The Thing (2011)

[High Priest Mikhal]

The Thing (2011) is one third rethink of John Carpenter's 1982 classic, two-thirds prequel, all parts god-awful flop. The story takes place prior to Carpenter's movie with the Norweigan base that first unearthed the spaceship the Thing came in, following by the Thing encased in ice not far away. The problem is it over-explains things and thus ruins the mystery, the actors play total idiots, the plot is thin as water, and the action is plain lousy. The movie fell into the trap of "gore over horror" as well as one hollow character meant to be a sex object more than an actual personality. The only real homage to Carpenter's movie is in the credits where things lead up to the opening scenes of the original.

This is one I'd recommend skipping. Don't even rent it unless you have Netflix Online or some other flat-rate service and it's available there. This one ranks down there with Uwe Boll's efforts. Good idea, very poorly executed.

[A G Thing]

Wow... I am a huge fan of the Thing (both movies)... I have watched it and while expectations of the first one did cloud my judgement some before I could reflect I have to say that as a prequel it does great. Yes there are issues but I don't think it is as serious as you said from my perspective and some spotty CGI and Pacing issues aside the story was very solid and it highlighted all the main points of what the Americans from Outpost 31 saw when they investigated the Norwegian Thule Station. I could argue this a lot but it sounds like you have decided completely that it is not the original therefor it is modern and thus bad but maybe not and this is just a gut shot reaction to it not being the same movie as the 82 J.C. THING. Then again maybe you saw somethings that I did not and your opinion is based on sound logic. It is your opinion and even if I change your mind your opinion then was right for you and if I don't it is still right for you so I am not saying your opinion is wrong, I just am saying I have a different one, so I ask that you hear me out.

I just ask that anyone willing to go to the movie does what the audience and critics should have done for the first and not judge the motives, special effects and story based on preconceptions and such, especially those of us who cherish the classic and may be prone to Fanboy/girl Rage Syndrome. The first movie received a very similar reception when it first appeared so look deeper and take it in not as something you can just watch passively but something you have to actively think about. If you have not seen the first then for the record at first it was lambasted as a gore-fest with no plot or character and way too much emphasis on the monster with no rhyme or reason and a dark ending that ruined it. But over time it has been reevaluated and by many it was proven to be very deep in plot, character and even praised for the effects and eventually grasped as one of the best dark movies made. For those who watched and examined it from an unbiased lens they found more than what critics or even they saw perhaps the first time and it has influenced so much of modern horror that it became a cult classic with emphasis on the classic. Look at the first and this new films story and characters from the perspective of why people (and THINGS) do what they do and it becomes very much a deeper experience than originally perceived! A murder mystery horror sci-fi thriller that defies conventions of what makes a hero and even what makes us human.

That said I am more than willing to respond (Post or PM if desired to prevent possible flames or such!) if anyone has significant criticisms or problems with the movie and try to at least make it clear that while it can be mistaken as an imitation of a modern horror hack and slash, it is what lies beneath that counts!

[Zettaijin]

Did either of you see the original? The black and white flick from 1951? Saw it as young'un and I can't say I trust my memories alone on this one.

So here are some reviews of The Thing from Another World.

http://www.1000misspenthours.com/review ... ng1951.htm
http://www.aycyas.com/thing.htm

[Gonzoron of the FoS]

Disappointing to hear. The original is a classic must-see, and the trailer for the new one intrigued me. oh well, thanks for saving me $12.

[alhoon]

It costs 12$ to rent a movie?!?

[Gonzoron of the FoS]

No, I thought it was in theaters. Shows how out of the loop I am. Did it go straight to DVD or has it already come and gone from theaters?

[A G Thing]

Never saw the 1950's film adaptation... I am aware of it but I just have not had the time to look it up at the moment. Still I would like to see it eventually and hopfully I will soon. I heard it is vastly different then the more modern adaption and holds to a lot of movie making standards of the era rather than trying to adapt purely from the novel "Who Goes There!" which the Carpenter movie takes the majority of its inspiration from. Still I think I could enjoy it as well even if it is not as heavy as the newer ones and I do like when the Good Guys win and their is a happy ending!

