER to avoid shitty relationships, that she has the POWER to insist on a better job - even if it means leaving her current employer (I know this is not typically applicable to the working poor, by the way, who are pretty much screwed, unfortunately), that she has the power to kick a would-be date rapist in the crotch and tell everyone who will listen that he's a piece of shit and stand up to his accusations that she's a slut - tell a woman she can and should do these things, and THAT'S empowerment.

No, it's not that easy. It's not. But I'd rather feel like I have the power and then fail, than to constantly cower in the dark fearing every man who comes along. If my choice is between fear and no fear, I'll choose the latter.

It's just me. Again, I don't expect you to agree, or even to not be infuriated. And also, I sincerely apologize for the length of this comment, which could at this point safely be called a dissertation. Oops.

No hard feelings on my end, either. :)

P.S. My disclaimers and uses of words like "often", "usually", and "many" should have made it clear, but just in case it wasn't - my viewpoint is not flawless, does not apply to everyone in every situation, and does not apply *whatsoever* to women in societies that, for instance, practice genital mutilation/refuse to allow girls to go to school/force women to wear burkas.

Nope, I read all of the posts, Vi. I don't mind being disagreed with.

You're more feminist than I initially thought, S. I think we have the same aim and different ways of expressing it. Best of luck to you.

... This was the most I've ever commented on a movie that I have no desire to see. Wait, no, I commented a lot on the DaVinci Code, too.

Also, Brutus, your comment about the lawn equipment was the most hilarious I have read on this thread thusfar. When Charlotte gives me that cookie I'll give it to you.

S, I hear you loud and clear about women's bad judgment calls, but you're ignoring the sorry-ass fact that men rape/beat the shit out of/discriminate against women a hell of a lot more often than the reverse. Empowering women to up and leave when this happens to them is only half the battle in that it doesn't address these men's shitty, scary conduct. I have plenty of fantastic feminist men in my life (I tend to avoid the shitbirds, as well) and, thus, know bad male behavior is neither ingrained nor inevitable. It does, however, happen every day, all over the world.

After reading halfway through these comments and getting fed up with all the straw men and ridiculous comebacks, I've determined that while Matt was feeling a bit sorry for himself in his little mini-rant about how being a member of your own nation's majority demographic is so unfair, Candice is a complete idiot.

Oh Jen. Thank you so much for your very useful comment.

I'm still not sure why pointing out some demographic information makes me a "complete idiot." Yes, I mentioned that it was available at Wikipedia (silly me, I'd never used it before and had no idea it was so reviled). Nevertheless, as pointed out by another commenter, the number was taken from actual census data that is easily researched online and verified. It's even referenced via the Wiki page. The only reason I even mentioned it was so people could look it up themselves if they didn't believe me. Go figure!

Had I known it would upset so many people for me to bother looking up actual numbers, I wouldn't have wasted my effort. One of my pet peeves is people who make up still numbers like that when it's just as easy to look them up, so I couldn't resist.

But, of course, the larger question (in my idiotic opinion, anyway) would be why someone would feel "persecuted" simply because there are more Latinos than caucasians where they live. As I stated before, with white Christian dudes occupying so many influential positions in both government and society at large, I would posit that even the most outnumbered white man in America still has a quite an enviable position.

Having come back to one major clusterfuck of a comment page (I had no idea), I am pretty embarrassed to even be associated with this. But I'd be even more embarrassed if I just let someone call me a "complete idiot" without saying something. I'm a grad student who does a shit-ton of research on a regular basis; when it comes to pinning down demographics and finding/using reliable and useful information, I'm not a novice. And as a woman dating "out of my race" and living in the South (my fianceè is Puerto Rican), I don't feel I'm entirely unqualified to put my two cents in on a discussion about race in America. (No less than a white guy in Texas, at least.)

So... if some dude wants to complain about not getting enough respect for his whiteness, he can say whatever he wants, but spare me the condescension and the freaky hyperbole.

But yeah, seriously, this shit makes freerepublic.com look measured and reasonable.

PS: And I'm DEFINITELY not letting up on Christians anytime soon, so don't even bring THAT shit up!

Holy crap, Fozzy's right about the albinos being presented in such a negative light. Hey, did you see the way they were portrayed in 'The Descent'? Its fucking shameless.

Also Candice, if you're really ashamed to have commented in this forum, you could just as easily stop commenting. I guess it just can't be allowed to slide when not everyone is willing to just roll over and agree with you, huh? And considering you threw a figure at me that didn't even include the contested race (hispanics) in its numbers, I'm surprised you haven't been kicked out of whatever graduate school you snuck into for having such shitty research habits (WIKEPEDIA?! get fucking serious).

As for my own shitty research, you'll note I consented to my own (unintentional)exaggeration (sp?) and have been more than willing to agree with good points or achnowledge when I was mistaken. You would have known that if you actually read my comments, instead of skimming them for buzzwords so you could have the leverage to spray more self righeous bullshit all over the place.

Good call Jen.

