Body Snatchers, l'invasion continue

Entertaining, but totally unnecessary and uncalled for remake of the classic 1956 movie makes the fatal mistake of moving the action to a military base which has fallen victim to pods that kill everyone in site and replace them with cold emotionless replacements. Very unmemorable fare with an appealing cast and decent visual effects.

Rated R; Nudity, Violence, and Profanity.

The Malone family move to a military base to help contain a toxic spill. Many of the soldiers and families are behaving strangely but is it the toxins or something more sinister?

I'm not a fan of remakes, many try to just copy the success of other films while some lift the original scene for scene to poor effect. However this at least tries to do something slightly different with it by setting it in a military base and bringing the drama into the family setting. In fact this setting creates some of the best scenes – my favourite being where Carol tells her daughter Marti that `there's no one like you left'. The greater effects are good but really I preferred the paranoid tension of the 50's original rather than the horror of effects.

However I still think this is a very workable horror from a good director. Of course it suffers with comparison with the original – that's because the original is a sci-fi classic. But as it's own film it is pretty good. Indeed the ending is what director Siegel intended – but he was forced into having a more hopeful epilogue ending. Naturally it has it's weaknesses – the effects overpower the story at times but really I found this to be enjoyable as a horror.

The cast are one of the weak links. I love Kinney because I'm a big Oz (HBO) fan, but here he doesn't really make a mark. Tilly has all the good lines and she is actually quite good. Anwar is also very watchable. But Ermey is type cast in his usual military role and Whitaker is far too calm and reasoned to do the job – he needed to be more like McCarthy in the original.

Overall, this should be watched and not compared. In it's own right it is a good horror with only a few weaknesses that spoil it slightly. And if you do want to compare it to the 50's version then please remember than this is the type of ending that Siegel wanted and to me is one of the strengths of this film.

Okay, the 1956 original paved the way and has to get the credit for that, but from an objective point-of-view, both the 1978 and this 1993 remake are better, scarier, more developed. In comparison to the second version, this one has a nowhere nearly as brilliant, rather disappointing ending, but the pacing is must faster. Abel Ferrara keeps the movie running for only a tight 85 minutes, and pushes all the right buttons along the way; the horror ranges from the gory (the melting heads) to the supremely subtle (the scene in the classroom, where all the kids draw the exact same picture, except for one, who naturally realizes that something is wrong - the teacher seems to want to punish him for being different). This is a spine-chilling, absolutely terrific little picture - but even if it wasn't, it would still be worth seeing just for Meg Tilly's exceptional performance - her "where are you gonna go?" monologue is as scary as anything in say, "Psycho" or "Rosemary's Baby". (***1/2)

In this remake of a classic, they used Bad Lieutenant and King of New York director Abel Ferrara, and cast the young beauty Gabrielle Anwar (The Librarian: Return to King Solomon's Mines) and "thirthsomething" Terry Kinney in the leads.

Kinney went on to do The Laramie Project later and was fantastic.

If you want conformity, then setting your movie on a military installation ensures that you have an easier time of it. Younger people will love this version, but just updating to modern techniques and special effects doesn't always make for a better picture.

Skintastic Moment: Great view of Gabrielle Anwar's ta-tas waking up on a stretcher.

"Body Snatchers" is definitely the poorest of the three Snatcher films. It is uninspired and sloppily written--lacking all the style and finesse that the other two "Invasion" films are famous for. The film is set in a military instillation which isn't conducive for good horror and thrills. The locale fails for the same reason it did as the setting for "Child's Play 3". It's too distant from us, too foreign...we can't easily relate to it. Movies set in small towns and cities scare us because that IS our world--it's our familiar.

The special effects are great and it's a fun rental. I like some of the scenes, most were so cheesy I had to laugh. (Especially when the "pod soldier" let the protagonist fly away in the helicopter because he didn't emotionally react to, "I F___ed your girlfriend." Give me a break!) It's an okay film--treasure the first two "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" and throw "Body Snatchers" on if you have nothing better to do. 4/10