That it was. But they were clearly disturbed and depressed. Non-disturbed, healthy people do not do what they did. They were all traumatized by the violent deaths of loved ones, to the point of retraction into a fantasy world. If this is not "disturbed" I don't know what is.
One can argue that the elders "took and oath" and therefore could not go, but what was the point of their whole structure in the first place? It was to preserve the secrecy of the village. Allowing anyone else to go risked betrayal of that secret. But Walker did, so how is it that he kept his oath?
Indeed, he did indeed risk betrayal of that secret, and the other elders chastised him for this. It would seem that his daughter's impending grief outweighed the risks, for him. I also think that a big theme of the film was that to truly live life, one needs to risk, and to risk for love. This is what he decided his daughter must experience, to have a full life worth living. But it's true just the same that it was a risk, and a betrayal of the "oath". This was a major conflict of the story, of course. Stories can have conflicts. ;-)
Walker kept the letter and said "screw the intent" because he couldn't bear to see his daughter suffer when a solution was readily available. In doing so he risked everything (but by golly he kept his oath). The lack of rational thought by people who structured such an elaborate escape is the frustration of the film.
What you characterize as "lack of rational thought" is merely the playing out of a moral dilemma. Walker found himself in a moral dilemma. There was no "rational" way out of it and anything he chose would have been a betrayal of some value which he held, or another. I'm not sure why you think any of this is a criticism of anything. There is no perfect "rational" way to construct, hold together, and live your life in, such a Village, if only because it is founded on a lie. Seems to me that was one of the points of the story.
As to why they didn't bring palm pilots, the answer is obvious - it would have wrecked twist at the end. Surely that cannot be allowed after going to such ridiculous screenwriting lengths to provide one.
True - Walker's decision to make the community pretend to be in 1897 in every detail only makes sense as something someone would do in his case if they were part of a story which is trying to fool the reader/viewer into thinking it's actually 1897. I'll give you that ;-) There's no denying that this story involved artifice. It was fiction. best,
Thanks, I'll write that down ;-)
Good stories are about conflicts. Bad stories are about silly contrived conflicts.
I can't help but wonder how Walker and the others can manage to retrieve the boy from the pit without breaking their oath, given that he couldn't escort his daughter safely to the edge of the preserve... Oh, the hand wringing that's gonna cause!