A baby born to a human couple turns out to be a mutant monster with an appetite to kill when scared.
|It's Alive Movie(DivX)||Resolution: 640x272 px||Total Size: 699 Mb|
|It's Alive Movie(HD 720)||Resolution: 1280x528 px||Total Size: 4479 Mb|
|It's Alive Movie(iPod)||Resolution: 480x208 px||Total Size: 239 Mb||
|It's Alive Movie(HD 1080)||Resolution: 1920x800 px||Total Size: 6715 Mb|
|It's Alive Movie(HD)||Resolution: 852x352 px||Total Size: 406 Mb||
Pregnant college student Lenore Harker leaves college before the end ofthe semester to move to an isolated house with her boyfriend Frank. When Lenore is ready to deliver the baby, they drive to the hospital.In the surgery room, the two doctors and the two nurses are foundslaughtered and Lenore and the baby are found covered of blood. When Lenore is released, the family returns to Frank's house....They should have just called this movie killer baby, or something butthe fact of the matter is its a poor remake of a poor movie anyway.Characters are uninvolved and look bored, and really, the only fun Igore from this movie was spotting British celebs with their silly fauxpas American accents.Special effects are dire, they just consist people running aroundpretending to be scared of a mutant jelly baby or just over the topscenes of needless gore.It's a bad movie with little in the way of anything positive, but atleast the hospital scene is okay.
Bijou Phillips is pregnant about six months but the infant inside isgrowing at an abnormal rate and must be taken out due to the paininflicted on the mother. Shortly after its birth via C-section, theentire hospital staff is slaughtered by the baby, but Phillips cannotrecollect (or has simply blocked the whole incident out) what happenedmuch to the disappointment of the police who need answers. James Murrayis the father, RaphaÃ«l Coleman his crippled brother(a car accidentwhich killed their parents, he barely survived), Ty Glaser Phillips'school friend, Owen Teale the police officer(Sgt Perkins who suspectsPhillips knows more than she is letting on), and Jack Ellis thepsychiatrist( attempting to jar Phillips' memory as to what happenedthat day in surgery)round out the cast. To be honest, I'm not a BijouPhillips fan and she once again did little to change my opinion of her.Except at the beginning, before entering the hospital for her son'sbirth, Phillips remains vacuous and aloof. I do understand that hercharacter is tired and mentally deteriorating due to her baby'sferocious appetite for blood and human flesh(killing people and thedifficulties of breastfeeding, not to mention, the constant crying formore cannibalistic nourishment don't help matters), but I had a damnhard time sympathetically aligning myself to her. I do think the pointof the first film, the desperate attempts by a mother to protect herbeloved child no matter what damage it causes or people it harms, ispresent in the remake, but a lot of the original's personality ismissing from the newer modern take. I enjoyed Larry Cohen's "panicstricken public" and how the killer infant was considered a terror tothe city, while this remake localizes the monster baby's antics toPhillips and Murray's New Mexico home. Those who come to talk senseinto Phillips usually wind up lunch for the baby who even eats rats andcats. While acknowledging her baby's activities in horror when shecomes across the grisly remains of what it has done to people it feedsfrom, she nevertheless continues to protect it, consequences be damned.We know that eventually protecting the baby will become impossible andshe will have to take drastic measures to keep it from killing herhusband or his brother. I didn't find IT'S ALIVE particularlysatisfying, especially the underwhelming CGI of the baby(it is hardlyever on screen and when it is, the effects are quite noticeable)and thegory attacks are often hard to decipher due to the director'sinsistence on not showing the murders in elaborate detail. I'd just saystick with the original unless you are just a monster baby moviecompletist. How the baby can lock its father in the basement, hoparound like a squirrel, and create such bloody crime scenes defiescommon sense. The film's explanation for the abnormalities of the babyderived from pills off the internet which are supposed to cause amiscarriage!
