Village of the Damned (1995) Reviews

• Indifference to violence

  ODDBear2005-06-02

  John Carpenter's remake of the 1960 original has little to add but it's more violent and explicit. The plot is the same; 10 women get pregnant simultaneously during a group pass out. Several years go by and the children all look similar and stick together. They appear to be anything but normal and once they start killing the residents of the small village it's clear they have to be stopped. Carpenter is really a master of suspense and some scenes work remarkably well, however this is not one of his best films. Not much happens here and the film drags a bit, plus the inclusion of a government intervention and a possible world wide epidemic of these children does little to further the film. Still, Carpenter manages to create a decent amount of suspense and uneasiness by playing on the film's simple premise; that little children are the evildoers here. The soulless stares and glowing eyes are enough to creep you out. The social statement about people (and children) becoming indifferent to violence is a valid input, since the film couldn't really go for the same underlying meaning as the original, which was made during the cold war; the children personifying the threat from the east penetrating the west. An average John Carpenter film is still a lot more interesting than most other horror films out there. Village of the Damned is not one of his best but it's a good film nonetheless.

• Different Remake and Feel of the 1960 Black and White film.

  hu6752005-06-20

  In the quiet small town in Southern California. Something terribly goes wrong in the small village of Midwich. After an unseen force invades a quiet coastal town. Ten woman mysteriously find themselves pregnant. Local Doctor (Christopher Reeve) and an mysterious government scientist Dr. Susan Verner (Kristie Alley) decide to help each other. When the woman simultaneously give birth... and the reign of terror begins. This is a remake of the 1960 Classic film. The new version is directed by John Carpenter (Escape From New York, Escape From L.A.). Carpenter gives this version with much more explicit violence. Although the original was much more eerie but Carpenter manages to top several key scenes from the original. One of the Highlights of this remake is the Strong Performances by Reeve, Alley, Linda Kozlowski, Mark Hamill (as a Priest!), Thomas Deeker as David and Lindsey Haun "The Leader of the Emotionless Children". The Remake does look better in Color than the 1960 Black & White original. This new version was a Box Office disappointment. The film plays better on Video than it did in Theaters but it is a must see in Widescreen, especially Gary B. Kibbe's terrific cinematography. Carpenter cut several scenes before the film's release. Scenes like 9 infants getting up together in the same time (Which is a Babies Puppet F/X from K.N.B EFX Group), 8 Children Attacked and Probably Killing Three Other Children. There is good visual effects by Industrial, Light and Magic. Carpenter Co-Composed the film's music. DVD has an sharp anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) transfer and an terrific-Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound. DVD Features are the Original Theatrical Trailer, Bonus Trailer from Other Films and Production Notes. It would have better if the DVD has an audio commentary by Carpenter and Deleted Scenes. We might have these features on a Future DVD but highly doubtful from this Underrated film. One of the few underrated film by John Carpenter. Panavision. (****/*****).

• Good Old School Film-making

  jluis19842005-11-16

  John Carpenter, a respected director among the horror genre enthusiasts, gives us a remake of the classic 60's sci-fi /horror movie. Many people consider it the weakest Carpenter movie, but now, almost 10 years later, it's easy to notice why this movie was considered a failure in it's time, and certainly it's easier to appreciate it for what it is: an old school horror movie. A year before Scream gave new life to the genre, this movie told the story of a small village lost in the rural areas of the U.S. where something strange happened one afternoon when the entire town fell unconscious. By strange circumstances 10 women got pregnant that day, but only 9 children survived. The remaining children look all the same and behave in strange ways, creating horror in town. All this while a government team studies them. Christopher Reeve stars as the father of the leader of the children, Mara. Co-star Kirstie Alley as the government scientific in charge of the study. To be fair, the acting of the children was superb, while the acting of the adult characters was somewhat weak. Reeve steals the show, and Alley just seems out of place. As I wrote before, the whole movie has that early 80's feeling, and I would dare to say that it feels as something made for TV. Not necessarily a bad thing, but it's probably the main reason this movie is not very popular. This old school style maybe was not very attractive for 95's audience, Carpenter would go in a better direction once reunited with Kurt Russell in 96's Escape From L.A. I have not seen the original movie yet, so I came to it without any expectation, I can't say I ended pleased, but I found it entertaining, although quite slow at times. It's worth to notice that it has beautiful cinematography, and even when it may be a flawed effort, it's worth a rent. It's one of those movies that takes it's time to grow on you. 7/10

• A Pointless Remake.

  catalyst8-12008-02-18

  If you haven't seen the original 1960 film, or read Whyndham's 'The Midwhich Cuckoos', then you might possibly like Carpenter's remake. It has degrees of suspense, and passable acting (perhaps most surprisingly by Christopher Reeve in his last performance prior to his paralysis), but these qualities are inconsistent throughout the film and it frequently falls flat. If you've seen the original film then avoid this one, especially if you have read Whyndam's novel too, you will only come away from the experience with a sense of disappointment and feel cheated of the time you invested in watching it. This film lacks many things that the original had - great and consistent acting, tension, and suspense to name but three. There seems to have been a conscious effort to add gore and violence, and that decision is perhaps the main reason this film fails so miserably compared to the original. The gratuitously graphic nature of the violence directly detracts from the suspense and tension so evident in the original. Whereas in another carpenter remake 'The Thing' the effects and violence enhanced the sense of dread, here they are responsible for destroying it. There are other reasons that this film is quite dire, one of them being the narrative compromises made to attempt a recreation of the visual style of the original film e.g. the children all wear matching clothes which, in the original, was logical since in England children do indeed wear school uniforms. However Carpenter's US town sees the children uniformly garbed with no reason, other than to draw attention to their uniformity in a massively clumsy and illogical visual device. Take my advice, watch the original and avoid this. It's one strictly for carpenter fanatics, not people who are simply fans of his work.

• The black and white original was much more colorful

  LCShackley2007-09-10

  What made the original version of this film such a classic horror picture? A sense of understatement, of unspoken horror. John Carpenter has never been a director to master the art of understatement, and maybe that's why this movie is such a pale shadow of the 1960 version. The best parts of this film are those that mirror the original. But since the remake was made in the 1990s, Carpenter could throw in grueling childbirth scenes, boiling arms, barbecuing heads, a grisly shootout, an alien baby that looks like one of those 1960s troll dolls in a bottle, and of course, the option of abortion for parents who don't want to go through with their strange pregnancies. In 1960, the idea of an alien "virgin birth" was left understated; Carpenter gives us pregnant women in white robes reaching for the heavens. What happened to the original eerie emphasis on how fast the children grew? I don't recall any mention of that in the remake; in fact, Alley mentions how long she has been observing the children. The most misbegotten idea of all was the addition of Kirstie Alley and the subplot involving government agents SUPPORTING the alien children. And out of nowhere, in a town that seems vaguely Episcopalian (with emphasis on the 'alian'), a wild-eyed bunch of torch-waving fundamentalists appear to confront the children. All we're missing is a fat burgomeister in lederhosen. The eyeball effects are good, adding color change to the original glow (which effect, by the way, still stands up in the B/W version). There are no glaring problems with casting or acting either; this was just an unnecessary and uninspiring remake of a classic film.