The Thing remake

[Dr. Gonzo]

Saw it, liked it, didn't love it. I actually saw a few missed opportunities during the course of the film. It doesn't really do anything new. Kinda follows that basic formula. Towards the end I just wanted to see how the thing becomes the dog and runs off into the snow, signaling the beginning of Carpenter's The Thing... and yes that does happen... during the end credits... but it wasn't really satisfying. It was just kind of thrown in there.

Was it worth the money? I'm not sure. Halloween is around the corner and I love watching these kinds of movies this time of year.
Plus I had a few drinks so I was enjoying myself.

In short: If it was on TV I would probably stop to watch it. For a few minutes.
I'll leave you with my friend's thoughts.
"Would have rather seen the Carpenter version on the big screen. That would have been great."

 

[Moedred]

Spielberg's friendly little kind hearted alien E.T. came out just before Carpenter unleashed The Thing.

It all comes full circle: "Chariots of the Gods, man. They practically own South America. I mean, they taught the Incas everything they know." Another buried saucer and origin story for civilization, also in the X Files movie. That was quite an influential book.

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

It all comes full circle: "Chariots of the Gods, man. They practically own South America. I mean, they taught the Incas everything they know." Another buried saucer and origin story for civilization, also in the X Files movie. That was quite an influential book.

not to mention the idea Steven had in War of the Worlds of having the tripods come from underground.

 

[AndyLGR]

I finally got round to seeing it this week. It was decent, very watchable. It had a lot to live up to in the John Carpenter version though. The fan boy in me was interested to see all the things we saw in the original when they went to the base camp where the Thing escaped from, which were all present and correct. Although I was looking forward to seeing a bit more of what the thing looks like in its own form, which you don't really get to see much of.

I had to question what happened to the woman? I assumed either the survivor back at the camp killed her or that she was in fact the thing? But then again was the last guy she torched the thing who had tried to fool her with the earring?

Anyway overall it was worth watching, but it only served to make me want to watch the 80's version more.

I wonder if we'll see another version of this in 30 years time? Which seems to be the circle the Thing movies go in.

 

[HenryJunior]

It wasn't a different version or remake, it told the story of what happened at the Norwegian camp up to the first couple minutes of the Carpenter movie. Many things that happen in the new 2011 film show through in the original, such as the ice coffin, the axe still in the wall, and of course the helicopter chasing down the dog. Yeah the original was much better but I liked the effort that was attempted in this new flick though, for once someone respected John Carpenter's previous work (unlike a few certain directors...). Sometimes it's true though, monsters are scarier when we don't know too much about them, and The Thing 2011 breaks that a bit.

 

[Mickiana]

I didn't mind the 2011 prequel even though it didn't quite match its predecessor. The makers of the prequel describe how they were forensic in the bid to tie in their story with all the indicators contained in Carpenter's version. IMO, in this bid for exactitude, less emphasis was put on building up a story of suspense and utilising metaphor in the plot. They were successful in matching an appropriate story line, but the same tension and atmosphere of mistrust was not quite up there with JC's 1982 masterpiece.

 

[Montana Smith]

Although we knew they were all going to die (the film-makers referred to it as a "melancholic" quality), the film was involving to the extent that we see the 'things' that lead up to the opening of Carpenter's movie.

At the beginning I was wary, considering the bashing that this film gets. The snowcat falling down the crevice didn't look very promising. I was expecting a reveal of the alien craft in line with the 1951 version (and the 1982 Norwegian footage).

1951:

The creators of the latest one apparently didn't think that the thermite charges would have done the job of revealing the craft, so took an excursion from Carpenter's canon.

Creature effects were good, employing as many animatronics as possible, but enhancing them with CGI.

Surprised that Colin's suicide was cut out, and remains only as a deleted scene on the DVD. One of the most memorable parts of the Norwegian station in the original was, for me, the radio operator with the frozen stalactites of blood running down his hand. We see him dead in chair in the prequel, but not the act that put him there.

One thing remains constant through all three interpretations of the story:

Fire!

 

[Montana Smith]

A little backstory to the 2011 entry gleaned from the audio commentary.

They had intended to film extra scenes aboard the alien craft showing that the crew had been collecting alien species as if for a "museum".

The bodies of dead 'Thing' type creatures around the ship would intimate that The Thing wasn't the pilot, but a creature that had broken free. That would have explained why the ship crashed onto Earth 100,000 years ago.

