300 opiniones
- Condemned-Soul
- 25 feb 2019
- Enlace permanente
Invasion of the Body Snatcher (1978)
The original 1950s version of this movie is such a favorite of mine, I hesitated to watch this one. But fear not. This is great, too. It's got the same theme, but very richly and creatively rendered, some superb photography, great night stuff, and most importantly, great acting by the key 3 or 4 people.
Director Philip Kaufman works sporadically as director and writer (he hit it big with "Raiders of the Lost Ark") and he clearly has a unique and somewhat fearless vision that remains rooted in Hollywood sensibilities. That is, this is no independent film, yet it's creative.
And it's scary. Between the development of fear over the actual biological invasion, and the old fashioned chase and hide sequences, this is a tense movie. But yet it's convincing, given the realistic, nuanced acting by the main couple, Donald Sutherland (as a Health Department official) and Brooke Adams (as a lab analyst in the same department). Of course, what happens isn't believable at all, somehow, but it's so close to feasible, and in fact so close to what we live with already (some people without feelings, out for themselves, part of a conspiracy, etc.), it isn't hard to pull it off.
Cinematographer Michael Chapman is about as good as it gets in the Hollywood vein, polished and with amazing, varied lighting (he also did "Raging Bull," "The Fugitive," and "Taxi Driver," for starters). So this movie works on every level. The one thing it isn't, of course, is original, but as a remake, we have to take it for how it handles it, 1970s style. Impressive.
The original 1950s version of this movie is such a favorite of mine, I hesitated to watch this one. But fear not. This is great, too. It's got the same theme, but very richly and creatively rendered, some superb photography, great night stuff, and most importantly, great acting by the key 3 or 4 people.
Director Philip Kaufman works sporadically as director and writer (he hit it big with "Raiders of the Lost Ark") and he clearly has a unique and somewhat fearless vision that remains rooted in Hollywood sensibilities. That is, this is no independent film, yet it's creative.
And it's scary. Between the development of fear over the actual biological invasion, and the old fashioned chase and hide sequences, this is a tense movie. But yet it's convincing, given the realistic, nuanced acting by the main couple, Donald Sutherland (as a Health Department official) and Brooke Adams (as a lab analyst in the same department). Of course, what happens isn't believable at all, somehow, but it's so close to feasible, and in fact so close to what we live with already (some people without feelings, out for themselves, part of a conspiracy, etc.), it isn't hard to pull it off.
Cinematographer Michael Chapman is about as good as it gets in the Hollywood vein, polished and with amazing, varied lighting (he also did "Raging Bull," "The Fugitive," and "Taxi Driver," for starters). So this movie works on every level. The one thing it isn't, of course, is original, but as a remake, we have to take it for how it handles it, 1970s style. Impressive.
- secondtake
- 8 oct 2010
- Enlace permanente
Invasion of the Body Snatchers is the remake of 1956 movie by the same title and considered to be, by many fans, to be the definitive and the best version of the story.
The movie begins with images of plasmas from an alien world floating out into space towards planet earth. Then the rain comes and we see an odd organism growing on plants' leafs. Before too long, people start to act strange, they group and exchange plants, they act indifferent to their surroundings, they are emotionless, almost robotic. A group of characters who are not affected soon find themselves a minority in a world that is changing rapidly.
One of the greatest appeals of this movie is its socio-political resonance. It can be interpreted as a state of minority versus majority, us versus them and individualism versus social conformity. It shows how we try to turn the others into a version of ourselves because we can't tolerate the otherness. And maybe this is a universal common trait of all beings whether alien or human. Even though the commentary is about humans, it is actually alien organism that takes over human bodies (snatches human bodies - hence body snatchers).
The movie also questions how much we should sacrifice to achieve harmony in society. Should we preserve our individuality at risk of conflicting with other members of the society, or should we just join the majority, think like others, walk like others and talk like others do? Like all great science fiction movies, the story is social commentary on the state of the world. This is probably the reason why there are so many versions of this movie. And most recently in 2007, another version was made called "The Invasion" starring Nicole Kidman and Daniel Craig.
The movie begins with images of plasmas from an alien world floating out into space towards planet earth. Then the rain comes and we see an odd organism growing on plants' leafs. Before too long, people start to act strange, they group and exchange plants, they act indifferent to their surroundings, they are emotionless, almost robotic. A group of characters who are not affected soon find themselves a minority in a world that is changing rapidly.
One of the greatest appeals of this movie is its socio-political resonance. It can be interpreted as a state of minority versus majority, us versus them and individualism versus social conformity. It shows how we try to turn the others into a version of ourselves because we can't tolerate the otherness. And maybe this is a universal common trait of all beings whether alien or human. Even though the commentary is about humans, it is actually alien organism that takes over human bodies (snatches human bodies - hence body snatchers).
The movie also questions how much we should sacrifice to achieve harmony in society. Should we preserve our individuality at risk of conflicting with other members of the society, or should we just join the majority, think like others, walk like others and talk like others do? Like all great science fiction movies, the story is social commentary on the state of the world. This is probably the reason why there are so many versions of this movie. And most recently in 2007, another version was made called "The Invasion" starring Nicole Kidman and Daniel Craig.
