Another week, another rewatch of a 1986 movie I originally hated, but now kind of enjoy. This may be blasphemous since the movie is Invaders from Mars, about which Joe Dante once said, shaking his head with a look of disgust, “very few remakes are as misguided.” Sure, it comes nowhere near to capturing the charm of the original 1953 film, but on its own, it’s not bad. It’s impossible to discuss it without some comparisons between the two; however, I don’t intend this forum to be as in depth as one of my “Remake Rewind” reviews.
.
The first thing I’ll say is, for a sci-fi movie of this era, the special effects are terrific! The creatures look fantastic with none of the cheap “seams” that sometimes distract us from the action. The only horribly dated effects appear once or twice when the alien ray guns are fired. Well, I guess the spaceship landing behind the hill looks impossibly large. But… the creatures! And even a shot of Louise Fletcher sucking down a frog looks entirely realistic.
.
I also enjoyed the loving tributes to the original film sprinkled throughout. Not only is the path and bridge leading over the hill taken directly from the 1953 version, but the original Martian Supreme Intelligence prop is seen with other junk in the school’s boiler room. Other surprises and treats are more subtle… I’m sure I missed some. Also, the screenplay by Dan O’Bannon & Don Jakoby is directly based on the original screenplay by Richard Blake and, overall, doesn’t stray far from it.
.
The changes are mostly a matter of updating the era in which the story takes place. The best and most telling example I can provide is that an innocent “gee whiz” from young David (Jimmy Hunt) becomes a more crass “holy shit” from young David (Hunter Carson.) In both films, the story is told from his point of view and may all be a dream. And in both, the ending in ambiguous. Invaders from Mars (1986) is a little more blatant about what it wants you to believe, although what specifically happens is still left unknown.
.
The biggest departure from Invaders from Mars (1953) is the treatment of the female lead. Originally, she was the empathetic health department physician, Dr. Pat Blake (Helena Carter), a wise source of comfort and hope for David. Here, she’s the terrified school nurse, Linda Magnusson (Karen Black), an annoying tagalong for David. “I don’t know what I saw. I’m sorry, David,” she tells the boy. “It’s OK to be afraid,” he replies. Then she responds “I’m not afraid… I’m petrified.” David ends up comforting her, holding her in his arms while they hide.
.
I took this approach as a failed attempt at comedy. It’s offensive to women of any era. On the other hand, I don’t mind jettisoning the character of the astronomer, Dr. David Kelston (Arthur Franz.) In 1953, he did little more than stand around smoking his pipe after delivering the obligatory science lesson earlier in the film. In 1986, the lesson is delivered by the senior scientist of a top-secret military “project” and contains updated information that we wouldn’t have known about Mars 33 years earlier.
.
Sandwiched between Lifeforce and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2, director Tobe Hooper injects Invaders from Mars with some distinguishing visual flairs. It’s never boring, but perhaps sacrifices a little exposition between point A and point B when the humans the Martians control sabotage the launch of a rocket at NASA. This is an example of using knowledge gained from the original to inform your understanding of the remake. In this way, the two movies work together, as different as they may be, rather than completely clash against each other.
Comments