Gli invasori spaziali

Lots of positive and negative feedback for this film, and I can understand why. Whether we want to admit it or not, nostalgia does have an impact on how we view things. As someone between the two generations(early 30's at this time), I can understand how I have put special importance on things I watched as a child. I know that some of these films were not too good but they mean't a lot to me. I also know that I was the kind of person that watched older films and appreciated them if they were good, and watched newer films and appreciated them if they were good. The biggest problem with many younger viewers today is that they do not look at a film in a context of when it was made, nor do they look at the most important aspect of the film which is what message is the film trying to relate....NOT how does it look in relating its message. We as a society are too caught up with presentation and other superficial things that sometimes we ignore what the core of something is. Anyway...enough philosophizing. This film is a good film period. Yep, it is cheaply made. Yep, it is filled with lots of stock footage, particularly the battle scenes which take place at night but footage takes place during day. Yep, it has mediocre acting. I won't argue those point because they are accurate. But those are only a part of the film...and for this film at least a very small part. This film has style and substance. Director William Cameron Menzies WAS a great director. He directed the science fiction classic Things To Come in the 30's which was a visionary masterpiece. He made this film fun to watch as he incorporated German expressionistic sets into his small-town simple story of a boy that knows aliens have landed on Earth in his back yard. The young boy played by Jimmy Hunt does a fine job in his role. The messages the film relates, however, are for me at least the core of the film....watch out for the ordinary....listen to children.....conformity is dangerous. This film is saying so much...give it a chance without worrying about window-dressing! And a final note...Long Live Morris Ankrum in film...I like him in this movie!

Invaders From Mars is, arguably, a cult classic. William Cameron Menzies, of "Gone With The Wind" and "The Thief of Baghdad" and "Things to Come" fame puts his artistic expertise to work in creating a world of impending doom, seen through the eyes of an 11 year old boy.

It is because of this point-of-view that lends a nightmarish quality to a struggle this boy encounters when he tries to convince the authorities that a spaceship landed in a sandpit behind his house.

The sense of "something's not right" with Mom and Dad starts as the boy's parents are sucked below the sandpit into the evil arms of the Martians, made into zombie-spies, and returned to the surface. The boy's fear mounts when local police and even high-ranking military fall prey to the Martians' mind control.

Through the assistance of a well trusted astrophysicist and a school psychologist the boy convinces the local Army base to make a beach head in the boy's back yard... and the battle to return the boy's parents and the villagers to normalcy begins. Eventually, the boy and the psychologist confront the Martian intelligence (midget Luce Potter as a convincing body-less head with tentacle-like arms in a glass sphere). In a poor "race against time" sequence in which the little boy and psychologist are rescued from the spaceship before it blows up, the film reaches its climax to the cacophonous din of artillery explosions, and Raoul Kraushaar's eerie, disharmonious a capella choir.

Many criticize the poor production values, the over use of stock footage, the idiotic costumes, and the fact that the film had TWO endings (one popularized in Great Britain, one here in U.S.A.).

Yes, I agree that production and set values were cheap (green condoms to represent molten rock "bubbles" in the tunnels and obvious zippers in the velour-like jump suits of the Martian slaves, to name a few.)

Nevertheless, Menzies applies forced perspective to his sets, and the skillful use of background mattes to lend an unearthly tone to the scene Remember folks, this is 1953... a time when Communism infiltration and subordination of Mr. and Mrs. Joe America was the chief "fear of the day". There are few other films of that period that deftly portrayed this paranoia so aptly as "Invaders From Mars"

If one overlooks the "rough" edges of its obviously low budget, one can still appreciate the helplessness, fear and mistrust the little boy develops as his parents and others are turned into "tools of the Martians". Is it truly a nightmare, or did it actually happen? The viewer is left to make that choice.

I was only a year old when this movie came out, but I saw it on TV when I was around 8 years old, and it made a deep impression on me. In fact, when they brought out that long needle, my sister and I hid behind the couch and screamed for our mother to come turn off the TV! As a result, I did not know how the movie ended until I saw it again as a teenager. The special effects may seem cheesy to the jaded audiences of today, but they were effective enough to give me nightmares for years. (In one dream I am being carried by my own mother, who is walking stiffly, with a fixed smile.) I believe what makes it work is that the entire film is seen from the point of view of the boy. The director capitalizes on the insecurity of young children, and the way they relate to the world around them. All the best horror and science fiction movies succeed not because of CGI, costumes, rubber prostheses and fake blood, but because they focus on basic human fears and insecurities.

After reading many of the comments regarding this movie, I am somewhat amused to see how many have forgotten that there was life before CGI computer effects.

"Invaders From Mars" is still potent in the most valuable way, and that's imagination. The storyline, which owes a great deal to "The Wizard of Oz" in it's final moments, has deep psychological effects which still resonate today. If it wasn't so effective, people wouldn't still be discussing it after nearly fifty years.

CGI effects have dumbed down movies to nothing more than computer-effects orgies, relying on a "gee-whiz" factor that ultimately comes up empty in more than a few cases (the big-budget "Godzilla" leaps quickly to mind here). IFM was originally set to be a 3-D movie, which was ultimately scrapped for budgetary concerns. William Cameron Menzies, the director, used the original sets which had been designed to force perspective. The resulting film, which throws the objectivity to a child's point of view has fascinated viewers for years. Menzies did the best with what he could afford, and the visual results are still gripping even today. Yes, the film has it's flaws, but we need to consider the making of IFM in its historical context. Menzies was an Oscar-winning art director (for "Gone With the Wind", no less). Also consider his work on "Thief of Bagdad" with Sabu, one of the most beautiful color films ever made. IFM shows the same visual excitement (referred to by some viewers as "garish"), but rising above it's badly slashed budget to gain a foothold in popular memory.

It's sad to think that the work of a real artist will be dismissed simply because he worked in an era where technology hadn't swallowed vision.

One of the most memorable SF films from the 50s. For anyone who was a kid in the 50s or 60s, just say "the movie where people are sucked into the sand", and everyone instantly knows which movie you mean. Those scenes are unforgettable, as are the scenes of the Martian Intelligence, and the image of the nurse about to receive the mind control device. And that haunting, otherworldly choral sound! Probably the most brilliantly eerie vocal sound ever made for a movie. Unfortunately, many people won't be able to look past the low budget 50s production values, but there's some great work here. William Cameron Menzies was a genius at production design. Check out the nightmarish forced perspective of the path leading to the sand pit, and the police station. A must see.