The Thing Prequel

[Bad Ronald]

I drove thru Carpenters hometown a hundred times you would have a BIG imagination too if you lived there.
Town name was also used in THE STAND.
Origin of Ray Flowers radio program.
Carthage.

RF RF hmmm there's a thread there
(Randall Flagg)

[slickwilly13]

It is out on Blu Ray tomorrow.

[bassman]

I've just given this a watch and like most opinions already stated....it wasn't so bad. It obviously isn't as great as Carpenter's film(I never expected it to be), but it's really pretty good when you put it up against the plethora of recent horror remakes/sequels/etc. I'm glad I didn't pay to view it, but I don't really feel like I wasted my time.

I was just reading a rumor that initially more of the visual effects were practical, but the studio went in and replaced a lot of them with CGI because test screenings proved that the practical effects were too "out of date" for today's audiences. Anyone else heard anything about this? It certainly sounds like something a studio would do to make it more in tune with recent CGI horror films...

[MinionZombie]

I've just given this a watch and like most opinions already stated....it wasn't so bad. It obviously isn't as great as Carpenter's film(I never expected it to be), but it's really pretty good when you put it up against the plethora of recent horror remakes/sequels/etc. I'm glad I didn't pay to view it, but I don't really feel like I wasted my time.

I was just reading a rumor that initially more of the visual effects were practical, but the studio went in and replaced a lot of them with CGI because test screenings proved that the practical effects were too "out of date" for today's audiences. Anyone else heard anything about this? It certainly sounds like something a studio would do to make it more in tune with recent CGI horror films...

The movie's a load of cobblers, I thought it was rubbish...

My review (spoiler free):
http://deadshed.blogspot.com/2012/01/thing-matthijs-van-heijningen-jr-2011.html

My bitch-list (spoilers galore):
http://deadshed.blogspot.com/2012/01/thing-2011-spoiler-ific-twenty-point.html

As for the FX, they made such a big deal about "ooh, we've got practical effects, don't worry fans!" but then everything is covered in CGI - it's exactly the same bullshit that happened on 2010's The Wolfman, where they take a practical effect (half of which is green cloth) and paste layer-after-layer-after-layer of CGI over it, so it just looks like it was made entirely in a computer in the first place ... so what's the goddamned point?

Fuck this movie - it's not Yawn04 bad, but it's still crap.

[LouCipherr]

The movie's a load of cobblers, I thought it was rubbish...

...

Fuck this movie - it's not Yawn04 bad, but it's still crap.


Y'know MZ, I was totally with you 'till I read the first of your 20 point bitch-fest:

"...there's no mystery for the fans of the franchise. Indeed, knowing the outcome, but not the specific details of how the horror unfolded....is exactly why it's such a haunting part of John Carpenter's 1982 film."

The Halloween remake (Fuck you, Rob Zombie!) did exactly what you stated above, and you liked it. :p

:lol: :D

[MinionZombie]

Lou - nah, they're two different situations. Halloween was more a case of the motivation of the central antagonist being explored much more up-front ... it's not as good as the mystery of the original, but it wasn't trash either. RZ's Halloween wasn't flawless by any means, there are numerous problems with it (and H2), but there are also numerous things I dig about both flicks.

The Thing (2011) is just dunderheaded and completely ignores the entire modus operandi of the eponymous beastie ... it exchanges stealth (directly important to the very survival and 'DNA' of the creature itself at the most base, core level) with exposing itself to anyone and everyone at the drop of a hat - and making a hell of a lot of noise in the process.

Only the end credits tie-in with the beginning of JC's flick provides actual interest, and of course - the lovely, lovely, lovely - Mary Elizabeth Winstead. :o

[LouCipherr]

Lou - nah, they're two different situations. Halloween was more a case of the motivation of the central antagonist being explored much more up-front ..