- starlit-sky
- 20 ene 2011
- Enlace permanente
The 1956 film is an enduring classic; Abel Ferrara's 1993 picture is extra jarring as it emphasizes the horror element. Even as the concept has been explored time and again to various ends throughout different media (the two episodes of sci-fi comedy show 'Eureka' preceding the series finale is a favorite example of mine), somehow I've missed out all these years on this 1978 rendition. Now that I've finally caught up I can't believe it's taken so long: this is utterly phenomenal.
From one variation to the next each adaptation of 'The body snatchers' takes a slightly different approach. The 1978 movie is noticeably longer in its runtime, and more drawn out in its pacing - with the payoff of being distinctly haunting, and arguably more deeply frightening, as the course of events develops. This remains true even as the narrative is slightly more scattered, bouncing around a bit for a time between different scenes and characters, and that's at least in part thanks to the sensibilities of cinematic storytelling that changed in the intervening 22 years: this 'Invasion of the body snatchers' progressively shows us much more as the narrative advances, and whether it's just more creepy and unnatural behavior, or the specific effects and fabrications realizing genre elements, the cumulative effect is intensely unnerving.
That is to say that 'Invasion' successfully builds incredible, pervasive atmosphere that never once yields; I'm rather reminded of the films of John Carpenter, a master of horror whose bread and butter throughout his career has been that same dread air. In some such features it might be one aspect or another, or some combination, that helps to achieve that aura; here, it rather seems that every single facet is discretely bent toward it. Relatively few are those pictures in which sound effects so emphatically contribute to the viewing experience, yet in this instance they are crucial and arresting. From subtle makeup to more advanced prosthetics and special effects, the visuals are all but excruciating (again recalling Carpenter, I say as a major fangirl), bolstered by very careful cinematography, lighting and shadow, and precise orchestration of every shot and scene. At all times Denny Zeitlin's score strikes exactly the right chords - discordant or sweeping, light and sparing or heavy and foreboding - to give further shape to the proceedings. The acting from this terrific cast is perfect and focused across the board; among others, Donald Sutherland, Brooke Adams, Jeff Goldblum, and Veronica Cartwright impress with what I'm inclined to think are surely among the best performances they've ever given.
Outstanding production design and art direction adjoin superb filming locations to foster a horrific sense of how solidly rooted and wide-ranging the conspiracy is. Where some scenes pointedly echo the 1956 classic, the rendition here is unquestionably more visceral, more explosive, more fiercely engaging and invigorating. Conversely, Ferrara's treatment is more closely centered on a particular setting, and makes the most of 90s notions of horror within that space - but for as vivid as it may be, to my astonishment the 1978 film still comes out on top in terms of the feelings it imparts, the reactions it elicits. Characters feel more complete and sympathetic, dialogue is more vitally charged and relatable, and at every turn the scene writing and narrative resonate more powerfully. As much as I love Don Siegel's picture, and Ferrara's, from top to bottom this is a more absorbing, spellbinding, menacing, disquieting, fulfilling viewing experience - and outright superior.
Every now and again one watches a movie that so wholly entrances us that it's difficult to find the words to elucidate the joy of watching. We talk in circles, we trip over ourselves, in our exuberance we lose track of some of what we might want to see. 1978's 'Invasion of the body snatchers' is one of those movies. I had high expectations when I sat to watch, for all the reasons, and still they were handily exceeded. What more is there to say? This is a must-see, and that's all there is to it.
From one variation to the next each adaptation of 'The body snatchers' takes a slightly different approach. The 1978 movie is noticeably longer in its runtime, and more drawn out in its pacing - with the payoff of being distinctly haunting, and arguably more deeply frightening, as the course of events develops. This remains true even as the narrative is slightly more scattered, bouncing around a bit for a time between different scenes and characters, and that's at least in part thanks to the sensibilities of cinematic storytelling that changed in the intervening 22 years: this 'Invasion of the body snatchers' progressively shows us much more as the narrative advances, and whether it's just more creepy and unnatural behavior, or the specific effects and fabrications realizing genre elements, the cumulative effect is intensely unnerving.
That is to say that 'Invasion' successfully builds incredible, pervasive atmosphere that never once yields; I'm rather reminded of the films of John Carpenter, a master of horror whose bread and butter throughout his career has been that same dread air. In some such features it might be one aspect or another, or some combination, that helps to achieve that aura; here, it rather seems that every single facet is discretely bent toward it. Relatively few are those pictures in which sound effects so emphatically contribute to the viewing experience, yet in this instance they are crucial and arresting. From subtle makeup to more advanced prosthetics and special effects, the visuals are all but excruciating (again recalling Carpenter, I say as a major fangirl), bolstered by very careful cinematography, lighting and shadow, and precise orchestration of every shot and scene. At all times Denny Zeitlin's score strikes exactly the right chords - discordant or sweeping, light and sparing or heavy and foreboding - to give further shape to the proceedings. The acting from this terrific cast is perfect and focused across the board; among others, Donald Sutherland, Brooke Adams, Jeff Goldblum, and Veronica Cartwright impress with what I'm inclined to think are surely among the best performances they've ever given.
Outstanding production design and art direction adjoin superb filming locations to foster a horrific sense of how solidly rooted and wide-ranging the conspiracy is. Where some scenes pointedly echo the 1956 classic, the rendition here is unquestionably more visceral, more explosive, more fiercely engaging and invigorating. Conversely, Ferrara's treatment is more closely centered on a particular setting, and makes the most of 90s notions of horror within that space - but for as vivid as it may be, to my astonishment the 1978 film still comes out on top in terms of the feelings it imparts, the reactions it elicits. Characters feel more complete and sympathetic, dialogue is more vitally charged and relatable, and at every turn the scene writing and narrative resonate more powerfully. As much as I love Don Siegel's picture, and Ferrara's, from top to bottom this is a more absorbing, spellbinding, menacing, disquieting, fulfilling viewing experience - and outright superior.
