Talk:Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978 film)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article. Feel free to add your name to the participants list and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.

Contents 1 What is the twist ending? 2 Original research 3 Fair use rationale for Image:Sutherland screams.jpg 4 Fair use rationale for Image:Invasion of the body snatchers movie poster 1978.jpg 5 Remake?

[edit] What is the twist ending?

The plot synopsis ends by saying there's a twist ending and having a picture of it, but it doesn't actually say what the twist ending is. Can someone please fill that in? To people like me who have not seen the movie, the picture of a man in trenchcoat standing in a parking lot explains nothing. --76.200.128.249 (talk) 17:39, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Look two sections below this for the answer. The image that actually depicted the twist ending had no fair use rationale, and ended up being deleted because of that. --AutoFire (talk) 16:46, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

To me it seems like a bad idea to give away the ending of the movie here. I don't think that spoilers are necessary or useful, and I think this one should be removed. If someone else agrees with me, I'd encourage them to change it. Karadoc** (talk) 02:38, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I think the image should be removed, it's a major spoiler (obviously) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.50.212.231 (talk) 21:01, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

How would it be useless and serve no purpose? In fact, wouldn't it be pointless to only give away almost all of the plot except the end? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.99.187.99 (talk) 20:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I just watched the movie a few days ago. I was very young when it came out and my original interpretation of the ending was simply that Dr. Bennell was finally duplicated and the woman who approached him was left as the very last of the group not yet duplicated. Now I am wondering what is the significance of the scene just before the final scene. Dr. Bennell goes into his office and looks around as if he is afraid of being caught. He clips an article, sticks it in his pocket and walks out. Now I think that he had a plan to destroy the aliens that involved some secret research for which he had to go back to his workplace at the health department. When the woman approached him on the street and let her guard down, Dr. Bennell realized that she would get in the way of his plan and it would be better to let her believe that he was an alien and maybe even turn her in. His shrieking scream was faked to protect his plan. This is ending is very optimistic because it implies something like the ending of War of the Worlds where there may be an earthly biological weapon to destroy the alien process. The duplicates do not need to be destroyed necessarily, just the pods. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.212.180.150 (talk) 05:52, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Original research

The section on homages and the one citing differences between this film and the original film appear to consist almost entirely of original research. --Jtalledo (talk) 03:12, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Okay. Mea Culpa. I think the sections are worthwhile and informative. If you're a true fan of the 1978 Invasion of the Body Snatchers (as I am), can you help me out with references? The homages are obvious if the 1956 and 1978 versions are watched in tandem. I haven't found any outside articles that list them as extensively or in as much detail as I have. But there are reviews that mention the fact that the 1978 movie is full of homages. In the SciFi Scanner review of the latest DVD release, John Brownlee makes this statement: "The DVD release is widescreen with a commentary by Philip Kaufman (who shoved so many homages and references into the film that I'm sure his observations on the making of the film will be fascinating)." That's at http://blogs.amctv.com/scifiscanner/2007/08/invasion-of-the.html. Another review from the Sacramento Bee makes similar observations. Their article is at http://www.sacbee.com/624/story/315832.html. The 1978 changes section is not entirely mine. The comment on feminism could rightly be removed as personal opinion. However, the observation that the remake includes a "backstory" in the first scene on the alien planet, as well as the observation that the 1978 film is infused with "moody paranoia" is mentioned in several reviews. See especially the review at http://www.scifimoviepage.com/dvd/invasion-dvd.html. See also http://www.scifimoviepage.com/invasion.html. Other sources would be http://toxicuniverse.com/review.php?rid=10003160 and http://www.toxicuniverse.com/review.php?rid=10000816. The preponderance of articles that refer to the atmosphere of paranoia would seem to elevate that particular bit above the level of mere personal opinion. Even though Janet Maslin's original review in The New York Times is, for the most part, quite negative, she does mention the fact that the FX of the hatching pods is "brilliantly unsettling" and that Matthew taking a garden hoe to the head of his double is a "gruesome moment." Her review is found at http://movies2.nytimes.com/movie/review?_r=1&res=9C0CE1DF1E38E732A25751C2A9649D946990D6CF. Another review worth noting is found at http://www.bbc.co.uk/films/2001/03/26/invasion_of_the_body_snatchers_1978_review.shtml. I'd like this to be a team effort on the part of lovers of the film to create a factual, informative, and lively article on the 1978 version of Invasion of the Body Snatchers which conforms to Wikipedia's rules. --KDBROCK777 (talk) 21:21, 19 September 2007 (UTC) KDBROCK777 02:24, 20 September 2007 (UTC) Keith Ellerbrock

I think most of the points in the "Homages" section are unnecessary - since this film is a remake of the 1956 film, some parallels are expected. The "changes" section is more like an essay than anything else. After reading it over, I think a lot of the content in the sections just isn't enyclopedic. --Jtalledo (talk) 22:55, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I was 21 years old when the 1978 remake came out and I saw it in its first week of release. I was a blow-dried original denizen of the era in which the movie was made. Seeing the film on the big screen made a big impression on me. I've been a fan ever since. I agree that the homage section (written by me) and the changes section (not primarily written by me) don't comply with the wiki rules on such things. You can choose to reduce the entire section down to a mere stub if you want to. However, without any constructive suggestions from you (or from someone else who is enthusiastic about the movie), it will probably remain a stub for a long while. Terse, scolding posts from overseers do not build the kind of rapport and cooperation that, I think, is required to produce an article that is factually-based, well-referenced, but also of interest to fans of the genre and of this particular film. A little gentleness and patience in dealing with beginners' mistakes would go a long way toward bringing new contributors into the process. I'm a big sci-fi fan, but I don't think I'll be contributing any more to this Wiki Project. KDBROCK777 03:03, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Sutherland screams.jpg

Image:Sutherland screams.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 06:12, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Invasion of the body snatchers movie poster 1978.jpg

Image:Invasion of the body snatchers movie poster 1978.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Remake?

Veronica Cartwright said in an interview that "Well, our film was a continuation of the story rather than a remake which is why the Kevin McCarthy character is still seen running." --DrBat (talk) 01:32, 21 January 2008 (UTC)