KallioWeHardlyKnewYe
Hey! We won!
- May 30, 2003
- 15,529
- 3,380
I was able to get the DVD through my local library (though it took a month for it to come in). That's probably not going to help you though ...
Movies: The Official "Movie of the Week" Club Thread III
- Thread starter TP
- Start date
- Status
I was able to get the DVD through my local library (though it took a month for it to come in). That's probably not going to help you though ...
Pranzo Oltranzista
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2017
- 3,842
- 2,701
Very fun little film indeed. A gem that's simple and open enough to be read in different ways and which was mostly perceived as a metaphor of the mccarthyist fear of the communist invasion (but was also interpreted as the exact opposite - and if you tone down the political statement, as a more interesting comment on the raise of conformity and the loss of personal freedom). Both readings were denied by the makers of the film, which is too pretty interesting. Even if closer to the sci-fi genre, the film remains very important for making the horror "human" (before Psycho and Peeping Tom).
Remade into a masterpiece in 78, it still carries (like the lesser versions that followed) an extraordinarily efficient malaise in bringing a very real and palpable fear of the otherness and it's reciprocal threat.
I'm surprised there isn't a French video store that doesn't carry it in Montreal--I know such shops are few and far between these days, but might be worth a try canvassing the few who are. If you are affiliated with a university or are a graduate of a nearby one, they usually can get anything you can dream up; local libraries can be a big help, too. When I was putting my book together I was amazed how my small local library could keep getting its hands on relatively esoteric movies from India and Bollywood.
Apologies to those who have had difficulty finding The Image Book--I had no idea. I just walked into Bay Video when the film was released a couple of months ago and bought a copy, I assumed it was that easy everywhere but I can see that was obviously a bad assumption.
Spring in Fialta
A malign star kept him
My alma meter is 3 hours away in Quebec City.
I've got a plane to catch on Saturday so I don't know if I'll have the time to find a video store (!) and watch the film. Quick search on Google gets me a...porn store. There's one in the Verdun neighborhood, but that's a trek for me, especially with no guarantee. There are some websites that rent the film, like Amazon, but it's US only, which is incredibly frustrating.
Pranzo Oltranzista
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2017
- 3,842
- 2,701
KallioWeHardlyKnewYe
Hey! We won!
- May 30, 2003
- 15,529
- 3,380
I don't mind having to do a little hunting for titles. Sorta fun sometimes. I too have been impressed at the breadth offered at my local library system however I'm shocked to learn The Devils seems to be a tough one on that front. They've had much more obscure titles. Perhaps its the controversy and nature of the movie keeping it off their shelves ...
Eastern European/Communist country films from the 60s seem to be the tough spot for me. I think I've whiffed on two of those over the years.
Eastern European/Communist country films from the 60s seem to be the tough spot for me. I think I've whiffed on two of those over the years.
I collected roughly 670 reviews from 70 countries (most of the reviews edited or revised from the movie page), submitted my book for consideration to a small, partly student-run press at York University, got accepted, and, voila, Beyond Hollywood: 21st Century International Film came out in 2016:Hold on cowboy, that's new and very interesting to me. Care to elaborate?
Still available at Barnes%Noble on line, Indigo on line, Kobo, and virtually any Amazon, including France, India and Japan
Last edited:
Pranzo Oltranzista
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2017
- 3,842
- 2,701
I collected roughly 670 reviews from 70 countries (most of the reviews edited or revised from the movie page), submitted my book for consideration to a small, partly student-run press at York University, got accepted, and, voila, Beyond Hollywood: 21st Century International Film came out in 2016:
Still available at Barnes%Noble on line, Indigo on line, Kobo, and virtually any Amazon, including France, India and Japan
Wow, that's amazing. Much respect!!
Hey, take a pass on it. You've got bigger fish to fry...if it pops up in the future, then you can take a shot at it.My alma meter is 3 hours away in Quebec City.
