User reviews

I reviewed this clever tribute to low-budget 1950s sci=fi flicks (most notably "Invaders From Mars") some years ago. Having just watched it again, I felt compelled to write it up one more time. The people who put this charming cult classic together definitely knew what they were doing: A big city college teacher (LeMat) goes searching for his missing ex-wife in a rural Midwest town, only to discover the town is populated by what appear to be very hostile aliens (for one thing, they love blowing up cars). The professor learns the aliens took over the town in the late 1950s, with our government's permission. One of the great gags in this delightful movie is that, 25 years later, nothing has changed in the occupied town. It's still full of hayseeds and sock hops and hideous American-made monster mobiles. A tabloid journalist (Allen) joins the professor in his search, and all hell breaks loose as the aliens attempt to keep their identity a secret. The supporting cast is populated by award-winning actors like Louise Fletcher, doing a variation on her legendary Nurse Wratchet (around the same time, she also appeared in a spoofy remake of "Invaders From Mars"), and Michael Lerner, whose woebegone character has lost his wife and kids to the aliens and has been locked away in the funny farm. The movie was clearly shot on a shoestring, with poor sound quality and way too many single takes (watch the little boy at the end put his right arm around his dad for a split second before dropping it and staring off-camera at what probably was one of his real-life parents). But the film also exhibits a unique charm and features some truly unnerving moments (dig the "Evil Dead" bit when the professor's dog, now a captive of the aliens, appears to rush back and forth past the professor on a lonely road, unseen but definitely there via incredible sound effects and unusual camera work. Also, some of the other effects are extremely satisfying in their crude way, such as a series of glowing orbs that hold the captive humans and the aliens' spaceship. Plus, the story's pace never slackens. There's something going on every second of this movie; there ain't no padding. The ending is utter hokum, but intentionally so, I suspect.

In 1958, in Centerville, Illinois, a spacecraft lands on the city in an alien invasion and the population vanishes.

Twenty-five years later, Margaret Newman (Diana Scarwid) leaves her daughter Elizabeth in New York with her ex-husband Charles Bigelow (Paul Le Mat), who is an entomologist and professor of Columbia, since she would go to her hometown Centerville to attend the funeral of her mother. Margaret disappears and Charles drives with his dog Louie to Centerville to seek out his ex-wife. He finds a weird population living in a typical 1958 town. While looking for Margaret, Louie disappears and Charles is attacked by an alien but he succeeds to escape.

Back in New York, Charles visits a government department directed by Mrs. Benjamin (Louise Fletcher) to report his findings but she does not give credit to his words. Charles finds a tabloid newspaper with a picture of an alien and he visits the editor Betty Walker (Nancy Allen) that discloses that she has made up the story using a photo that the newspaper received ten years ago from a lunatic. Soon Betty has a close encounter with an alien disguised as Avon Lady and is chased by them. So she teams up with Charles expecting to rescue Elizabeth from the extraterrestrial beings.

"Strange Invaders" is a nostalgic tribute to the sci-fi from the 50's. The naive story is very well written with humor and good screenplay. The cameo of June Lockhart and Mark Goddard from the original "Lost in Space" is another tribute to the series that is part of the childhood of a generation. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "Estranhos Invasores" ("Strange Invaders")

I never saw Strange Invaders until yesterday but I found it immensely pleasurable to watch. Diana Scarwid, Nancy Allen, Louise Fletcher, and the cast was pretty interesting to watch with their material about alien beings playing humans for 25 years. While it probably took off from E.T. in the previous year, Strange Invaders is worth watching for the fans of science fiction and fantasy. I enjoyed it immensely maybe because I think Diana Scarwid deserved better in terms of scripts and she should have been a household name ever since her performance as the older Christina Crawford in Mommy Dearest. Oscar Winner Louise Fletcher also deserved more than roles that were secondary, supporting or featuring. Nevertheless, Strange Invaders is strange but fun to watch for kids, adults, or anybody who doesn't take themselves too seriously.

In the 1950's, aliens landed on Earth and blended in with our society. Now, they're ship is back, and they will do anything to silence the few who know they're real identity. "Strange invaders" has a good cast, top-notch visual effects, some really creative creature effects, a decent plot, and a fairly adept (If not rather routine) script. The cast includes: Paul Le Mat, June Lockhart, and Wallace Shawn. Recommended.

