The Invasion (2007) – A Good Streak Has to End Some Time

A few more days here, another sixteen years there, and we come to the next installment in this run through the evolution of the Body Snatchers series.

As I've gotten older, I've come to realize I don't get the same zeal in a bad movie takedown I once did. There's definitely a catharsis to it, but it's not something I find myself going out of my way for the way I used to.

I'm saying that up front for a reason – I didn't go into this one expecting a cinematic drag. With that in mind, I'm still willing to admit The Invasion is probably the most disappointing watch I have had tied to this project since switching to the franchise format.

Besides the fact this just makes the whole thing look
incredibly vague and uninteresting, the knowledge that
Daniel Craig's career just gets THAT much better
after this just makes his being squandered here hurt that much more.

Yes, I say this even after having watched 2011's The Thing and Omen IV: The Awakening. The Thing, while misfired, seemed to have its heart in the right place, and Omen IV at least managed to get an honest to God laugh out of me (albeit not by design.) That still puts them both ahead of The Invasion for me in the final estimate.

Again, I want to make this very clear – I went into this trying to find good in it. I won't pretend I wasn't skeptical, but I still gave it the benefit of the doubt. Hell, I was even getting curious to see how it'd play in the aftermath of the first three in relatively short succession.

Turns out, sadly, not very well. From the jump, this surpasses Ferrara in terms of taking departures from the source. Granted, on its own, departure can be a good thing, but there's still a limit. In this version, much of the old premise is gone – of the original pod concept, the only thing that they seemed to maintain was an alien lifeform (the pod is now a spore) that needs you to sleep to take over. Granted, even the reasoning there has been altered – the spore doesn't so much grow a new you as it infects you and rewrites you, with sleep as a catalyst (and the infection now spread by people vomiting on their targets. No, you read that right.)

Pictured - a still from a setpiece that literally involves
dodging vomit on the subway.
Go look it up. I'm not making this up.
I'll wait.

With that tenuous a connection, it was hard not to suspect, while watching, that this movie started as something else and then in the process got retooled into a Body Snatchers movie – certainly common enough in the realm of horror sequels and remakes. Surprisingly, this is one time where the process was reversed – the project was meant to be a more straightforward adaptation, then the writer diverged wildly in an attempt to modernize it, leading to what we got back in 2007.

Again, difference in and of itself isn't a bad thing. If this were a better movie, I'd likely be commending it for its taking the chance. As it is though, the changes don't really feel like they add much to the movie, save for someone deciding this series had a criminal lack of people spitting/puking on each other.

I'm trying not to harp too much on the changes, lest this simply read as purist rage. The problem is, unlike with earlier changes in content, I'm not entirely clear as to the why of many of the changes beyond 'it's modern.'

For a series that I have earlier lauded for its ability to adapt its themes to the concerns of the time, The Invasion is particularly frustrating. I've given it some time since watching trying to parse out a singular theme it's trying to explore to the extent the previous versions did (even if by accident in 56) and it all just keeps coming back to the immortal words of David Byrne: “You're talking a lot, but you're not saying anything.”

and while I'm comparing this to films which felt like
they had a clearer idea what they wanted to convey -
spending a large chunk of this in a supermarket just
left me wanting to watch The Mist.

For a movie made in 2007, it does feel like it's trying to make some commentary with its changes. The new method of transmission, for example, could read as addressing the growing concern with flu outbreaks – albeit that theme then makes a strange read of the movie's use of inoculations, which in the current environment, can manage to read first as anti, then pro vaccination.

I'd be inclined to give more of the benefit of the doubt that they weren't quite intending a theme there, but for the fact that the changes were in the interest of a more modern take to begin with, to say nothing for the fact that, by the fourth go around, the idea that a Body Snatchers movie is saying something is sort of expected by now unless the people making it say otherwise.

Which leads to probably one of the biggest issues with what this movie is saying – when it addresses the idea of humanity and emotion. It's a concept that's been at the core of every iteration of the series, even in its more (relatively) apolitical early incarnation. In truth, the series started to drift from this with Ferrara, but it's such a stark departure here as to become jarring.