This is what bothered me throughout the film...it's location. We as theaudience are supposed to believe this story takes place in New Mexico.Unfortunately, we're tipped off at the beginning of the film that itwas shot in Bulgaria (where?)with a Bulgarian crew etc. This is when afilm should save it's credits for the end of the movie. A few minutesinto the flick, we are told via a caption, that the story takes placein New Mexico. Even if my eyes were shut tight during openingcredits--I'd know in a heartbeat that the location isn't New Mexico.Instead, what we see is an Alamo style house on the edge of a Bulgarianforest with tall looming trees behind it. Are they kidding? I canunderstand saving money by shooting in Bulgaria(where?)but how couldthey expect us (in the USA) to believe that it was New Mexico? Why notsay Oregon or some other geographically similar location? Instead, allwe see are gray skies and obviously freezing cold outdoor shots withshivering actors. There are so many gaffes in this straight to DVDmovie that it is incredibly distracting. We see shots of a pool atnight with a pool cover on it, then, in the next shot, it's off. Steamrising out of this pool (cold in Bulgaria...where?) There were very fewshots of the baby in it's monster guise and we as the audience, can'tunderstand why no one can see what's up with this kid. The baby'sfather is never around and when he is, never seems to have a clue thatthis kid is a little monster.The entire New Mexico police force consisted of 2 cops, both of whichmade Inspector Clouseau look like Sherlock Holmes. They never ask forback up (they didn't have shoulder radios) even when being attacked bythis 10 lb wunderkind. As a matter of fact these police were wearinggeneric uniforms with no insignia etc.The acting was OK up until the mommy (played by Bijou Philips)startedto think she was actually in a film that may get some notice and beganto ham it up to the point of it being embarrassing.I think that everyone associated with the remake of this camp classicshould've watched the movie "Grace" if they wanted to see a terrifyingmovie about a demon child. That was a well done film--great dialog andacting, both subtle and scary to the point of making me squirm in myseat and giving me nightmares. Well, It's Alive gave me nightmares too.I dreamt that I wasted a $1.07 at Red Box.
I do not hate many remakes because they stain the memory of "classic"(or semi-classic) movies.In fact, I am absolutely open to receive themwith all the possible objectivity, and I think I could recognize theirhits in the minority of cases something good came from them (like forexample, The Thing and Dawn of the Dead).But what definitely upsets mefrom many remakes is the arrogance to think they can improve an oldfilm with the mere thing of "modernize" it, when generally the valuefrom the original film resides on the historical context it was made,portraying the sensibility and style from a time.A clear example is thecult film It's Alive, written and directed by the underrated LarryCohen in 1974, which had a naughty style which found suspense and humandrama in premises which border on the ridiculous.That also applies toother Cohen's films, such as The Stuff, Q and God Told Me To, whichended up being much more entertaining and interesting than Iexpected.What I mostly liked from It's Alive is that it endorsed itsbizarre story with interesting ideas about paternity, scientificresponsibility and the then emergent field of the inducedfertility.Now, the atrocious remake of that film tries to "update"those ideas, but without a pinch of the ingenuity and talent Cohenshowed in the original film.It's Alive does not fulfill at all with its purpose of creating horror,suspense or even interest.90% of this movie is set on a remote house,something which severely limits the wingspan from the story, andinstead of the suburban horror from the original film, we have a simple"slasher" formula, with the disposable characters escaping from themurderer by the dark corridors and basements from the house.And eventhough the murderer is a baby, that circumstance is never used to trysomething more innovating or at least shocking.Another big problem is the pathetic performances.Nobody shows even theslightest energy or conviction.And as for direction, Josef Rusnakbelongs to the school of filmmakers who simply film the scenes from thescreenplay, and they then chronologically edit them...but who do nothave a single idea on how to tell a story, or how to work with theactors.I do not have much more to say.It's Alive (2008) is an execrable"horror" movie, and one of those films which truly damage thegenre.Instead of watching this atrocity, I recommend you to see thevery entertaining original film.
This whole thing is laughably stupid in every possible way, from the bad acting to the cheesy evil baby effects to the lack of a real explanation for the evil baby, to the way the hospital never really deals with the mass murder in the birthing room, and so on.
