The Thing Prequel

[slickwilly13]

I just read a leaked script *maybe real*. If the movie follows what I read, then it is a prequel and not a remake. I actually liked this script. It follows what I have read about the movie so far. I will know for sure in October if it is real or not. As long as the special effects and acting do not suck, then it should be a good movie if you like JC's.

[MikePizzoff]

The trailer makes this movie look like it's going to start out prequel-ish, but then turn into a remake. Anybody else notice umpteen shots that looked like scenes straight out of Carpenter's?

[shootemindehead]

Am I the only one who's cheesed off that there's a 20 something dolly bird at the centre of this particular show? Antarctic research stations have always been dominated by a male workforce and even these days, women comprise a relatively small percentage of staff. In 1982, it would have been an extremely rare event for a woman (of any scientific background) to have been asked to go there. These type of hollywoodisms drive me up the wall. Still, in all, I'm kind of looking forward to this, but the trailer seems full of cheap shock moments that were largely absent from the 1982 film. Not to mention CGI, which if overused will put me off even further.

[ProfessorChaos]

yeah, mixed feelings about this trailer. looks highly derivative of carpenter's version, almost too much in fact. and the inclusion of teeny-bopper (or mid-20's) girls just makes the movie seem cheap or half-assed. still interested, but i'm not holding my hopes very high.

[bassman]

Am I the only one who's cheesed off that there's a 20 something dolly bird at the centre of this particular show? Antarctic research stations have always been dominated by a male workforce and even these days, women comprise a relatively small percentage of staff. In 1982, it would have been an extremely rare event for a woman (of any scientific background) to have been asked to go there. In the trailer that leaked from last year's comic con, I believe they mention something about how she was the top of her class and a "genious". So I guess that's how they'll explain it in the film....

[MinionZombie]

What's all this being said slagging off Mary Elizabeth Winstead?! I won't be having any of that 'round here - how can you not love some MEW? Death Proof, Scott Pilgrim vs The World - quality, says I! Cheap scare shots though - aye, I'm nervous about the film basing it's scares in that. Now, JC's flick rarely, if at all, had any such (or vaguely similar) moments. That film was terrifying because of the creeping dread, the paranoia, the isolation. That shit is creepy scary - indeed just thinking about the flick, or thinking 'what if I was in that situation', gets my skin crawling. That's how you make a great horror movie. We'll see I guess ... but aye, the main concerns are: 1) Too much copying of JC's superb film. 2) Reliance on jump scares. As for *sarcastic gasp* A WOMAN appearing at the Norwegian camp - even if a female being in such a location, especially in 1982, was rare, methinks it's not impossible. I mean come on lads, if you can have an alien spaceship frozen in the ice, that holds a shape-shifting organism that takes over people's bodies and replicates them, then you can ruddy well have a lady in the cast - especially if it's Mary Elizabeth Winstead.

[shootemindehead]

Not sure if one can one be a "genius" in Paleontology. Besides, she's in her 20's. Would she really be any more of a genius than some geezer (or woman) who's been studying for longer than she's even been alive? It's ridiculous. Also, the whole "let's ask the Americans to send someone down to check out this" is a pain in the arse too. Would have been a better film just to keep it to the Norwegians. They all die, dog runs off in the end...credits roll. Then stick on 1982 film. -- -------- Post added at 05:38 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:37 PM ---------- - how can you not love some MEW? Ha ha...that sounds dirty. I'm telling Neil.

[JDFP]

I'm waiting for this to break down into a "Day" style debate of whether or not Winstead's character would have been raped by the Norwegians or not due to their isolation and being cut off from the rest of the world and the only female around. As far as the film, I saw the trailer and I'm definitely going to give it a shot. While I'm sure I'll be highly disappointed with the infusion of silly CGI I'm willing to give it a chance and hoping they don't screw it up too badly. I digged the "update" of the soundtrack in the trailer for a more "popish" sound of Morricone's original frightening music. The real question will be on how accurate they are in portraying clothing/actions/styles from 1982 here as opposed to a more recent setting. If anyone cracks a line of: "I'm on it!" or "let's roll!" I think I'll scream. j.p.

