Watch it at Amazon
17 out of 20 people found the following review useful: Good – but not in the same way as the original, 3 August 2002 Author: bob the moo from Birmingham, UK
The Malone family move to a military base to help contain a toxic spill. Many of the soldiers and families are behaving strangely but is it the toxins or something more sinister?I'm not a fan of remakes, many try to just copy the success of other films while some lift the original scene for scene to poor effect. However this at least tries to do something slightly different with it by setting it in a military base and bringing the drama into the family setting. In fact this setting creates some of the best scenes – my favourite being where Carol tells her daughter Marti that `there's no one like you left'. The greater effects are good but really I preferred the paranoid tension of the 50's original rather than the horror of effects.However I still think this is a very workable horror from a good director. Of course it suffers with comparison with the original – that's because the original is a sci-fi classic. But as it's own film it is pretty good. Indeed the ending is what director Siegel intended – but he was forced into having a more hopeful epilogue ending. Naturally it has it's weaknesses – the effects overpower the story at times but really I found this to be enjoyable as a horror.The cast are one of the weak links. I love Kinney because I'm a big Oz (HBO) fan, but here he doesn't really make a mark. Tilly has all the good lines and she is actually quite good. Anwar is also very watchable. But Ermey is type cast in his usual military role and Whitaker is far too calm and reasoned to do the job – he needed to be more like McCarthy in the original.Overall, this should be watched and not compared. In it's own right it is a good horror with only a few weaknesses that spoil it slightly. And if you do want to compare it to the 50's version then please remember than this is the type of ending that Siegel wanted and to me is one of the strengths of this film.
13 out of 15 people found the following review useful: Aliens take control of everything...even your body and soul !, 26 November 2003 Author: Coventry from the Draconian Swamp of Unholy Souls
Normally, I try never to watch any remakes before I had the chance to see the originals...So, watching this movie really was an exception for me since I never saw Don Siegel's version from 1956 and neither did I had the chance so far to catch the Philip Kaufman remake from 1978 starring Donald Sutherland. But this movie came on TV the other night and I watched it anyway. Besides, there were a few very interesting and respected people involved in this production. First of all, there's director Abel Ferrara of course. He already delivered a few true masterpieces before and some of them are personal favorites of mine ( like Driller Killer, Bad Lieutenant and The Addiction ). But I wasn't completely convinced about watching this movie before I noticed that both Larry Cohen and Stuart Gordon took part in writing the screenplay. All three are very talented and influential men in the field of horror and I figured a collaboration between the three of them could only lead to something good. Well, it certainly is a decent movie and it provides the viewers with several scares. But - in general - I have to admit that I expected a bit more of it. The whole movie looks "unfinished" from time to time and the basic plot-idea isn't explained well enough, I think. I also had the feeling that everything moved too quick...Body Snatchers only lasts 87 minutes and that's a bit short for a rather complicated story like this. I would have preferred it to be a little longer and more detailed. Because of the fast storytelling, the ending also looks really fake and too abrupt. That was my biggest disappointment about it, I guess. Nevertheless, Body Snatchers contains multiple memorable scenes and it actually has the ability to raise the hair on your arms...That's quite an achievement too, I may say. Especially the sequence where both the daughter ( an adorable Gabrielle Anwar ) and the father ( a terribly boring Terry Kinney ) are being "body-snatched" is really frightening and a beautiful example of suspense-cinema and building up a tight atmosphere. This terrific scene ends with a powerful monologue by Meg Tilly's character. The entire movie is in fact recommended if it were only for this scene !! The further cast of Body Snatchers also contains a washed up Beverly Hills star ( whose name I don't remember ) and very enjoyable little roles by first class actors like Forest Whitaker and R. Lee Ermey. I guess this last one is doomed to play the authority figure ever since his outstanding performance in Full Metal Jacket but what the heck. He's brilliant every single time. In conclusion, Body Snatchers contains a few very bloody and explicit sequences so horror fans won't be disappointed completely. It could have been a lot better, that's a fact. But on the other hand..it could have been a lot worse as well.