I'll start with what I liked, it's quite short.

The main idea is not new but it has potential, and the atmosphere in most of the movie is quite well achieved, mainly due to some good cinematography work (at some points very interesting) and some cool and creepy practical effects which helped this movie have at least a few scenes that I'll remember as interesting.

All the rest was nearly abysmal.

The script is terrible, really bad pace, nonsensical, incoherent behaviour, ridiculous scenes, horrible dialogs and very shallow relationship and character development.

The mediocrity of this movie starts in the writing, but it definitely explodes in your face thanks to the terrible directing work, with horrible performances, specially from Paul Le Mat as the protagonist, who went from humorous friendly teacher (in the very first scene he appears) to utterly unlikable and useless, what a pain to watch!

I don't want to mention every and each of the poor performances, as I don't want to spoil anything (if that's possible) and it would take too long, I'll say I only liked the dog, unfortunately he doesn't have a long role (a waste of talent if you ask me), so you can imagine how bad everyone else was.

There are long scenes of the characters running (or driving) around without stopping and thinking what the hell they're doing, nothing makes sense, ever.

The music is something that really bothered me, totally out of place classic orchestral music, at one point when they're sitting in a car stuck in traffic, it was the first time I felt confused about the music in a movie, thinking "what the hell did the director think at this point?!". Some parts of the music sounded a bit like Star Wars, in plain, uneventful moments in a little town in the middle of nowhere. Incredibly pretentious and misused.

It was an hour and half that felt like an eternity, almost quitted nearly an hour in, but I wanted to see the ending. It was nothing that redeems such a mess of a movie, still, there are a couple good cinematographically achieved scenes for which I'm glad I stayed that half hour.

I can't stress enough how bad this movie was. Boring, almost insultingly stupid and uninspired.

It could be better with a proper script, definitely, but as it is, I've been left with the sensation of a long time of suffering and rolling my eyes.

This movie is pays great respect to the Sci-Fi movies of the 50's, but takes itself somewhat serious. If you view this film in that sense, you will have a great time!

The special effects are on a low budget and some of the camera angles are kind of strange, but the acting and the story are what keep this film going. A pre Barton Fink Michael Lerner is here and is great as always!

Be sure to look for two cameo's from former Lost in Space stars! Also, a very early R.E.M. song can be heard in the back ground of one scene.

Again, if you watch this with the frame of mind that this is a 50's sci-fi movie made in the 80's, you will get a real kick out of it!

I give this film a B+

Entomology professor from New York traveling to a rural town in Illinois to find his missing wife, unaware that aliens disguised as humans took over the community back in 1958--in a deal with the US government. Apparently, director Michael Laughlin, who also co-wrote the screenplay with William Condon (from a treatment by Laughlin, Condon and Walter Halsey Davis), wanted his film to be nothing more ambitious than a retread of those dopey-sinister monster movies of 30 years prior (you could call this Laughlin's valentine to the drive-in sci-fi). It's a low-budget, sometimes-campy/sometimes-gross entry about alien invaders and their unsuspecting human targets, but Laughlin is merely imitating the genre without transcending it--and all we're left with is the formula. It's a ticklish concept, especially for film buffs; however, once it becomes apparent that the picture isn't going to stretch beyond its own cartoonish borders, interest begins to fade. Clueless leading man Paul LeMat (looking like an overgrown adolescent) doesn't appear to be in on the joke anyway--a bewilderment most audiences will likely share. ** from ****

