Stachehunter-857-73111
Joined Nov 2013
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews13
Stachehunter-857-73111's rating
The reviews for "Invaders From Mars" here on IMDb are uniformly ridiculous, being written by those who have NO clue about the history of the original film and what transpired after it was completed and shown to the public.
IFM was the brainchild of William Cameron Menzies, Oscar winner for Art Direction on a little picture called "Gone With the Wind" and many critics' pick for best use of Technicolor as designer for Alexander Korda's sumptuous "Thief of Bagdad" in 1940. "Thief" remains one of the top ten films to utilize Technicolor in every sense of the word. No other film comes close.
Menzies took on strange projects after his triumphs, such as "The Maze" in 1953 which used the new 3-D process to tell the story of a man who's really a frog. The 3D effects were very well suited to this foolish Gothic story, especially in the maze sequences. The film flopped, and is now only remember by Menzies devotees.
Along came the real masterpiece of Menzies' checkered career: "Invaders From Mars" in 1953. Menzies wanted to use the 3D process, but was eventually underfunded by the producers of this early sci-fi classic. The sets had been built to show the unfolding story from a child's point of view and disorient the viewer. The lack of 3D robbed the visuals of their impact, yet the story of a child's warning of invasion from outer space remains potent. Potent enough for Tobe Hooper to resurrect the whole damn thing in 1986 with some new whiz-bang effects. This version of IFM, while pouring on the homages to the original film (flawed though it was) is even more unfortunate despite a bigger budget and better known actors.
Hooper's version of IFM is sloppy, lazy, and completely unfocused. He threw out the real tension the original offered by inserting useless comedy sequences and unnecessary effects to cover his myopia. The taut storyline of the 53' version is gone, replaced by SNL skit actors and Louise Fletcher as the teacher who swallows frogs, a character nonexistent in the 53' original. Hooper throws on the nostalgia to those in the know by reconstructing the famous "fence to the sandpit" and having the original David Gardner, the actor Jimmy Hunt (as a policeman) tell his partner "I haven't been up here since I was a kid" as they check out the scene of the sand abductions. Other silly 53' references are: David's school is now the "William Cameron Menzies" Elementary School, and the brief discovery of the original Martian "brain in the bubble" resting atop a discarded file cabinet in the school's basement, briefly seen when a cop's flashlight reveals it momentarily. Other stupid referential visuals litter the film to no avail. The Martians here look like backwards equines, and the "Mastermind" Martian will never be a substitute for the original. The original "brain" was a dwarf woman in amazing makeup (who had no dialog) and stood on a cardboard box for a few bucks and a box lunch according to Jimmy Hunt's adult recollection. Hooper just fails here at the usual 80's remake, expecting that audiences have completely forgotten the original source of this taut thriller.
Watch if you need to. I paid to see this junk when it appeared in 1986. I left early. The 1953 version is fertile material for someone to reassess. Given the richness of the original material, Hooper's version is nothing less than stupid, very stupid.
IFM was the brainchild of William Cameron Menzies, Oscar winner for Art Direction on a little picture called "Gone With the Wind" and many critics' pick for best use of Technicolor as designer for Alexander Korda's sumptuous "Thief of Bagdad" in 1940. "Thief" remains one of the top ten films to utilize Technicolor in every sense of the word. No other film comes close.
Menzies took on strange projects after his triumphs, such as "The Maze" in 1953 which used the new 3-D process to tell the story of a man who's really a frog. The 3D effects were very well suited to this foolish Gothic story, especially in the maze sequences. The film flopped, and is now only remember by Menzies devotees.
Along came the real masterpiece of Menzies' checkered career: "Invaders From Mars" in 1953. Menzies wanted to use the 3D process, but was eventually underfunded by the producers of this early sci-fi classic. The sets had been built to show the unfolding story from a child's point of view and disorient the viewer. The lack of 3D robbed the visuals of their impact, yet the story of a child's warning of invasion from outer space remains potent. Potent enough for Tobe Hooper to resurrect the whole damn thing in 1986 with some new whiz-bang effects. This version of IFM, while pouring on the homages to the original film (flawed though it was) is even more unfortunate despite a bigger budget and better known actors.
Hooper's version of IFM is sloppy, lazy, and completely unfocused. He threw out the real tension the original offered by inserting useless comedy sequences and unnecessary effects to cover his myopia. The taut storyline of the 53' version is gone, replaced by SNL skit actors and Louise Fletcher as the teacher who swallows frogs, a character nonexistent in the 53' original. Hooper throws on the nostalgia to those in the know by reconstructing the famous "fence to the sandpit" and having the original David Gardner, the actor Jimmy Hunt (as a policeman) tell his partner "I haven't been up here since I was a kid" as they check out the scene of the sand abductions. Other silly 53' references are: David's school is now the "William Cameron Menzies" Elementary School, and the brief discovery of the original Martian "brain in the bubble" resting atop a discarded file cabinet in the school's basement, briefly seen when a cop's flashlight reveals it momentarily. Other stupid referential visuals litter the film to no avail. The Martians here look like backwards equines, and the "Mastermind" Martian will never be a substitute for the original. The original "brain" was a dwarf woman in amazing makeup (who had no dialog) and stood on a cardboard box for a few bucks and a box lunch according to Jimmy Hunt's adult recollection. Hooper just fails here at the usual 80's remake, expecting that audiences have completely forgotten the original source of this taut thriller.