Spring in Fialta
A malign star kept him
Part of my trip will be in Casablanca, which perhaps surprisingly, is a wonderland for stands containing a ridiculous amount of hacked movies, which will probably be my best best at this point, and also give me something to do during the day!
Ralph Spoilsport
Registered User
- Jun 4, 2011
- 1,234
- 426
I watched The Hypothesis of the Stolen Painting and The Image Book back-to-back in one afternoon, and as a result I feel like I have a brain the size of a walnut. But here goes.
The Hypothesis of the Stolen Painting is like a whodunnit for philosophy majors and art theorists and my first impression is that it explores the relationship between narrative film and its forebearers…mainly painting, but also literature, mythology, and ritual ceremony. It's a short hop from painting to photography and thus from tableaux vivants to cinema--all they need is someone to call "action". One link between Tonnerre's paintings is that they are all action scenes, motion pictures before there was such a thing. To tell their story they capture a moment in time but all the action that precedes and follows that moment is captured on canvas somewhere in its details. The fourth painting, which was stolen and whereabouts unknown (thus literally a "moving picture" ha ha) was assuredly not a portrait or still life. That's my hypothesis, and I'm sticking to it.
But overall I feel this first viewing was just a practice run, and when I go back to this puzzle again--which I probably will (what kind of a cult movie would it be to watch just once)--I'll hopefully get a better grasp of its meaning. It's certainly intriguing and, at 63 minutes, easy on the schedule.
And now to Jean-Luc Godard's The Image Book…sheesh, this isn't getting any easier…
There's a scene in John Ford's Young Mr. Lincoln, referenced in The Image Book, in which Lincoln (played by young Henry Fonda) picks up a law book for the first time and beholds it with wonder. "Think you can read it?" someone asks. "Aw, I reckon I might make heads or tails of it, if'n I put my mind to it." In the next shot Abe's sitting beneath a tree, the book open in his lap. But he's not reading, no...he's dreaming, inspired by the principles of justice he'd been absorbing. It's one of the few optimistic notes in the film--heck, maybe its only note of optimism--and it struck me for that reason, standing out amidst the barrage of chaotic and jarring images. But it also struck me because Godard's "book" is similarly awe-inspiring, a headlong dive into the mess of modern humanity. Ball of confusion: that's what the world is today. (Actually, much of Godard's focus is on Europe's relation to the Arab world...I wonder sometimes how long America will be reckoning with the legacy of slavery, then note that Europe is still dealing with the aftermath of the Crusades.) But despite its pessimistic tone it is a feast for the senses; in fact, it may be sensory overload, which again reflects the times.
As for making heads or tails of it, this was my second encounter with The Image Book and my response is still shock and awe. But I see myself in the future sitting by the fireplace in an easy chair, brandy in one hand, cigar in the other (not happening, but hey--it's my fantasy), leisurely perusing Godard's book on my laptop, savouring it at my own pace. It's a complex work that I think will reward deeper contemplation. But for now I'm not complaining. Godard to me is like my favorite singer who happens to sing in a foreign language. Most of the meaning in the lyrics may escape me but the passion, emotion and assurance are loud and clear and the expressiveness in his technique is tops. I'm more than good with that.
The Hypothesis of the Stolen Painting is like a whodunnit for philosophy majors and art theorists and my first impression is that it explores the relationship between narrative film and its forebearers…mainly painting, but also literature, mythology, and ritual ceremony. It's a short hop from painting to photography and thus from tableaux vivants to cinema--all they need is someone to call "action". One link between Tonnerre's paintings is that they are all action scenes, motion pictures before there was such a thing. To tell their story they capture a moment in time but all the action that precedes and follows that moment is captured on canvas somewhere in its details. The fourth painting, which was stolen and whereabouts unknown (thus literally a "moving picture" ha ha) was assuredly not a portrait or still life. That's my hypothesis, and I'm sticking to it.
