MovieChat Forums > Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956) Discussion > Which of the four versions are the best?

Which of the four versions are the best?


As silly as this sounds, I'd still like to know what people have to say over the matter of the original and and it's three remakes. Who likes which the most? I'm gonna say this one, the original.


You can not see through The Tunnel Of Doom.

reply

I didn't care too much for the '78 version, but I never really liked anything I saw by Kaufmann. I haven't seen the Abel Ferrara version. I definitely think the '56 version is better than the '78 version, though.

reply

For me the Kaufmann version wins hands down.

In fact I think it's a bit of an unsung masterpiece. It's genuinely chilling AND intelligent enough to recognise that the pod people premis is best utilised as a PSYCHOLOGICAL metaphor for dehumanisation and conformity as opposed to a primarily POLITICAL metaphor for McCarthyism and "Reds under the Beds" scaremongering as is the (alleged) subtext of the original.

NOTE: I say "alleged" because... hell if you're interested check out my other post titled "McCARTHY ALLEGORY? YES or NO?".


If only you could see what I have seen through your eyes.

reply

I have to say that the 50`s version is my favourite. Although I find the 70`s one more scary, the original seems to make more sense to me. And the main character is better, he acts more naturally. I mean Donald Sutherland is holding an axe and then he just drops it for no reason whatsoever. Why? He could use it to smash their heads!
The 90`s one is piss-poor.

reply

I liked the 1956 version because we are left with some hope for the future. The 1978 version was very depressing and the 1993 version I can't remember real well.

reply

For me the Kaufmann version wins hands down.

In fact I think it's a bit of an unsung masterpiece. It's genuinely chilling AND intelligent enough to recognise that the pod people premis is best utilised as a PSYCHOLOGICAL metaphor for dehumanisation and conformity as opposed to a primarily POLITICAL metaphor for McCarthyism and "Reds under the Beds" scaremongering as is the (alleged) subtext of the original.


Actually, I think that Siegel's 1956 version works as a psychological metaphor (of dehumanization and conformity), too. His film isn't simply a matter of "scare mongering" because it can be read as an anti-McCarthy, anti-witch-hunt film.

reply

I haven't seen the 90's IBS version, but to me the 1956 version is, by far, the best. I don't think the 1978 version can hold a candle to the 1956 version. Although the 56 version was shot in B&W, and perhaps on a limited budget, it remains as one of the most powerful movies that I have ever seen.

reply

It was directed by Don Siegel, a famous director who made all those Westerns and films like Escape From Alcatraz.



Global Warming, it's a personal decision innit? - Nigel Tufnel

reply

The '78 version is the best.It has the best, most suspenseful story structure; the film doesn't begin with the story already well in progress and instead lets things build up (making narration, like in the 1st & 3rd versions, unnecessary).It's the one most immersed in science fiction, what with the showing of the pods' origins.It's the one with the single creepiest scene (newborn pod people writhing around while Matthew & friends sleep).It's scariest since therein the pod people do the most damage: taking over a large city in a few days with no hope of anyone stopping their spread thru the world.It's got the best action scenes and the best soundtrack.And IOTBS '78 has no plot holes.This original body snatchers film is easily the next best version with acting as good as the '78 flick.You really care about the small-town doctor seeing his world turned upside down.The black & white format helps the invasion story's terrifying feel, making up for the lack of great special effects.The '93 version has a few good scenes, but it's not nearly as well made as the 1st two films.The plot and characters there weren't drawn out well.Unlike IOTBS '78, the only thing that remake does better than the original is special effects.

reply

[deleted]

79 is maybe a scarier version but not certainely a better one. I'm more inclined to Seigel's version because of its magical, creepy, weird atmophere that is getting under my skin every time i'm watching it. Anyhow, i also think that the narration in the 78 version is better; it's better moviemaking without voice-overs, the film is about the visuality and the way how you can present the images and not just telling the audience what's happening in the film.

reply

isnt there more than 3?

Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956)
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978)
The Body Snatcher (1945)
Body Snatchers (1993)
The Incredible Body Snatchers (1972)

reply

The Body Snatcher (1945) is based on a story by Robert Louis Stevenson about Burke and Hare, notorious Victorian grave robbers. It is chillingly atmospheric and stars Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi.

Personally, I enjoy the fifties Invasion better then the seventies version. The latter one seems kind of draggy. I prefer the pace of the earlier movie.

reply

This one. It has a rewatchable quality that the others lacked and the direction by old pro Don Siegel is flawless.

reply

The 1978 version is more grisly and retains more shock value, but the understated 1956 original is more elegant, dynamic, and socially powerful. I haven't seen the 1993 edition.

reply

[deleted]

Bump

Giddy-up, goat!

reply

the original
and its the only one i've seen btw

i saw a bit of the 1st 70s one and i hated it, it was just boring and uninspired

Sig

reply

1978

reply

I really like the 1978 version. The ending is really a shock. But I LOVE the 1956 version. It's one of my favorites and I just have to watch it whenever it's on.

reply

I really couldn't get into the 78 version when I first saw it so I didn't like it, so much that I didn't even bother to finish it. I haven't bothered to see the one with Daniel Craig and Nicole Kidman. I love the original though.

--
Please check out some short reviews by me:
http://filmandtv-reviews.blogspot.com/

reply