Invasion of the Body Snatchers

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.

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.

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+

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.

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.