Was not looking forward to this as I consider the John Carpenter version pretty much perfect, but damn the trailer looks pretty awesome. And yes I know trailers are designed to get you to see the movie, but still...
I haven't seen the trailer. But I'll probably see this and then just go back to watching the Carpenter one.
Yeah, I saw the trailer last night.
Looks fun.
The Red Band Trailer is out.
http://www.ign.com/videos/2011/09/19/the-thing-red-band-trailer (http://www.ign.com/videos/2011/09/19/the-thing-red-band-trailer)
I don't know. Its looks ok I guess. Its missing some of the doom and gloom from the first movie.
Might check it out just out of curiosity, but I'm not expecting anything better than Carpenter's masterpiece.
My biggest problem is that it doesn't seem to bring anything new to the table. It looks like a complete rehash of the John Carpenter version. Also I prefer mood over shock effects..That's just me though.
The trailer doesn't really do it for me.
Isn't this technically a prequel?
yup
"After creating the Dawn of the Dead remake, producers Marc Abraham and Eric Newman began to look through the Universal Studios library to find new properties to work on. Upon finding John Carpenter's 1982 film The Thing, the two convinced Universal to create a prequel instead of a remake, as they felt that remaking Carpenter's film would be like "paint(ing) a mustache on the Mona Lisa"[18] Eric Newman explained; "I'd be the first to say no one should ever try to do Jaws again and I certainly wouldn't want to see anyone remake The Exorcist... And we really felt the same way about The Thing. It's a great film. But once we realized there was a new story to tell, with the same characters and the same world, but from a very different point of view, we took it as a challenge. It's the story about the guys who are just ghosts in Carpenter's movie - they're already dead. But having Universal give us a chance to tell their story was irresistible."[19]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_(2011_film) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_(2011_film))
So, this take is from the Norwegian point of view ??? So, we can assume the movie ends with two people in a helicopter shooting at a dog ???
Quote from: GodShifter on September 27, 2011, 09:21:07 AM
So, this take is from the Norwegian point of view ??? So, we can assume the movie ends with two people in a helicopter shooting at a dog ???
Pretty sure those guys were from somewhere this group was communicating with.
I think everyone dies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_%282011_film%29
From the wikipedia entry, it appears it is the Norwegian story that results in the creature taking the form of a dog and running into the American camp where the 1982 version starts.
Quote from: GodShifter on September 27, 2011, 12:38:10 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_%282011_film%29
From the wikipedia entry, it appears it is the Norwegian story that results in the creature taking the form of a dog and running into the American camp where the 1982 version starts.
You are correct, it is the Norwegians.
I dunno, as a big fan of Carpenter's Thing (heh) I'm apprehensive.
The use of a heroine has me put off a little. This is 'The Thing' after all it takes place in the Antarctic, I don't want potential love interests turning into the alien and some twit graduate student screaming about it, I want macho!
The use of CG has me put off alot. For me a good part of why Carpenter's remake was so good was, well, there was a 600lb hunk of foam latex sitting in the room with them. And, to Carpenter's credit, it was the first amorphic monster successfully brought to film. Thirty years later, there's cg'd masses of undulating flesh in almost any creature based movie or video game out there. I think it would have been cool to re-visit old techniques and update them, so, there really was a mass of undulating flesh in the room with the actors. That approach would've sold the monster a little better, seeing as how over the last 30 years amorphic is pretty much morphic now. (but obviously I have not seen it yet)
The acting from the 1982 version is pretty damn good (macho).
Last but not least, who did the score? The score from Carpenter's is perfect because it captures the desolation and expanse of the arctic (macho).
I'll go see it, but I'm not super enthused.
*shakes fist at cloud*
Even the fucking dog in Carpenter's could act.
As long as the chick dies HARD I'm down with it. Please tell me it's not PG-13.