Also... I guess either I just got ignored by Gonzoron for being too long winded or at least that I came off as kind of pushy... But to answer him, it is in the theaters still...

I guess if no one wants to read then oh well! But I stand by what I wrote above and I believe the THING 2011 is a good movie when tied to the 82 film and with the context and all that. I guess I am the minority though!

[Wiccy of the Fraternity]

The 1951 original and 1982 remake are both excellent, I'll see this one eventually, but only when I don't have to pay to see it (probably at a friends house them). In the meantime I have plenty of other things to keep me entertained that I know are much better and better ways to fill my time.

[Gonzoron of the FoS]

Also... I guess either I just got ignored by Gonzoron for being too long winded or at least that I came off as kind of pushy... But to answer him, it is in the theaters still...

Neither, my friend. I wrote my post before you did, but had a problem with my network connection. This morning, I hit refresh and submitted again, after yours was there. The board warned me that there were new posts, but I didn't bother reading them at the time and just hit submit, figuring I'd catch up later.

Well, now I've got a vote for and a vote against (unless I missed another post! ) Not sure what to do. Aww, who am I kidding. I have 2 kids under the age of 5. No way will I have a chance to see this in the theater anyway...

[A G Thing]

Well it is good to know I am not driving people away!

Still I can understand having kids that young restricting your movie choices.

I still recommend it if you can though!!! Even if I am a little biased!

[High Priest Mikhal]

We'll just have to agree to disagree, A G Thing. I tried--I really did try--to go into this with an open mind. I think it was how the protag (can't remember her name) took an hour to pick up that a flamethrower was the only way to fight this Thing. Come on! They knew they had to kill every cell and yet it took them that long to realize fire is the best way? Specifically, only she realized it? And these are supposed to be scientists...

I admit the '82 remake of The Thing From Another World (yes, I've seen it, and I like it) was fairly gory by that time's standards. But it wasn't as gratuitous or overdone. Take the scene where the Thing's head pulls itself off its burning body, sprouts eyestalks and legs, and crawls under the desk. Pretty gross, but it did serve to clue in MacReady (Kurt Russel's character) to the fact that each individual cell was an independent animal and that a simple hot wire in a blood sample could identify those infected. The scene in the dog pen is just disgusting (and infuriating for me since I hate seeing innocent animals hurt, even if it is just acting), but it also served the plot by showing that the Thing is protean and clued the characters into how it functions: by assimilating other organisms, it can mimic them perfectly. And it did explain the melted together bi-corpse thing found at the Norweigan base.

The 2011 "prequel" just made some very critical mistakes, like the Thing not being terribly subtle, the pointless and endless dialogue that explains things the audience could figure out on their own, and the emphasis on the grotesqueness of the Thing for horror value. Where is the human factor from the originals? The terror of not knowing who is the Thing? The subtlety the Thing showed in the previous movies whereas here it's picking off victims in its natural form? I'm biased, I admit, but for this movie's pedigree it feels like they didn't even try. Consider that it's by the same guy who directed the remake of A Nightmare On Elm Street. Admittedly I never saw that one because, in my mind, Freddy is and always will be Robert Englund, but I heard similar complaints about that movie. Considering Eric Heisserer wrote the script for both these movies, I'm seeing a pattern. He does great original movies, but his remakes are awful.

[A G Thing]

We'll just have to agree to disagree, A G Thing. I tried--I really did try--to go into this with an open mind. I think it was how the protag (can't remember her name) took an hour to pick up that a flamethrower was the only way to fight this Thing. Come on! They knew they had to kill every cell and yet it took them that long to realize fire is the best way? Specifically, only she realized it? And these are supposed to be scientists...

I admit the '82 remake of The Thing From Another World (yes, I've seen it, and I like it) was fairly gory by that time's standards. But it wasn't as gratuitous or overdone. Take the scene where the Thing's head pulls itself off its burning body, sprouts eyestalks and legs, and crawls under the desk. Pretty gross, but it did serve to clue in MacReady (Kurt Russel's character) to the fact that each individual cell was an independent animal and that a simple hot wire in a blood sample could identify those infected. The scene in the dog pen is just disgusting (and infuriating for me since I hate seeing innocent animals hurt, even if it is just acting), but it also served the plot by showing that the Thing is protean and clued the characters into how it functions: by assimilating other organisms, it can mimic them perfectly. And it did explain the melted together bi-corpse thing found at the Norweigan base.