Every now and again one watches a movie that so wholly entrances us that it's difficult to find the words to elucidate the joy of watching. We talk in circles, we trip over ourselves, in our exuberance we lose track of some of what we might want to see. 1978's 'Invasion of the body snatchers' is one of those movies. I had high expectations when I sat to watch, for all the reasons, and still they were handily exceeded. What more is there to say? This is a must-see, and that's all there is to it.
- I_Ailurophile
- 13 oct 2022
- Enlace permanente
I first saw this film in a movie theater at midnight, as part of an October horror-movie festival. I almost didn't go; I had always had this movie figured as another stupid Hollywood remake of a great film from the past, and thought they were probably only showing it instead of the original because of that weird, vague prejudice against black and white movies that still for some reason permeates this country, even though the novelty of color wore off about forty years ago. But I figured what the hell, it wouldn't hurt to check it out, and when will I get a chance to see any of these movies in a theater again? So I went, and was almost immediately sucked in by the mind-bending direction and the terrific acting. But not only that; it was after midnight, remember, and I was getting sleepy, and I found myself in that kind of hypnotized, pseudo-dreaming state you can get into when you're watching a movie really late at night. I was really into the movie, mind you, but it was like a dream, I wasn't wholly conscious. And just as I was at my most out-of-it, as I was almost technically asleep, the movie hit me with that last shot, you know the one I mean, and jolted me wide awake like a bucket of ice water. It was just like waking up from a nightmare. I thought I was gonna start crying. I haven't been that freaked out by a movie since I was a little kid. As the end credits rolled and the house lights came up, I heard some other people in the theater talking about what a stupid movie it was, man, was that a waste of money, I'm glad it was only three-fifty, and it was a really surreal moment; I've just had one of the most horrifying moments of my waking life, and they're talking about how silly it was (although, truthfully, they may have been a little shaken up themselves and just covering for it, I dunno). A week or so later I was talking about it with my dad, who had seen it when it came out, and I mentioned the ending, and he did a dead-on mimic of the last shot, and I said "God! Don't do that!" I was STILL shaken up by this movie.
There aren't a lot of movies that even try to be frightening--most horror movies (and novels and so on) actually have other concerns: being funny, or shocking, or gory, or surprising, or bizarre, or whatever--and even fewer actually pull it off, actually scare you. Man, does this one pull it off.
There aren't a lot of movies that even try to be frightening--most horror movies (and novels and so on) actually have other concerns: being funny, or shocking, or gory, or surprising, or bizarre, or whatever--and even fewer actually pull it off, actually scare you. Man, does this one pull it off.
- Mr. Book.
- 6 abr 2000
- Enlace permanente
- Boba_Fett1138
- 16 jun 2006
- Enlace permanente
- Dominic_25_
- 22 oct 2022
- Enlace permanente
This is a solid horror/sci-fi story with good production values. Those values include outstanding direction by Philip Kaufman, camera-work by Michael Chapman and acting. The cast of main characters was comprised of Donald Sutherland, Brooke Adams, Leonard Nimoy, Jeff Goldblum and Veronica Cartwright. Of the group, Sutherland had the most lines and was the most impressive. All of it added up to a pretty classy film, a lot more than you'd except reading the movie title.
There was some profanity and nudity so maybe it wasn't totally classy, but the profanity was light and the nudity was a few shots of Adams' breasts.
The movie clicked because it built up the suspense beautifully, and proved you don't need a lot of violence and gore to scare the viewer. Too bad modern filmmakers of horror films can't seem to understand that. In fact the scariest thing of the movie - and it WAS scary - might have been the eerie noises emanating from the "re-born" humans.
The photography is good and I loved the facial closeups and interesting camera angles. The film is a visual treat. The original film in 1956 is a good one but it's generally conceded this re-make is superior. The star of that first film, by the way - Kevin McCarthy, makes a cameo appearance in here. That was a nice touch.
There was some profanity and nudity so maybe it wasn't totally classy, but the profanity was light and the nudity was a few shots of Adams' breasts.
The movie clicked because it built up the suspense beautifully, and proved you don't need a lot of violence and gore to scare the viewer. Too bad modern filmmakers of horror films can't seem to understand that. In fact the scariest thing of the movie - and it WAS scary - might have been the eerie noises emanating from the "re-born" humans.
The photography is good and I loved the facial closeups and interesting camera angles. The film is a visual treat. The original film in 1956 is a good one but it's generally conceded this re-make is superior. The star of that first film, by the way - Kevin McCarthy, makes a cameo appearance in here. That was a nice touch.
- ccthemovieman-1
- 24 nov 2006
- Enlace permanente
I hadn't seen this film in about 20 years, and now after watching it current day, it's just as good if not better now. No CGI, and I like that... The cast, and acting is really good, Donald Sutherland delivers an amazing performance. The cinematography is awesome! I highly recommend this as a must watch for any Sci-fi and/or Horror fan.