Good God, you are really bizarre. I've explained my reasoning thirteen different ways, if none of those things merit at least a polite, rational response, then there's no talking to you. Also, I don't recall you "consenting" anything, just a lot of venom spewing. WIKIPEDIA! WIKIPEDIA! WIKIPEDIA!

I wasn't going to comment any further, and won't after this. I just felt it would be appropriate to respond to a direct comment towards me (one that didn't offer any support for my supposed idiocy, but whatever, what else is new?). I don't need everyone to agree with me -- unlike some -- but I don't have to take a cheap potshot, posted DAYS and DOZENS of comments after the fact.

You don't know me, and you don't know anything about my education experience, my own experiences with racism, or anything else about me for that matter. All you know is that I challenged something you said and you keep having major freakouts over it. Keep focusing on the Wikipedia nonsense; it seems to be distracting others, but I've certainly noticed that you've been all too happy to focus on that one aspect while ignoring any actual points I've attempted to make. Secretly, it makes me all giggly inside.

Whatever. If you think I'm full of self-righteous bullshit because I deigned to post my opinion, then I invite you to take a look in the fucking mirror. It's a comments section; if you can't deal with differing opinions, go ahead and turn O'Reilly back on. If you're so sensitive about this topic, then I invite you to think about why it hurts you so very freakin' much. And if all you've got is cheap shots about my education, then you don't have very much, now do you?

In the meantime, just know all your personal insults cheapen any point you have to make. And yeah, now that I've had a moment speak in my defense, I'm outta here. Nice to see the Internet fostering understanding, as usual.

PS: Don't forget: WIKIPEDIA!

I just noticed you can't even SPELL Wikipedia. Or "self-righteous." You might wanna run spellcheck next time you set out to malign someone's education level. Just a suggestion.

I know, I promised I wouldn't post anymore, but THAT I definitely couldn't resist. Heh!

"Why is it still OK in Hollywood to treat women as the malevolent Other when pretty much every other special-interest group has found a way to prevent being so thoroughly demonized? "

Hmmmmm have you ever seen anything with Adam Sandler? Or Mel Gibson? Or basically every second "comedy" out there?

Unless you are a straight caucasian male you are being ridiculed all over the place.

And let´s not forget that it´s still considered "funny" by many idiots when a woman slaps or beats a man.

Thank God that's over. Agreed to a point Thomas, but I didn't think 'Hard Candy' or 'Misery' were very funny movies at all. Maybe if Adam Sandler had been the victim in either one of those. That Kathy Bates though. puurrrr :)

"Maybe if Adam Sandler had been the victim in either one of those."

I must admit that I'd pay serious money to watch Kathy Bates slap the shit out of Sandler on film.

Since we're making requests....can she backslap Ben Stiller as well? I'd be the first in line to pay for that.

If you can get KB to line up Sandler and Stiller and just go 'wobbida-wobbida-wobbida' back and forth, I'd pay $20 for that!

OMG, there are so many comments on here! LOL and, TK, sorry for the silly comment =) no hard feelings. these comments are getting funny!

Wow, S., had you made yourself this clear in the beginning, you would have cut down on the flames. I don't disagree with a thing that you said, and although you were not writing to me, I want to say that you have a lot of good points. The fact of the matter is that both men and women suffer under patriarchy. We have a lot of cultural scripts that we follow based upon these myths. What probably happened in your family is that your mother and sister believed that cultural hype that you can "change a man." Believe me, my sister fell for that one, although not with such disaserrous results. Also, lets not forget the "bad boy" myth. Nice guys often get really screwed over behind that crap. Men sometimes believe that its okay to "rough up", be possessive about, or dominate a woman, and lets not forget the whole "no means yes" or gettin' 'er liquored up to get your way sexually.

While many of these ideas are clearly Neaderthal in nature, they are still very much alive in our culture. Even women's romance novels often include an element of force or lack of consent in a "love scene." These fine lines are so easily crossed, and when they are, they often constitute a crime. This is not to say that everyone involved in such a situation is not responsible for their conduct. My point is that we need to be very aware of what we do and say, and what cultural constructs and assumptions we are acting upon.

And I agree, we need to empower women. My father was and is a large part of my life. He taught me to love, respect, and defend myself, and between he and my strong mother, I learned to believe in my own power. The one man who tried to preliminarily take advantage of my on a date probably has a ball that is still missing the light of day as we speak.

And now that my hads are tired, I bid you good day.

Thank you for your comments, Serai. I found myself agreeing with roughly 95% of what you said, give or take 5%. Good to know that someone actually understands what was going on in the original (a great film, by the way). This review confirmed what I already knew - that I would be avoiding yet another ill-advised, unnecessary remake. As for all the background noise going on, I'll just say this: I would give Serai a hug and a smooch on the cheek for her sane, well-reasoned post, but I'd be too scared of all you hate-mongers persecuting me for my act of non-trollery.

You may resume persecuting each other with your sandy vaginas.