But overall I feel this first viewing was just a practice run, and when I go back to this puzzle again--which I probably will (what kind of a cult movie would it be to watch just once)--I'll hopefully get a better grasp of its meaning. It's certainly intriguing and, at 63 minutes, easy on the schedule.
And now to Jean-Luc Godard's The Image Book…sheesh, this isn't getting any easier…
There's a scene in John Ford's Young Mr. Lincoln, referenced in The Image Book, in which Lincoln (played by young Henry Fonda) picks up a law book for the first time and beholds it with wonder. "Think you can read it?" someone asks. "Aw, I reckon I might make heads or tails of it, if'n I put my mind to it." In the next shot Abe's sitting beneath a tree, the book open in his lap. But he's not reading, no...he's dreaming, inspired by the principles of justice he'd been absorbing. It's one of the few optimistic notes in the film--heck, maybe its only note of optimism--and it struck me for that reason, standing out amidst the barrage of chaotic and jarring images. But it also struck me because Godard's "book" is similarly awe-inspiring, a headlong dive into the mess of modern humanity. Ball of confusion: that's what the world is today. (Actually, much of Godard's focus is on Europe's relation to the Arab world...I wonder sometimes how long America will be reckoning with the legacy of slavery, then note that Europe is still dealing with the aftermath of the Crusades.) But despite its pessimistic tone it is a feast for the senses; in fact, it may be sensory overload, which again reflects the times.
As for making heads or tails of it, this was my second encounter with The Image Book and my response is still shock and awe. But I see myself in the future sitting by the fireplace in an easy chair, brandy in one hand, cigar in the other (not happening, but hey--it's my fantasy), leisurely perusing Godard's book on my laptop, savouring it at my own pace. It's a complex work that I think will reward deeper contemplation. But for now I'm not complaining. Godard to me is like my favorite singer who happens to sing in a foreign language. Most of the meaning in the lyrics may escape me but the passion, emotion and assurance are loud and clear and the expressiveness in his technique is tops. I'm more than good with that.
Ralph Spoilsport
Registered User
- Jun 4, 2011
- 1,234
- 426
Inter-library loan has come through for me in the past. It may take a few weeks though.
Ralph Spoilsport
Registered User
- Jun 4, 2011
- 1,234
- 426
I collected roughly 670 reviews from 70 countries (most of the reviews edited or revised from the movie page), submitted my book for consideration to a small, partly student-run press at York University, got accepted, and, voila, Beyond Hollywood: 21st Century International Film came out in 2016:
Still available at Barnes%Noble on line, Indigo on line, Kobo, and virtually any Amazon, including France, India and Japan
Got your Top 10 list ready for the next Sight & Sound poll?
Spring in Fialta
A malign star kept him
Oh, it's nothing like the movie at this point...
I'm more excited for Spain and Tangier...where I'll be sure to stop by at the free Paul Bowles exhibit. 
The Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956) Directed by Don Siegel
This brings back memories of Saturday matinees when I was a kid. Usually it would be a double feature with two horror/science fiction movies on the bill. Big bag of popcorn and a coke and you were on your way. The movies usually were memorable for all the wrong things, like you could clearly see the zipper on the costumes of the creatures in Mole People or the string attached to the flying saucer in Plan 9 from Outer Space, considered by some the worst movie ever made (I always liked Ed Woods lighting, though). By the time I got home, these cheapo "B" movies had already escaped my memory. And then there was this damned thing that scared the bejesus our of every 10-year-old on the block. For probably a week I looked under my bed every night before I went to sleep. The Invasion of Body Snatchers uses very simple means to generate its creepiness. There are none of the usual deformed monsters, alien space ships, or inescapable death rays typical of the breed; no Vincent Price/Peter Cushing slimy bad guys. The only special effect used in the movie is giant pods, pods that contain transforming bodies, bodies that are YOU. The movie also possesses a really good, believable story with decent acting and economic direction by Don Siegel. Siegel was the king of pulpy "B" movies who went on to bigger though not necessarily better things and that included five of Clint Eastwood's heyday movies, including Dirty Harry. Eastwood has always credited Siegel with teaching him everything he knows about direction. Siegel always got to the point quick and his movies end before they wear out their welcome (The Invasion of the Body Snatchers is only 80 minutes long). Thrills, but no frills. It worked beautifully this time around.
