gkrupa73

There is little I can add to the comments offered by the other posters. However, when viewing this film I do see Stan and Babe working on becoming the masterful Babes in the Woods characters we have come to know them. Their timing and interaction is never less than astounding and their fearlessly effective telegraphing of a gag reveals a mastery of their craft that I would argue no other comics have. There was one event that startled me about this film and helped me to appreciate it more. I have been informed by a reliable source that this film is used as a training film at the United States Department of Labor!!!!!!!!!!! What is it used to train people about? The common mistakes that ordinary people make in construction sites or similar situations that place themselves in danger. When film scholars label Stan and Babe as the perfect masters of Reducio ad Absurdum comedy, as they do, perhaps the use this early Stan and Babe effort found itself put to helps prove the point.

I have always found Lee Van Cleef to seem to be a very limited actor. Of course, that is because of the roles he found himself having to play. There was not much he had to do in the spaghetti westerns except stand around and look blankly sinister. Then some years ago I found a copy of this film. I remember seeing it in the 1950s but had forgotten the cast. I remember thinking the film silly back then. Now as I have ripened into maturity ("A full grown nut" as Ralph Kramden said to Ed Norton)- or maybe I have just gotten ripe- I find I really enjoy this film. A good monster film is never about the monster. The film is about the people dealing with each other and the monster in that order. It Conquered The World fits that rule. The special effects simply do not exist. The alien is totally absurd in its appearance. However, I can ignore all that because of the acting and the plot involving the characters. I found Lee Van Cleef especially effective in this role and I enjoy watching him bring his character to life. He is struggling with his decision to assist an alien from Venus come to Earth to save us all from our jejune frivolities which inhibit human progress. He wants things to be better for people and thinks he has found a way through this alien being. He has his doubts and Lee is well able to act this conflict of doubt to our great satisfaction. Peter Graves is an actor you can count on to give a good performance even when he is not inspired. Dittos for the rest of the cast. In short, if you can ignore the cheap sets, absurd special effects, uninspired means of corner cutting due to lack of budget, and just enjoy the acting- a weakness for the lesser of the 1950s genre helps, too- I would recommend this film with the stated qualifications.

I loved Animal House. I still do. It is far more comical then banal nonsense like like Seinfeld, that ignoramus Jim Carry, or whoever that jerk is who made those Spy Shagging things (whatever that losers name is). They may have made money-but not comedy. I would go so far as to say that a good fun comedy has not been made in 25 years. As such, I pity the younger film goers. What do they have to compare current comedies to? Generational arrogance and narcissism will not allow them to watch a film made at an earlier time-God forbid-and they must watch what their peers tell them to (Far be it have an original mind!). So, I loved Animal House simply because it is a comedy that is funny. You cannot have a comedy about nothing and enjoy it unless you have nothing inside. Animal House follows the rules. You have well defined characters who successfully engage in comical acts and get involved in comical events. They are funny because you know who the characters are and can relate them to the events and their own comical actions have reason, logical direction and are therefore funny. So, when Blutto gets a ladder and peeps into the girl's dormitory, we laugh not because he may be exploiting the girls (I figure someone is going to address that subject that way so I might as well do it first)or that we are exploiting them- laugh because by the time Blutto does this, we expect him to do something like this, we recognize this and we laugh. Thus, Animal House is a well made comedy that follows the rules of comedy in a contemporary sea of films made by people who are passed off as comedy makers but who are as funny as foot fungus. In that context, how could it seem to so many be as anything other but a "classic"?