Has the sandy vagina really reached the epidemic levels that these pages reflect?
And when did it become okay to talk about your sandy vagina?
I feel old. Mostly because I prefer to hide my sandy vagina behind a veil of shame and martyrdom/masochism.

And if we're going to have Kathy Bates torture Ben Stiller, I submit that she have a go at Jack Black as well. I just don't like him.

And Loob, I thought most women would hide their sandy vaginas behind underwear.

I need a shower now.

When you're dealing with sand, it's best to go commando.

Then how do you keep more sand from getting in there? I mean, I'm not sure I understand how this works.

LOL :D
(dang I hate that acronym, but *heeheehee* also looks pretty sad.)

An old boyfriend of mine used to get really pissed off whenever he saw a guy getting kicked in the balls as the "punch line" in any movie. (Cut to guy writhing on the ground in excruciating pain) "Hahahaha! That's SO funny!" He said if they showed a woman getting kicked in the crotch or punched in the boobs or anything like that in movies, it's horrible "abuse" and the perpetrator would soon be punished -- possibly by a good kick in the testicular region. (Cut to guy writhing on the ground in excruciating pain) "Hooray! That jerk totally deserved it!" Is this movie maybe some sort of retribution for all those nut-bashings we've chuckled at and cheered on all these years?

crackers, whores, kykes, nigs, waps, pollaks, micks, cunts, twats, fags, heebs, towel heads, wappy-nigs, gooks, chinks, japs, zipperheads, honkeys, whitebread, tar baby, REPULICAN, liberal!, et al.???

I'm feeling left out. Does anyone know the bad word for Hungarians?

Look Sandor, just because you're feeling left out doesn't mean you can just make up stupid names for fictional countries. Asshole.

Wykupedia.

Sorry Matt. Me Bad.

Hey Jen.

Could you (or someone else) explain Matt's behavior. I was fine with it until I came to the part. I don't understand the rancor -- I think that that is a good word. Rancor: deep-seated enmity(?)

Sorry. I meant to say: Came to 'asshole' part. . .

Oh, sorry. I guess sarcasm doesn't translate too well over the internet. Oh well.

Just for some more info about the Latin, 'malus' really means bad, not evil, but the translation is perfectly acceptable. And someone said that 'manus' was a word which is often thought to mean man. Manus actually means 'hand' and is feminine. If someone hasn't already said it, 'vir' means man,

Thank you, Jeremy Fox! I have been trying to tell people how bad this film is since I saw it 2 weeks ago. Now I will just refer them to your column.

The only thing I would add is that LaBute's totally shameless borrowing from other films includes "Dark Secret of Harvest Home" male mutilations and just a dash of the divine feminine from "The DaVinci Code."

One thing you can say for the original "Wicker Man" is that careful research was done into the pagan rituals it protrayed, whereas in the remake one wonders if LaBute actually bothered to watch all the films he ripped off or just read about them online.

The only cliche LaBute missed is that none of the women on Summerisle work tee-shirts saying "A Woman Without a Man is Like a Fish Without a Bicycle." We'll look for that in his next film.

What a crappy movie. I can`t believe nobody mentioned the worst scene of all . Nick Cage running around in a bear outfit . How stupid was that? I`m glad they burnt him up , they should have burned the film before it ever got released.

Thanks for the feminist take on this. Given what you've said about this film maker, I will avoid his movies altogether.
I am curious to see the original Wicker Man, though.

but are there scenes of cage being burnt alive for beltane in a wicker basket...PLEASE say that there is burning nick caged in wicker in this shitkicker's flick...

"LaBute's film certainly offers no insights into relations between men and women, and it's only scary if you were frightened by a vagina as a child."

Hilarious.

I rarely bother to what remakes as they are usually pathetic.
But as i really like the original, i thought i'd give it a go.
I can honestly say i have never seen such a piss poor remake before.
I hope the cast and crew are suitably embarressed with this so called film.
Here's a tip for any other filmmakers out there who are thinking about remaking something..DON'T DO IT!!!, believe me, it WILL! be shit.

This is the worst fucking movie ever, wasted the whole time watching this shit of fucking movie. The ending sucks, too many white people, and worst religion on the face of the earth. You white people are a fucked up race.

You're right no doubt about the repugnant subtext but, as you say, as a feminist I was so distracted but the utter banality of the film that I really didn't get too worked up about any of the larger thematic issues. The whole set-up just has zero credibility so it's hard to really care.

Perhaps LaBute does have some kind of bee in his bonnet (pardon the pun) about gender politics but perhaps it's just a reflex for him to reach for these kind of subject matters -- he certainly had nothing of any interest to say about it here. I'm not so concerned about him being a misogynist as just a really bad filmmaker working in a genre that he has no understanding or respect for.

Please everyone see the original film ... and *don't* see the re-make first (if you have to see it at all) and don't read any spoilers! Actually, as far as I'm concerned the original film is a perfect example of how the best horror films merely carry an idea to its conclusions with some guts and intelligence. It's not a perfect film but it knows what it's trying to say and it delivers.