I always retained fond memories of this film, and even though two new versions followed over the years, one of which was good, I always preferred the original. Still do. However taking a film course years and years later, I wasn't expecting this movie to pop up on the course syllabus. Why it appeared is another matter. One theory about science fiction movies is that from a sociological standpoint, they always reflect what the society is most fearful of at the time. For instance a lot of the early '50s movies dealt with genetic mutations caused by radioactivity, a reflection of everyone's concern about living with deadly atomic bombs and nuclear weapons. The Invasion of the Body Snatchers, the theory goes, had a subtext that dealt with the fear of Communism, of people becoming soulless and unfeeling which is the way Communism was perceived in the West at the time. In other words, "B" science fiction movies underscore our deepest, subconscious fears. It's a hard position to argue against because once you know the theory the film seems an obvious example. It should be noted that writers/directors themselves may have no idea that this subtext exists--it is just impossible to make a movie that doesn't reflect on a subtle level the concerns of its time. These kinds of sociological theoretical approaches did another thing as well, an unintended consequence: to critique a movie, you didn't have to worry whether it was good or bad anymore as that kind of judgement has nothing to do with the social implications. You just write about movies in terms of their subtexts, good or bad, and what they reveal about the society of the time. As theories go, it is in its way a very useful, fertile one. As for the flick, it's still a classic. Now that it has gotten this far, I suspect the original version of The Invasions of the Body Snatchers will be a classic forever.
Side note: I don't remember who my prof was but I still remember the way he introduced this sociological theory of film to his class. His opening line was "How would a Texas millionaire know how to act if he didn't see himself reflected in the movies that he watches." I don't even know if that's true but the line sure got my attention.
Last edited:
Pranzo Oltranzista
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2017
- 3,842
- 2,701
Three. The Kaufman version (to me the best one by far), the Ferrara version (which is still an interesting film), and the Kidman version (which is a mess, but still retains some of the original concept's inherent creepiness).
A fan of Baudrillard or a précurseur?
Edit - or to put it more bluntly:
1956: 7/10
1978: 9/10
1993: 4/10
2007: 3/10
Last edited:
KallioWeHardlyKnewYe
Hey! We won!
- May 30, 2003
- 15,529
- 3,380
Invasion of the Body Snatchers
Siegel (1956)
“Make them listen to me before it’s too late!”
Dr. Miles Bennell, harried and stressed, implores the police and doctors seeing to him that something strange is happening in his town and it needs to be stopped. It’s a grabber of opening as the Doctor tells his tale. He returned to his sunny and sleepy California town of Santa Mira a few days earlier, called back for a medical emergency. But by the time he arrives, no one seems to be ill. Except maybe that plucky little boy. He thinks his mom isn’t really his mom. But that doesn’t make any sense does it? Here’s a drugs and a lollipop. Get some rest. This Bennell of a few days earlier seems to be less interested in patients and more interested in Becky Driscol, an old flame returned to town. A planned date is short circuited by another strange request. His friend Jack and his wife have a body. It’s laying on their pool table, a featureless man with a “vague” face. Ok, now that’s weird. Bennell finally thinks something is up, but again is strangely blase about it. It’s going to take a little more to convince him. But their numbers are growing. He’s cornered by some new versions of old friends who give him the pitch — no emotion, no feeling, only survival free from the drives of ambition, desire, faith. He passes and goes on the run with Becky. The key is to not fall asleep — that’s when they get you. Hiding in an old mine, that’s where they get Becky and they almost get him too but Bennell escapes, pod folk on his trail. He hits the highway and they let him go. No one will believe him. And besides, trucks are already loaded up with pods headed to other towns....
