The tyranist's thoughts
This is the kind of movie that makes you want to read the novel. Having spawned two well-regarded versions on film, it has to be an interesting read and I find myself wondering where it is different from what I've seen.
One day in the spring everyone in a little town called Midwich blacks out. When they come to the women are pregnant and the government has arrived. Nine months later, still in the spring apparently, the children are born. And what children they are. Super smart and mentally developed at a staggeringly young age, but there is a price.
This one was a little unusual for Carpenter, but turned out very nicely. The story sometimes feels rushed and the conclusion of the movie seems pretty abrupt. Still the story is fascinating and is perhaps more so because I spent the entire time imagining the implications these kids would have. The setting could have used a little work. It was too innocuous for my tastes.
It was fun to see Christopher Reeve up and walking even though I knew that this was his last mobile film. I also liked Mark Hamill as the ultra-conservative pastor and Kirstie Alley as the heartless government bitch, a role she plays all too well.
Check this one out if you get a minute. I think you'll enjoy it and if nothing else you'll look at children differently. Especially the smart ones.
Posted: July 15th, 2002

Rish's Reviews
After being entertained and delighted by the original 1960 film, I ran out and rented this one, thinking it would be great fun to compare the two. I listed the Skulls and started my review, only to find out that tyranist had gotten here first. Dejected, I put the review on the shelf, where it stayed for many months. I guess it couldn't hurt to post it now.
Starring Kirstie Alley, Linda Kozlowski, and Christopher Reeve, who was technically a Former Celebrity when this came out, but I just can't bring myself to call him one now. Lindsey Haun plays Mara, the leader Child. And Mark Hamill has a smallish part. I love the guy, but HIM I can call a F.C..
The film is pretty scary. It's certainly compelling. Carpenter is a born filmmaker. There is a VERY scary moment when the first child exhibits its powers. I remember, when I first saw the film, thinking, "Holy crap! This movie is gonna seriously freak me out!" It didn't, though, because that moment is easily the scariest part of the film.
It's a longer film than the original, with much more development of the characters. This version introduces a couple of new and interesting concepts, though not all end up being followed through/followed up on. The film does a nice job with the unconsciousness scene. One is stillborn. The leader in this version is female. That could be better and could be worse. In this case, it's not better.
The inevitable GOOD Midwich Child rears its head. I had a conversation once with a friend who loathed the idea of a friendly ghost in horror movies (it was right after I saw the 1999 version of The Haunting). I really have to agree with him here.
There's a significant jump in the narrative that makes me think scenes were lifted for time. It's somewhat awkward.
The Children are obviously aliens in this one (they were supposed to be in the original novel, though it was very discreet). And something is lost in the unsubtlety. The Children, though hideous in a beautiful way, are not so convincing as were the originals. This is largely due to the vast amount of dialogue they're given, parts of which betray the lack of comfort the young actors have with the big words and cold calculation. There is, also, a fundamental difference in the speech patterns of the English versus Americans ("I will never forgive you for failing to change my diaper that time," sounds much more menacing--and believable--with a British accent)(even if a British child would more likely say "nappies" instead of "diapers"). The original had mostly silent Children. And the ones in the '95 film are a hell of a lot scarier when they are silent.
I remember when this came out, thinking the first half was good, and the second half . . . mehh. While I liked it better all these years later, the first half is still much better. The film isn't bad, but it isn't great either. Some dork once said that John Carpenter "makes good but unsatisfying films." This is one of them.
Posted: December 20, 2006