For all the hype it got I was expecting a lot more!

Excellent adaptation.

A lot more amusing than I thought it would be.

Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

Quite possibly the worst re-make of any film and quite possibly one of the worst films ever.

Having watched the original "The Wicker Man" and I'd read all the bad reviews for "The Wicker Tree" but I had to see it for myself. Massive spoilers below. After watching it, I thought that many of the reviewers missed it for what it really was - a much deeper movie than most realize. The underlying theme is religion - as neither the "born again" Christians nor the pagans come off in a positive light. Both Beth and Steve are portrayed as being extremely naive born again Christians - in their introductory scene at the Texas gospel church, their introducer's spiel makes it quite clear how little they all know about the pagans or Scotland for the matter as a nod to the innate provincialism of Christianity. (to say nothing of other religions as well!) Sir Lachlan's answer to Delia's question whether or not he really believed in their religion is a nod to Marx's well known quote "Religion is the opiate of the masses" - and it's true for both the pagans and the born-again Christians in the film. It's Sir Lachlan who dupes the pagans along to hide the fact that it's the nuclear plant that's responsible for the infertility all along. Sir Lachlan is just cynically leading along the townsfolk in believing that religion will be the answer to their ills - that is why there wasn't really much in way of outrage when Beth shoves him into the Wicker Tree and sets him on fire...deep down they all suspected his heart wasn't really into their beliefs. The film also plays on the hypocrisy that comes with religion on the part of both Beth's and Steve. They wear "promise rings" but the TV show scene of Beth's earlier musical career and her nearly succumbing to her old ways while watching it as well as Steve's cheating on Beth by having sex with Lolly aptly sums up the hypocrisy inherent in religion and the fact that religion is too artificial to contain human nature. The songs play a important part, particularly when the pagans change "There is Power in the Blood" into their horrifying chant when they corner Steve as the Wee Laddie in the castle and tear him apart and devour his flesh and blood as a nod to the maenads of ancient Greek myth. And it's also an allusion to how many pagan holidays have been converted to Christian ones. (Christmas, Halloween and Easter in particular) I think Hardy fully intended it to be a black satire on the nature of religion and I think he succeeded and it's a pretty relevant message in light of how modern religion and politics strive to demonize their opponents as being anything but a fellow human being which is exactly how Beth, Steven and the pagans perceive each other. Steve and Beth out of sheer naivete and ignorance while it's more of a thin veneer of civility by the pagans. To them, Beth and Steve are every bit the dumb animals like a goat or sheep that'd ordinarily be sacrificed. In which case the verse "the precious blood of the Lamb" takes on a very grim pagan undertone to it.

...and NOT in a good way. THE WICKER TREE is one of the most awful sequels in existence, a completely terrible movie made all the worse by the fact that THE WICKER MAN is one of the best British horror films in existence. I truly have no idea what Robin Hardy was thinking when he wrote and directed this; it looks like the man's talent left him many, many years ago.This time around, the action is set on the Scottish mainland, where a couple of American evangelists have turned up to preach their usual guff to the residents of a village. The American characters are one of the worst things about this; the acting is horrendous and they're saddled with the kind of goofy charm of an American PIE movie, not a supposed horror movie like this. They're completely at odds with the rest of the production.Elsewhere, the main thrust of the story of the first film is copied almost word for word, with a couple of (poor) twists to differentiate things. There's time for an extensive sub-plot to graphically portray what the "riding of the laddie" is all about, but I wonder why they bothered because it's hardly profound. Christopher Lee was meant to star in this but had to pull out due to ill health, with the reliable Graham McTavish (RAMBO) stepping in; Lee still appears but only in a brief greenscreen cameo. For once I'm glad he didn't appear for longer and debase himself with a leading role here.Former child actress Honeysuckle Weeks turns up, unrecognisably aged and forced to strip for the majority of her running time; you have to feel for her that things have come to this. But it's the tone of THE WICKER TREE that is so very, very wrong; that a sequel to one of the classics of British CINEMA, let alone the horror genre, made by the same writer/director of all people, should totally miss the mark and become this kind of mess. All you can do is shake your head and cry.

Associating yourself with a successful previous film is always a double-edged sword, as the guaranteed audience from the first film are liable to be more critical if the subsequent movie is short of the mark.What can I say about this movie? The original "Wicker Man" was like a finely crafted sculpture, while the "Wicker Tree" by comparison is more of a turd on a stick. OK, perhaps that is a bit harsh, and I did find the movie reasonably entertaining, but there is something of a gulf in quality between these two films.The Plot In essence – two "born again" young people (one former pop singer and a reformed gambler) leave the American "God Belt" to convert the inhabitants of Scotland. No luck in the cities, so they go to the country where a local community (who seem to have a dearth of children) take them to their hearts before killing them as a part of a May day ritual.The issues Firstly, the setting. Yes, I could see a remote rural island community being seduced into Pagan ritualism, but this is set on "the border between Scotland and England", i.e. mainland Britain. In fact much of the filming took place not that far from Edinburgh, a major city.Secondly, the motivation. In the original, an isolated rural island community turned to human sacrifice when its sole source of income, fruit and veg, failed disastrously. In the sequel, however, the boss of the local nuclear power plant is aware that his facility is leaking deadly radioactive material into the water table which has rendered the local population sterile. OK, if you live in a small community next to a nuclear power station and suddenly nobody can have children, surely your first suspicion would be the plant itself – you wouldn't let the plant owner convince you that the dramatic rise in childlessness was as a result of displeasing pagan deities. I mean, it's not like nuclear power doesn't already have a reputation..Thirdly, the method. I am aware that a number of Wiccan followers were a bit concerned about the misrepresentation of their religion in the original film, but at least it all looked plausible to the viewer. Sadly, in the Wicker Tree the "pagan rituals" portrayed all seemed completely wacky. Did pagans really turn the may Queen into a human waxwork? Did they really chase someone around, catch them, rip them apart with their bare hands and eat them? Even if it were true it would still seem preposterous.Fourthly, the victims. When Edward Woodward's character flew over to the island to locate a missing girl, the audience was shocked when his good intentions were betrayed and he ended up sacrificed. In this film, however, the victims are annoying "God-bothering" Americans and it is a blessing to all when they end up slain.Fifthly, the loose ends. Why build a wicker tree? Why try to butcher an animal using a table circular saw? Why petrify the May Queen? There were only about five or six pickled May Queens on display, so this practise hadn't been going on for long, yet it clearly wasn't working – why continue? Why hadn't the childlessness of the village been spotted by the local Health Authority, bringing down a wave of investigations on the nearby nuclear plant? What was the point of Christopher Lee's bit, other than to tie in to the old film? Even then he wasn't referred to as "Lord Summerisle"..In conclusion, I actually quite like the movie for its silliness, but don't for one moment think that you will be getting another "Wicker Man"..