- BoynamedAndrew
- 30 mar 2020
- Enlace permanente
On top of being an engrossing conspiracy thriller in step with the gritty urban tales of the time, the Invasion of the Body Snatchers is also a genuinely creepy film which slyly suggests there is something sinister beneath the surface.
- punchsrv
- 13 ene 2019
- Enlace permanente
- zarcos-01818
- 12 feb 2024
- Enlace permanente
Shortly after Elizabeth Driscoll (Brooke Adams) discovers a strange plant in her San Francisco-area yard that she cannot identify, her boyfriend begins acting strangely--he looks the same, but Elizabeth swears he's a different person. Before long, more and more people are claiming the same thing about their friends and relatives. Just what is going on? Although not quite as good as the original Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956), this remake is very interesting and well worth a watch. Some things it does better than the original, although slightly more is not done as well. But it is full or intriguing ideas, some beautiful cinematography, and quite a few quirky charms.
One oddity about this film is that it seems to assume that very few people will watch who aren't already familiar with the original. Scripter W.D. Richter and director Philip Kaufman give away the "twist" immediately, and there are a number of statements from characters in this film (such as the first time we hear the advice to not fall asleep) that only make sense if one already knows from Don Siegel's original just why they shouldn't fall asleep. For this reason, I strongly recommend that anyone interested in this film who hasn't seen it yet should make sure they watch the original first.
The opening shots, which firmly set this remake into sci-fi territory, are a great idea, even if the execution is somewhat questionable. I'm not sure that Kaufman's "art gel" works, and the way it moves through space, as if blown by trade winds, is slightly hokey. But I'm willing to forgive a misstep if it's in service of a great idea, and especially if the misstep is the result of budgetary limitations.
Early in the film, the major asset is the cinematography. There is an excellent, slow tracking shot down a hallway, where we only see our main character by way of her feet and a slight reflection in a window. There are a lot of great "tilted" shots. There are a lot of subtle lighting effects to set mood, and a just as many subtle instances of symbolism for the horrors to come.
The cast, featuring Adams, Donald Sutherland, Jeff Goldblum, Leonard Nimoy and Veronica Cartwright, is an interesting combination of stars who tend to give idiosyncratic performances. Kaufman exploits the collection of personalities well, although occasionally gives us odd "everyone talk at once" scenes which can verge on the brink of annoying. Although I'm not usually the biggest fan of Goldblum (in some roles, such as The Fly, I like him, in some roles he tends to irritate me), I noted an odd similarity between him in this film and an actor and performance I'm much more fond of--David Duchovny and his X-Files character Fox Mulder.
Speaking of that, there is a strong X-Files vibe to this film overall. Whereas the original Invasion had thinly veiled subtexts of fear and doubts of "The Other"--whether politically-rooted (the common analysis is that the original Invasion was a subtext for U.S. fears of communism), religiously-rooted (some see it as a parable about cults, or religions in general) or simply about personal identity (in a philosophical sense of "Who am I/are you?" "What makes one oneself?"), Kaufman's take has stronger subtexts of encroaching mental illness--fear of losing one's mind and a generalized, "clinical" paranoia.
Given that difference, it's perhaps odd that there are so many similarities between the two films. The character structure and relationships are largely the same, with some mostly insignificant differences, including slightly different occupations. There are many scenes taken almost verbatim from the original film, often only with differences of setting, but staged the same, with similar scenarios and occasionally identical dialogue. There is even a wonderful moment where Kevin McCarthy, star of the original film, comes running down the street, screaming that we're all doomed.
A number of quirky moments push the value of Kaufman's film up a notch. These are sprinkled throughout the film, but some highlights are a Robert Duvall cameo as a priest inexplicably on a swingset next to toddlers, the "mud bath" parlor, a brief spurt of marvelous, Zappa-sounding avant-garde classical as we witness a chase down a staircase, and a greenhouse in a shipping yard, through which Elizabeth eventually strolls naked, casually walking by employees. The "creature" effects may be better here than in the original, but they are not more effective for that.
But overall, this is a great film. Just make sure you don't miss the superior original.
One oddity about this film is that it seems to assume that very few people will watch who aren't already familiar with the original. Scripter W.D. Richter and director Philip Kaufman give away the "twist" immediately, and there are a number of statements from characters in this film (such as the first time we hear the advice to not fall asleep) that only make sense if one already knows from Don Siegel's original just why they shouldn't fall asleep. For this reason, I strongly recommend that anyone interested in this film who hasn't seen it yet should make sure they watch the original first.
The opening shots, which firmly set this remake into sci-fi territory, are a great idea, even if the execution is somewhat questionable. I'm not sure that Kaufman's "art gel" works, and the way it moves through space, as if blown by trade winds, is slightly hokey. But I'm willing to forgive a misstep if it's in service of a great idea, and especially if the misstep is the result of budgetary limitations.
Early in the film, the major asset is the cinematography. There is an excellent, slow tracking shot down a hallway, where we only see our main character by way of her feet and a slight reflection in a window. There are a lot of great "tilted" shots. There are a lot of subtle lighting effects to set mood, and a just as many subtle instances of symbolism for the horrors to come.