...and thereby removing the mystery of the entire film, which is exactly what made the original so good. I'd say they are both the same in this respect. Even if it's more up-front, same concept. :p

In the new Thing, why are we removing the mystery of what happened at the Norwegian camp? That's part of what made the original so tense - which makes this film a moot point. We know something happened to this camp in the original, but we aren't sure what - which makes it all the more creepy. Why ruin that? They did the exact same thing with exploring Michael and his "motivations" - which, I might add, RZ got completely wrong in the remake. I won't go into it, but I think we know what they are.


it exchanges stealth ... with exposing itself to anyone and everyone at the drop of a hat - and making a hell of a lot of noise in the process.

Wow, just like RZ did with Michael Meyers, eh? :shifty:


it's not as good as the mystery of the original, but it wasn't trash either

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[MinionZombie]

It's like talking to a brick wall that smells of bacon soap... :rolleyes:

:elol:

[LouCipherr]

It's like talking to a brick wall that smells of bacon soap... :rolleyes:

:elol:

I guess if being consistent in my opinions is being a brick wall, then so be it. Does that make you a floppy piece of bacon?

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e104/LouCipherr/baconsizzle.gif

mmmmmm... bacon.

:lol:

[MinionZombie]

No - I just see a difference between the situations of The Thing and Halloween. In The Thing we've seen the outcome at the Norwegian camp very clearly, and we've seen how events unfold over the course of JC's flick ... strangely though the Norwegian camp seems to now be half-populated by Americans, Brits, and even a French chick IIRC.

With Halloween it's a different situation. Myers goes on a killing spree in both, his main target is the same (his kid sister), the only real difference is his homelife. Instead of a very average American middle class white collar family, his family is white trash (hey, it's a Rob Zombie movie after all :lol:), but it's not exactly like he's especially abused or anything, he's just got a bit of a rough homelife where everyone shouts ... it's not a huge thing ... he could have just as easily not become a serial killer. The switch that flipped still remains mostly unsolved.

The Thing (2011) just goes over old ground not adding anything to proceedings, repeats scenes, and generally hides inside an imitation of the JC flick, before going off on it's own rubbish, under-developed tangents. My point is The Thing 2011 is perfunctory because we know the outcome of the camp, and we're just ticking off details from the JC film (e.g. the axe in the door, the ice block etc), and the events that occur in the 2011 film at the Norwegian Camp are essentially no different from JC's film (discovery, first attack, autopsy, distrust, deaths, and a piss-poor spaceship-set finale that's essentially just copying (badly) the 'blow the bastard up' ending of JC's flick).

[slickwilly13]

It is on youtube for those interested.

[bassman]

It is on youtube for those interested.

It will be....for another.....5....4....3....2....

[LouCipherr]

No - I just see a difference between the situations of The Thing and Halloween.

Yes, I do too: one sucks, the other sucks harder. No, wait, I got it: one story did not needed to be retold, and the other story was one that was already told in the original flick.

Just razzin' ya, MZ... :lol: :p

[MinionZombie]

Just razzin' ya, MZ... :lol: :p

I blame the bacon addiction... :D

[LouCipherr]

I blame the bacon addiction... :D

I hate to say it, but I think you're correct. :o

[slickwilly13]

I thought of an idea last night. Instead of a blood test or checking for fake teeth & fillings. What about tattoos?

[MinionZombie]

I thought of an idea last night. Instead of a blood test or checking for fake teeth & fillings. What about tattoos?

Although like fillings, the thing would be "I never had tattoos, but I'm not a thing!" - whereas the blood one makes sense - everyone has blood! :thumbsup:

That should totally be a slogan for something... :D

[slickwilly13]

Yes, but if a person had very visable tattoos, then people would notice. I know people with tattoos visabe on their arms. Then one day on camp their tattoos are no longer present. It would be a dead give away.

[MinionZombie]

Yes, but if a person had very visable tattoos, then people would notice. I know people with tattoos visabe on their arms. Then one day on camp their tattoos are no longer present. It would be a dead give away.

Ah indeed, a fair point - a good back-up/additional tell.