The film-makers, however, decided it would be too complicated to do, while being sure that the viewers would understand the back story.

More than a shade of the space jockey ship in Alien, but Carpenter's The Thing was an Earth-based version of Ridley Scott's film.

Colin's suicide was left out because they didn't want him to take the "hero" role in slitting his throat while being trapped by the creature. Still, the cut scene was pretty self-explanatory as a man undertaking a desperate measure in a hopeless situation.


Finally, they couldn't decide what happened to Kate after the end. They got as far as thinking she would have returned to the station, but after Lars and the helicopter pilot had left. Then departed before MacReady arrived.

So, according to them she survived. Don't think she would have gone back to the Norwegian station, though. Or else she would have gone on to the next nearest point of civilization: the American outpost. (Which couldn't be too far away seeing as the helicopter chased the Alaskan Malamute there).

Instead, it's far more likely she went directly to the Russian station 50 miles away. Which means that the alien craft itself was some distance from the Norwegian station.

Consequently, the ending of the 2011 version has an impact on the final scene of Carpenter's film. MacReady and Childs' situation is no longer as bleak as it once was (unless The Thing merely kills the human). Kate knows what happened, and an American station no longer answering to communication might bring help...

...though I hope there's no sequel.

 

[Mickiana]

Saw an interesting Youtube clip Analysis of The Thing which dissected the plot and demonstrated the importance of certain themes that supported the plot. One point the fellow made was to argue that Childs was most likely taken over by the thing by the end when he appears with MacCready. This would leave it wonderfully open ended and ripe for a sequel, not that anyone might bother with that now, especially after two attempts that were flops. Carpenter's version stands well on its own without the need for prequels or sequels, but I don't mind if people end up making them.

 

[Montana Smith]

Saw an interesting Youtube clip Analysis of The Thing which dissected the plot and demonstrated the importance of certain themes that supported the plot. One point the fellow made was to argue that Childs was most likely taken over by the thing by the end when he appears with MacCready. This would leave it wonderfully open ended and ripe for a sequel, not that anyone might bother with that now, especially after two attempts that were flops. Carpenter's version stands well on its own without the need for prequels or sequels, but I don't mind if people end up making them.

Two attempts? What was the other one?

As for Childs, I automatically suspected him as the infected party, purely because Macready seemed to be the likely hero. Nevertheless, Carpenter's ending was wonderfully sombre and open-ended, because you never really knew for sure what would happen next.

It was only after reading the plot summary of the 1938 novella, Who Goes There?, that I realized how close Carpenter's film was to the original story.

The novella was first published in the Astounding Science-Fiction magazine, and from what I recall of those stories they often had twists in their tales. Who Goes There? didn't, but Carpenter added one.

I don't know how old I was when I first saw Carpenter's film, but a school friend's older brother had rented it from the video shop. I think they had a Betamax VCR.

The film left quite an impact, which is why I don't hope for a sequel.



There's a text interview with the director of the prequel here:

http://io9.com/5849650/the-director-of-the-thing-reveals-the-aliens-secret-backstory



And if anyone wants to read the 1938 story by John W. Campbell, I found the text here:

http://www.scaryforkids.com/who-goes-there-by-john-w-campbell/

 

[Montana Smith]

Just found a complete scan of the original story as it was published in Astounding Science Fiction vol. 21, #6, August 1938, written under John Wood Campbell's pen name, Don A. Stuart.

Five pages are illustrated, of which these three are the best:

 

[Mickiana]

Two attempts? What was the other one?

I was referring to both JC's version and the 2011 prequel being box office flops. After those failures who would attempt a third in the form of perhaps a sequel? They wouldn't get any backing now as it is. JC's was savaged by critics and competed against ET's release. The 2011 prequel also was not treated kindly by critics and story wise was not up to the Carpenter standard. The story was technically good in matching up with JC's and even patched up plot holes in the 82 version, but it lacked a thrill and suspense somehow.

 

[AndyLGR]

Like you Montana I saw JCs version on video in the mid 80s and at the time it was one of the most amazing films effects wise I'd ever seen. It was really at the cutting edge then and I thought the film was carrying a lot of word of mouth positivity. What it did at the box office I don't know, but I always thought its profits must of been helped when it came out on video. It always seemed one of those 80s movies you had to see.