Watch if you need to. I paid to see this junk when it appeared in 1986. I left early. The 1953 version is fertile material for someone to reassess. Given the richness of the original material, Hooper's version is nothing less than stupid, very stupid.
So, Disney ambushes Gregory Maguire, the author of "Wicked" in this tepid retelling of "Sleeping Beauty" and the unnecessary explanation for the actions of the exquisite villain we love to hate, Maleficent.
Maguire had a brilliant idea once upon a time, his speculation about a wicked woman's progression towards very bad behavior and the reasons behind that transformation changed fairy tales forever. Maguire caught lightening in a bottle, using complex characters and situations to explain a life that ended with a bucket of water. "Wicked" had everything that "Maleficent" does not: compelling characters and a sturdy plot which gave the characters room to move and grow. "Maleficent" is the Dollar General version of "Wicked". For it's tedious running time of 90-some minutes, it plods along throwing 200 million dollars of CGI imagery at you, which is evidently supposed to divert you from noticing the plot holes and jaw-droppingly abysmal dialog. It feels padded out in many places. It's stingy in the extreme and comes across like a puppy that's peed on the carpet. You can't hate a puppy, all cuteness and earnest contrition for the wet spot. "Maleficent" wants your love so badly it's willing to humiliate the best villain Disney ever had.
We love Maleficent simply because she's bad to the bone. Why should we care what happened to her back in the day? Great villains are often just what they appear to be, corrupt individuals who take pleasure in the suffering of others. The original Maleficent owned her darkness, and in the end, died for it. This new, terrible "explanation" for old Mal's bitchery was given to us by the horrid Linda Woolverton's screenplay (Woolverton also scribbled the wretched screenplay for Tim Burton's "Alice in Wonderland). This reimagining of why the old girl was such a meanie nearly turns Disney's Grande Dame of Evil into June Cleaver. All that was missing was a string of everyday pearls and a frilly apron. Let's not talk about the three fairies or the weak retelling of the famous pink/blue fight between them. I wanted to spray them with Raid and watch them die. Now that's evil.
Evidently, the backbone Disney showed in 1959 allowing Maleficent to invoke "all the powers of Hell" in her dragon transformation is all gone. Being a real meanie is bad these days. No one is accountable for doing bad things, they're just misunderstood. Being a meanie doesn't sell merchandise. Being a meanie and dying when you finally get caught doesn't allow for a sequel. Get ready for "Maleficent 2: Forest Frolics". Two stars, one for each of Angelina Jolie's cheekbone prosthetics. A truly depressing film from a once innovative studio.
Maguire had a brilliant idea once upon a time, his speculation about a wicked woman's progression towards very bad behavior and the reasons behind that transformation changed fairy tales forever. Maguire caught lightening in a bottle, using complex characters and situations to explain a life that ended with a bucket of water. "Wicked" had everything that "Maleficent" does not: compelling characters and a sturdy plot which gave the characters room to move and grow. "Maleficent" is the Dollar General version of "Wicked". For it's tedious running time of 90-some minutes, it plods along throwing 200 million dollars of CGI imagery at you, which is evidently supposed to divert you from noticing the plot holes and jaw-droppingly abysmal dialog. It feels padded out in many places. It's stingy in the extreme and comes across like a puppy that's peed on the carpet. You can't hate a puppy, all cuteness and earnest contrition for the wet spot. "Maleficent" wants your love so badly it's willing to humiliate the best villain Disney ever had.
We love Maleficent simply because she's bad to the bone. Why should we care what happened to her back in the day? Great villains are often just what they appear to be, corrupt individuals who take pleasure in the suffering of others. The original Maleficent owned her darkness, and in the end, died for it. This new, terrible "explanation" for old Mal's bitchery was given to us by the horrid Linda Woolverton's screenplay (Woolverton also scribbled the wretched screenplay for Tim Burton's "Alice in Wonderland). This reimagining of why the old girl was such a meanie nearly turns Disney's Grande Dame of Evil into June Cleaver. All that was missing was a string of everyday pearls and a frilly apron. Let's not talk about the three fairies or the weak retelling of the famous pink/blue fight between them. I wanted to spray them with Raid and watch them die. Now that's evil.
Evidently, the backbone Disney showed in 1959 allowing Maleficent to invoke "all the powers of Hell" in her dragon transformation is all gone. Being a real meanie is bad these days. No one is accountable for doing bad things, they're just misunderstood. Being a meanie doesn't sell merchandise. Being a meanie and dying when you finally get caught doesn't allow for a sequel. Get ready for "Maleficent 2: Forest Frolics". Two stars, one for each of Angelina Jolie's cheekbone prosthetics. A truly depressing film from a once innovative studio.
Recently taken polls
1 total poll taken