In earlier iterations, the idea of the negative side of human emotions is simply framed as part of the pods' argument – they offer humanity a freedom from fear, hate, etc, albeit at the cost of the positive emotions such as joy and love that other versions offer as a counter point. In this, the emphasis feels almost exclusively fixed on the negative emotions, with human characters dwelling on it even before the aliens start taking them over. Even when the movie ends with humanity surviving the titular invasion, it is presented with a dour counterpoint as Jeffrey Wright only dwells on all those more negative traits of humanity surviving.

Also adding to the 'Where were you going with this?' factor:
This version has people who just have inherent
immunity to the spore. For seemingly no other reason
than to justify the 'happy' ending.
Just wanted to observe that is all.

On one hand, I get it – it was 2007 (and this project actually started in 2004), people weren't in a particularly happy headspace at the time. But even with that context in mind, it's hard to really look at this and feel like it's really saying anything specific to the time beyond 'Boy, humanity sucks, am I right?'

Which, again, raises the question of why go to all the trouble of so completely remaking it if you're really not going to have a clear vision of where you want to go with it. As it is, this movie has threads that could have made for interesting exploration, but never really feels like it does much more than chew them over for a little while and never really come a single conclusion about them.

I would be more likely to forgive a lot of this if the movie still worked as a thriller. Sadly, it's in that sort of nexus of a movie that manages to be both underwhelming and technically overproduced (at the same time, so I don't even have that to take solace in here.

There has been talk since about offering another take on the series – and honestly, I stand by what I said in earlier writeups, there is still pretty fertile ground for this concept to take root in (no pun intended.)

This time it just didn't take is all.

Well, we'll see what happens if that new one comes.

Until then.

Body Snatchers (1993) - Well, THIS Got Scarier With Time

Welcome back. You're just in time for a fresh round of pods.

Now, you WILL remember to keep these properly watered in your rooms, right?

Look, I'm just concerned is all. I'm still seeing some emotions and I think these plants could help.

...wait. Let me try that again.

ANYWAY, we're jumping ahead in time, this time by fifteen years. It's a new generation and a new kind of Body Snatcher, this time with a new title, and a new director in the form of Abel Ferrara (which was weird for me to remember coming in this time with memories of Bad Lieutenant and Ms. 45.)

There IS still a fair amount of unsettling nonsexual nudity
but nothing quite on the level of Harvey Keitel's breakdown scene.

As an evolution of story, Body Snatchers differs considerably from either of the two prior movies. The pod people are still there, and function in much the same way as in the previous versions, but that is about it. In this case, the medical examiner hero of the past two movies is now a secondary, with the movie instead focusing on his daughter (played by a young Gabrielle Anwar) as the family is moved out to investigate strange goings-on an army base.

If you haven't figured out where it goes from there, well...I don't know what to tell you except keep taking care of those plants. It'll be over soon.

As I've said a few times now, one of the things that's fascinating about this series is how its core idea is adaptable, able to change itself to fit the themes and fears of whenever it is made, whether by design or simple happenstance.

In this case - well, welcome to a post Gulf War brand of pod people.

With that in mind, as some of you have already likely picked up on – Ferrara's decision to set the movie on an army base is a major part of where this movie is going thematically. This is probably the most thematically pointed of the four takes on the story produced to date – by the time Marti (Anwar) and her family arrive at the base, the pods have already taken over much of the populace. Thanks to the tendency of military culture to lean heavily on conformity, this change in the social structure isn't registered right away. Much of it is simply treated as standard army culture rather than an indication of shed humanity.

Okay, so it's not particularly subtle, but then no rule stated it had to be. For what it's worth though, Ferrara mostly conveys it well. At times it can be a little too on the nose (such as a sequence involving Marti's little brother in school where the students' art projects are all the exact same drawing) but even then, it doesn't feel like the movie slows to beat you over the head with it.

One other area where this particular version stands out – while not as uniquely grim as its 78 predecessor, Body Snatchers is arguably the entry in the series that could be described as the most overtly horror-based. Much more time is spent on sequences of people being taken over by pods – up to and including seeing the fate of a human fully taken over within the first act, a reveal previously kept till near the ending. It's understandable in some ways – by this point, the concept of the pod person was already a part of our cultural lexicon, so Ferrara didn't have to play it as coy, the audience already knew what it was getting into.