'It's Alive'! and you'll wish you weren't after wasting time on thislittle beauty! Allow me to continue. So, is this New Mexico after anuclear winter? I live in Oregon and this certainly looked like myhome, not New Mexico. No sand, no sun, no people of color. But Idigress. As the plot (and I use that word loosely) began to unfoldanother demented baby movie came to mind, that being "Grace". Drop'It's Alive' on its head and run out and get that movie. Majorcreep-out. When shown at Sundance, it was said to have caused two mento faint and projectile vomiting from audience members. Anyhow, whydoes she keep the bundle of joy? If he is so strong as to take outadults, how is it he reverts to cooing baby when in her arms? How is itthat she has breasts left? How is it that her husband hasn't noticedthe little freak when he gazes upon him in sheer love? This movie is amess and not in a laughable, good way. Like others who reviewed, I wasdrawn in by Ms. Phillips. Curious I guess. She did a good job. Didn'tburst out laughing at the absurdities in the story line. Did I reallysee the tiny hand of the baby grabbing at thin air from inside themouth of one of the victims? If so, it was worth it for that.
This review is from: It's Alive (Unrated) (DVD) I thought the original was okay. I could barely make it all the way through this one. Maybe I've developed some taste in movies since I saw the original. :-)
It's Alive (2008) ** (out of 4) Remake of Larry Cohen's cult classic has parents Lenore and Frank(Bijou Phillips, James Murray) happy to welcome in a baby boy but thereseems to be something wrong. During the C-Section everyone in thedelivery room was murdered with the exception of mommy and baby. Soonothers start to go missing and you just know it has something to dowith the baby. This film, co-written by the original film's directorand screenwriter, ended up going straight-to-DVD here in the U.S. andthat's pretty understandable because this film is pretty so-so fromstart to finish. I'd imagine this one here would have been a tough sellas not too many people want to watch a movie about a killer baby andeven if they did this film doesn't offer up too much. I think thebiggest problem here is the screenplay. For starters, we're suppose toconnect with the mother yet the screenplay doesn't do her any favors bymaking her rather stupid and someone we really can't care for. Shebegins helping the baby by covering up the murders, which some mightsay a lot of parents would but at the same time she never stops andthinks about the thing being a killer. Another problem is that all ofthe violence is kept off screen and we never get to see the baby doingany of the killings. I'm sure this was done so that the film might havea chance of getting released but this makes the film rather blandespecially when compared to the original. The screenplay does add a fewgood touches including keeping the baby normal looking instead of themutant from the original film. We also get a rather interesting reasonas to what's wrong with the kid and why he's doing all the killings. Ithink it would have helped the film had this been brought up at thestart so that we could have known this going through the film and theycould have done more with it. I thought both Phillips and Murray werefine in their roles with the supporting players doing fine work aswell. No one is going to win an Oscar for their work but it's goodenough for this type of film. In the end this movie really doesn't workbut it's not a complete failure either. The movie is just here andthere's really nothing special or bad about it. I'm not sure who itwill appeal to other than those who need to see every horror movie outthere or those who just want to compare it to the original.
This review is from: It's Alive (DVD) I enjoyED THIS MOVIE. i AN SURE OTHERS WILL IF THEY LIKE HORROR MOVIES,
In this supposed "remake" of the LARRY COHEN 1974 film of the samename. A newborn baby runs amok, killing cops, doctors, psychiatrists.cats, rats, rabbits, opening doors, lifting & killing adults, poundingskulls in with his baby fists, eating a hole in his father, punchingholes in the wall, while the mother slowly goes insane & goes to greatlengths to protect the infant from those who try to hurt it, as thesheriff tries to figure out what's going on, (especially following thedelivery room slaughter of a group of doctors), & when the lead heroinehas no memory of anything from the night her baby was born, apsychiatrist tries to get her to remember the event of the night ittook place so they can hopefully get an image of the killer(unfortuantly the mother by this point knows who the killer reallyis...) she suffers from nightmarish visions (she has a psychic link toher child) her one breast has horrible bite marks on it, her friendsare greatly worried about her, especially after the child's birth,since she has cut off all communications with them. She manages for awhile to keep the babies unnatural habits a secret, tossing the deadanimals