The cast, featuring Adams, Donald Sutherland, Jeff Goldblum, Leonard Nimoy and Veronica Cartwright, is an interesting combination of stars who tend to give idiosyncratic performances. Kaufman exploits the collection of personalities well, although occasionally gives us odd "everyone talk at once" scenes which can verge on the brink of annoying. Although I'm not usually the biggest fan of Goldblum (in some roles, such as The Fly, I like him, in some roles he tends to irritate me), I noted an odd similarity between him in this film and an actor and performance I'm much more fond of--David Duchovny and his X-Files character Fox Mulder.
Speaking of that, there is a strong X-Files vibe to this film overall. Whereas the original Invasion had thinly veiled subtexts of fear and doubts of "The Other"--whether politically-rooted (the common analysis is that the original Invasion was a subtext for U.S. fears of communism), religiously-rooted (some see it as a parable about cults, or religions in general) or simply about personal identity (in a philosophical sense of "Who am I/are you?" "What makes one oneself?"), Kaufman's take has stronger subtexts of encroaching mental illness--fear of losing one's mind and a generalized, "clinical" paranoia.
Given that difference, it's perhaps odd that there are so many similarities between the two films. The character structure and relationships are largely the same, with some mostly insignificant differences, including slightly different occupations. There are many scenes taken almost verbatim from the original film, often only with differences of setting, but staged the same, with similar scenarios and occasionally identical dialogue. There is even a wonderful moment where Kevin McCarthy, star of the original film, comes running down the street, screaming that we're all doomed.
A number of quirky moments push the value of Kaufman's film up a notch. These are sprinkled throughout the film, but some highlights are a Robert Duvall cameo as a priest inexplicably on a swingset next to toddlers, the "mud bath" parlor, a brief spurt of marvelous, Zappa-sounding avant-garde classical as we witness a chase down a staircase, and a greenhouse in a shipping yard, through which Elizabeth eventually strolls naked, casually walking by employees. The "creature" effects may be better here than in the original, but they are not more effective for that.
But overall, this is a great film. Just make sure you don't miss the superior original.
- BrandtSponseller
- 8 feb 2005
- Enlace permanente
While some contend the original was a better version, I still prefer this one. Donald Sutherland, Jeff Goldblum and Leonard Nimoy was excellent, providing more logic and insight to the film where the original failed to accomplish. Sure, it was tougher to make a secret invasion of a large city seem more believable, but the more believable and rational appeal of this film puts it heads and tales above the rest. Also, the fact that it is a little more drawn out and conceptualized, it makes for a better night of movie making than the original.
- Agent10
- 7 ago 2002
- Enlace permanente
- ron-21382
- 7 ago 2024
- Enlace permanente
The original 'Invasion Of The Body Snatchers' is one of my favourite thrillers of all time, and a very hard movie to top. I'm always sceptical about remakes of classic horror and SF films, but this version by Philip Kaufman is much better than one would expect, and ALMOST as good as the original. I still think Don Siegel's version is the best because it really evokes small town life in middle America, and that makes the horror and suspense all the more effective. Kaufman transplants the setting to San Francisco and the big city location means it loses its sense of intimacy and community, and instead has more of an alienated urban feel to it. But it's still an excellent movie, and along with Cronenberg's 'The Fly' and Carpenter's 'The Thing' the most successful remake of a 1950s horror classic to date. What really helps this movie is the cast. Donald Sutherland, one of the 1970s most interesting and intelligent actors, is excellent in the main role, played by Kevin McCarthy in the first film. And the lovely Brooke Adams ('Days Of Heaven', 'The Dead Zone', 'The Unborn') is first rate as the main female lead, her role being much more substantial than Dan Wynter's in the original. I've had a major crush on Adams ever since I first saw this movie. She is beautiful but goofy and I really thought she was going to be a major star. The supporting cast is excellent, led by the wonderful Jeff Goldblum and 'Alien's Veronica Cartwright, and of course Leonard Nimoy, in his most memorable non-Trek role. Also keep an eye out for cameos by the star and director of the original version (Kevin McCarthy and Don 'Dirty Harry' Siegel), and a very brief but eerie one by Robert Duvall! 'Invasion Of The Body Snatchers' is a superb example of how to remake a horror classic, and is one of the creepiest and most nerve-wracking thrillers of the 1970s. I highly recommend it and the original 'Body Snatchers', they are two of the scariest movies ever made!
- Infofreak
- 24 abr 2003
- Enlace permanente
I have never been a fan of horror movies or remakes because they are usually not good. But when done right, they can be special movies. Invasion of the Body Snatchers happens to be both a remake and a horror movie, so I had my doubts. Luckily, this is a really good movie. This film is based off the 1956 film of the same name, and I hear it is a good movie. So when a remake at least equals the quality of the original, then that means you did something right. Most people seem to agree that this movie equals the same horror tone as the original, but it passes it in terms of conception. There are many themes this movie expanded on. Such themes include paranoia, the idea of dehumanization whether it's mentally or quite literally in the case of this movie. You could also talk about the idea of the lack of trust of people in an increasing complicated world. The original had roots in communism as the 1950's were known for paranoia as the Cold War escalated. You could easily see the transfer of those ideas in this film. Paranoia is rampant as these invisible alien creatures take over human bodies and minds. These ideas really created the tension and horror that the movie needed.
This science-fiction remake is sent in the city of San Francisco, California. One day, Elizabeth Driscoll (Brooke Adams) complains to her good friend Matthew Bennell (Donald Sutherland) that her husband has been acting very strange. Bennell originally dismisses the thought as marital problems. But when more people start complaining, he becomes increasingly concerned. When writer Jack Bellicec (Jeff Goldblum) and his wife Nancy (Veronica Cartwright) uncover a mutated corpse, Bennell realizes that the world has been taken over by an unseen force. Now it's up to him to beat the clock before the whole city turns into mutants.