[MinionZombie]

Well surely part of the point in being a genius is that you're highly intelligent - you can be far more intelligent as a teenager than a smart 50 year old. Age has nothing to do with it, you don't gain knowledge and get measurably smarter as you grow older - like go from average intelligence and grow to become a genius. So, if someone's a genius, they can easily be far smarter than a bunch of guys of average/above average/high intelligence in their 30s, 40s, and 50s. So it's convenient as a plot point, but not ridiculous. The 'send in an American' thing is a point, but hopefully it's not a huge problem ... but such is the state of the movie industry, and certain parts of the audience, if you're spending millions of dollars on a movie, then the suits have to have a few 'cash back points' to convince them to dish out the cash so the filmmakers can get going. It's not always the case, but neither is it a rare occurrence ... as long as it's handled well enough, what's the huge deal? It's kind of "hmmm", but it's not like they've flown in Elmo as well so they can attract the kindergarten demographic.

[shootemindehead]

Well surely part of the point in being a genius is that you're highly intelligent - you can be far more intelligent as a teenager than a smart 50 year old. Age has nothing to do with it, you don't gain knowledge and get measurably smarter as you grow older - like go from average intelligence and grow to become a genius. So, if someone's a genius, they can easily be far smarter than a bunch of guys of average/above average/high intelligence in their 30s, 40s, and 50s. So it's convenient as a plot point, but not ridiculous. The 'send in an American' thing is a point, but hopefully it's not a huge problem ... but such is the state of the movie industry, and certain parts of the audience, if you're spending millions of dollars on a movie, then the suits have to have a few 'cash back points' to convince them to dish out the cash so the filmmakers can get going. It's not always the case, but neither is it a rare occurrence ... as long as it's handled well enough, what's the huge deal? It's kind of "hmmm", but it's not like they've flown in Elmo as well so they can attract the kindergarten demographic. My point is, if you've been studying in a field for 40+ years, you have the edge over some 24 year old college girlie. Having her character there is just a silly hollywood plot device and it's impossible not to be cynical about it. I't difficult to believe that she's the only "genius" in town. MEW, is eyecandy. That's all. The Hollywood preference to some crusty old professor. The other cliche of "getting the Yanks involved" is obvious to me as well, but again, it's difficult not to roll one's eyes and tut. In saying all that, it'll probably be the only film I'll end up seeing in the cinema this year... ...and that's really depressing.

[slickwilly13]

I have to agree. I do not think she should be in this movie. She is not the only female, btw. I honestly do not believe there should be any Americans or females in the camp. I guess that is the diffrence in films from 30 yrs ago compared to today. You would think the Norwegians would keep it underwraps for themselves or at least have fetched out another Norwegian or European paleontologist, who is a man, to examine the frozen fossil they found in the ice.

[blind2d]

Well, there were women in the original... So, this isn't TOO much of a stretch. Then again, yeah... But hey! I'm sure it'll either be good for roasting, or it'll cook, so either way we get hot food, which is something that's valuable in such a cold climate (Hollywood... Or the Arctic, I suppose). Oh listen to me, acting like I know what I'm talking about. Who here's seen the original 'Thing from another world'? There's fire in that one too! Um... Yes, needs a dog. And... Electrocution. That's key. Um... Yes. Still, I can't see this as being anything but bad. A remake of an awesome movie, being even better than it's source material remade again? Or if not, still a VERRRY similar concept? Nope. It'll prolly suck. Oh well.

[shootemindehead]

Ha ha....how many have you had? Cheers!

[Danny]

i just got why im not excited after the trailer. -its not because of cgi -its not because its not a john carpenter film -its not even for the inevitable retcons you know why this film is going to be mediocre? because carpenter told the whole story. It's a timeless tale of isolation and paranoia. Theres nothing you can add or reveal anymore. We are told through the imagery of the first 15 minutes of the thing what happened to the entire cast of this film. The thing replicates creatures, it wants to do this. thats it. people will turn on one another just like the first film. it will turn into monsters, just like the first film. just this week i read the comics set after the first and you know what they were about? the exact same situation in 5 different locations. thing appears, people distrust each other, one person is left standing. the thing was a one hit wonder for good reason. this may be a fully competent film but in all honesty we need this less than we needed highlander the quickening. addendum: I fully realise the asinine hypocrisy of that given we are all fans of the romero films, but love or hate his last 3, at least he stopped making it about people trapped in a building

[MinionZombie]

Indeed, as I've said above, it's somewhat pointless to make this movie - being that we know what happened. But it's a way to do a remake that isn't a remake. However, JC's flick flopped upon release (the same year as E.T.) and it has only become a hit over the last three decades once it was rediscovered and seen for the tip-top bit of paranoid, creep-inducing, masterclass in suspense and terror that it is.