Dreams Are What Le Cinema Is For: Invasion of the Body Snatchers - 1978

INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS 1978lecinemadreams.blogspot.com/2012/01/invasion-of-body-snatchers-1978.html

Smart movies are hard to come by. Smart remakes…near impossible. Why?Well, maybe it’s because Hollywood’s attitude towards remakes is built on a kind of Catch-22 logic: If a film is poorlymade and flops at the boxoffice—precisely the type of film, one would assume, to best benefit from being remade—Hollywood won’t touch it. However, if a film is accomplished and financially successful (leaning towards classic-status), superfluous existence aside, Hollywood can’t seem to wait to get a crack at churning out a remake.

Wholly motivated by a studio’s desire to repeat an earlier triumph and capitalize on brand recognition without havingto break a sweat, most remakes are cynical, dumbed-down affairs tricked-up with new technology and a paucity ofinspiration. The lazier, more arrogant cousin of the sequel, remakes (which, by definition, presume an improvementover the original) have been responsible for some of the most painful moviegoing experiences I’ve ever had; e.g.,The Stepford Wives (2004), The Haunting (1999), and The Women (2008). Just to name a few.

Yet, as if to prove the rule by exception, every now and then, when a remake is inspired by an idea rather than anaccountant’s ledger, the results can be surprising, fresh, even transcendent. Such is the case with Phillip Kaufman’sshrewd and remarkably effective remake of the 1956 sci-fi/horror classic, Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

Donald Sutherland as Matthew Bennell

1/9

Brooke Adams as Elizabeth Driscoll

Jeff Goldblum as Jack Bellicec

Veronica Cartwright as Nancy Bellicec

2/9

Leonard Nimoy as Dr. David Kibner

The original Don Siegel film was a little B-movie masterpiece of paranoia and dread which, intentionally or not,tapped into America’s ambivalence to post-war conformity and anxiety over the anti-communist panic ofMcCarthyism. Staying true to the core story line of the original, Kaufman’s remake of Invasion of the Body Snatchers(a deliciously pulpy title I’m glad the remake didn't abandon) is about an invasion of plant-like organisms from spacethat duplicate and replace human life—sans emotions. Life continues as before, the sole casualty (and ultimatetragedy) being a loss of personality and individuality.

The timeless appeal of Invasion of the Body Snatchers (it’s been remade at least two other times) may have a lot todo with the fact that we’re a culture which clings to the notion of individuality in the abstract, yet values conformity inthe concrete. Even a cursory glimpse at the “comments” section of any Internet news site reveals that tolerance foropposing points of views and ways of life is not exactly America’s strong suit. Yet that doesn’t stop each of us fromharboring, deep within our democratic bosoms, the romantic belief that we honor, above all else, the individual’sright to be just that: an individual.

What's HE doing here?Robert Duvall's unbilled cameo as an unidentified priest suspiciously eyeing

Brooke Adamsas she picks one of the flowers that figure so significantly in the plot, was

appropriately mysteriousenough to seriously unsettle 1978 audiences when the film premiered

WHAT I LOVE ABOUT THIS FILMWhat makes this Invasion of the Body Snatchers such a chilling delight is how acutely, and with such perceptive wit,it captures the mood and preoccupations of a particular point and place in time, and uses it to breathe fresh life intoa familiar horror tale. The late Ira Levin (with both Rosemary’s Baby and The Stepford Wives) was a master at this

3/9

sort of thing: creating tension out of tapping into the core anxieties lying at the center of a shifting cultural climate.

Instead of the small town setting of the original, the 1978 film makes the most of its “Me Decade” angst and takesplace in that most defiantly individualistic of American cities; San Francisco. Which is, conceptually speaking,perfection personified. Where better to rage a war against conformity than a city which prides itself on being ahaven for the eccentric, the unique, and the idiosyncratic.

San Francisco's Transamerica PyramidThroughout the film, shots are composed that juxtapose the unique elements of

San Francisco'sunique "personality" with the threat of impending dehumanization and a loss of

individuality

For those too young to have experienced the '70s firsthand, Invasion of the Body Snatchers is an affectionate, butnonetheless spot-on, skewering of a certain West Coast sensibility. I was attending an arts college in San Franciscoin 1978, and this film captures the feel of the time so authentically, it tweaks serious pangs of nostalgia every time Iwatch it. Seriously, most of the people I attended class with at The San Francisco Art Institute were likethe characters played by Cartwright and Goldblum.