The 2011 "prequel" just made some very critical mistakes, like the Thing not being terribly subtle, the pointless and endless dialogue that explains things the audience could figure out on their own, and the emphasis on the grotesqueness of the Thing for horror value. Where is the human factor from the originals? The terror of not knowing who is the Thing? The subtlety the Thing showed in the previous movies whereas here it's picking off victims in its natural form? I'm biased, I admit, but for this movie's pedigree it feels like they didn't even try. Consider that it's by the same guy who directed the remake of A Nightmare On Elm Street. Admittedly I never saw that one because, in my mind, Freddy is and always will be Robert Englund, but I heard similar complaints about that movie. Considering Eric Heisserer wrote the script for both these movies, I'm seeing a pattern. He does great original movies, but his remakes are awful.

Its fine if you want to disagree and as you have listed your points I will respond with what I noticed of the film if you want to read it!

BY THE WAY IF YOU DON'T LIKE SPOILERS AND A TON OF READING THEN DON'T OPEN THE SPOILER TAG OBVIOUSLY!

VIEW CONTENT:

Okay to start I remember her name is Kate and of note is that while she ends up using the flamethrower she is not the first to use it. When the other woman Juliette changes and attacks her someone else comes in with it and uses it. Second on this part is that she at that up to the point she got attacked she was the only one who truly believed that was what happened to its victims. They saw inside the creature was absorbing the guy but they had no firm evidence he was being replicated as they did not check to see if he had fillings and they only found the titanium plate outside his body inside the things body. Most probably believed he was being eaten. When they examined the blood and Kate noticed the fillings she put things together but still none believed her until the above attack.

As for the THING not being as subtle well that is a matter on how you look at it and if you compare it to what you know of the 82 version. A lot of the reviews I have come across online have claimed that the movie borrows heavily from the 82 in doing homages and such. I can see that but I also see that I did not want to see a copy of the 82 movie so if it is different then I would have to treat it as such. A part of me when I was watching it still wanted the same movie and I had to remind myself that my expectations of it were far to biased. Once I did I saw something else in how the THING behaved.

The THING just woke up from the ice and it is now trying to start over. It imitates Greer and then the Dog and then realizing that it is exposed it try's to hide. From Greer and the Dog it gains new knowledge on how it can get out of the Arctic and its options are these. It can escape by helicopter, by the ship in the ice, by track vehicle or if it can be the last one left so no one can warn the others and either freeze or find some way to be "rescued". The first one that still looks like the alien is found it attacks and kills one of the group but the other calls out and as it is in the middle of absorption and wedged under something it realizes it is in trouble. The group shoots it and yet that does little to nothing so eventually they use fuel and a flare and burn it and the building it is tunneling up into to kill it. It had already been revealed so once it was trapped it could do little to save its self from being killed.

From there it plays much more stealthy and imitates Juliette as Greer is the most likely suspect and waits to try and get on the helicopter to get away. Kate finds the evidence and warns them to land. Noticing this and hearing the American Pilot Carter say he is going to land Greer THING now has two choices. He can return to the base below and risk having been revealed or at least being stuck there as the humans hunt the THINGS as they outnumber them significantly and Carter trusts Kate enough to land so together they may be more convincing. It's second choice is that it knows it has three humans who are for the most part defenseless in front of it and that of all of them it has the best odds though not 100% of surviving the crash and this gives it an opportunity to kill and or infect three people giving its side better odds all around. It was a risk and possibly a sacrifice to crash the helicopter as it could have used it to escape but it knew the base had another helicopter (the one at the end) that was coming back eventually. So it tried to kill the three humans but died in the crash only killing one and casting the two survivors into suspicious circumstances.