Seems that the foremost reason why this movie isn't much appreciated is because most people don't seem to understand that this movie is being an homage to the science-fiction movies from the '50's. As an homage this movie is really a quite good one, surprisingly. So, all of those silly and sloppy moments, that weak story and unusual camera handling and editing was all intentional. The creators did a good job at recreate the same sort of style and atmosphere but at the same time also manage to place it in the modern world and time of 1983. I liked some of the subtle and nice touches in the movie, that were a nod and throwback to the '50's genre movies. Those who are a bit familiar with that period of genre movies will most likely be able to appreciate this movie. But a good homage of course doesn't make a great movie as well. No, in the end this movie will certainly not make any of my favorite lists but the movie remains a good enough one to watch. The movie fails to make a lasting impression, also because it's an obvious low budget one, so it's lacking in any big spectacular moments. Also the story isn't' that much special and basically is like a whole bunch of other science-fiction movies thrown together but then again, also those movies from the '50's never really featured a great or original script and to be fair, they weren't always that much good as movies. So in that regard this movie also pays perfectly homage to that and I don't think it ever was the film-makers goal and aim to make a spectacular and classic genre movie. They just wanted to have fun, paying homage to the movies they love and with this movie they also give the viewers, that understand this, some good fun to watch as well. 7/10

There are good films and bad films, main features and B-movies. 'Strange Invaders' belongs in none of these categories, it requires a special description of its own. Utter bilge.

The acting is wooden and the script, such as it is, is terrible. The direction is all over the place and the action has little coherence. The story line leaps all over the place with liitle in the way of explanation. Characters appear here, then there, then who knows where. There is no logic to the story and there are so many unexplained features as to render it impossible to follow with any understanding of what's going on.

This is probably the worst film I've ever seen. The characters have no empathy and demand no sympathy. It's truly dreadful.

The decidedly miscast Paul LeMat here plays Charles Bigelow, a Columbia University entomology professor who tracks his odd-duck ex-wife Margaret (Diana Scarwid) to her old hometown, which is typical Smalltown, U.S.A. (She'd left their daughter (Lulu Sylbert) with him and then disappeared.) Not only does he find it to be a strange environment (it seems to be stuck in the 50s), but the locals aren't exactly welcoming. A couple of WTF experiences later and he realizes that, in fact, the aliens have landed, and have kept this town in this state for a quarter century. He teams up with a tabloid journalist, Betty Walker (ever lovely and appealing Nancy Allen), and a supposed nut case (the excellent Michael Lerner) to take on the "strange invaders".

This film was fashioned by director Michael Laughlin ("Dead Kids") and his co-writer, Bill Condon (a future director, himself) as both a loving tribute to and parody of vintage science-fiction. In that respect, it gets its look and feel just right. It's often amusing, has its heart in the right place, and in this viewers' humble opinion, actually has a fairly decent pace. The script isn't perfect; it does have some holes, but overall Laughlin and Condon did a nice job here. Having partly shot their film in Canada, it does have a delightful scenic quality, which is only enhanced by the widescreen photography. It also features some wonderfully icky and gross makeup and creature effects that are certain to have some more squeamish viewers going, "Ewww." Best of all is the score by John Addison, which does a fine job of truly evoking the era.

As part of their presentation, Laughlin and Condon cast the film with some supporting roles and cameo appearances for performers from old time sci-fi: June Lockhart and Mark Goddard from 'Lost in Space', Kenneth Tobey ("The Thing from Another World", etc.). Cinemas' original grumpy old man, Charles Lane, co-stars along with Louise Fletcher (playing a not-quite-on-the-level government agent), Fiona Lewis, a too briefly seen Wallace Shawn, character actor Jack Kehler (in his film debut), singer Bobby "Boris" Pickett, and Dan Shor & Dey Young, the young stars of "Dead Kids". LeMat is a rather bland hero, but Allen is luminous, and Lerner pretty much delivers the best performance in the thing. Condon has an uncredited cameo as a guy listening in a doorway.

Perhaps the most value lies in trivia revealed by Laughlin on his audio commentary: at the time, he was young Sylberts' stepdad; her real dad was the legendary Hollywood production designer Richard Sylbert, and her mom is Susanna Moore, the production & costume designer on this film; Laughlin was involved with Moore when this film was made.

Pay close attention during an early scene to hear what may have been the first use of an R.E.M. song in a movie.

Seven out of 10.

Dreadful acting, dreadful effects, dreadful directing ... the actors sounded really stilted as if they were making it up as they went along .... and I can't really believe that the main character hadn't met his ex wife's parents or didn't know anything about where she came from !!