16 out of 23 people found the following review useful: Somewhat Unnecessary, 23 February 2003 Author: Theo Robertson from Isle Of Bute, Scotland
Everyone knows the plot of THE INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS because they`d already been two adaptations before the 1993 remake . The same basic plot had also been done in the 1955 television serial QUATERMASS 2 which was also remade by Hammer films in the late 1950s and we`ve seen DOCTOR WHO stories like Spearhead From Space that uses a very similar premise . In short the idea had been done to death by the 1990s On its own BODY SNATCHERS isn`t a terrible film , it is moody and dark as it should be , but it does have a rather mechanical script with a scene featuring some teen angst followed by a mysterious scene followed by a scene featuring teen angst followed by a mysterious scene followed by a scene featuring teen angst . Everyone knows that the plot revolves around alien infiltration so do the audience get to find out why the aliens come to Earth ? Not really , unlike the 50s original there`s no real ambiguity as to the aliens motive or subtext either . I should also point out that aliens taking over military bases makes perfect logical sense if they want to nullify humanity but unfortunately setting the story on a military base where through necessity human individuality is disallowed and where the newly introduced protagonists don`t know the other characters means we have a story that lacks compelling and terrifying drama . We find it somewhat difficult to care about the people involved because they lack individuality to begin with .As I said it`s by no means terrible but BODY SNATCHERS fails alongside the 1978 version which I rate as the greatest paranoid thriller ever made
10 out of 13 people found the following review useful: "Only the race counts - not the individual"., 3 September 2002 Author: gridoon
Okay, the 1956 original paved the way and has to get the credit for that, but from an objective point-of-view, both the 1978 and this 1993 remake are better, scarier, more developed. In comparison to the second version, this one has a nowhere nearly as brilliant, rather disappointing ending, but the pacing is must faster. Abel Ferrara keeps the movie running for only a tight 85 minutes, and pushes all the right buttons along the way; the horror ranges from the gory (the melting heads) to the supremely subtle (the scene in the classroom, where all the kids draw the exact same picture, except for one, who naturally realizes that something is wrong - the teacher seems to want to punish him for being different). This is a spine-chilling, absolutely terrific little picture - but even if it wasn't, it would still be worth seeing just for Meg Tilly's exceptional performance - her "where are you gonna go?" monologue is as scary as anything in say, "Psycho" or "Rosemary's Baby". (***1/2)
6 out of 8 people found the following review useful: They Get You When You Sleep, 12 October 2006 Author: Claudio Carvalho from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
The teenager Marti Malone (Gabrielle Anwar) is traveling along her summer vacations with her father, the EPA inspector Steve Malone (Terry Kinney), her stepmother Carol Malone (Meg Tilly) and her young stepbrother Andy (Reilly Murphy) to a military base where her father will inspect some toxic products. In a gas station bathroom on the road, she is scared by a soldier that advises her to not sleep, because they get you when you sleep. Once in the base, she becomes friend of Jean Platt (Christine Elise), the daughter of the general in charge of the base, and the helicopter pilot Tim Young (Billy Wirth). Marti and her father see that people are acting strange, and sooner they find that aliens are cloning the human beings in the base and invading Earth.Abel Ferrara's remake of Don Siegel's 1956 "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" is more violent than the original movie, but is also very good. There are three particular moments that I like very much: the first one is certainly when Marti throws Andy from the helicopter. I believe very few directors would have the courage to make such scene. The second one is the scary screams of Carol and Jean later. Last but not the least is the scene in the hospital when Gabrielle Anwar is naked and partially shows her breast. Although the end of this version is happier than the original one, it is open with the helicopter landing and Carol's voice saying "Where you gonna go? Where you gonna run? Where you gonna hide? Nowhere, cause there's no one like you left." And then, "THE END" is highlighted with uppercases, probably meaning that Marti and Tim would be the last human beings on Earth. My vote is seven.Title (Brazil): "Invasores de Corpos – A Invasão Continua" ("Bodies' Invaders – The Invasion Continues")
4 out of 5 people found the following review useful: There's No-one... Like You... Left..., 3 December 2006 Author: robertconnor from England
Ferrara's riff on the Bodysnatchers story takes us onto a military base this time, as an environmental scientist and his family arrive to take up a month long placement. Are those soldiers unemotional because they're soldiers or because of something more sinister? Ferrara's film doesn't really work in the end, but it does contain some highly effective set pieces - the eery collection of refuse sacks each morning, the nursery class creating identical paintings, the first attempt to 'snatch' Marti as she dozes in the bath. Best of all though has to be Meg Tilly. By allowing Carol to be cool towards her step-daughter from the beginning, Ferrara hints at what is to come, and her final attempt to persuade her terrified 'husband' to give in to the inevitable is a brilliantly chilling study in quiet menace. Always more interesting than her 'in-yer-face' sister Jennifer, it makes you wonder why Meg retired from the screen two years later.
