MovieChat Forums > Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978) Discussion > John Carpenter's The Thing vs Invasion o...

John Carpenter's The Thing vs Invasion of Body Snatchers 78?


Which film did you prefer, they're both classics, remakes (or sequels of classics) awesome and filled with suspense and both known for their classic endings and famous scenes & moments. So, which did you prefer and why? John Carpenter's The Thing or 1978 Invasion of the Body Snatchers?

"I am the ultimate badass, you do not wanna `*beep*` wit' me!" Hudson in Aliens.

reply

The Thing. Much as I like Invasion- rewatched it last night for the first time in around 20 years and loved the photography and sound direction- I do think it's a little too long and stars to flag in the last act. Just a personal opinion, mind you. And it does have THAT ending, which is one of the best.

reply

[deleted]

Both are amazing, but my vote goes to "Invasion of the Body Snatchers". It may be my all time favorite horror film :)










"Speak of the Devil, and He shall appear."

reply

Only a short time ago I would have said The Thing no question, but I rewatched Invasion of the Body Snatchers last month and now I'm going to have to call it a tie. The Thing has the more terrifying monster but I care more about the characters in Body Snatchers. Seems like the two movies would make an ideal double feature.

And I'll take them both over Alien, which I do like.

reply

Carpenter's Thing is incredibly overrated. I just don't get it. It is strictly gore for gore's sake. It has very few moments of genuine horror. The characters are all interchangeable and the acting nothing to write home about. The '78 Invasion of the Body Snatchers is a rarity: a remake that is actually GOOD! Most remakes suck. This one didn't.

reply

I agree with you about Carpenter's The Thing. The characters are one dimensional and flat, and the story doesn't even make sense at times. It's a movie built around a series of extravagant special effects pieces, with no real plot or character development to speak of.

~ I'm a 21st century man and I don't wanna be here.

reply

Degree7 wrote:

I agree with you about Carpenter's The Thing. The characters are one dimensional and flat, and the story doesn't even make sense at times. It's a movie built around a series of extravagant special effects pieces, with no real plot or character development to speak of.


The Thing has no plot? It's a sci-fi monster film, about alien beings that want to destroy/replicate/replace all human life on earth? How exactly is that plot so significantly different than Invasion of the Body Snatchers?

IOTBS definitely wins the character development battle, but then again I don't think The Thing was bad in that area either. In The Thing one learned about the characters through their responses to the growing threat, much different than the conventional approach to character development that IOTBS took, which was to flesh out details of their personal lives, tastes, and personality quirks. The characters in The Thing were pretty much entirely defined by their actions, and were reasonably distinctive in that regard, even if 2 or 3 characters blurred into one another (Bennings, Norris, Fuchs, especially). That minor shortcoming is more apparent upon the first viewing, but the 2nd or 3rd time you see it you can see that Carpenter drew them out better than it might have initially seemed.

reply

The Thing has no plot? It's a sci-fi monster film, about alien beings that want to destroy/replicate/replace all human life on earth?


On the surface they're not that different, although Invasion has a few more interesting twists and turns right up until the ending. You even learn a bit about the psychology of the alien spores, and it has a definite 70s paranoia vibe going on. By comparison, The Thing does attempt to have a bit of a whodunnit plot progression going on, but with so many of the characters running around behaving stupidly, and a non-ending, then I wonder why I should even remain invested in what happens.

The characters in The Thing were pretty much entirely defined by their actions,


My problem was that all the characters were simplistic, such as the pothead, the military guy, the fat guy, the black guys, the sled dog guy, the nerdy guys. None of the characters extended beyond any surface level descriptions, and were largely interchangeable. The only ones that held my interest were Macready and Blair, and that's because their characters were explored a little bit more.

Whereas Invasion has more unique characters, even if they are somewhat stereotypical liberal San Fran bohemians who enjoy Asian stir fry and mud baths. But they seem like real people, and not just faceless fodder for the monster.

To be honest, I don't think either of these films are that great. They're not bad movies, but I wouldn't call them classics of their genres. I find Invasion to be a tiny bit better because of the above points, but overall I'd only give it a B, whereas The Thing would get a B-.




~ I'm a 21st century man and I don't wanna be here.

reply

Both great but I'm going with the Thing.

reply

The Thing!!! It's in my Top 10 for sure (BTW -I recently got to meet John Carpenter). I just watched Body Snatchers for the first time today. I don't know why I had never watched it before since I'm a huge sci-fi and horror fan. I did enjoy it, but there were too many parts where it didn't make any sense. Some people took a long time to be replicated and others it seemed like minutes. I don't know...it was very good but there were too many mistakes.




Get away from her, you BITCH!!!

reply

John Carpenter's The Thing is a classic! 10/10
Invasion of Body Snatchers '78 is just a film with good idea, but not enough going on to keep me interested. The original 1956 version is much better. 5.5/10

_
My October Challenge 2016: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls066074398/

reply