To its credit, the quick cut presentation of the scene still
makes for a pretty unsettling first reveal, even if you
know what's coming.

This more open approach to the creature and body horror leads to arguably the movie's strongest sequence – an extended scene in which soldier Tim (Billy Wirth), feigning being a pod, has to work his way through an army hospital that has been turned into a conversion center. Ferrara keeps the focus predominantly on Tim and the occasional looks at what he sees, and all the while we hear sounds of soldiers screaming as they're restrained and sedated or the sick, wet sounds of bodies collapsing as they're fully taken over. It manages to be both blatant but also careful enough to make sure it doesn't over play any one visual, creating an altogether disturbing tableau, made all the more effective by the extra challenge that Tim is required to keep a straight face through all of it.

Following this fairly nightmarish scene, we get an ending that is, to this point, probably the closest thing to an upbeat end (give or take for the studio mandated ending to 56, that is.) Of course, even that ending is laced with heavy ambiguity that the pods have already outpaced the survivors, and it's only a matter of time before they escape from one threat into another.

A threat that, in this version, makes the idea of sleeping
even MORE unsettling.

Overall, Ferrara's take remains an interesting one. There's no denying it's a movie with something to say, even if it's at times a bit too blunt about what it's saying, but it also still keeps its story moving, even while it's making sure you don't miss the point. The end result isn't quite as to-the-bone unsettling as its predecessor, but it still manages a fair number of unsettling jolts all on its own.

I still don't know if I can agree with Roger Ebert's assessment that this was the best of the three. In fact, as it is now, I think I'd put it third in line – though less from any fault of its own and more just preference for the first two in their approach. Even with that placing, this still works well as a fresh take.

Also, given what followed the 90s, a dark commentary on the enforced conformity of military culture, particularly with an emphasis on the threat of it eventually working its way off base and weaving its way among civilians as well that feels uncomfortably prescient, so it's got that going for it.

Three for three so far and each has been enjoyable experiences, with something unique to say for them.

Now comes...well...we'll get to The Invasion next time.

With a comment like that, I suppose I've already tipped my hand about what I thought about it, huh?

Well, you'll get to hear me explain that more next time.

ARE YOU ASLEEP YET?
JUST CHECKING

Till then.

Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978) – It's the End of the World As We Know It (You Won't Feel a Thing)

Welcome back fellow humans. I trust you've all been tending to your gardens?

Getting lots of rest?

Good. Very good. Keep at it!

With that, it's back into the green house for cultivating another batch of pods for this year's Halloween run.

In what might be the biggest timeline jump I've done so far (give or take for how you want to read last year's segue into the extended universe of The Thing), we're jumping 22 years ahead from where Don Siegel left the town of Santa Mira, CA to its alien fate.

This time around, the baton went to Philip Kaufman – who saw this as an opportunity not to simply remake the original (which he has gone on record as being a fan of) but rather to make a variation on a theme.

Something about the desolate landscape on this poster just feels
incredibly appropriate given the tone the movie leans into.

Which is an interesting way to put it, given his version has, for many, become the definitive variation of the series – so much so that his version of the pod person has become the one ingrained into the popular culture, most famously in the image of them pointing and shrieking to identify those not yet turned.

Like its predecessor, this is an entry I was having a hard time deciding how to approach at first. One part because I've already discussed it on here back in the day, and one part because so much has already been said for it.

What's been said has been justified, of course. Over 40 years later, this movie still works well. True, some of the aesthetic is a bit dated, but that is pretty unavoidable. Once you adjust to that, the movie still plays very well as a thriller, slowly building its paranoia and taking that early time to let you grow to become invested in the small group of characters caught up in the growing menace.

Speaking of that slow burn, that's actually the aspect I wanted to focus on this time. Like The Thing last year, this is a movie I've revisited many times over the years, so for this, rather than just do to a general overview, I was challenging myself to stick to a single particular facet of the movie.

Tangential to where I'm going with this, I will die on the hill
that these versions of the pods are the most visually unsettling.