The San Francisco of Invasion of The Body Snatchers is the post-"hippie movement" San Francisco when theaging, free-love crowd had to make room for the navel-gazing yuppie. It was an age of alternatives: alternativemedicine, alternative religion and alternative thinking. The media was full of cults, causes, conspiracy theories, esttraining, and best-selling pop psychologists. Communal living and fighting for social causes was replaced by pride inownership (restored Victorian apartments became symbols of yuppie affluence) and a reverence for privacy andpersonal space (as exemplified by the high-tech stereo headphones worn by the character, Geoffrey). Ecologybuttons replaced peace signs, and a 1973 book titled “The Sound of Music and Plants” by Dorothy Retallck(detailing the effects of music on plant growth…a point referenced humorously in the film) was just part of a largerexaltation of urban plant life and vegetation in general.

As in all times of social realignment, unacknowledged social anxiety and unease is part of the adaptive culturallandscape. It makes sense to me that in a city as welcoming of change as San Francisco, the perceptive observermight also notice a distinct edginess and uncertainty behind the city's composed veneer of blissed-out broad-mindedness.

4/9

This barely perceptible nervousness is precisely what director Phillip Kaufman and screenwriter W.D. Richter seizeon in Invasion of the Body Snatchers to provide a contemporary kick to the sci-fi, body-switching horror. The threatappears to come from deep space, but when it comes down to it, what’s most frightening about the whole body-snatching idea is the possibility that what we most cling to in an interdependent way among friends and loved ones(our individuality), is what is least valued about us from a societal perspective. It hardly feels unintentional that the pod people taking over San Francisco are undetectable precisely because oftheir behavioral similarity to the urban professionals whose infiltration had been threatening the city’s loosey gooseyvibe since the early '70s. Nor are we meant to ascertain unequivocally whether or not the psychobabble of LeonardNimoy’s paperback psychologist is pod-talk or just the new language of the New-Age.

PERFORMANCESIt always puzzles me the way so many directors of horror and suspense films overlook the obvious fact that theeffectiveness of any horror film rests in whatever investment the audience has in the fate of the protagonists. Taketime to flesh out the characters and there’s no telling how far an audience will go with your premise.This is especially true with a film whose plot pivots on that intangible quality known as “humanity.” Invasion of theBody Snatchers appears to have been cast with an eye towards emphasizing the idiosyncrasies of its stars, and itmakes a world of difference in how we respond to all the genre trappings of chases, close calls, and suspicious redherrings. Donald Sutherland, sporting the same curly locks from 1973's Don’t Look Now, has always been a kind ofgoofy, off-beat leading man. He’s not the lantern-jawed, hero type, so he comes off a believably strong, yetvulnerable enough for you never to be quite sure if he’s up to the task at hand.

5/9

Brooke Adams is one of my favorite underrated actresses. She was among a small group of intelligent, distinctiveactresses (like Geneviève Bujold) the '70s produced and then discarded when audience tastes turned to blandprettiness. Not anybody's idea of a cookie-cutter actress, Adams establishes herself and her character almostimmediately. And in much the same way (and to similar effect) as Paula Prentiss' uniqueness is used in TheStepford Wives; the threat of Adams' distinctiveness being lost to flatlining conformity is made all the more acute bythe casting.

As good as Adams and Sutherland are (and Adams is amazing), the prizes have to go to Jeff Goldblum and AngelaCartwright. As just kind of couple you’d expect to find in San Francisco (they run a mud-bath establishment; he’s apoet, she’s one of those espousers of crackpot theories who nevertheless always sounds more sane than thepeople around her). They are a hilarious and touching pair, and I daresay that without their contribution, as excellenta film as Invasion of the Body Snatchers is, it wouldn’t soar the way it does.

And let’s not leave out Leonard Nimoy. I’ve never been a fan of Star Trek and no doubt I have a minimal awarenessof his gifts as an actor, but I must say his role as the infuriatingly logical psychologist is an inspired bit of casting.Audiences were never likely to shed their image of him as Spock, so I like that the film intentionally makes use ofour predisposed sense of him in a way that doesn’t intrude, but rather enhances.

