Film

The Visitor

Name: The Visitor
Genre: Horror, Science Fiction
Released: 1979
Cast: Mel Ferrer, Glenn Ford, Lance Henriksen, John Huston, Joanne Nail

Other titles called The Visitor: the 2008 film.

A delirious 1979 sci-fi horror film where an intergalactic warrior descends to stop a demonic child's apocalyptic breeding program. Visually baroque and narratively bewildering, it tosses together religious imagery, alien mythology, and B-movie chaos with complete sincerity. For the curious and the cult-film adventurous.

TMDb rating

2.7

Should you watch it?

Watch it if you enjoy late-seventies B-movie weirdness, where earnest melodrama, cheap-looking cosmic mysticism and a fierce old-school cast collide with a total lack of restraint.

Skip it if you need tight plotting or coherent logic; the film lurches between scenes, its effects are dated, and its sincerity can curdle into unintentional comedy for long stretches.

What it asks of you: About ninety minutes of goodwill at 109 minutes running time, with loose pacing, abrupt tonal shifts and a willingness to accept sudden leaps in logic without explanation.

Not sure? Find tonight's pick in a minute.

If you liked this

The Exorcist1973

The definitive demonic-child horror film: methodical, theologically grounded, genuinely terrifying. Everything The Visitor reaches for but can't quite grasp, executed with absolute conviction and craft.

But If you've seen it, you know it backward. If you haven't, it's three decades old and occasionally slow. Some find the pacing meditative; others find it grinding.

Possession1981

Andrzej Żuławski's unhinged masterpiece of marital breakdown and Lovecraftian nightmare. Visually aggressive, tonally unstable, and genuinely weird in ways that feel earned rather than accidental.

But Deliberately difficult. The dialogue is cryptic, the editing jarring, and it's not interested in making sense in conventional ways. Some will call this pretentious; they may not be wrong.

Lifeforce1985

Tobe Hooper's shambling space-vampire epic. Garish, sexed-up, operating on pure id. If you want baroque sci-fi horror that doesn't apologize, this is your film.

But Tonally chaotic and dramatically nonsensical. The second half collapses into chaos. You're watching it for the audacity and the imagery, not the plot.

Not sure tonight? Get a pick in a minute, starting from The Visitor

The wildcard

Something you would not have found on your own.

Santa Sangre1989

Both film a kind of baroque religious nightmare where cosmic and sexual evil intertwine; both feature demonic or corrupted children at the narrative center; both prioritize hallucinatory atmosphere over plot coherence.

Alejandro Jodorowsky's hallucinogenic fever dream about a mute man, his armless mother, and religious trauma. Visually arresting, narratively nightmarish, operating in the register of fever and myth rather than conventional logic.

But Extreme imagery involving children, sexual assault, and body horror. It's surreal to the point of incoherence for some. Jodorowsky is uncompromising and occasionally self-indulgent.

The Fifth Element1997

Luc Besson's operatic space adventure. Visually outrageous, narratively propulsive, deeply weird without ever losing momentum. Pure cinema as sensory experience.

But The script is thin and occasionally cringe. If you need character development and restraint, this isn't your film. It's also very long for what it is.

Scanners1981

David Cronenberg's muscular sci-fi thriller about telepathic assassins. Tense, inventive, grounded in plausible worldbuilding. The head-explosion scene remains genuinely shocking.

But Dated effects in places. The plot is genre-standard, and some scenes feel more like set pieces than narrative moments. Cronenberg's coldness can feel distancing.

Videodrome1983

Cronenberg again, now fully in dreamland: body horror, video technology, and sexual corruption intertwined. Philosophically ambitious and visually nauseating in equal measure.

But Deliberately unpleasant to watch. The body horror escalates beyond what many will tolerate. It's also oblique and doesn't spell out its meaning.

Invasion of the Body Snatchers1978

John Carpenter's paranoid remake. Impeccably crafted suspense, genuine unease, and a bleak worldview that lingers. The ending is extraordinary.

But Slow-burn. If you need constant action, you'll lose patience. The invasion happens gradually, which is the point but tests some viewers' attention.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan1982

The Star Trek film that works as pure cinema. Taut, theatrical, mythologically resonant. Ricardo Montalbán as Khan is unforgettable.

But You need some familiarity with the original series to care. If Star Trek feels dated or silly to you, this won't change your mind, just make it prettier.

Phase IV1974

Saul Bass's only narrative feature: ants evolve and attack humanity. Conceptually audacious and visually spare. It trusts the audience completely.

But Very slow and mostly dialogue-free. The climax is cryptic and unsatisfying if you want plot resolution. It's more poem than narrative.

Prince of Darkness1987

Both use hard sci-fi concepts (interdimensional beings, cosmic warfare) to literalize religious evil; both are interested in ancient cosmic threats awakening on Earth; both feature ensemble casts confronting incomprehensible forces.

John Carpenter's theological sci-fi horror. A research team discovers the literal embodiment of evil trapped in a church basement. Genuinely eerie, philosophically audacious, operating as both thriller and existential dread.

But Slow pacing and academic dialogue. The first act is nearly pure exposition. Carpenter's refusal to sensationalize means some will find it tedious where others find it meditative.

Stalker1979

Both made in the same year, both grapple with ancient forces and human faith; both use sci-fi trappings to explore metaphysical questions rather than plot; both feature guides/warriors who understand forces beyond normal comprehension.

Andrei Tarkovsky's hypnotic science fiction. A guide leads two men through a mysterious zone to a room that supposedly grants wishes. Meditative, philosophical, visually transcendent. Cinema as spiritual experience.

But Nearly three hours of slow tracking shots, long takes, and minimal plot. No action, minimal dialogue variation. If you need narrative momentum or conventional entertainment, you will be bored and frustrated.