Escape to the Movies: The Thing

[Daveman]

Before watching: "pleasebegoodpleasebegoodpleasebegoodpleasebegoodpleasebegoodpleasebegood"
After: "Fuck"

 

[Darks63]

Since it's a prequel--and if you're familiar with the opening of the original The Thing--doesn't that mean that you should know that everyone is going to be toast by the end of the movie? I thought the two guys in the helicopter in the opening of the original where the only two survivors, and they lasted all of five minutes.

yeah i'm surprised in the review he states that there are survivors when you know from the 82 that there wasn't any. I'm wondering if they come up with some bs way to keep winestead's character vertical.

 

[shogunblade]

...At first, it seems to be setting up the interesting addition of gender and/or cultural biases becoming part of the equation and people's suspicions of who may or may not be the Thing, but that never materializes and you begin to suspect...the only reason for her and one random character to be female is because someone uttered the dreaded "Sausagefest" at a story meeting.

Actually, from what I've read from the 1982 The Thing(If IMDB's Trivia Page is more reliable than Wikipedia), the script originally had a woman, but she ended up getting pregnant and was replaced with another male. If anything, the director's trying to copy the original script as closely as possible. However, in this day and age, the "Sausagefest" makes about as much sense.

OT: What a shame, just because I maybe held out a sliver of hope that it might have been good. Oh well, I still have the original on VHS, can't be too bad to check out. Good Review, Moviebob.

 

[Diablo2000]

... I will watched it anyway, my biggest problem with MovieBob is that when I disagree with him I REALLY disagree with him.
Since I love the Carpenter's remake, I will watch and hope that it's good or not was bad was MovieBob seens to believe.

 

[DJDarque]

Oh, look. Moviebob hates yet another movie that I found to be pretty damn good. How about if you want to see a movie go and see it instead of letting some cynical, self-entitled "critic" tell you not to..

 

[MatParker116]

A similar reason is why Sean Bean ended up in the Silent Hill film.

Because his parts were the only well-acted or good bits in the movie?

I may see this. Didn't think it would be as good as The Thing to begin with.

Original script had no male parts, someone said something, BEAN>

 

[Ashley Blalock]

A good point about how CGI has been such a bad thing for some film makers. With all that time building a monster and finding just the right spot to film it from so you can't see things like pumps or a puppeteer special effects shots were more finely crafted things.

If remakes, prequels, and the like were actually well crafted things either making up for the limits of special effects at the time of the original or skillfully crafting a story into the modern age I wouldn't mind them. Sadly too many films like a money grab to bank on a name and to market at teens who will not watch a film over 5 years old.

 

[Crazy_Dude]

CGI just doesn't bring the holy wtf shit factor practical effects bring. Especially if the CGI is done bad.

That "head-spider" still freaks me out. The Thing (1982) is one of the best horror movies to date.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Oh, look. Moviebob hates yet another movie that I found to be pretty damn good. How about if you want to see a movie go and see it instead of letting some cynical, self-entitled "critic" tell you not to..

I can't be the only person who sees the hilarity of putting critic in inverted commas.


Kind of like saying, "well that's just your 'opinion'."

 

[Notsomuch]

I really wanted this movie to be good. Maybe I was way off base when I thought that it could be to The thing what aliens was to alien.

 

[Kenjitsuka]

The moment when Thor laughs... makes me super confident I'll LOOOVE this movie
And no, you can NEVER see this trailer too often!!! Good plug, Bob!!!

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

"Sausagefest". The interesting thing about the 1982 Carpenter version is precisely that it is a sausagefest. Most horror films throw in at least one or two female characters so they can be the ones to panic and scream at the monster.

That, or their job was to have sex with one of the male leads then die a horrible horrible death so said male has a revenge excuse.

 

[Kenbo Slice]

It's not a remake, it's a prequel. Derp a derp

 

[Sm0gg]

so dumb to even try to prequel one of the greatest genre movies ever made. Carpenter is still alive, at least they could have had him involved.
I watch the 1982 classic at least once a year & still love it. Having this crap tacked on to the cannon is disappointing.

