The Thing Prequel

[LouCipherr]

I get where he's coming from. Y'know? You did it, it's done, moving on. If other people can't, that's their problem, just give credit and money where it's due. Yeah, I do too, but it makes him sound like a greedy old man.

[AfterMovieDiner]

possibly the most redundant film ever...? Don't we already know what happens before the Norweigan's fly in at the beginning of Carpenter's film? they will either just work their way towards the ending we all know is coming or change it and ruin the Carpenter version.

[bassman]

We know what happened to a few members of the camp. The rest is still up in the air.

[AfterMovieDiner]

Well we know that if they intend to make this a true prequel to Carpenter's film then the following things have to happen: They have to find the alien spaceship and video tape themselves doing it using technology available prior to 1982, then they have to take one of the aliens, encased in ice, back to their cabin and then they have to, at some point, destroy that cabin and almost burn it to the ground so all that's left is the shell that MacReady and the others find when they go on their search. We know the alien is in the dog at the end and we know that the two Norweigan's that escape go to their deaths. I honestly think Carpenter showed us enough for us to fill in the blanks. Plus the trailer for this prequel/sequel/remake looks like they stole all the set design and entire mood from the Carpenter version, along with its title (which makes no sense, at least something like The Thing Begins or something). It also looks suspiciously like it has a CGI creature, which means it will be poo (in my book, give me proper effects any day of the week). If we need an example of how bringing CGI into a series can ruin it, I have two words: Star Wars. I could totally have gone for a sequel on this, maybe 30 Days of Night meets Invasion of The Body Snatchers with The Thing in some small northern town and as long as you didn't reveal whose frozen body the Thing hibernated in you could maintain the integrity of the awesome ambiguous ending of Carpenter's version. Just a thought

[blind2d]

AMD, I'm really beginning to like you. Crap, now I feel a nagging urge to rewatch Carpenter's film, without the commentary this time. *gives muffin to AMD* - Derpy Hooves

[AcesandEights]

I could totally have gone for a sequel on this, maybe 30 Days of Night meets Invasion of The Body Snatchers with The Thing in some small northern town and as long as you didn't reveal whose frozen body the Thing hibernated in you could maintain the integrity of the awesome ambiguous ending of Carpenter's version. It's odd that you mention this, as I was thinking along similar lines about this very topic last night, even wondering how well an early to mid-80s romp through some backwoods portions of South Africa or New Zealand, where I think most Antarctic travel routed through at the time, would work. Definitely would have been a better way to go. Or just do a jazzed up version of AtMoM if people want to take the face to face with alien danger amongst a polar backdrop to the next cgi level, but ATMOM has been a geek Flying Dutchman for a while now.

[AfterMovieDiner]

Thanks man, nice to be appreciated. My first love with Carpenter was the Halloween series but since then it's all about the Kurt Russell movies, even Escape from LA, I just love them. I was really lucky to get to see The Thing on the big screen back in the winter at the IFC cinema in NYC, I think it was a new digital print because the quality was pristine. It's a near flawless film, brilliantly written, excellently directed and, personally I think, some of the best acting Russell's ever done. It's also my wife's favourite film next to Carlito's Way (yes folks, I married right!). The remaking of Halloween annoyed me A) because they remade Halloween and B) because up until then, like him or hate him, at least Rob Zombie was trying to do something that was his own, albeit heavily influenced by Craven, Carpenter and Hooper films from the 70s. but the remaking of any of his Russell pictures just takes the cake for me, I am just glad the Escape reboot is on pause for the moment. Just the thought of that boils my blood! Thanks for the muffin blind2d! Please feel free to have a meal in the After Movie Diner on me... -- -------- Post added at 05:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:24 PM ---------- It's odd that you mention this, as I was thinking along similar lines about this very topic last night, even wondering how well an early to mid-80s romp through some backwoods portions of South Africa or New Zealand, where I think most Antarctic travel routed through at the time, would work. Definitely would have been a better way to go. Or just do a jazzed up version of AtMoM if people want to take the face to face with alien danger amongst a polar backdrop to the next cgi level, but ATMOM has been a geek Flying Dutchman for a while now. Any sort of sequel could work really well in the right hands. I just don't understand all these remakes when with little or no effort you could come up with a sequel idea just as plausible and at least attempt to keep the brand name of the movie alive without ruining the existence of the first. Plus they always remake films that don't need it. How about remake, with the original director's involvement, films that were either good ideas but badly realised or never had the budget in the first place but are now sort of underground favs. They did it with The Crazies and actually, despite Olyphant, it wasn't half bad... much better than the over-rated Dawn remake from Zack the Hack Snyde-face. Also True Blood is almost a direct follow on/progression, storywise, from what could've been a really good film: Sundown: A Vampire in Retreat which never had the budget to be as good as the idea is and which I would love to see remade properly but maintaining Bruce Campbell in the cast, obviously especially as vampires are big now...

[slickwilly13]

Check this out! http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/25961 Thoughts?

[Neil]

^^ v.interesting!

[Kaos]

Looks pretty good to me.

[AfterMovieDiner]

If they honestly go with these and a less CGI approach it will be better certainly but ultimately still redundant because of A. the reasons I explained before and B. while paying homage to John Carpenter is indeed respectful, there is a thin line between homage and flat out just copying everything. What with the sets, props, costumes, colour palette and monster effects looking so similar, it does sort of render the whole thing pointless. If you can't bring your own thing to it then step away from the camera!!

[ProfessorChaos]

while i agree on nearly everything in the post above this, i still must say that i am pleased with what i see in those pics. much better than the cgi route. i also am thankful that they are making this a prequel to carpenter's film (easily one of my fave films of all time) and aside from the addition of the female characters, i feel that this is much better than the alternative, which would be a remake set in modern times in NYC during a blizzard with all kinds of dumb pretty young characters and a soundtrack of hip hop and scream-o tracks.

[clanglee]

What with the sets, props, costumes, colour palette and monster effects looking so similar, it does sort of render the whole thing pointless. But since it's a prequel to the original. . . isn't it a good thing that they are keeping things as similar a possible? Wouldn't it be weirder if all that was different? And besides. . . it's an Anarctic base in the 80's. . . .how different could it look?

[rongravy]

Check this out! http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/25961 Thoughts? Neato. That stuff would be cool to have in your house... life size and dripping with goo.

[shootemindehead]

Check this out! http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/25961 Thoughts? A lot of those were in a YouTube clip I saw a couple of months ago. Bare in mind that some of those are simple scaled down models. It doesn't mean that the final on screen product won't be fully CGI. "Is that a man in there?"