Quote from: Jor el on September 27, 2011, 09:02:29 PM
Even the fucking dog in Carpenter's could act.
quoted for truth
much of the eerie atmosphere, and good chucks of character development and the storyline were perpetuated not by dialogue, but looks and facial expressions between the actors,
Macho.
and I bet the chick goes up in the Norg chopper, only to dig thru three feet of powder for a live grenade.
the trailer up above is listed as rated 'R'.
Quote from: Jor el on September 27, 2011, 09:02:29 PM
Even the fucking dog in Carpenter's could act.
That dog was a better actor than some humans.
i didnt realize that carpenters movie was a remake but i guess i am the only one that thinks it fuckin sucked. i will definately catch this remake as the trailer looks interesting. assuming it doesnt turn out to be some pg-13 bullshit.
Quote from: lowdaddy on September 29, 2011, 02:06:55 PM
i didnt realize that carpenters movie was a remake but i guess i am the only one that thinks it fuckin sucked.
OH MY GOD! What did you just say?
u fuckin heard me. dont gimme any shit deaner. i'm in no mood for it. :-*
Quote from: lowdaddy on September 29, 2011, 04:42:10 PM
u fuckin heard me. dont gimme any shit deaner. i'm in no mood for it. :-*
Come on over and we'll watch it on Blu-ray on my 55" high def Home theater system. Maybe it'll change your mind. I promise I won't rape or kill you.
Let me know...
Did I scare Lowdaddy off? Damn, I have no friends. I'm so lonely.
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_HTBEyNzj4MA/S_7Df9bf4oI/AAAAAAAAGgA/sCgq1Za8_KM/s400/ASL-Creepy_Guy.jpg)
I'll be your friend, deaner...
Man, you're my bro which is better than a friend. Thing is Lowdaddy actually lives in my area. I would like to meet another poster in person at least once before I die.
I'M FEARLESS BITCHES!!! check your messages deaner.
hey I want to see carpenter's on bluray, didn't even know it came out. maybe i'll order it when i get some money.
Shit, come watch it at my house with me and lowdaddy (if I haven't scared him off).
You wont find this city slicker down them parts any time soon. But you never know.
As of now, it has a 30% Tomatoe rating on rottentomatoes.com
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_thing_2011/
Its seems to be getting the worst reviews at various horror sights like Bloody Disgusting.com and well as others.
Still want to see that fucker.
So has anyone gone to see this yet?
I'm about 2/3rds through it, and if there was something else on, Id switch it off.
It's not a remake but as we all know it's been tagged a 'prequel', which is only half true. This is my main problem with it. It's not being honest with the diehard fans of the Carpenter film. It's based on the Norwegian camp which precedes the storyline of the 1982 version, but it takes too many scenes and reinterpretations of the first one, to honestly fall for this whole prequel tagline. Has the same type of protagonist lead (this time a female lead in place of Russell) and random, almost too familiar looking character replacements from the earlier film. It's not scene for scene, but it might as well be for at least 20 minutes of random cuts scattered throughout and hard to look past, imo.
If youre going to call yourself a prequel then do NOT borrow lines (especially obvious Kurt Russelisms)and scenes from the original. It's almost confusing if youre actually going to believe that the same events happened on both camps (in the movie timeline sense)
The 'head spider' scene is brought back even (in a bit more extremo this time around, you know because they have to put their own stamp on it)..blood testing..flame thrower burning scenes lifted..the last 1/3 (intentionally?) rehashes some deadpan lines from the classic film, remnants in a shower stall chameleon change bring back visions of the bloody torn unis left in the trash from Carpenters.
The CGI weighs down the last 20 mins or so terribly (watching it now) with a dozen or so 'things' cat and mousing the remaining crew. I would say to skip it because I kind of wish I did and will indeed leave a bad taste in your mouth if you love the classic like I do.
edit: right when youve separated the two films as apples and oranges as the credits start to roll, they edit in the the first few minutes of Carpenters with the music and the husky being shot at...fuck this film in the face.