|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
#1
05-18-2010, 05:01 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Invasion Of The Body Snatchers
I briefly talked about this film in another thread, and wanted to discuss this story more in its various forms (Book vs. Original Film vs. 1978 remake vs. 1993 remake vs. 2007 remake.) I absolutely loved the original film and the 1978 remake (about equally), really didn't like the way the book ended, couldn't stand the 1993 remake, and never even bothered to watch the 2007 remake.
Your opinions? 
|
|
#2
05-19-2010, 06:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
1978 remake is the only one I thought was worth a damn. The original may have been good in it's time but it has aged as badly as cheap wine. The Nicole Kidman one was ok until the really bad ending but it never really gripped me. Never saw the 93 version or read the book, so I can't comment on those. But the level of tension and sense of paranoia throughout the Donald Sutherland version was intense and unmatched in either of the other ones I saw.
|
|
#3
05-19-2010, 07:25 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The original stands high above the others. IMO the 78 version has dated more than the original. The original has a marvelous ambiguity at the end, where you're not sure what will happen. The last shot of the 78 version gives everything away and ruins the effect- and ruins the whole movie.
I know I've seen the Ferara version, but I honestly can't remember anything about it, which is strange because I'm a Ferara fan.
__________________
Lee Widener, Author Website  Cartoon Artwork, Underground Art, Other Weird Stuff 
|
|
#4
05-19-2010, 07:32 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I've seen the original and the 78 Sutherland version and I liked both of them. The one with Nicole Kidman stunk, IMO. I was under the impression it was a different movie entirely until I watched it.
I should have known I guess. But, I thought it was pretty bad, especially when I realized what it was.
|
|
#5
05-20-2010, 01:57 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#6
05-20-2010, 03:19 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Book - never read it.
Original Film - Excellent, a classic. Arguably the best sci-fi horror ever till Alien came along. 1978 remake - Pretty good, a classic in its own right. Kaufman's direction is solid, plus the all-star cast put in some nice performances. 1993 remake - Pretty good. Gabrielle Anwar's appeal makes the film very likeable. Film retains a underlying chilling tone throughout. 2007 remake - Entertaining. I didn't mind it a lot. Kidman & Craig disappoint.
__________________
"If you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
#7
05-28-2010, 01:41 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
When I saw the 2007 remake, I had no idea about its earlier versions or the original story and it did disappoints me. Still I haven't get the chance to read the original story/book but recently saw the 56's original film & the 78's remake.
Both are undoubtedly fantastic; specially 1956 original film was better in terms of metaphorical means & obviously the ending. But the thing is original is more like a beautiful classic sci fi thriller than a horror where 1978 Kaufman version unfolds the story somewhat like in a Cronenbergian way of body horror sub genre which is all in all utterly creepy, dark & interesting also. Now like to check out the 90's version. Man...what a story that get the celluloid treatment 4 times in last 6 decades! We can guess there will be at least another one is coming in next 20 years.
__________________
@Letterboxd
|
|
#8
06-17-2010, 05:41 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Pretty much agree totally except for 2007 remake, really did not care for it at all. I love the original film but haven't seen it in too long, it stands up among the best of the 50s sci-fi and B movie greats
__________________
  Battle Royalty, 2009 @Wolf_Scousemac
|
 |
|
|
