Wicker Man (the new one) Wherefore the "missing child" plot?

Unboxed spoilers follow, although if you have never seen this you probably shouldn’t.

However, Neil LaBute seems like an intelligent guy, so I’m wondering something pretty basic about the “plot.” After knowing the way it plays out, it just doesn’t make sense. So- on to the windmill-tilting:
Cage’s character is lured to the island via a false “mystery”, which is made known to him via a letter from his former sweetheart. Since he’s a do-gooder, he goes to the island to look for the girl.

Once he arrives, the islanders set to being mysterious, so that they can keep Cage there for long enough for him to be part of the fertility ceremony. All this time, he is presumably free to leave the island, though he doesn’t.

Since they eventually set upon him and force him into the sacrifice, then why don’t they do this as soon as he arrives and just keep him imprisoned until the day? What is the point of all of the “mystery”? (Except, of course, the movie)

The thing that I can see is that he has a gun, and they need to access the gun and unload it*. But this could have been accomplished in any number of ways. Is there any reason for all of the mysterious behavior (including the apparent killing of their off-island supplier) except to serve the misapprehension of Cage (and the audience)? I never saw the original so maybe it explains things better.

I know, I should just get over it.

*this is itself strange. Logically, they wanted him to think he had the gun, and everything was normal. If you have access to the gun, why not take it altogether and then capture him?

Never mind.

I finally watched the original one last night in anticipation of seeing the new one with a rifftrax. I had heard the new one was awful but it really sounds like I did the smart thing by not ruining my taste for the brilliant and subtle movie I watched last night by seeing the Cage one first. Of course now I’m kicking myself that I waited so long to see the original film but that’s a small price to pay.

I’m probably watching the Cage version next week with the rifftrax. The Mystery Science Theater 3000 crew should be able to keep the pain down (I hope).

In the original, the sacrifice had to be “willing”.

The victim had to take on a specific ceremonial role and walk right on up to the wicker man. Now, he didn’t actually volunteer to be killed, but he did play the role to get 9/10ths of the way to the sacrifice (he was also a virgin, and an agent of the state, and therefore the “king”, so he was a particularly attractive sacrifice) trying to rescue the girl, which was good enough for Summerisle and co. It wouldn’t do for their purposes to just club him over the head and keep him tied up in a closet until they were ready for the ceremony. He had a role to play.

I haven’t seen the remake. It doesn’t sound nearly as good. Replace the sex with bees? Why?

Have NOT seen the new one ( and don’t plan on it ), but in the original there is no gun. The reason the protagonist is lured into a series of actions is because for religious reasons ( the Summerisle religion ) it is necessary for him to freely choose his fate. At least in a sense. Not that he chooses to be sacrificed, but he chose to be the Holy Fool ( very important ), he chose not to be tempted and lose his virginity, etc.

From the original script:

*You, uniquely, were the one we needed.

A man who would come here of his own free will.

A man who has come here with the power of a king by representing the law.

A man who would come here as a virgin.

A man who has come here as a fool.

Get out of my way.

You are the fool, Mr. Howie - Punch, one of the great fool-victims of history, for you have accepted the role of king for a day, and who but a fool would do that?*

Edited to add: Err…or what Menocchio said ;).

  • Tamerlane

I am so pissed that I saw this one first. So pissed.

No Cage/Wicker Man thread is complete without this.

Heh - I had never seen that. Somehow.

I didn’t notice the hilarity contribution of the overbearing music, but in that format, wow.

See, this is why I hold out the vague hope that LaBute knew how ridiculous this was, and that somehow he’s in on the joke. Somehow. I just know it. He has to be, right?

Right?

I read an article recently on LaBute, can’t remember where, sorry. Possibly The Guardian. Anyways, he said there that he he knew he was going to upset a few people by doing his own version of such a classic film (and was still pretty happy with his own take on the story), but was somewhat surprised by the intensity of the condemnation that it received from fans of the original. He seemed to be serious.