away, hiding the mangled bodies in the basement, but as alwaysin these kinds of films, things get out of hand mighty quickly...Havinglearnt LARRY COHEN was remaking his original IT'S ALIVE, I was half &half, I figured the last thing we need is yet another pointless remake,but at the same time I figured as long as Larry was writing it, itmight be fun & who knows, turn out to be a much better movie, I wasbadly wrong on both counts. IT'S ALIVE is a terrible, boring film, nowgranted, IT'S ALIVE Parts 1-3 are no masterpieces, far from it, but atleast they never took themselves too seriously & were kind of fun towatch in a bad B movie sort of way. IT'S ALIVE 08' attempts to beserious all the way through & as a result of it, it fails bad, reallybad...Now I will give the film some points, I loved the scene where thepsychiatrist was killed, it was pretty cool & gruesome looking, thedirection was actually better & some of the effects weren't to bad &the film did have a couple of jumps that caught me off guard, but as awhole, the film has so much wrong with it I really don't know where tostart. The acting is bad, & like in the original, it's never reallymade clear just why the baby turned into a carnivorous predator, I meanthere is a small indication of what might have caused it, with a scenewhere she explains to her husband she took an experimental drug, butwho made the drug, did it have the same effect on other women's babieswho took it? etc. is never explained & the film bears almost noresemblance to the earlier film. This one is set in the countryside ¬ the city & with the exception of the killer baby, the delivery roommassacre & the family having the same last name as the family in theoriginal, none of the other events are repeated, in fact, the filmseems to be more of a sequel that claims to be a remake, probably doneby the producers who figured they would be able to lure more customersinto renting something they think is a remake or an entirely new movierather then renting a movie just called IT'S ALIVE 4. The mothercharacter is also annoying, as she acts as though all these horriblethings the baby is doing is normal & seemingly doesn't care as to whatis happening to a bunch of innocent people, including her friends.Other area's the film flunks in is with the drab looking cinematography & the writers have poor knowledge on police procedural, as thecops here allow dogs to run through the hospital looking for a killer(they do that for drug searches or if they have something of thecriminal(s) they are looking for & use that for the dogs to pick uptheir scent, here they have nothing of the supposed unseen killer sohow are the dogs going to pick up his scent? & the film also cops outby turning the Davis parents from a middle aged couple who are dealingwith a horrible travesty to a couple of college kids in New Mexico &their college friends, with the father of the baby being the olderbrother of a crippled youngster both of whom lost their parents a yearor two prior & the film fails to generate any interest from first frametill last. Already forgotten remake, that thankfully blew up in thefaces of the greedy studio heads & was dropped direct to DVD (& eventhen the film was scantly distributed) & is a prime example of studiogreed overcoming any good intentions to produce even a half decentremake, as a result, the film fails in almost every department. It'sobvious the studio was aiming this at a younger audience, but it's sobland & uninteresting that even the very few who did see it, laughed atit & called it boring. In short, if you seen one killer foetus movieyou've seen them all, I'm tired of them quiet frankly, they are allpretty much boring & none of the current ones have added anything newto the genre, they just cover the same old tired grounds. As in theoriginal film, the baby is barely seen, perhaps that is for the better,since the baby monster effects are quiet poor. *1/2 stars
I love It's Alive, it is a favorite of mine. Cheesy 70's killer babyflick, you can't beat that. I am a big fan of Larry Cohen, and hisolder flicks, so when I heard a remake was being made I was skeptical.I thought if done right, if they went with a less cheesy approach, itcould be decent, at least better than some of the other recent remakes.I wasn't sure what was going on with this film until recently Ireceived a screener of the remake at work. I must say, I actuallyenjoyed it a lot more than expected. It has flaws, including a CGIkiller baby this time...but overall, this film is actually a lot offun. It isn't the spooky, realistic film it could have been, but it isa bloody good time. Though not as much fun as the original, it is adecent watch, with some decent gore. It really has no relation to theoriginal, other than a killing baby, and the same of the family isstill Davis. Overall, if you like the original, it is a decent watch,and if you haven't watched the legendary classic, watch that first,then this. I was just sad they didn't recreate the milkman scene.