9 out of 16 people found the following review useful: Three times not a charm, 19 October 2003 Author: Adam from Los angeles
"Body Snatchers" is definitely the poorest of the three Snatcher films. It is uninspired and sloppily written--lacking all the style and finesse that the other two "Invasion" films are famous for. The film is set in a military instillation which isn't conducive for good horror and thrills. The locale fails for the same reason it did as the setting for "Child's Play 3". It's too distant from us, too foreign...we can't easily relate to it. Movies set in small towns and cities scare us because that IS our world--it's our familiar.The special effects are great and it's a fun rental. I like some of the scenes, most were so cheesy I had to laugh. (Especially when the "pod soldier" let the protagonist fly away in the helicopter because he didn't emotionally react to, "I F___ed your girlfriend." Give me a break!) It's an okay film--treasure the first two "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" and throw "Body Snatchers" on if you have nothing better to do. 4/10
1 out of 1 people found the following review useful: "We'll give 'em hell Malone!", 21 December 2008 Author: Backlash007 from Kentucky
~Spoiler~Body Snatchers is the second attempt at updating Jack Finney's classic tale for a new generation. Let me preface this review by saying both the original film and the 70's remake are haunting pieces of cinema. Body Snatchers '93 doesn't quite live up to its predecessors. It's not a bad film per se, but with the pedigree it sports it should have been much better. Some of the names credited with the story and screenplay are Larry Cohen, Stuart Gordon, and Dennis Paoli. Those three names can be seen on some of the most famous horror posters of all time. And with a director like Abel Ferrara the film should have been more interesting. This time the invasion takes place solely on a military base witnessed through the eyes of outsider Gabrielle Anwar. Forest Whitaker is playing the paranoid role and Meg Tilly is the main "face" of the aliens. There are some good moments to be found and the pod effects look good because they are still practical at this point. The problem is once the pods become people. The aliens are supposed to be completely devoid of emotion yet I think they show a lot in this film. I also think they blew the "scream" out of proportion for this one. It's not nearly as haunting as the previous film. I still think it has its own merits and is far superior to the latest Nicole Kidman retread.
1 out of 1 people found the following review useful: Effective but SLOW, 31 October 2004 Author: spider63 from United States
Spoilers: Having seen every version of this film, including a couple of similar pod movies; I can say that this version is pretty good. I never liked the 1978 version very much, because Donald Sutherland and his pals were just too cheesy and it was hard to care whether or not they bought the farm. This version has a lot more going for it, like Gabrielle Anwar is a cute reason to want to stay alive. Unfortunately, her Dad is very dense and never puts the pieces together until it is too late. Forest Whitaker is wasted in his role (like usual). His bizarre suicide instead of shooting all the Poddies that he can get is a bit of a letdown. Christine Elise has a small part, but she adds a lot of life to this movie. This version of Body Snatchers appeals to me because of the family dynamics which are explored. The earlier two versions did not really deal with an entire family. The concept of children being "podded" adds suspense to the movie. Except for the various scenes dealing with the Pods taking over humans, and with the Poddies confronting the humans, the rest of the movie is very slow paced. The scenes with R. Lee Ermey are incredibly boring. Ermey plays the Base Commander, and he is so lackluster that I wondered if maybe the Pod People just left him as he was, figuring that they could not improve on his natural lifeless acting. The end of the movie is a bit disturbing, as the Helicopter Pilot rescues only his girlfriend, and not her brother, or any of the other humans that were being forced to change into Pod People. On the positive side, this version has some payback, as the Helicopter Pilot destroys several of the trucks carrying the pods and the Command Base. It is not clear if he kills the main source of the pods, or if the "Government" finds out that the Pod People are a real menace. Like the previous versions, it leaves a lot of questions unanswered. Unlike the previous two versions, this one is closer to being an action movie, and that makes it better. Meg Tilly has a creepy role as the mother who is converted into a Poddie, and she is very good at being weird.
1 out of 1 people found the following review useful: Snatcherific, 8 October 2003 Author: Andrew (specter@living-dead.com) from Toronto
Admittedly, I was certain I was headed for B-movie hell when I first queued up The Body Snatchers, and I am happy to say that my initial impressions of the film were wrong. I can't compare this 1993 version to the earlier ones as I have not yet seen them, but on it's own merits, The Body Snatchers is quite an exciting movie. The story this time is centered around a U.S. military base where most of the personnel seem to be mere vessels for some sort of extra-terrestrial beings intent on taking over the human race. The creature effects are quite good (we actually don't see too many creatures but but a lot of tentacles make for some queasy moments) and we get some decent bloody chunks of gore here an there. From an acting perspective I thought everyone was solid and have no complaints. I was particularly impressed with R. Lee Ermey was down played his character and it worked. I've always found his characters a little to hammy to take seriously. Also noteworthy is the musical score/sound which gave the movie a lot of its creepiness. Perhaps not overly musical but definitely eerie. All in all I would give The Body Snatchers a solid 7 out of ten, Perhaps losing a mark for a slow beginning. But once The Body Snatchers Kicks it into High gear around the half hour mark, it's an unrelenting thrill fest that demands to be seen at least once.
Add another review
