CheerupSilver Very Cool!!!

Claysaba Excellent, Without a doubt!!

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Allissa .Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

desperado_here This scene was the biggest icebreaker. She owned it!

navinshynas I never seen a worst movie like this..Acting sucks and this movie have no logic.My 2 hours time got wasted 😈.My Suggestion is not to watch this movie.I expected more N Atlast I got disappointed.Mart i character is gud and his Father acting is not bad.In Horror Plot Not worth movie to watch.

Michael_Elliott Body Snatchers (1993)*** (out of 4) Teenager Marti Malone (Gabrielle Anwar) travels to an Army base with her father (Terry Kinney), stepmom (Meg Tilly) and her young brother. Before long she realizes that something isn't right with some of the people on the base and it turns out that some of them are pods of their former being.Abel Ferrara's BODY SNATCHERS has the unlucky job of trying to follow up two very well-known and very much loved films. The 1956 version of this is without question one of the greatest science fiction movies ever made and the 1978 version with Donald Sutherland is also quite good. This third version isn't nearly in the same league as those two pictures but at the same time I've always liked this one and it's rather surreal and bizarre atmosphere.Ferrara might have seemed like an unlikely person to direct this "mainstream" picture but he's got a couple other genre people on board. Larry Cohen is credited as one of the story writers and we've also got Stuart Gordon credited as one of the co-screenplay writers. The three of them gives this version of the story a few nice twists including how it's more psychological than the previous two films. This probably accounts for the bizarre atmosphere that is hanging over the film because there's just a very dry feel to the entire picture and an uneasy nature that really comes across.The film also benefits from some very good performances including Anwar who is very believable in the role of the teenager who finds everyone she knew suddenly changing. Kinney is also good as the father and Billy Wirth also delivers a fine performance. Meg Tilly is also extremely good as the stepmother. We're also treated to some very good cinematography as well as a score that perfectly fits the material.As much as I enjoy this version of the story, there's still always been something that just didn't sit right. I've seen the film around four or five times and I still don't know exactly what it's missing but perhaps a longer running time would have worked. Several subjects are touched upon in the short running time and perhaps these could have been better explored in a longer movie. I'm not sure. Either way, BODY SNATCHERS deserves to have a better reputation than it has.

gavin6942 A teenage girl and her father discover alien clones are replacing humans on a remote U.S. military base in Alabama.So, as of today (2015) there are, to my knowledge, four official versions of this story. The 1950s, the 1970s, the 1990s and a movie called "Invasion" from around 2007. The first two seem to be vaguely inspired by the novel (which is very good), the third one only loosely so, and I have no idea about the fourth.I want to like this one. It is not a bad movie. Some say it is the best, but I am not sure exactly why they think that. For me, it will always be the 1970s one that reigns. This one just seemed weak. I like what they tried to do with the gore effects, but they are no real improvement over the 70s version, and the characters just are not as strong (nor do they have the actors to back them up).