georgemhands I Was recommended this film by a friend due to my huge interest in cult classic horror and thriller films, needless to say I was hugely disappointed by this film and would strongly urge anyone who may feel tempted to watch this film to not as it will simply be a complete waste of time and money. I could give this films the befit of the doubt and say it has not aged well due to it being made in the early 70s, however I feel that is simply not the case! The film drags on and does not really give the viewer any feeling expect from pure frustration, and as soon as the film reaches a 'climax' it is ruined by the film abruptly ending with the main character (a policemen) being burn alive in a huge wicker man hence the title. Stay well clear of this film, anyone who calls this a cult classic is simply offending the true cult classics such as the likes of "a clockwork orange" and "the Omen" both made is the same era and far far better!!

Eric Stevenson This is probably one of the best horror movies I've seen, although I admit it doesn't really try that hard to be scary. It's a shame that my introduction to this film was the cheesy Nicolas Cage version. This is better in every way, mostly because well, the acting is infinitely better. It was weird watching this knowing how it would end. That still didn't take away any enjoyment from the film. What's great about this film is how philosophical it is.We get a lot of great points raised about religion and other things like sexuality. It was hard to recognize such a young Christopher Lee. The pacing in this film was great, especially with how it didn't feel too long or short. The plot is that a religious police officer is going to this isolated island community to search for a missing girl. I don't know why the Nicolas Cage version had so much more women. ***1/2

MonsterVision99 The Wicker Man (1973) its a movie that has gained notoriety as time has passed since it was released. Its been called the "Citizen Kane" of horror movies but I don't think that's necessarily true. Its a really good movie and has some interesting ideas and themes and its executed almost perfectly but its not as great as something like The Exorcist or Rosemary's Baby, at least, I don't think it is.I cant think of anything that I dislike about this film, its well directed, well written, well acted, well everything, but it doesn't strike me as one of the best horror films ever made, I would say that its one of the best from the seventies.I have to say that I didn't find the ending to be satisfying, its really well made and its perhaps the most iconic scene in the movie, but I was really rooting for our main character, I just think that the ending is too much of a downer, but that's just me, otherwise, its a great movie.

guylyons When i saw this film in 1973 at the age of 20, alone at night in the dark, it stunned me. A genuine believable horror story. No special effects, a great script, fine performances, limited budget . Just about every box that needs to be ticked in a horror film was included. A haunting scene with folk music is one of the films most memorable moments. A cracking ending, with Christoper Lee in fine form, it is a work that cannot be praised highly enough.Another positive no stupid comedy scenes to wreck the flow and build up of tension as the film progresses. Why oh why cannot horror film makers produce work like this, instead of the unimaginative effect ridden slasher scenes with teens, in so many productions today.