 

[MowDownJoe]

Oh, Hollywood... why are you so Hollywood?

 

[Sm0gg]

they couldn't remake the the Carpenter classic if they tried, at least they couldn't make it better in any way. Testament to the talent of the Director, cast & crew involved.

 

[Da Joz]

The Avengers trailer gave me a massive erection.

 

[Jennacide]

Gee, let me act surprised that a remake of one of my favorite movies ever was a complete and utter clusterfuck. Oh, right, I don't have to, since I saw it coming miles away.

A similar reason is why Sean Bean ended up in the Silent Hill film.

Which was an equally awful idea.

 

[TheMadDoctorsCat]

Anyone know where to get 'The thing from another world'? I've looked everywhere for a copy

PLEASE don't spend money on the 1950s film. Reasons:

Firstly, forget the "whodunnit" nature of Carpenter's film. The 1950s film is a monster movie, pure and simple. The tension is, I think, supposed to come from the dispute between the scientists who want to study the monster, and the soldiers who want to kill it. Trouble is that...

Secondly, everyone pays lip service to how dangerous the monster is, yet when it's not around they don't seem to be scared of it, and the film never actually shows us any real threat to humankind from this lumbering thing. Yeah, it looks kinda impressive, but they don't even bother to explain why it looks vaguely human-shaped. Erm... guys... this one doesn't imitate anything, it's a MONSTER. Care to make it look like something... anything... other than a guy in a freakin' suit? Give it some claws, or a beak? Anything?

Thirdly, the token female character. One of the most annoying token females in the history of film. I'm not exaggerating. She does nothing to advance the plot. She has no character arc of any sort. She cleans, cooks, and acts as the love interest of the male lead character (none of the other men show any interest in her despite the fact that none of them have had any sex for three damn months.) About a quarter of this film is spend on her and her pointless, lustless romance with the main guy.

So... it's not tense. It's not scary. The monster is never a credible threat to humanity, although it does look kinda cool in one or two scenes. The characters are forgettable. The main conflict in the film, that between scientist and soldier, goes nowhere. An inordinate amount of time is spent on the sole female character despite the fact that she somehow manages to be even less interesting than most of the rest.

In short... film's a dud. Catch it on late-night TV sometime, then forget about it.

 

[Sm0gg]

Carpenter's The Thing really doesn't really rank up there for "memorable character". And if you didn't know Wilford Brimley was going to be the "face on the final boss fight," then you need to have your brain checked. Carpenter's The Thing is not really "classical" material: it's a cult film. Last time I checked, those two concepts are radically different.

So I fail to see how you can complain about these things int he remake if not even the original got them right, unless you are so blinded by nostalgia, and bitterly cynical about Hollywood to the point where it obscures your obligations as a critic.

Oh wait, this is MovieBob we're talking about. Of COURSE he can't do a proper job because he's too blinded by nostalgia and bitterly cynical about Hollywood! Silly me... expecting a critic to actually be critical instead of just complaining about how it's Hollywood being Hollywood and that it's not original!

Once again, MovieBob really cements himself as being one of the worst contributors on this site.

Utter BS,
Carpenter's The Thing, 1982. is a Classic. No doubt about it. & a tightly made, ensemble cast, independent work of Genius. Look at the wiki on the film, look at the people involved. It's an enduring film that still stands up right from the opening scenes with ominous sounds from Ennio Morricone, to the excellent special effects, acting, script, photography, set design & direction.
It's a film that most people have seen & remember & keep in mind this is a genre 'Monster' movie & a type of remake in itself of a 1951 Howard Hawks Film. Quite remarkable really, without doubt one of my favorite films of all time & without doubt a film deserving the 'Classic' designation, unarguably way more than just another 'Cult Classic'. Cult Classic is for films like 'Pink Flamingos' or 'Plan9 from Outer Space' or 'Faster Pussycat Kill Kill Kill' or any number of other great movies with limited appeal.