The Invasion / Invasion of the Body Snatchers

faceman

As much as its not that highly rated, I immensly enjoyed the 70's version of Invasion of the Body Snatchers. There was a real sense of claustrophobia, paranoia and loss of hope. Plus it had a great ending.

This year's Invasion, granted was a troubled film (it was short prior to Casino Royale hence why Daniel Craig looks so different), but lacked everything that the not so great 70's flick did achieve.

A shame really as its a top notch premise and particularly in this day and age where media manipulation, censorship, government control plays a big part in the running of the world.

All that good stuff aside, kidman annoys the hell out of me for some reason!

Any views?

Karl Hungus

faceman wrote: »

As much as its not that highly rated, I immensly enjoyed the 70's version of Invasion of the Body Snatchers. There was a real sense of claustrophobia, paranoia and loss of hope. Plus it had a great ending.

Huh? I thought the 70's version was very highly rated indeed.

ixoy

Karl Hungus wrote: »

Huh? I thought the 70's version was very highly rated indeed.

Echoing the "Huh?" - the '78 version is regarded as a classic of the genre I felt and one of the best examples of how a remake can work well. Who hasn't rated it highly? It featured, I believe, quite highly in RottenTomatoes' recent Top 100 Sci-Fi ficks for example.

This version doesn't look any use and, after a pretty poor '90s version, maybe they shoud leave it alone for a while.

faceman

Karl Hungus wrote: »

Huh? I thought the 70's version was very highly rated indeed.

ixoy wrote: »

Echoing the "Huh?" - the '78 version is regarded as a classic of the genre I felt and one of the best examples of how a remake can work well. Who hasn't rated it highly? It featured, I believe, quite highly in RottenTomatoes' recent Top 100 Sci-Fi ficks for example.

yeah, as you see from my original post, i immensely enjoyed it the '78 flick. Perhaps my knowledge of other people/critic's opinion on the film is somewhat off the mark on this one but that being said, that particular comment wasn't the purpose of starting this thread.

senordingdong

I'm irritated by this movie and I haven't even seen it yet, it's becasue the trailer was so over played at the cinema for the past 2 months or so.

On a plus note, didn't the guy that directed 'Downfall' direct this at some stage?

faceman

^ quite possibly, it was a very troubled shoot. avoid it if you can!

senordingdong

But Downfall was brilliant.

Cabaal

I also immensely enjoyed the 70's version, I'm not holding out much hope for this re-make,

As for a bad rating for the old version, even the 70's version has a 7.2 rating on imdb which ain't bad http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0077745/

Invasion has a 6.1 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0427392/

The Denouncer

Is the 70's version coming out on Region 2 Special Edition DVD? I like that one, with Spock and The Fly. I see Veronica Cartwright has a cameo in the new one, and of course Kevin McCarthy has a cameo in the 1978 remake. I presume Nicole Kidman will have a cameo in the 2028 remake.

The reviews for the Invasion are terrible. After delivering his cut Oliver Hirschbiegel was fired and the Wackowski brothers were brought in to write a new ending and up the action ending. James McTeigue was them brought on to shoot the additional material. Some of the CGI in the traielr looks terrible, the piece where the man and girl jump off the building looks atrocious.

The trailer has run before every film for the past two months in my local cinema and after all that they don't even bother getting the film in.

faceman

Deleted User wrote: »

The reviews for the Invasion are terrible. After delivering his cut Oliver Hirschbiegel was fired and the Wackowski brothers were brought in to write a new ending and up the action ending. James McTeigue was them brought on to shoot the additional material. Some of the CGI in the traielr looks terrible, the piece where the man and girl jump off the building looks atrocious.

the effects are awful as is the ending. I cant emphasise enough how bad the ending is. Its original cut Blade Runner bad...

galactus

The '78 version is a classic, no doubt. Maybe not in the same league as "Save the Green Planet" though

The ending with Keifer's dad is outstanding. I doubt if you could get an ending like that nowadays though.

I, for one, won't be watching Invasion, the remake of The Wicker Man or any other crappy remakes. Please stop encouraging them!

CyberGhost

The 70th version was awesome,

I can never forget Matthews face of pure shock and horror when he sees Elisabeth turn into one of those things.


I hate remakes so much(I know the 70th was a remake, but to me it's an original damn it), why can't people leave the classics alone?

mike65

How many version do we need? 1956 (80 min of tight tension), 1978 (120 mins of languid queasiness) 1993 (90 mins of okayness it was'nt really the same for me as they shifted the emphisis alot.)

The Philip Kaufman version is proberly the best for the cast alone.

Mike.

mike65

Bump! 1978 version is on Sci-Fi channel tonight at about 10.30 (ish)

Mike.

Nolanger

None of the remakes understood that what made the original disturbing was that it was set in a small town where everyone knew each other. Hence the horror of seeing someone familiar change.
The remakes set the story in large cities where everyone's a stranger and it doesn't really impact as much when they change.

The Denouncer

The brill 70's version is cheap in Xtravision at the moment but I might wait for a special edition.

TerrorFirmer

Few months too late, but The Invasion was absolutely dreadful in my opinion, devoid of any redeeming qualities, never quite feels like it has any real substance, and it's practically over while you're still waiting, in vain, for something to kick off that signifies the core of the story....just feels beginning and end. Not fleshed out at all. Plus, it gets even more negative marks for the interaction between Kidman and her child, what is it with these sort of movies as of late that insist on having children to serve as the main catalyst....ugh.

Basq

Loved the 78 version.. I think the moment with Donald Sutherland's face from 1.51 onwards is one of the most unforgettable images in cinema. Certainly for me!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=na2W38tLp_Q

Terrified me when I first saw it as a child!

navin.r.johnson

I'm with everyone else, 78 version rocks. Couldn't be bothered with the new one. Daniel Craig is a clown and the those Chanel ads make me want to throw Nicole Kidman off the Eifel Tower.

Galvasean

basquille wrote: »

Loved the 78 version.. I think the moment with Donald Sutherland's face from 1.51 onwards is one of the most unforgettable images in cinema. Certainly for me!

Not just the look, but Argh the sound! :eek:

faceman

poor donald, look at him resorting to doing guiness ads!

mike65

Big money small work. There's no shame in it these days. Once upon a time stars would only do ads for Japanese tv as thats where the commercial would stay.

Mike.

Galvasean

mike65 wrote: »

Big money small work. There's no shame in it these days. Once upon a time stars would only do ads for Japanese tv as thats where the commercial would stay.

Mike.

Damn right.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skBlEbsM0jM

faceman

Galvasean wrote: »

Damn right.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skBlEbsM0jM

Fixed that for you.

That ad is... surreal!