First, I forgot that this actually ends on a happy note. It feels tacked on. Didn’t do my research so I’m not sure if it was tacked on as a form of comfort. Totally forget it’s there though. In my mind it ends with McCarthy ranting in the street, but it doesn’t. It ends with an FBI call to stop all those outbound trucks.
I always forget how tight and propulsive this is. It doesn’t waste time with explanations, well with full explanations anyway. Not much to mull over in terms of villainous motivation or method. It’s delightfully simple. And I love that POP sound effect every time a pod opens. The ominous piano score slaps, as the kids might say. Siegel stages a few great sequences too — I’m partial to the nighttime town gathering of the hollowed out pod people on the town square (variations of which we’ve seen in everything from The Truman Show to John Wick 2) and everything set in the cave. Dana Wynter don’t impress me much but her sleepy/spooky act here works well. The black-and-white cinematography shines most here as well.
Nit picks? The acting is kinda rough all around. I know McCarthy’s performance is borderline iconic, but there’s no middle ground with him. He’s too low key for stretches and then way turned up at peak. Low key might not be fair. I suppose my issue isn’t an acting one as much as a script one. But he really, really doesn’t seem that interested in the mysteries around him until it’s pretty much explained to him. Weird faceless body? Yeah, that’s odd, but maybe Becky and I can you know ... wink, wink, nudge nudge. I laugh about it, but I’d be a liar if I said it doesn’t take a little away from what otherwise should be some tense moments. Like I said, I’m nit picking here.
Anti-communist screed? I know that’s the popular reading given the timing and Siegel’s leanings. Watching it oh these years on and while I wouldn’t push back on that, I think it’s fair to say the source story can probably be applied to whatever “threat from the inside” one may want to ascribe to it, metaphoric or not. That’s why it’s a damn classic.
Siegel (1956)
“Make them listen to me before it’s too late!”
Dr. Miles Bennell, harried and stressed, implores the police and doctors seeing to him that something strange is happening in his town and it needs to be stopped. It’s a grabber of opening as the Doctor tells his tale. He returned to his sunny and sleepy California town of Santa Mira a few days earlier, called back for a medical emergency. But by the time he arrives, no one seems to be ill. Except maybe that plucky little boy. He thinks his mom isn’t really his mom. But that doesn’t make any sense does it? Here’s a drugs and a lollipop. Get some rest. This Bennell of a few days earlier seems to be less interested in patients and more interested in Becky Driscol, an old flame returned to town. A planned date is short circuited by another strange request. His friend Jack and his wife have a body. It’s laying on their pool table, a featureless man with a “vague” face. Ok, now that’s weird. Bennell finally thinks something is up, but again is strangely blase about it. It’s going to take a little more to convince him. But their numbers are growing. He’s cornered by some new versions of old friends who give him the pitch — no emotion, no feeling, only survival free from the drives of ambition, desire, faith. He passes and goes on the run with Becky. The key is to not fall asleep — that’s when they get you. Hiding in an old mine, that’s where they get Becky and they almost get him too but Bennell escapes, pod folk on his trail. He hits the highway and they let him go. No one will believe him. And besides, trucks are already loaded up with pods headed to other towns....
First, I forgot that this actually ends on a happy note. It feels tacked on. Didn’t do my research so I’m not sure if it was tacked on as a form of comfort. Totally forget it’s there though. In my mind it ends with McCarthy ranting in the street, but it doesn’t. It ends with an FBI call to stop all those outbound trucks.
I always forget how tight and propulsive this is. It doesn’t waste time with explanations, well with full explanations anyway. Not much to mull over in terms of villainous motivation or method. It’s delightfully simple. And I love that POP sound effect every time a pod opens. The ominous piano score slaps, as the kids might say. Siegel stages a few great sequences too — I’m partial to the nighttime town gathering of the hollowed out pod people on the town square (variations of which we’ve seen in everything from The Truman Show to John Wick 2) and everything set in the cave. Dana Wynter don’t impress me much but her sleepy/spooky act here works well. The black-and-white cinematography shines most here as well.