In trying to do that, it finally hit me just how well Kaufman builds that menace into the movie from the get-go. Some of it's easy to see up front – like the first movie, we have the numerous people who know something is wrong, but can't put their finger on what (there's definitely a social commentary aspect to the fact the first characters we see picking up on it are women and minorities who ultimately go ignored) – and that's by design to help bait the hook.

Then there's the parts that aren't as readily apparent to a first time viewer – things like the scene early on when Brooke Adams unknowingly picks one of the pods. Naturally, our focus is on her, but it's also hard not to pick up on the conversation going on around her, as children are led out to the garden by their teachers, encouraged to pick flowers to bring home to their parents. Once you know what's coming, it seems obvious, but watched in a vacuum, it plays as fairly benign.

Particularly compared to its later accompanying, and far darker, moment when a group of school children are being led into a building where they're being told it's time to take naps. By the time that scene occurs, we know the grim fate that awaits the kids far better than we do in that first moment, but revisiting that first moment becomes much darker in that regard in hindsight.

Given the larger scale this movie builds on compared to the
predecessor, I find myself subscribing to the fan theory that
Kaufman made a sequel where that bookend never happened
and Bennell's been on the run for years.

The same goes for the recurring scenes of the waste removal trucks. It's one of those aspects that reads as fairly benign on that first watch in a vacuum, then takes on a whole new tone on the revisit – particularly when you look in the hopper and note there is no other garbage in that mixture other than the almost literal ashes of the human race.

Dread is a tricky formula to get right in a movie – it's easy to risk laying it on too thick and showing your hand, or couching too much in mystery that loses its value on a rewatch. Kaufman strikes a good balance here, with many of the smaller clues becoming much grimmer horrors filling in the margins on later viewings, more fully painting in the picture of what rapidly becomes clear is a larger destruction of humanity unfolding around our unknowing heroes.

The result is a feeling that, having now seen every entry in the series, feels ultimately unique to this movie. It's the one Body Snatchers film I would say manages to feel genuinely apocalyptic. There's others that flirt with that line with ambiguity, but no other entry sounds the death knell for the human race with as much certainty as this one does, and given how much of it is baked into the movie from the start, it really pays off in the final minutes of the movie – it's possible Veronica Cartwright isn't the last human left on the planet, or in the city, but for our purposes, she may as well be. And as such, it's hard not to sympathize and share in her terror as that knowledge hits home with one last alien shriek.

On that note - we as a society don't give Veronica Cartwright
nearly enough credit as an actress. This would have been an
easy scene to botch and she nails it - both in the initial shock
and horror as well as that subsequent moment where it looks
as though the last of her sanity has just snapped realizing
this is the end.

Which brings us to a close for another entry.

It will be a little less than twenty years before the next entry – though our own visit to Abel Ferrara's The Body Snatchers will be in considerably less time. Until then, stay safe, and keep watering those plants.

No reason. They just look nice, that's all.

The Thing (2011) – The Other Side of the Remake Coin

Okay, that title is a bit of a misnomer.

But only a bit.

Following the comics in the 90s, there were a few attempts to try and bring The Thing back to the screens – one I had only recently learned about was an attempt at a Sci-Fi Channel miniseries that got up to scripting before going under – but for a time, couldn't quite make it land.

They finally changed that in 2011, with the release of The Thing – an attempt at a prequel to the 1982 movie designed to fill in the story of the doomed Norwegian team from the first movie.

There's a certain unintentional meta-brilliance to having
this use the exact same title as the original while being something of an incomplete copy.

Like the idea of providing a clear answer to the fates of MacReady and Childs, I can't pretend I don't see why people would want to explore the first thaw, even if I can't say I agree with it. Yes, we know in broad strokes what happened, but doubtless there are some that would want to know how things like the split-face monster came to be.

The problem in a case like this is, unlike with MacReady and Childs, you already have a pretty clear idea what's going to happen. This is a dilemma of prequels in general – the question of why fill in when you know where it goes. But it's easier with something like, say, the fall of Anakin Skywalker, where a lot of the details were left vague originally (...let's not discuss the finished product now), vs the fate of the Norwegian outpost, where Carpenter's movie gives you enough details in what the Outpost 31 crew find to tell a pretty clear story. It's not air-tight, but you have enough points you're expected to hit that many filmmakers would find their hands tied by that.