The film does have a good cast, and they all turned in solid performances. Donald Sutherland is a great actor, and he showed himself some range here. Brooke Adams made a name for herself earlier in 1978 with Days of Heaven, and she turns in another good performance. Jeff Goldblum is an amazing actor as you will see in future movies, but he is really good in one of his earlier roles in this film. One of the best performances in the film comes from the amazing Leonard Nimoy. You might know him from his iconic role as Spock in the original Star Trek television series. He is usually typecast as similar characters in his movies, but this role as Dr. David Kibner gives him something fresh, something different. He plays more of a villainous character, and it's a welcome sight.
The production design adds to the horror elements. The look of the movie is creepy and sometimes downright scary. The pods where humans are transformed are wonderfully scary. When the movie shows how these humans are transformed is the ultimate prize when it comes to being scared. Any fan of horror would appreciate this.
Overall, I really enjoyed the 1978 version of Invasion of the Body Snatchers much to my surprise and delight. It succeeds in giving me the creeps, but in such intelligent ways. It's a thematic film touching on concepts of paranoia-which was a very popular concept considering what was going on in the world at the time. So remember if you see any pods nearby, well lets hope it is not an invisible alien making you its next prey. After all, I became a little paranoid for a few days after I saw the movie.
My Grade: B+
This science-fiction remake is sent in the city of San Francisco, California. One day, Elizabeth Driscoll (Brooke Adams) complains to her good friend Matthew Bennell (Donald Sutherland) that her husband has been acting very strange. Bennell originally dismisses the thought as marital problems. But when more people start complaining, he becomes increasingly concerned. When writer Jack Bellicec (Jeff Goldblum) and his wife Nancy (Veronica Cartwright) uncover a mutated corpse, Bennell realizes that the world has been taken over by an unseen force. Now it's up to him to beat the clock before the whole city turns into mutants.
The film does have a good cast, and they all turned in solid performances. Donald Sutherland is a great actor, and he showed himself some range here. Brooke Adams made a name for herself earlier in 1978 with Days of Heaven, and she turns in another good performance. Jeff Goldblum is an amazing actor as you will see in future movies, but he is really good in one of his earlier roles in this film. One of the best performances in the film comes from the amazing Leonard Nimoy. You might know him from his iconic role as Spock in the original Star Trek television series. He is usually typecast as similar characters in his movies, but this role as Dr. David Kibner gives him something fresh, something different. He plays more of a villainous character, and it's a welcome sight.
The production design adds to the horror elements. The look of the movie is creepy and sometimes downright scary. The pods where humans are transformed are wonderfully scary. When the movie shows how these humans are transformed is the ultimate prize when it comes to being scared. Any fan of horror would appreciate this.
Overall, I really enjoyed the 1978 version of Invasion of the Body Snatchers much to my surprise and delight. It succeeds in giving me the creeps, but in such intelligent ways. It's a thematic film touching on concepts of paranoia-which was a very popular concept considering what was going on in the world at the time. So remember if you see any pods nearby, well lets hope it is not an invisible alien making you its next prey. After all, I became a little paranoid for a few days after I saw the movie.
My Grade: B+
- gab-14712
- 17 oct 2017
- Enlace permanente
A truely riveting story. It's interesting how the female characters are the first ones to realise and insist that people are being copied, while the men are lethargic in their acceptance of it.
The pace and realism are strong. It gets further and further under the skin as the film progresses. Uniquely frighting and intriguing. All subsequent versions don't par with this. I've not seen the original yet. Heard that's the best. Well done Kaufman and team.
The pace and realism are strong. It gets further and further under the skin as the film progresses. Uniquely frighting and intriguing. All subsequent versions don't par with this. I've not seen the original yet. Heard that's the best. Well done Kaufman and team.
- Nemesis42
- 12 oct 2020
- Enlace permanente
This is the second adaptation , still very scary and eerie , about vintage novel deals with San Francisco residents who are being replaced by duplicates hatched from weird pods . It creates an altering the human behaviour in the new invaders. Meanwhile a doctor (top-notch Donald Sutherland) must protect his helper ( significant role for Brooke Adams) and soon aware that pods from outer space are duplicating and replacing everyone there . The doctor may hold the means to avoid the extraterrestrial invasion . The mysterious epidemic from outer space is spread her friends (Art Hindle, Jeff Goldblum , Leonard Nimoy) and San Francisco people , everybody are being take over by emotionless , cold behaving . The mysterious seeds from outer space are growing and destroying San Francisco Bay Area at an alarming attack.
This scary Sci-Fi displays a tense screenplay based on Jack Finney novel titled ¨Body snatchers¨ that can be considered truly disturbing . Packs suspense, chills , thrills, spectacular scenes and pretty turns and twists . Good performances from Donald Sutherland and Veronica Cartwight who subsequently acted in the last version , besides important cameo role by Kevin McCarthy , Donald Siegel and can be glimpsed Robert Duvall . Appropriately rare and frightening musical score by Denny Zeitlin at his last soundtrack . Very good cinematography by the magnificent cameraman John A Alonzo . The motion picture is professionally directed by Philip Kauffman , with great originality in spite of being a remake .