Nit picks? The acting is kinda rough all around. I know McCarthy’s performance is borderline iconic, but there’s no middle ground with him. He’s too low key for stretches and then way turned up at peak. Low key might not be fair. I suppose my issue isn’t an acting one as much as a script one. But he really, really doesn’t seem that interested in the mysteries around him until it’s pretty much explained to him. Weird faceless body? Yeah, that’s odd, but maybe Becky and I can you know ... wink, wink, nudge nudge. I laugh about it, but I’d be a liar if I said it doesn’t take a little away from what otherwise should be some tense moments. Like I said, I’m nit picking here.
Anti-communist screed? I know that’s the popular reading given the timing and Siegel’s leanings. Watching it oh these years on and while I wouldn’t push back on that, I think it’s fair to say the source story can probably be applied to whatever “threat from the inside” one may want to ascribe to it, metaphoric or not. That’s why it’s a damn classic.
Referring to the teacher or me? For the teacher, it would have to be a precursor. For me, I try to avoid French cultural and linguistic theorists like the plague. I first learned this stuff from a great and influential film critic, movie analyst and teacher, Robin Wood, whose published several books of film analysis on everything from Hitchcock to sexual politics at the movies. He was a very widely respected thinker about film. He tended to specialize in an auteur approach to analysis in his earlier years. Then, after he came out as gay, he switched to a more sociological and psychological way of looking at movies. He was a bit of a prickly pear, but he had a very lively mind for film and for getting his students to actually think about what they were seeing.
Last edited:
Pranzo Oltranzista
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2017
- 3,842
- 2,701
I was referring to the teacher. I'm from the opposite point of the spectrum - PhD in semiotics, big fan of Barthes, Derrida... My own work - as modest as it was - was greatly influenced by Julia Kristeva and Michel Serres.
Yeah, that's about as "opposite point" as one can get. Has your background significantly altered the way you see or judge movies? Just curious to know.
Pranzo Oltranzista
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2017
- 3,842
- 2,701
Of course, and I think it's sometimes obvious in my few comments in here. I'm mostly interested in the fabric of the "text" and its links to other works.
Early New Year's resolution for you: write some reviews in here, at least occasionally. It would be great to have your take on things and it would add another perspective to consider.
Pranzo Oltranzista
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2017
- 3,842
- 2,701
I don't have much time to think nowadays, but if something inspires me, sure will. Used to be a movie critic (!) for a swiss magazine, a long long time ago.
Jevo
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2010
- 3,487
- 368
Invasion of The Body Snatchers (1956) dir. Don Siegel
Dr. Bennell returns to his small town practice after being away at a conference. His nurse has asked him to come immediately, because many people have come and asked for him when he was away. However none of them are in any need of medical attention any more. Becky Driscoll, an old love interest of Bennell has also returned to town after several years away. Becky's cousin claims that her father is an imposter. He looks and remembers exactly as her father, but inside he is different she claims. Bennell checks it out and can't see anything different with the man. He and Becky both dismiss the claim until they are called over to a couple of friends of Bennell, Jack and Teddy, who found a body of some sort in their house. A body with no distinctive features, not even finger prints. It's only when Jack falls asleep that the body starts adopting his features.
Invasion of The Body Snatchers is a classic sci-fi horror. It's very well crafted, and even today it manages to create some very tense moments, even though the first scene tells us that Bennell is going to be okay. I was quite surprised how well it held up in the 'horror' department. This is not always something that ages particularly well. But I think because the tension is very character driven instead of being stuff like jump scares or scary masks, it still works very well today. The special effects do leave a bit to be desired. The bodies slowly transforming in the green house looks like crash test dummies. And the seed pods, which carry the matter to create a copy of a person, seems to weigh as if they were made out of papier-mâché, which they probably were. It's not a big deal, but they could at least have pretended the seed pods had a little bit of mass to them in the two scenes where they were handled. The movie isn't really consistent about how the body snatching works. At first it seems to be implied that when you fall asleep your mind is transferred to the copy with an added communism filter. But when Becky falls asleep she wakes up in her own body with the communism filter added. The latter version is how the allegory works in a non-sci fi world, and is perhaps the 'scarier' version.
