The Wicker Man (1973)

Sergent Howie (Edward Woodward, who without the "ward" becomes a terrible director), a police officer from mainland Scotland, has received an anonymous letter urging him to investigate the disappearance of young Rowan Morrison from her home on the remote Scottish island of Summerisle.  Howie flies a seaplane to the island and begins to poke around, but finds himself stonewalled at every turn.  The locals feign ignorance of the girl, her mother doesn't acknowledge Rowan's existence; all Howie gets for his efforts is frustration.

Not a clue

Even more frustrating for the strict Christian Howie is the fact that the island's people are obviously pagan.  As he wanders about town, he finds schoolchildren singing songs about sex, schoolgirls reciting the importance of the phallus in their culture, and a group of couples openly "doing it" outdoors.  When Howie eventually meets with Lord Summerilse (Christopher Lee), he declares that Rowan was most likely murdered as a sacrifice to the island's pagan gods.  That's pretty nasty if he's right, but there is something even more sinister happening on Summerisle.

Do these people look like they have something to hide?

That plot doesn't sound like much of a horror movie, does it?  The Wicker Man is an odd hybrid of genres (suspense/thriller, musical, and horror) that sound like they shouldn't gel properly, but are surprisingly effective when combined.  This won't knock Willy Wonka from the top of your "favorite musicals" list (it is on top, right?), but the folk stylings of the soundtrack provide some interesting moments that supplement the plot.

Example: Britt Ekland beating a wall and slapping her ass in the nude to music

As for the other elements, the film handles them in turn.  The horror does not become apparent until the very end, but the suspense is effective at a slow boil.

The acting in The Wicker Man is pretty solid, but most of the cast is forced by the plot to remain fairly impassive.  Edward Woodward was fine in the lead.  It's one thing to play a cop as Sgt. Killjoy, interrupting festivities and generally trying to play the part of a disapproving father figure, but Woodward was also able to lace his performance with an increasing degree of desperation.  Sometimes, it's the little additions that make all the difference.  Christopher Lee plays Woodward's opposite with relish, charisma, and the male equivalent of a bouffant. 

I generally like Lee for being such a good villain --- his voice alone is usually enough to make him watchable --- but this is definitely one of my favorite performances by him.  Lee isn't in much of the movie, but his presence makes all the difference.  Plus, he prances around while dressed as an ugly woman.  Bonus!  The only other noteworthy actors are a bevy of busty women.  Britt Ekland stands out the most, as she is given the most screen time as Sgt. Howie's would-be seducer and has a prominent nude scene (although the full-body shots were a body double, since Ekland had recently become pregnant).  Ekland is halfway decent here, but her talent still lies primarily with her body.  Diane Cilento was definitely the best actress in the film as the schoolteacher.  Hers is not a very large role, but she gets a little extra time as one of the characters that tries to explain the island's religion to Howie; she comes across as clever and earnest, although obviously hiding something.  Horror veteran Ingrid Pitt also has a small role as a sexy librarian.  She doesn't do much in her bit role, but I liked her.  Maybe it was the hair.

Pitt, about to record a message with her droid

This was director Robin Hardy's first effort behind the camera, and it would be his only directing credit for more than fifteen years.  I don't know why --- I thought he did a very good job.  The version I watched was the theatrical one, which is nine minutes shorter than the difficult to find special edition, but I still enjoyed the film and his direction.  The movie takes place mostly during the daytime, which is unusual for any horror or thriller movie.  Something sinister is obviously going on, but it is not hiding in the shadows, but in plain sight.  It was an interesting choice to include so many songs in the film, but they are handled pretty well; most of the songs provide interesting insights into the culture on the island.  There are a few stinkers in the soundtrack, but it is, for the most part, likable enough.  The best work Hardy does is with the pacing of the film.  He builds up the tension slowly, and it only feels like a horror movie when the mystery is revealed and the ending becomes apparent.  It's hard to make a good mystery and it's even more difficult to make a good horror movie --- Hardy did both at the same time, while avoiding just about every genre cliche in the book.

The terrible truth: Lee needs more hair product

The Wicker Man is definitely a bizarre film, though.  The tone is very atypical and there are more than a few moments that lean dangerously close to camp.  Luckily, the suspense is assembled effectively enough to keep most people from laughing at the more ridiculous scenes.

Oddly not humorous, in context

As much as I admire this film for being so different, that also makes it an acquired taste.  I bought this DVD about three years ago, and had never gotten around to watching it a second time.  Sure, I like the film, but it is so damn odd that I never felt like it fit my mood at any given time.  That's all that keeps me from giving it a truly fantastic rating --- a personal idiosyncrasy on my part.  Oh, and cosplay is weird.

Here's the Sneaker Pimps covering the song that Britt Ekland obviously sung and definitely did not have her voice dubbed over during.

Tom Jones

With ten Oscar nominations and four wins, how is it possible that I had never heard of Tom Jones before stumbling across it on Netflix?  Granted, 1963 was a while ago, but I can think of a few classic movies from that year --- The Birds, Dr. No, Hud --- that weren't even nominated for the Best Picture award that Tom Jones wound up winning.  Sadly, no one thought to cast a young Tom Jones as the title character in Tom Jones.  You might argue that Tom Jones didn't have commercial success until a year later, but I'm just going to chalk this one up to a casting director with no vision.

Who wouldn't want to see him accept an Oscar dressed like this?