"Strange Invaders" is a cheerful and likable 80's movie, regretfully forgotten these days because nowadays audiences don't understand the charm and inside jokes of authentic "Alien Invaders"-science fiction from the 1950's. This movie is one giant spoof/tribute to wonderful films such as "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" and "Invaders from Mars", but the screenplay is intelligent enough to add new and surprisingly original twists of its own. We have the typical remote American town – Centerville, Illinois – getting colonized by hideous aliens that take over the identities of the locals and examine the earthly life-style in the meantime. The ingenious elements in the script are, however, that this whole invasion-project was seemly approved by the government AND that the aliens never evolved after they landed on our planet. Centerville still looks like a swinging 50's town, with jukeboxes, old cars and traditional dress codes. University professor Charles Bigelow teams up with a gossip-journalist Betty Walker to investigate the town's bizarre secret. "Strange Invaders" is well-directed by Michael Laughlin ("Dead Kids") and cleverly co-written by Bill Condon. There's very few gore, which is a good thing, but the special effects are definitely not bad with a couple of adorable space-ship designs and the aliens' inventive method to "cristalyze" people. The acting performances are vivid, with Paul LeMat ("American Graffiti) and Nancy Allen ("Carrie", "Dressed to Kill"). The supportive cast is even better with spirited roles from Michael Lerner, Diana Scarwid and the wonderful Louise Fletcher, once again as the mean shrew. The happy-ending is somewhat lame and far too Disney/Steven Spielberg-like, but I suppose that's forgivable. Good, cheesy and nostalgic 80's entertainment.

A college professor (Paul Le Mat) goes looking for his missing wife and finds a town that appears to be stuck in the 1950s. While there, he's attacked by an alien but manages to escape. He then tries to get a reporter (Nancy Allen) to believe his story, which she does after she has her own close encounter.

The '80s was a fun decade for movies, not only for original material but also for movies that were inspired by the great sci-fi flicks of the '50s, such as this one. It's an enjoyable sci-fi horror movie that doesn't take itself seriously but isn't a straight-up comedy, either. Nancy Allen is lots of fun and Louise Fletcher is terrific in a supporting role. Paul Le Mat makes for an unassuming lead but he's quite good in the part. My favorite part of the whole movie is Michael Lerner's flashback scene. Love seeing older actors like Kenneth Tobey, Charles Lane, and June Lockhart. There are also some amusing genre references I got a kick out of. The sets, props, and special effects are excellent. Good use of location filming by director Michael Laughlin. Why does it seem no one shoots in small towns anymore?

It's a little slow-going and I can imagine some viewers will be frustrated that it skirts the line between straight sci-fi and comedy as much as it does. It's an entertaining movie, particularly if you like '50s sci-fi. I think it gets better with repeated viewings.

Paul Le Mat plays Charlie Bigelow, who goes to his ex-wife's Midwest hometown to investigate her disappearance. What he finds instead is a strange community that denies her existence, but he comes to discover that they are all alien colonists, who won't tolerate his interference. He sells this story to the tabloids, but this only encourages the aliens to pursue him with a vengeance...

Strange is the word to describe this Sci-Fi satire, which is totally flat and lifeless, with lethargic pacing and direction, and a storyline that goes nowhere. Well intentioned satire that falls well short of succeeding.

Where to begin.... This hideous excuse for a motion picture makes "Plan 9 From Outer Space" look well thought out. The music? It's culled from every single overwrought piece of PD shlock in existence. The focus? Hell, doesn't matter if in one shot there are thirty people standing in the road; the new angle shows a lone Packard with a waitress posing for Argosy Mag shots. Paul Le Mat, Diana Scarwid, Louise Fletcher, Wallace Shawn: fine actors who must have all been starving to death at that point in their lives and the director lured them to sign on with tempting bits of cat food. The production budget must have skyrocketed to well over fifty cents with the addition of The Space Alien Phallic Transportation Machine which, for a time, must have meant that the Oscar Meyer Wiener Mobile was not available. When Bad Movies Happen to Good Actors