I joke a bit with the communism filter, because the red scare is probably the most common reading of this movie, and it fits very well with the time period. But it really is just a general scare of some undefined dangerous other that can come and take over your community if you are not careful. First you start hanging out with a gay person, then you hang out with two gay persons, and before you know it, they might try to turn you into a gay person! And you don't want that do you. So better inform the authorities about any possible gays in your area, and warn your friends and family so they can stay away from the dangerous gays! Because the general story is so universal, is probably also why it has been remade several times. Because it can easily be fit to whatever The Scare is in current times. In fact you don't even need to do much in order to connect it to The Scare, because people will do that themselves, as we see with this version and the red scare and McCarthyism.
I was impressed with how well Invasion of the Body Snatchers actually held up in 2019. It's still entertaining, fast paced, and you rarely feel its age. There's a bit with the effects and the acting where the age is shown. But the movie doesn't require a whole lot from its actors, so that isn't really a big deal.
Dr. Bennell returns to his small town practice after being away at a conference. His nurse has asked him to come immediately, because many people have come and asked for him when he was away. However none of them are in any need of medical attention any more. Becky Driscoll, an old love interest of Bennell has also returned to town after several years away. Becky's cousin claims that her father is an imposter. He looks and remembers exactly as her father, but inside he is different she claims. Bennell checks it out and can't see anything different with the man. He and Becky both dismiss the claim until they are called over to a couple of friends of Bennell, Jack and Teddy, who found a body of some sort in their house. A body with no distinctive features, not even finger prints. It's only when Jack falls asleep that the body starts adopting his features.
Invasion of The Body Snatchers is a classic sci-fi horror. It's very well crafted, and even today it manages to create some very tense moments, even though the first scene tells us that Bennell is going to be okay. I was quite surprised how well it held up in the 'horror' department. This is not always something that ages particularly well. But I think because the tension is very character driven instead of being stuff like jump scares or scary masks, it still works very well today. The special effects do leave a bit to be desired. The bodies slowly transforming in the green house looks like crash test dummies. And the seed pods, which carry the matter to create a copy of a person, seems to weigh as if they were made out of papier-mâché, which they probably were. It's not a big deal, but they could at least have pretended the seed pods had a little bit of mass to them in the two scenes where they were handled. The movie isn't really consistent about how the body snatching works. At first it seems to be implied that when you fall asleep your mind is transferred to the copy with an added communism filter. But when Becky falls asleep she wakes up in her own body with the communism filter added. The latter version is how the allegory works in a non-sci fi world, and is perhaps the 'scarier' version.
I joke a bit with the communism filter, because the red scare is probably the most common reading of this movie, and it fits very well with the time period. But it really is just a general scare of some undefined dangerous other that can come and take over your community if you are not careful. First you start hanging out with a gay person, then you hang out with two gay persons, and before you know it, they might try to turn you into a gay person! And you don't want that do you. So better inform the authorities about any possible gays in your area, and warn your friends and family so they can stay away from the dangerous gays! Because the general story is so universal, is probably also why it has been remade several times. Because it can easily be fit to whatever The Scare is in current times. In fact you don't even need to do much in order to connect it to The Scare, because people will do that themselves, as we see with this version and the red scare and McCarthyism.
I was impressed with how well Invasion of the Body Snatchers actually held up in 2019. It's still entertaining, fast paced, and you rarely feel its age. There's a bit with the effects and the acting where the age is shown. But the movie doesn't require a whole lot from its actors, so that isn't really a big deal.
- Status