Other versions about this known story are the following : the classic adaptation which emerged as a cinema classic directed by Donald Siegel(1956) with Kevin McCarthy , Carolyn Jones and Dana Wynter, concerning about mysterious seeds duplicating people , it has emerged as a cinema classic that brings astonishing nightmares ; and inferior rendition in which the horror is diminished by Abel Ferrara(1994) that takes place in a military base with Forrest Whitaker , Meg Tilly, Terry Kenney and Gabriella Anwar. Lately recent version that results to be the least satisfactory titled ¨Invasion¨ with Daniel Craig, Nicole Kidman , Jeffrey Wrhight and directed by Oliver Hirschbiegel . Rating : Better than average . Worthwhile watching .
This scary Sci-Fi displays a tense screenplay based on Jack Finney novel titled ¨Body snatchers¨ that can be considered truly disturbing . Packs suspense, chills , thrills, spectacular scenes and pretty turns and twists . Good performances from Donald Sutherland and Veronica Cartwight who subsequently acted in the last version , besides important cameo role by Kevin McCarthy , Donald Siegel and can be glimpsed Robert Duvall . Appropriately rare and frightening musical score by Denny Zeitlin at his last soundtrack . Very good cinematography by the magnificent cameraman John A Alonzo . The motion picture is professionally directed by Philip Kauffman , with great originality in spite of being a remake .
Other versions about this known story are the following : the classic adaptation which emerged as a cinema classic directed by Donald Siegel(1956) with Kevin McCarthy , Carolyn Jones and Dana Wynter, concerning about mysterious seeds duplicating people , it has emerged as a cinema classic that brings astonishing nightmares ; and inferior rendition in which the horror is diminished by Abel Ferrara(1994) that takes place in a military base with Forrest Whitaker , Meg Tilly, Terry Kenney and Gabriella Anwar. Lately recent version that results to be the least satisfactory titled ¨Invasion¨ with Daniel Craig, Nicole Kidman , Jeffrey Wrhight and directed by Oliver Hirschbiegel . Rating : Better than average . Worthwhile watching .
- ma-cortes
- 13 nov 2011
- Enlace permanente
An evolution has begun and knows no bounds, a new species sinks its roots in fallow grounds, rising up and taking root, reaching out tendrils and shoots, it's not too long before it's packing on the pounds. As it mimics and consumes its doppelganger, if it spots originals it makes a clamour, no need for hate, no need for love, but it still fits hand in your glove, Charles Darwin might agree, it's a great planner. Perhaps there's links with those who seek to take control, those who manipulate, without going to polls, whose dogma and conviction, imposition and infliction, makes dystopia, a realistic goal.
Reflective and engaging, at many levels.
Reflective and engaging, at many levels.
- Xstal
- 30 dic 2023
- Enlace permanente
This is not a remake, but rather a reboot because, although the premise is identical and the films share some common moments, the story is elaborated quite differently. These are completely different characters, with different occupations and mutual relations, a different environment, and the development of events. Although the 1978 film has an impressive cast and better performances, a more complex script and better technical aspects, the original has a better atmosphere and it left a stronger impression on me. Maybe it's partly because I saw the original first, but I don't think it's just that. This story works well as a psychological drama and mystery thriller, but not as an explicit horror. This film made mistakes that its predecessor skillfully avoided, and with too much action, violence, and explicit effects, it spoiled the atmosphere, broke the tension, and made the story unconvincing and ineffective. What could have been a powerful psychological drama was almost turned into a corny B horror in the manner of the eighties. I also resent it for the completely unneeded introductory scene, which at the very beginning dispels the mystery and the potentially strong surprise effect. It is the fact that, since this is a remake, this movie is spoiled by the first one, but why ruin the surprise and mystery to those who did not watch the original ... The only thing I really liked about this film was the "cameo" appearance of Kevin McCarthy, in which he "replays" the final scene of the original.
6/10
6/10
- Bored_Dragon
- 31 may 2020
- Enlace permanente
The story we have here, filmed once before in 1956 (I haven't seen that version) and once again later, in 1994, is so strong and thought-provoking that even a just-adequate film based on it would be quite effective. This 1978 remake goes beyond "just-adequate", though. It's a creepy, scary chiller, and also one of the most intellectual films of this genre I've ever seen. Maybe it lags in a few places, but excellent performances, methodical direction and a LITERALLY chilling finale make it first-class entertainment. (***)
- gridoon
- 13 ago 2000
- Enlace permanente
- rmax304823
- 2 feb 2007
- Enlace permanente
Phillip Kaufman's adaptation of Jack Finney's classic novel had a lot to live up to after the classic 1956 take on it - and I think it lived up to expectations. Though not as great as the more politically orientated original, Kaufman's film is still a lesson in suspense and the central story has lost none of the intrigue that it captured in the original. The story follows an alien life form that has come from outer space and taken residence here on earth. Not content with living in sibilance with humans, the aliens become 'body snatchers' and make duplications of people while they're sleeping. These duplicates take the original host's place and are everything their originals were, only all forms of emotion vanish. Our story takes focus on Martin and Elizabeth, two workers at the US Health Department. After taking home a supposedly new type of flower, Elizabeth finds her boyfriend acting strangely and later discovers that she's not the only one with relatives who aren't quite themselves...
