|
Movie Review: 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers'
by Rich Brooks
29 November 2003
It is very seldom that VNN's editor asks me to review a particular movie or even to write about a specific topic. For better or worse, the movies and other subjects of my essays are entirely of my own choosing. However, a couple weeks ago Alex suggested that I review the 1978 remake of the sci-fi cult classic "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" and perhaps compare it to the 1956 original. Actually, I hadn't realized that there were two different versions of the film. My only previous exposure to this movie had occurred in the early 70s, when the theater I was managing at the time ran "Body Snatchers" as part of a retro double feature with "Night of the Living Dead." While I was surprised at the heavy business these old (even then) black-and-white films did, I wasn't interested enough at the time to actually sit down and watch either movie. So, when I recently was able to find VHS tapes of the two versions, my mind was essentially a blank slate.
I logically started with the 1956 version and was immediately struck by the flaming colors accompanying the scratchy soundtrack. I was sure that the original had been made, like all low-budget Republic pictures of that era, in the more economical black-and-white format. I looked at the video box again to verify that I indeed was watching the older version before rewinding the tape (it hadn't been completely rewound when I first put it in) and noticing that it was a "colorized" version I was now viewing. I remember that when Ted Turner first started colorizing older motion pictures a few years ago, there were loud outcries against the sacrilege of this practice. Such Hollywood notables as Bette Davis correctly noted that artistic integrity was compromised by adding color to a movie created to be seen in black and white, but I think they overreacted when they loudly demanded that this bastardizing process be outlawed. You see, it's a simple matter to completely turn off the color on the TV set and watch the movie in its original b&w, which is exactly what I did for the rest of the picture.
The story is a simple one which is handled in a straightforward, linear narrative style by 1956 director Don Siegel. Yes, itz a kosher production, so don't expect any semitically incorrect insights to be other than inadvertent. But the 1950s B-movie style is never ironic and there is none of the condescending attitude toward the characters as is displayed in most later jewed productions. This "unintended laugh" factor probably accounts for much of film's cult popularity and the reason it did so well at my box office some 15 years after it was released.
We know something is wrong in the fictional small town of "Santa Mira." People all over town are experiencing symptoms of strange illnesses, but are inexplicably "cured" before seeing a doctor. After they are "cured" their personalties change in ways only close friends and family members can recognize. It is a case of mass hysteria, and the tension slowly builds as we gradually learn its frightening cause. Alien "pods" have been planted which gradually develop into the bodies of existing persons. The process is complete when the alien finally takes over the brain of the human victim, and this can happen only when that victim finally falls asleep. The whole town is gradually taken over by these alien "body snatchers"and our hero and heroine (yes, there is a hackneyed love story of sorts) face a desperate need to escape. The "happy ending" created by making the story a flashback is illogical, strange, and need not be pondered too seriously.
By contrast, the 1978 remake lets us know immediately about the "pod people" and we therefore don't get the slowly building suspense of the original. The pods this time produce some exotic flowers which cause the physical changes. Obviously, this newer version was much costlier to produce, with big-name stars like Donald Sutherland, (jew) Leonard Nimoy, and Brooke Adams. The identities of the characters have changed and this time the story is set in San Francisco, with numerous location shots and the appropriate use of color. While the physical production values are obviously much higher, there seems to be considerably less tension and it seems that the material is much too thin for the two hours allotted to it. The result is boredom and an equally strange and unsatisfying, if slightly more plausible, ending. The massive cultural change occurring in the 22 years between the release dates of the two versions is also evident in such subtle details as a reference to "gayness" which would never have been made in the 50s. Presumed jew Phillip Kaufman directed the remake.
As to why VNN's editor considered these movies worthy of review from a White Nationalist perspective, I can only speculate. Obviously they are both full of political allegory and have been analyzed many times during the last 48 years. Left-wing critics have seen a depiction of "McCarthyism" in the "mass hysteria" created by these aliens. Given the jewish pedigree of "Body Snatchers," this interpretation is highly plausible. After all, McCarthy (in spite of having Roy Cohn as his top assistant) was really going after jews in government when he crusaded against "Communism," and so he became the number one target on the kike hit list of the fifties. The real "mass hysteria" of the fifties was the hysterical reaction of jews and other liberals to McCarthy's nonexistent "witch hunts."
In any event, the analogy which immediately came to my mind is the present-day hypnosis of America's vast lemming population by alien jewish body snatchers. Television and other mass media have taken over the bodies and are attempting to control the minds of all those Whites who fail to remain awake. As I've indicated before, I'm not a big sci-fi fan, but I think "body snatchers" is an appropriate and colorful metaphor for what is presently happening in our society.
RICH BROOKS
|