Tom Jones is an adaptation of The History of Tom Jones, a Foundling, written by Henry Fielding and published in 1749.  That might not sound like an enticing source for a movie, but Fielding was known for his humor and sarcasm; this period piece is actually a comedy.  The story goes something like this: When Squire Allworthy (George Devine) returns home after many months in London, he finds an infant in his bed.  Naturally curious, Allworthy investigates and concludes that one of his servants, Jenny Jones (Joyce Redman), and his barber (Jack MacGowran) made themselves a loud and leaky reminder of their lust.  Being the mid-18th century, lust was seen as a bad thing, and Allworthy kicked both presumed parents out of his care.  He chooses to raise the bastard as a gentleman and names the little fellow Tom Jones.  Why Tom?  Why not?  It's not unusual.  ***self-inflicted face-slap***

Fast-forward twenty-odd years, and Tom Jones (Albert Finney) has become a kind and fun-loving young man, with a warm spot for any comely lady who is willing to...er...keep him warm?  Despite his many romantic entanglements, Tom is only seriously interested in Sophie Western (Susannah York).  Too bad she's a lady and he's a bastard.  Speaking of bastards, Squire Allworthy's nephew, Blifil (David Warner), hates the affection Tom seems to get from everyone, especially from the squire.  He plots with a few lackeys to get Tom disinherited by Allworthy and forever banished from his land.

200 years later, one of these men will be a Russian spy in Dr. Strangelove

Tom handles his abrupt change in fortune in stride, and proceeds to walk the earth as a poor man, albeit one with enough charm and wits to keep busy and stay healthy.  Meanwhile, Sophie's father and aunt decide that she should marry Blifil, whether she wants to or not.  Will these star-crossed lovers ever find one another?  Well, it's a comedy, so the answer will probably be yes.

The acting in Tom Jones is generally pretty solid.  Albert Finney is surprisingly charming as a young man.  Since my knowledge of Finney comes from the past twenty years, it blew my mind that he ever spoke normally or had a facial texture that didn't resemble a prune.  I don't know if I agree with Sophie's maid that he's "the handsomest man" she ever saw, but there are certainly less likely heartthrobs.  Susannah York was pretty good, too, although a large portion of her role was to balance outrage with lovey-dovey eyes.  Still, I thought she did well with the lead role.  I really enjoyed Hugh Griffith as her father; he was a lot of fun as a boorish, crass, and insensitive squire.

Best line (to a grieving son at a funeral):"Eh, cheer up."

David Warner is fine as the slimy and hypocritical Blithil, as is his fellow-in-sliminess, Peter Bull.  There are a few notable supporting performances by the women in this movie.  Diane Cilento was okay as a lusty peasant slut, Edith Evans was occasionally horrifying as Sophie's hoity-toity aunt, Joan Greenwood was solid as a horny but selfish noblewoman, and Joyce Redman had one of the least sensual dinner scenes ever.  Future Indiana Jones villain Julian Glover also plays a small part as a horrific person.

"My fortune cookie says I will die by Biblical curse...?"

Despite the presence of many, many recognizable actors and five Academy Award acting nominations, this film really isn't about the actors.  It's about the direction.  Tony Richardson took a fairly standard period piece and manipulated its style and tone to make something unique.  The opening scenes are presented as a silent movie, complete with piano music and dialogue cards.  There is a chase scene that is an obvious homage to Benny Hill.  There are freeze frames and bizarre scene wipes.  Richardson shows what is important in the story, not through dialogue, but by silence and ambient noise; Tom and Sophie fall in love during a dialogue-free extended montage (it had to be at least eight minutes long) and the hypocrisy of the "nobles" is shown through extreme close-ups of their savagery while they are hunting.  There are even a few scenes where Tom breaks the fourth wall and addresses the audience; the best bit is when he is looking for his stolen money, accuses a maid/hotel owner, and then asks the audience if they saw her take anything from his pants.

Despite the interesting direction (and cinematography), I just wasn't terribly impressed by Tom Jones.  While it certainly is a watchable movie, I expected more from one of the few comedic Best Picture Oscar winners.  My biggest problem was the lack of funnies in the script.  Granted, this film was made in 1963, so the misadventures of a horny guy might have been edgy and shamefully funny at the time, but --- wait, no.  This film was released in the same year Dr. No was, and James Bond is at least as much of a man whore as Tom Jones.  No, I'm afraid that Tom Jones is one of those movies whose humor wasn't that sharp to begin with and has only dulled over time.

There are also a few scenes that simply irritated me.  I was grossed out by the extended eye-fucking Tom and Mrs. Waters engaged in over a forty-course meal.  I don't know why, but watching people flirt with greasy food smeared on their faces makes me nauseous.  The other scene I had a problem with was when Sophie's aunt advises a potential suitor to rape Sophie --- in those words!  Maybe this was just a bone Tony Richardson wanted to throw to the oh-so-important sexual predator audience, but I felt that it was in poor taste; the character who obliges in the rape attempt isn't even important, so he could have been cut from the film entirely and whittled this film down to under two hours long.

Without any lasting humor (maybe it just wasn't slapstick or sarcastic enough for me?), the clever direction appears to be random at times.  Without a sense of purpose, these solid acting performances lose their impact.  All in all, this was an interesting step forward in style for mainstream filmmaking, but that doesn't make it fun to watch in the present.

Don't poke her eye out!