A clever plot -- aliens take over a small town in rural America -- is almost done in by a plodding pace and the weakest leading man to ever appear in a sci-fi movie, Paul LeMat. Nevertheless, the movie has a strange charm, as LeMat travels to this podunkville to find his ex-wife, who inexplicably vanishes while visiting the town. The ending holds a couple of surprises, but by then you'll probably be glad the damn thing's over. The main reason to watch this sort-of cult classic is to see how closely a film made in 1983 succeeds in paying homage to all those cheeseball sci-fi flicks of the 1950s, when commies were the biggest threat, often showing up in sci-fi movies disguised as invading aliens. I have no doubt that as low-budget as this production was, it had its influence on ABC's classic sci-fi show, THE INVADERS. Also, keep an eye out for several familiar faces dotting the landscape, including Ken Tobey, star of Howard Hawks' 1951 commie threat epic, THE THING FROM Another WORLD.

I love movies, all genres, and from big dollar spectacles to small indie projects. But even making allowance for this piece of junk being 25 years old and its attempt at homage to the 1950's it just suffers in almost aspect, by which we judge films.

Throughout the movie, I was reminded of several "student films," I've had a chance to watch, efforts where creativity is required to fill gaps where funds are needed.

All in all, chances are there are much better uses for 90 minutes of your life.

2/10

It's "Back to the Future" meets "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" when a woman goes to her hometown in the Midwest but doesn't return. Her husband (Paul LeMat) goes there and discovers that aliens took it over 25 years earlier with the government's complicity! To complicate things just a little further, we find out that "Men in Black" was right: the tabloids DO tell the truth (in this case, there's an article about a town getting taken over by aliens)! It's just neat seeing that when he goes there, everything still looks like the 1950s, and then no one believes him. But overall, how they develop the story is pretty interesting. Louise Fletcher seems to be channeling Nurse Ratched as the government bureaucrat trying to keep the alien takeover under wraps, and Nancy Allen plays her usual kind of role as the tabloid reporter who wrote about the alien takeover. But really neat is Michael Lerner as a man whose family got abducted by the aliens many years earlier.

Anyway, "Strange Invaders" shows that alien invasion movies can be really cool, especially since the aliens took on human form. You're sure to like it. Also starring Wallace Shawn and Charles Lane (who's now 101 years old and still going).

I just read MonsieurMS comments. Did he see the same movie as i and either folks saw? I guess it galls me when someone takes to the time to write negative, uninteresting comments that give readers no insight to a movie. Comments like "There is somewhere in here the makings of a decent if routine SF story. It is thwarted by several factors. First, the actor is just awful. Even the competent actors are awful. The dialog is wooden and stilted. The plot plods along predictably. This seems less like a finished movie than actors going through a walk through. Extremely disappointing." This is an opinion, not a review of a movie. These comments do NOT help me in making a decision as to whether I want to watch this movie. "The actor is just awful" Do you mean the male actor? or the acting? But I digress, these types of opinions are cast by many others on this site, not just poor "MonsieurMS" If you are going to critically review a movie, state your opinions and cite examples. The plot of this movie rivals the plot of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" wherein are hero(s) are aware of the danger and are being pursued by the antagonists. A familiar "reds under the beds" 1950 plot that in my opinion is well executed and the viewer is keep interested. Paul Le Mat's character, Charles Bigelow, in particular is well crafted. So i guess in closing, please try to keep the vague comments to the AOL chatrooms, where this sort of banter is welcomed. I, for one, find this website very well constructed and helpful and would like to see it stay this way. BTW to the Gods of this site, do you choose comments made by members to be seen on the main page? Or is it chronological? If not, placing the most informative and best constructed comments first would probably serve to discourage persons creating comments simply to make them "first". Just my humble opinion.

A takeoff on the 1950s sci-fi films, this has its good moments and moves along a good clip, particularly in the first half. The second half doesn't measure up to the first 45 minutes.

There is a mixture of satire on those '50s films along with some genuine suspense and action. There is even some bad acting and some bad dialog, but I couldn't tell if it was done on purpose! It wasn't as innocent as the old films, however, especially when Nancy Allen started using the Lord's name in vain. Other than that, it's a fairly clean, language-wise.

It's okay but nothing great, certainly not "stunning," as quoted by Joel Siegel on the video box. Joel is one of those national film critics who is so far out of touch with normal citizens it's laughable.