I don't envy Matthijs van Heijningen Jr. and Eric Heisserer for taking on this job. By the early 2010s, Carpenter's movie had come a long way from its former status as a black sheep and now made for a very big set of shoes for anyone to fill.

To us, the viewers, this says 'stay the Hell away'
To this team, it still says 'Let's see what's inside!'

I say this in part because I want to cut them some slack with what they had to work with, and also because it makes it much more frustrating that, rather than take the risk and try something completely off the beaten path, but still reach the same end point, much of this movie just feels like reheated leftovers of its predecessor. The first act of this makes for some of the better material the film has to offer for this reason. There's no other team to force the situation forward, meaning the movie has to find its own footing to start and move from there – instead of the downed alien ship being a key to a base full of dead people, it's an archaeological mystery. They're approaching with more wonder than apprehension and it gives the cast some material to work with than they get in much of what follows.

Once the original alien is out of the ice, the movie starts running into problems. With that escape, it turns into a fast-forwarded edition of the '82 version, going through many of the beats and twists the first did, often rushing to them and losing much of the impact they had the first time around. The first attack, for example, is played out mostly outdoors at night and with a CGI creature that only attacks once. It moves quickly and never seems to want to stop to take in the horror of what it's selling. Compare it with its equivalent moment in '82, when the Thing attacks a kennel full of dogs that get wind of what it really is. The suddenness of the prequel version feels incredibly unsatisfying by comparison to the grim, visceral build-up that it's taking its cue from.

I get that Rob Bottin is a high hurdle to get past, but making this your first
look isn't really helping.

That difference between those two scenes is the best example of what may be the other major problem this movie has – for being built around a creature whose very nature is built on infiltration and survival, the Things in this movie really can't resist showing off early and often. Granted, the earlier movie's iteration of the creature was not, itself, a shrinking violet, but it was still a creature that understood the value of stealth – save for being caught mid-assimilation at one point, the '82 Thing is shown as a being that keeps its tentacles under wraps until it has been identified and has absolutely has no other choice – often preferring to stoke suspicions and keep everyone's eyes off it while it works.

The fact the new version offers a CGI Thing isn't helping matters either. I'll give the filmmakers some credit on this – it's been well established they wanted practical FX work and lobbied to try and get it before that was ultimately vetoed. Further, to be totally up front, I commend them for making the attempt at least. At the same time, watching the rest of the movie with that in mind, I feel like even practical effects would have only done so much to save these scenes. There's still an impatience to get to the body horror in many moments that takes what feels like it was supposed to be a shocking reveal and just drops it on out there without much build up or suspense.

"Okay, so we're turning back. Play it cool, play it cool.
No need to let them suspect me ye--SCREW IT! TENTACLES!"

I wanted to be able to find more to like in this movie in general. I know it didn't go entirely the way the filmmakers wanted, and if I'm giving some credit, I do like several members of the cast here – even if they've had better days than this. Unfortunately, that only does so much to save the finished product of this movie from what it becomes – a prequel to a story of Lovecraftian paranoia that broadly doubles down on the former while skimping quite a bit on the latter.

...Kind of an unimpressive note to close out Thing Week with, admittedly. But, you work with what you have.

Apocalypse October continues rolling, however, as we leave the frozen Hell of the Antarctic for a whole new Hell next Tuesday. We're heading off to the church basement as Carpenter flings the gates of Hell open and Prince of Darkness comes forth.

Till then.

The OctOmen - Take 2: The Omen: 666 (2006)

This IS rare – a double header!

In my defense, both of these were…they were something else, and while I could have just took things past deadline, I really want to close this month proper with the books. I meant what I said, I’m having more fun with those than I expected.

But that is for Halloween proper.

For now, I want you to travel back in time with me once again. The year is 2006, and Hollywood is still madly in the throes of its love affair with horror remakes. With degrees of success coming from rebooting The Ring, The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, Dawn of the Dead and The Hills Have Eyes, just about every horror property was getting sized up for a modernization for one reason for another.