The Invasion Poster

The Invasion (2007)

SciFi  
Rayting:   5.9/10 74.8K votes
Country: USA | Australia
Language: English | Russian
Release date: 25 October 2007

As a Washington, D.C. psychiatrist unearths the origin of an alien epidemic, she also discovers her son might be the only way it can be stopped.

Movie Trailer

Where to Watch

  • Buy
  • Buy
  • Buy

User Reviews

herrnoel 19 August 2007

The 70s remake of this film succeeded because it was a chilling psychological thriller with little to no horror film elements and a biting ending that lingered with you for days.

This film starts out with the premise and setup, but quickly deviates into a different film -- a rehashing of 28 days later and outbreak with illogical, formulaic action sequences that are literally lifted straight from any zombie film. As usual with sub-par screenplays, the plot requires illogical and implausible events to move forward and provide thrills. In the end, it couldn't make up its mind whether it was an intellectually compelling, psychological thriller or yet another zombie action film? The ending was ... eh I don't even want to explain it.

robyram 25 August 2007

Fmovies: I admit that I was hesitant about seeing "The Invasion" after reading some poor reviews and coming to this message board. I also was leery after learning that part of it was re-shot by different directors which is usually a very bad sign. Plus the fact that they give Kidman a kid in this film had me leery for I often grow weary of female leads in suspense/action/horror films having to protect children instead of other adults like male leads do especially if the kids are annoying.

So, I almost didn't see "The Invasion" after reading and hearing all of the complaints about no plot, no real character development, bad acting and poor directing/editing.

Yet, I finally agreed to just go with my gut and take a chance on a matinée show of "The Invasion." Boy, am I glad that I did, not only because I did not have to pay the outrageous full price of ten bucks but I actually liked this film.

Despite what some are saying this film does have a plot. People are actually doing things that lead to other plot points like the whole deal with Veronica Cartwright's character and Kidman's character leaving her son with the ex-husband. These two story lines lead to important discoveries and actions that happen later on in the film.

Also, there is character development. Kidman's character does develop because she's forced to change in order to survive and to protect herself and her son. The warm relationship between Kidman's character and her son and Ben also is established.

So beyond these relationships do we really need to dwell on the other characters for too long? After all this is a plot driven movie not a character driven movie. Besides, if they had taken time to thoroughly get into everyone else's back story people would be whining about the movie being too long. But I digress.

Also, I thought that all of the actors did a good job especially Kidman. She showed good range from being a caring psychiatrist, to a loving mother to a terrified woman to a desperate mother who would do anything to protect her child. I also like the mood and tone of this film. Granted the Pod People in the 1956 and 1978 versions were a tad bit creepier but I liked this film better than the 1978 version overall and I didn't miss that crazy scream. However, the 1956 version is definitely a classic.

Sure "The Invasion" is not perfect and it has it flaws and I feel that the studio probably should have left the original version alone. After all, the majority of the film is stronger than the last half which is obviously where the re-shoots took place. Still despite the unnecessary out of order time cuts, and a tad too many car crashes, the film still worked for me. I was definitely entertained.

Now that's saying a lot especially since I went in with low expectations.

Kashmirgrey 24 August 2007

You hafta' go into every movie with an open mind if you're going to give it a fair assessment, right? Well, I did exactly that with "The Invasion". Despite all the heavy and (quite) ugly criticism this movie received, it had a fair cast and it isn't too often that Nicole Kidman is in something completely awful. Let it be known, as well, that I am a big fan of both the original and the 1978 versions of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers". It is reasonable to speculate that fans of either of those two films will be disappointed with this latest stab at the "body snatcher" storyline.

However, I asked myself, is the point to compare this film against its predecessors or should I evaluate this film on its own merits alone? I decided the latter was the right course and with this in mind, I watched "The Invasion".

The film opens with a very frantic Carol Bennell (played by Nicole Kidman) rummaging through the shelves of a pharmacy. She is searching for sleep suppressants. We are then taken back in a recent past where a space shuttle crash lands into the countryside. The shuttle's wreckage has brought back something with it. From the moment that Bennell's ex-husband (played Jeremy Northam) pricks his fingers on a foreign organism, life becomes a serious drag for the (evidently, terrible) human species. Bennell, who is a psychiatrist, doesn't get it at first when one of her patients (played by Veronica Cartwright who also starred in the 1978 "Invasion of the Body Snatchers) irately claims her husband isn't her husband. But it doesn't take long before Bennell figured out that all is not right in Everytown, USA.