This film works because of a constant sense of paranoia. In the 1950's, this was tied in with the then 'reds under the beds' idea of communism spreading through capitalist America. This film seems to have dispensed with that idea, which gives way to more opportunity for sci-fi horror, which is more than welcome in my opinion. The special effects on display are bold and lavish, and therefore exciting to watch. They are a little hokey, but still not bad at all - the parts where you see the alien duplicate forming are fantastically gruesome, and also rather frightening. The whole idea of the film is frightening, even in spite of the fact that it ever happening is very unlikely. The idea that an alien race can take over almost an entire city in one night, and without anyone realising it, is not one that I'd like to have if I was a paranoid conspiracy theorist! Then there's the notion that they'll get you if you sleep as it's like one man in the film says..."gotta sleep sometime". Invasion of the Body Snatchers is also notable for featuring a great cast, which not only includes the excellent Donald Sutherland and the beautiful Brooke Adams, but also Jeff Goldblum (in his first of two successfully good remakes) and Leonard Nimoy, a.k.a. Captain Spock from Star Trek. Also watch out for cameos from original Invasion of the Body Snatchers director Don Siegel and said film's star.
This film works because of a constant sense of paranoia. In the 1950's, this was tied in with the then 'reds under the beds' idea of communism spreading through capitalist America. This film seems to have dispensed with that idea, which gives way to more opportunity for sci-fi horror, which is more than welcome in my opinion. The special effects on display are bold and lavish, and therefore exciting to watch. They are a little hokey, but still not bad at all - the parts where you see the alien duplicate forming are fantastically gruesome, and also rather frightening. The whole idea of the film is frightening, even in spite of the fact that it ever happening is very unlikely. The idea that an alien race can take over almost an entire city in one night, and without anyone realising it, is not one that I'd like to have if I was a paranoid conspiracy theorist! Then there's the notion that they'll get you if you sleep as it's like one man in the film says..."gotta sleep sometime". Invasion of the Body Snatchers is also notable for featuring a great cast, which not only includes the excellent Donald Sutherland and the beautiful Brooke Adams, but also Jeff Goldblum (in his first of two successfully good remakes) and Leonard Nimoy, a.k.a. Captain Spock from Star Trek. Also watch out for cameos from original Invasion of the Body Snatchers director Don Siegel and said film's star.
- The_Void
- 7 feb 2005
- Enlace permanente
This movie makes me a little bit sad every time I watch it because it's really good but it's too slow. It's got some truly terrifying scenes and an overwhelming sense of tension and paranoia, but I do wish the pacing was a bit better. This might just be my own subjective experience however, as I am really used to watching movies that are more exploitative and shocking and over the top. Then again, it's almost two hours long. The camera work is absolutely gorgeous, very artistic and swift, and the locations are beautiful. It almost feels English for some reason. Another complaint I have is that it feels a bit like a soulless machine... gorgeous but without any real conviction or personality. And this is actually a problem I have with most Hollywood films from this decade. So many are like this, and it turns me off to them. But regardless, this would be one of the better ones.
I do have to say that I feel like the cheap grindhouse films of the 70s are the better ones as far as American movies of the decade, they have more personality and touch.
Overall though this movie is very good, it seems to be slightly more intellectual than the average hollywood thriller, it has some meat to it, even though it is fairly straightforward. Almost unbearable tension.
I do have to say that I feel like the cheap grindhouse films of the 70s are the better ones as far as American movies of the decade, they have more personality and touch.
Overall though this movie is very good, it seems to be slightly more intellectual than the average hollywood thriller, it has some meat to it, even though it is fairly straightforward. Almost unbearable tension.
- nick121235
- 17 jul 2021
- Enlace permanente
The original 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers' is one of my favorites. There were so many films from the 1950s that involved an alien threat menacing small town Americana, but 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers' was one of the few standouts because it took what it was doing seriously. Not another in a long series of man-in-a-rubber-suit movies, its tactics were more psychological. We, like Dr. Bennell, are uncertain what's going on or even if there actually *is* anything going on until its too late. Then the walls close in on the doctor and Becky, and nowhere is safe, there is nowhere to hide. Added to this is the film's ambiguous subtext, and you end up with a movie that really is much better than it should be.
While I don't think the remake was bad necessarily, I don't think there's anything remarkable about it either. It was good for what it was, but it lacked any real suspense because it began by revealing the threat and then rushed to get that threat underway. Setting the film in a large city was a mistake. One of the strengths of the original was the confusion and horror the characters felt as they slowly watched the people around them, the people they had grown up with and known so well, become strangers. That element's lost when you set the movie in a place where nearly everyone is a stranger to begin with, where you wouldn't know if the person walking down the street is different today than they had been the day before. I also think the third act is overly long and drags out.
Kudos to the man-faced dog, though. That was great.
While I don't think the remake was bad necessarily, I don't think there's anything remarkable about it either. It was good for what it was, but it lacked any real suspense because it began by revealing the threat and then rushed to get that threat underway. Setting the film in a large city was a mistake. One of the strengths of the original was the confusion and horror the characters felt as they slowly watched the people around them, the people they had grown up with and known so well, become strangers. That element's lost when you set the movie in a place where nearly everyone is a stranger to begin with, where you wouldn't know if the person walking down the street is different today than they had been the day before. I also think the third act is overly long and drags out.
Kudos to the man-faced dog, though. That was great.
- dcshanno
- 19 oct 2004
- Enlace permanente