6/9

A trade paper ad promoting Veronica Cartwright forAcademy Award consideration

THE STUFF OF FANTASYMissed Opportunity or Cultural Sensitivity?Perhaps it’s a sign of Kaufman’s good taste, but as a gay man,I find it hard to imagine how a film about human cloning set inSan Francisco could resist the impulse to include a scene onCastro Street; home of the “Castro Street Clone.” For theuninitiated, The Castro is a gay district in San Francisco where(at least during the '70s) free-thinking gay men willfullyabandoned all personal individuality so as to look identical toone another. Sporting identical mustaches, haircuts, clothing,and physiques, the Castro Street Clone was a city mainstay,as identifiable and generic to San Francisco as theTransamerica building. To poke fun at a subculture's need tounify by obliterating differences seems right in line with whatthe film sought to lampoon.

And yet, thinking back, I recall with great sadness thatInvasion of the Body Snatchers was released about a monthafter the murder of openly-gay San Francisco SupervisorHarvey Milk, and the murder of Mayor George Moscone.Under these circumstances there would have been no place inthe film for a reference of this nature. I might have this wrong,but I even seem to remember that a jokey line of dialog DonaldSutherland speaks to psychologist Nimoy (“The Mayor’s apatient of yours, isn’t he?”) may have been temporarily cut outof sensitivity.In any event, it was strange watching a movie with so manyscenes taking place at its City Hall. San Francisco felt like avery scary place at the time, and, as one might imagine, thattragic real-life event—auguring a mounting intolerance andconservatism in the city known for its liberalism—only madewatching Invasion of the Body Snatchers an even more unsettling experience than it already was.

7/9

"It was like the whole city had changed overnight."

THE STUFF OF DREAMSI don’t know if director Phillip Kaufman is an admirer of Roman Polanski, but Invasion of the Body Snatchers is a filmI’m certain Polanski would appreciate. From the very first frames there is attention paid to establishing anatmosphere of ever-escalating paranoia and claustrophobia. Every shot contains something—whether in theforeground or distance—which supports these themes. Plants are in almost every shot, sometimes crowding theframe creating a small space of activity for the actors. There’s a brilliant sense of danger taking place beyond theconfines of the story we’re witnessing. People are seen running in the distance, every window seems to havesomeone staring out of it. The tension grows to the point that even banal human rituals like flossing take on anominous air (Elizabeth’s boyfriend is seen flossing in an early scene, later at a secret meeting in Union SquareDonald Sutherland’s character passes a man flossing in public). Of course, it’s wonderful that all this ambiance is piled on and we’re left to fill in many of the blanks ourselves. Theact of which engages us even further and pulls us into the story.

I've always liked how Sutherland's shattered windshield (result of a run in withdisgruntled restaurant staff) never gets repaired and offers us a view of a cityfractured. Reminds me of how Polanski has Jack Nicholson spend the lion's

share of Chinatown with a huge bandage on his nose. Its incongruity and hint ofunexpected violence is unsettling.

Invasion of the Body Snatchers has the most amusingly witty and dark screenplay. Here are just a smattering of myfavorite lines:

Jack: "Of course it's a conspiracy"Matthew: "What is?"Jack: "Everything!"

Nancy: (recoiling from a lifesize pod replica of her husband) "Jack, don't touch it! You don't know where it's been!"8/9

Jack: "Who are you calling?"Matthew: "Washington."Jack: "What...the CIA? The FBI? They're pods already!"

Nancy: "Well, why not a 'space flower'? Why do we always expect metal ships?"Jack: "I've never expected metal ships."

After Rosemary’s Baby, which, to me, is the best horror/suspense film ever made, I have to count Invasion of theBody Snatchers as one of the most consistently scary (and fun) thrillers I’ve ever seen. It delivers as drama, blackcomedy, sci-fi, and horror. Although set in a marvelously evoked '70s San Francisco, the film is so smart that it remains a relevant nightmare-inducer even after all these years.

Today, with all the pierced, body-inked, automatons walking around with their earbuds buried in their brains, eyestrained on texting fingers, with nary a moment of eye-contact or human interaction passed between them, we mightbe ripe for another remake. But I think we’d better hurry up. From what I’m seeing there’s not a lot of individuality leftto be fearful of losing.

Copyright © Ken Anderson

9/9