This film was not awful. This was, by no means, the worst of the "snatchers" make-overs. 1993's "Body Snatchers" is my nominee for that award. There were some moments in this film that worked well such as a brief, but tense scene when Bennell and her son (played by Jackson Bond) are unsure whether the other is... them. I also liked the "attempt" at a different approach to the body snatching "method". All in all, for me what kept me watching was Kidman. No, not just because she's a super-hottie (although it never hurts.) She adeptly became Bennell and breathed life into her character. I actually thought this was one of her better performances.

This could have been an excellent film, but as is all too often the case these days, character development was not a priority. Beyond Kidman as Bennell, character development was non-existent. How people are being snatched, also, is never adequately, not even remotely, explained. Wherein the other snatcher films, while the victim sleeps their body rotted away and their alien replacement is created within a giant pea-pod, in "The Invasion" the process is never identified. This makes for a very weak ending. Truly, with today's SFX, this could have been an extraordinary "revelation". What was most disappointing was the attempt at social and political commentary. Good grief! I cannot think of a more articulate adjective then just plain...lame.

emgasulla 13 December 2007

The Invasion fmovies. I honestly don't think the movie is worth an 8, not in its released form. But since the cuts and additions from the suits are so painfully obvious, I'm willing to give a higher rating to the movie that could have been... and for now, only the original director Oliver something has seen.

So the original movie (which is still discernible somehow) was supposed to be a dark, slow take on isolation, pill overuse and boring modern life. With a twist: a mom so desperate to protect her child, she would silently watch other people being killed as long as she can find her kid. That's actually moving and seldom seen in a macho-dominated Hollywood. I won't say that ice cold Kidman is the right choice to depict a desperate mom, but given that her role is to often look emotionless (so she can pass as another "pod people") she doesn't do too badly.

Now, the suits didn't like that and called those soft-brained Wachowski bros to make it -supposedly- more mainstream. And what they did was to add car chases, crashes, helicopters, fires and senseless violence in general. Inserted into the original movie at close intervals to keep people amused (or so they thought). Now, there are a few good directors who can pull out a combination of slow burn and crazy action. But a patchwork movie made of two different directors' bits, guys with widely opposed instincts and goals, no wonder the result is a flop.

If anything is to be learned from this, it's how little do Hollywood executives know about what makes a good movie. Granted, a non-stop mishmash of violence and fifth-drink bar philosophy like The Matrix can earn the big bucks, but you can't expect Matrix-like bits to improve what was intended to be a slow paced, moody film. Which was probably condemned to be a box office failure, but also could have been pretty good.

wji222 31 August 2007

First of all, this is not a scary movie. Instead, there is an atmosphere of tenseness, especially when Kidman and Craig's characters must pretend to have already changed in order to survive. Kidman easily carries this film, and she makes you believe the plot line that another actress would have easily made ludicrous. I have read some critical reviews questioning the casting of Kidman in this role, mostly due to the fact that her icy demeanor is seemingly miscast in a role that calls for emotion. However, I believe that it is this very demeanor that allows her to be believable in this film. She plays an extremely smart psychologist who catches on to the situation fast. She is an analyzer, and it is her lack of deep emotion that allows for her to think quickly and critically, without it, she would have easily succumbed to the body snatchers and there would have been no movie. There is indeed a liberal undercurrent through this movie. It questions our role in Iraq but more importantly, it questions our actions as a species, our emotions, our anger, our selfishness, and their effects on our society. To create a world in which everyone is equal, rational, no war, no disease, no famine, no inequality is what the body snatchers are offering...and for this movie goer, there was at least one point in the film in which I found myself asking whether that would be so bad. Sure, the ending was a little too quick and tidy, but overall, this was a great movie.

rdambroso 24 August 2007

We went to see this last night. After all of the horrific reviews, I was expecting a real P.O.S. I was pleasantly surprised. While not to say it was an AWESOME movie or anything. It was good Sci Fi fun. I get irritated when a lot of movie buffs are looking for every film to be a Gone with the Wind or something. This was just a fun, smooth, entertaining production. I've never been a real fan of Nicole kidman, but I must say, she was quite fetching in this movie. If you are looking for the 50's version of War of the Worlds..The forbidden planet..John Carpenter's the THING...etc..it doesn't qualify. If you are looking for a fun Sci Fi Thriller to watch, it does the job.

Similar Movies

7.4
Nope

Nope 2022

5.7
Jurassic World Dominion

Jurassic World Dominion 2022

6.9
Attack

Attack 2022

5.9
Crimes of the Future

Crimes of the Future 2022

5.9
The In Between

The In Between 2022

6.6
After Yang

After Yang 2022

4.6
Firestarter

Firestarter 2022

4.3
Dark Cloud

Dark Cloud 2022


Share Post

Direct Link

Markdown Link (reddit comments)

HTML (website / blogs)

BBCode (message boards & forums)

Watch Movies Online | Privacy Policy
Fmovies.guru provides links to other sites on the internet and doesn't host any files itself.