glamour-et-voyage Literally the only thing that saves this poorly acted, horrifically directed, sloppy production is some of its sets. The alien space tunnels suck, the Winston 'aliens', which look like ugly potatoes are woefully bad. The only good sets are the ultra plastic looking house and hill sets. Even the good ones are only enjoyable if you like that sort of camp. One of the worst child actors I have ever seen in a major Hollywood production. Hooper's direction is worse than you could even imagine it could be. Watch some clips on YouTube if you're interested, don't rent or buy this abomination.

bowmanblue It's hard to believe that in 1986 the world was treated to James Cameron's 'Aliens.' Not only was it an awesome sequel to Ridley Scott's 'Alien' movie, but it also set the trend for female role models in science fiction forever. But then you probably already know this. However, what you might not know is that 'Invaders From Mars' was also released that year. It too had a female lead, but it's unlikely that she'll be remembered in such ground-breaking terms as our flamethrower-wielding space lieutenant. She spends her time screaming, getting into trouble and generally being one of the worst representations of women on the big screen since 'Willie' from 'Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.' But, I'm getting ahead of myself. She's just one part of a much bigger problem.It's always brave of film-makers to produce a film which has a child as the main star, especially if the film isn't really aimed at children to begin with. In fact, it's actually quite hard to see who this film is aimed at. Part of it feels like it should be some PG children's film about a plucky young scamp, accidentally stumbling across an alien plot and then foiling it in a light-hearted manner (think 'The Explorers' in style, but with more tension). However, it then comes across as quite a lot darker in tone, making it almost seem like a horror movie, but without too much gore. As I say, the star is a – very annoying – young boy with an awful haircut (even by eighties standards!) whose home town comes under attack from aliens who take over his parents (amongst others). He therefore runs around shrieking the whole time in an attempt to get people to believe what's happening. Yet, no matter how annoying he comes across, he's still better than the female lead (his teacher) who he constantly has to tell what to do.The reason I watched this film (besides my natural love of sci-fi and eighties cheese-fests) was because of the aliens from Mars. If you look at any advertising relating to this film you'll see that they're featured heavily. And there's a reason – they're the only decent thing in this movie. The monsters really are pretty special for practical/non-CGI effects. It's just a shame that it feels like the whole film's budget has gone on them and they're only it in for a handful of scenes.Okay, so you can probably tell I'm not a massive fan of the film, but – from a personal point of view – the aliens weren't just the only good thing about the film. Eventually, the boy enlists the help of the military to help out and, for once, they're surprisingly competent. Not only that, but James Karen (most famous from his roles in the first two 'Return of the Living Dead' films) also pops up as the general and – as always – he's a treat to watch.The ending was sort of okay too, but it was too little too late. The two leads are possibly some of the most annoying characters ever committed to screen and the cool practical effects just don't warrant sitting down to watch this one.

gavin6942 In this remake of the classic 1950s science fiction tale, a boy (Hunter Carson) tries to stop an invasion of his town by aliens who take over the the minds of his parents, his least-liked schoolteacher (Louise Fletcher) and other townspeople.This film has an all-star cast and crew: director Tobe Hooper, writer Dan O'Bannon, composer Christopher Young, actress Karen Black, and special effects guru Stan Winston. Say what you will, but the film has some of the finest people involved.The film lost money and received generally negative reviews. Time Out wrote, "whereas the original worked by building up an increasingly black mood, this version relies almost entirely on the special effects; and such limited brooding tension as it has is gratuitously undermined by a string of sequences played purely for laughs." Paul Corupe of Rue Morgue also comes down hard on the film, saying "Hooper overloads the remake with outrageous FX, excessively detailed sets and convoluted explanations." In short, he says the film "is unsatisfying, little more than a series of chase sequences" and "surprisingly clunky creatures that look like they were lifted from Jim Henson's reject pile."The film is, indeed, heavily reliant on Winston's creatures, and it is a bit silly or campy more often than suspenseful or scary. A great film it is not. But this also depends on who the audience is: if this is geared towards children (which may be the case), perhaps it works best being silly and without too much terror.

Michael_Elliott Invaders from Mars (1986) * 1/2 (out of 4) Tobe Hooper's disappointing remake of the 1950s classic about a young boy (Hunter Carson) who witnesses a UFO land in his backyard and soon realizes that aliens are overtaking various people in town. The only person who will believe him is a teacher (Karen Black) and the two quickly find themselves hunted by the aliens. There were a lot of remakes going on during this era so it makes since that someone would try to remake INVADERS FROM MARS but The Cannon Group probably should have left it to someone else while they just worried about their Charles Bronson and Chuck Norris pictures. Or, perhaps they could have added Bronson and Norris to this thing and at least delivered some fun. This is a really lifeless, over-long and rather pointless remake that doesn't have much of anything going for it. Just about the only good thing that can be said about the film belongs to the special effects, which were pretty good. I thought the landing of the spaceship was rather effective with the lights being used and the monsters certainly looked very good. I also thought the set design of the cave was well done but sadly everything else here is just a bust. The biggest problem is the direction by Hooper who just doesn't bring any energy to anything going on. No matter what a scene calls for the director completely misses the boat and this includes the early scenes with him trying to show this "loving" family. There's so much sugar added to these scenes that you can't help but roll your eyes. Then when the boy comes under attack you'd expect there to be some suspense but there isn't. There are even a few hints at some comedy but this doesn't work either. The final forty-minutes of the film goes into action mode with all sorts of gun play, explosions and other craziness but these scenes too fail to gather up any excitement or energy. The performances really aren't anything to write home about either. Black is about as over-the-top in her emotions as one could get. Carson, as the young boy, isn't charming a bit and comes off more annoying than anything else. Timothy Bottoms plays the father and isn't all that entertaining. James Karen, from THE RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD, is also so over-the-top that it seems like he thinks he's in some spoof. Even former Oscar-winner Louise Fletcher goes overboard as the psycho teacher. Jimmy Hunt, the boy from the original film, gets a fine cameo. INVADERS FROM MARS is considered one of the biggest disasters from the 80s and it's easy to see why Hooper's career started to go down. With such a budget they really should have came up with something much better but at least we have the original to go to.