It takes a lot for a movie to make me actually angry. And I don't justmean in a "holy crap, that was awful" kind of way. I mean for it tomake me sit there with a face full of scowl for the whole thing. YetIt's Alive has accomplished that. To be fair, I should have known whatI was getting into. There are very few homicidal baby movies that haveever been executed to even an acceptable degree.There's really not much going on here. A girl takes a break fromcollege to have a baby and weird stuff starts happening. Now this mightbe forgivable if...say...mommy and daddy had no clue what was going on.But mom knows damn well and seems totally cool with it. I understandmost parents will forgive their children just about anything, butthere's got to be a limit. So Bijou Phillips, who needs to pick a new,less ridiculous name, spend the whole movie ignoring the fact that herbaby is evil incarnate and even enabling it from time to time. This(sort of) gets explained about 3/4 of the way through, but it's such anawful explanation and the movie so horrible that by that time you won'tcare.There is nothing redeemable here. The acting is capable but stillsomehow annoying. The kill scenes are fun in an over the too kind ofway, but there's not nearly enough of them to justify the rest of thistrash. Ummm...they didn't kill any puppies? Is that something you canapplaud a movie for? Seriously, I have trouble thinking of a singlegood thing to say about this film. I'm not going to whine about itbeing the worst movie ever, but I absolutely hated it it.
"It's Alive" is a remake of the 70's classic by Larry Cohen (which wasexecutive producer on this one). It even spawned 2 more sequels, "ItLives Again" and "Island Of The Alive". I saw those movies once andcurious what the remake would be like. Well it is bad, really bad. Itstarts of great with a massacre during the birth (although it is notactually shown) but the story goes rapidly downhill from than on. Italso makes no sense at all, especially the actions of the mother aftershe discovers that there is something seriously evil about her baby.(the baby kills a pigeon and she acts like the whole thing didn'thappen and is supposed to be normal ??) The killings are rather stupid,there is even a laughably CGI effect of the baby's little arm crushingto a victim's head. Very cheaply done. The baby is not really shown(very little budget on special effects). Maybe they tried it but it wasso bad that they actually cut it out before theatrical release. I sawthe so-called UNRATED version, no idea what had to be cut out for thetheatrical version. Could not have been much...
This review is from: It's Alive (DVD) If You've seen the Trailer....You've seen the whole Flick......The original was a great Exploitatiuon classic...this,,,,a waste of Film and Your time.
In all honesty, I never thought Larry Cohen's original shlock fest It's Alive was anything special in the first place, and to no surprise, this direct-to-DVD remake isn't either. This time around, Bijou Philips and James Murray play the parents of the murderous, blood-hungry little tyke, who isn't quite as mutant-looking he was in the original film. That being said, there really isn't too much in the way of explanation as to much of what goes on in It's Alive, as we witness some people doing some very stupid things, and some non-sensical moments within the plot that are nothing short of head scratching. Still, there's something to admire as there are some genuine shocks to be had, but other than that, this new take on It's Alive is pretty limp, and pretty pointless too.
I understand IMDb's ten line minimum for posted reviews, but there aretimes when ten lines are hard to fill. There are even those times whenten words are pretty tough. This terrible remake of Larry Cohen'sminor-classic of 1974 is one such occasion. It is pure tripe and littlemore really needs to be said beyond a sincere admonition to avoid atall costs. But in the service of a minimum line count, I will add thatit is typical Millennium fare - shot in Bulgaria with a multinationalhodgepodge of cast and crew, working from an amateurish script for adirector with no discernible talent. It never ceases to amaze me how somany people can have so little pride in what they do.
This remake of the 1974 original is pretty dang bad, I wouldn't waste your time. Rent the original and avoid this one, if you must see It's Alive.
It's Alive is set in New Mexico where college student Lenore Harker(Bijou Phillips) & her boyfriend Frank Davis (James Murray) areexpecting a baby boy, while taking a shower Lenore feels labour pains &know's that she is going to give birth. Frank rushes her to thehospital where Lenore is taken into the delivery room, some time lateran orderly enters the delivery room & finds four of the medical teamdead having been brutally torn to pieces while Lenore & her baby boyseem unhurt. The cops have no clues & Sergeant Perkins (Owen Teale) hasno leads except Lenore who was under anaesthetic at the time, Lenore &Frank with their newborn baby son Daniel are allowed to go home butthere's something not quite right with the young baby. Lenore findsDaniel eating dead animals & when she finds a dead body torn to piecesLenore know's there's only one explanation but how could a young babyboy be a vicious killer...Directed by Josef Rusnak this is a remake of the Larry Cohen written,produced & directed horror film It's Alive (1974) which was aconsiderable success at the time of release & spawned two sequels ofit's own as well as this remake which Cohen himself co-wrote. Ipersonally have no problems with remakes at all, the original filmstill exists so I don't see any issue whatsoever, while the originalIt's Alive was a good solid horror film that had a little bit of wit,black humour & intelligence the It's Alive remake is more bland but Idid still quite like it for what it was. Predictable to appease to theteen horror film crowd the mother & father in this remake are prettyyoung teens rather than grown adults as in the original but you couldsay that the script deals with the pressures & problems of youngparents which is a much, much bigger issue now in 2010 than it was backin 1974 so in a way the script has just been adjusted for a newgeneration & a new society where it's actually very relevant, issues ofblind maternal love, abortion, premature birth & the emotional effectsof caring for a newborn baby are touched upon but are never gone intowith any great depth or intelligence. At only 80 minutes long It'sAlive is short, very short & not that much happens really although itdoes have a few nice moments & the somewhat downbeat choice of endingwas surprising although also welcome. The first twenty five minutesfollows the original quite closely as a woman gives birth to a mutantbaby that kills the medical team but instead of having the baby go onthe run & being hunted down the mother tries to protect it & cover upfor it's crimes in a decent twist on the original, having said thatsurely anyone finding their newborn baby eating dead animals & killingpeople would have a hard time loving it & protecting like Lenore doeshere.Available in both 'R' rated & 'Unrated' versions I saw the Unrated cutwhich is gorier than than the original with better effects & attackscenes, slashed dead bodies are seen, severed limbs are shown, someoneis ripped in half, there's lots of blood splatter & someone gets a tinybaby claw fist punched through their head. There's a bit of nudity aswell, while being breast fed Damien bites his mother's nipple & draw'sblood in another glaring sign something was wrong that Lenore chose toignore. Surprisingly the mutant baby effects are extremely restrained &there's only ever one shot of it during the entire film, strangelythere are no scenes of Daniel as a normal baby either as he is kept offscreen for virtually the whole film. Don't let anyone tell you theoriginal three It's Alive films are classic either, they are not withIt's Alive III: Island of the Alive (1987) easily the worst out of thefour films, I should know I have now watched all four It's Alive filmsin the space of four days (yeah, my head hurts just thinking about it).Filmed in Bulgaria the IMDb says It's Alive had a $10,000,000 budgetwhich I don't believe for a second, there's no way this cost that much& if did have a budget that big it wouldn't have been shot in Bulgaria.The acting varies, the main cast do alright with Bijou Phillips quitegood as the mother.It's Alive the remake is a decent little horror film in it's own rightactually, don't let anyone fool you that the original is someuntouchable classic because it's not although I would still say it's abit better than this remake overall. A good pace, nicely shot, there'ssome good gore & virtually no CGI computer effects work means It'sAlive the remake actually turned out better than I had expected.
I'll make my review brief as there's not much to say about the 2008 version of "It's Alive," except that it is yet another unnecessary remake of the 70s horror film. Also, I might add that the new film is not entertaining (in whatever way you might define it), and not definitely scary. Bijou Phillips is a grad student Lenore Harker taking a break because she is expecting a baby. She is happy to live with her loving boyfriend Frank Davis (James Murray) and his younger brother Chris (Raphaël Coleman). But strange things start to happen at the hospital where the baby Daniel was born and her home too, and everything points to the obvious conclusion that most viewers know before the film begins. I said "strange," but the fact is it is much worse than just "strange," involving several dead bodies. However, the film (directed by Josef Rusnak best known for his "The Thirteenth Floor") completely fails to generate tension. The film is hardly scary and death scenes are all bland and dull. It doesn't even have a campy charm that makes some horror movies entertaining. Its 80 minute running time feels very long.
Even I have to leave comment regarding this movie. We just sat therewith our jaws wide open thinking : "Is this for real or is this astudent movie from 1st semester". The story is so retarded.My 3 yearold nephew could have written a better story. I mean a disformed babythat eats human and animal flesh.....okay....could work....but not ifyour CGI looks like you bought it over ebay and the screewriter was sohigh on drugs he just wrote down anything for his next fix.Seriously......we laughed the whole time and the only time we wherescared was whas when we accidentally hit the replay button after therolling credits. If you want to see the possibly worst horror movieever produced go and rent " it's alive". And don't forget to watch thedirector's interview. You will be pissing yourself how he actuallysells the movie as one of the best of its genre. OMG. Enjoy