The Juliette THING played along with Kate trying to make sure she could stop her from convincing the others all as a ploy to get her alone. If she had managed to absorb Kate the Thule station would have fallen in no time thus Kate manages to escape. The THING had underestimated her as this is its first time dealing with humans and now that it was revealed and she was shouting bloody hell to the world it once again opted to try and kill or infect as many as it could. It killed another person and is left behind a door at which time it tries to absorb the body perhaps before it is dead. It did not count on the fact that another person would show up with the flamethrower that quickly and burn it as it tries to absorb one of its victims.

Now as they fight more and more chaos starts to arise from the situation as they suggest a blood test and that is thwarted by the THING. Kate thinks up the Filling Test which while not proving someone is the THING conclusively does narrow it down a bit. The Americans who had returned from the crashed helicopter and been locked away to wait for the test to be finished, escape from being locked away and then are forced to kill someone detonating the flamethrower. That however was because the Norwegian was prompted by someone who was infected. The THING meanwhile is knocked out by the blast pretending to care for his friend though that was just unintentional. Now to explain the next burst out look at what it saw before it was knocked out. The group had been arguing no doubt and it had been trying to play that chaos to get the Americans killed so it could get rid of more humans as it was hopelessly outnumbered. It was in risk of being quarantined by Kate and the Norwegians but the Americans proved that they would shoot if they had to and the situation became even more complex it could not be sure that the situation would remain at a stalemate while its human form was trying to recover. The humans were trigger happy and it could end up as charcoal unless it acted and with its chances fading and the dog as a back up it perhaps decided to take another risk. It may have even been pretending to be unconscious trying to plan its next move but then out of luck two of the men come over and try to carry it to safety. Down one flamethrower and near to hostages/victims it tries to use the two humans as a shield and begins to separate and attack covering the time it needs to get to a more combat oriented form. It gets lucky when the flamethrower malfunctions like in the first movie (Those guys in the arctic need to check their suppliers! ) and it is able to kill infect or absorb many with others trying to run and hide. It escapes just in time and imitates another victim while Kate and Carter now try to burn the victims and mop up its distractions while they hunt it down. Eventually they do manage to kill the splitface THING but they notice the last of its imitations trying to go in the Track vehicle. They follow leading to the final confrontation.

The THING in the ship starts it up, Carter gets separated from Kate, and Carter (How I see it) is imitated. The THING manages to find Kate and attacks but using the knowledge of Carter sees that she is in a very important area of the ship and realizes she has a grenade. It first tries to disarm her in order to prevent losing its easy way out all the while Carter THING waits to see if it is needed. Kate runs, gets trapped but finds the grenade and throws it in the THING while Carter THING watches.

Knowing the ship is about to be rendered unusable by the grenade Carter helps Kate escape back to the vehicle. He does not absorb Kate on the way to the vehicle for two reasons. First is that it needs to not destroy the clothes they both have and second is the fact that if it fails to catch her she may destroy the vehicles before it can escape. On top of that it does not suspect that Kate has seen the earring and even then it may be thinking what its next move is. It knows if it can get to the Russian base it may allow it time to assimilate one of them but only if it can get the Cold War era distrust out of the way. But as an American if it shows up in a Thule Station vehicle and alone it would be hard pressed to do such especially as a man. If it could imitate Kate however there would be two people to confirm the story of some accident at Thule and have twice the odds of infecting a Russian and more options with a female form against a presumidly male base! In an effort to seem more human it lets Kate put the flamethrower away as it gets in to go. Kate now accuses Carter who I think was a THING quite obviously even with the forgetting which ear the earring was in as it was as I said distracted. It cannot change because if it ruins the vehicle it may not make it to the Russian base and it does not think that Kate will burn it because only it knows the way to the Russian base plus it believes the lingering attraction might allow it to talk its way out of it. Kate however does not want to take any risks and with evidence she believes is conclusive burns the THING possibly stranding herself there to die a cold death as we don't know if the other vehicle has enough fuel in it or if she could find somewhere safe.

Finally the Dog THING as the only survivor has been hidden away learning from the mistakes it watched the other THINGS make and hearing the gunshot and helicopter realizes that there are two humans up there one of which was always aggressive and unstable and that it is shouting. Since it cannot know if the other THING got in the ship but even if it did it had to fend for its self it assumes the plan has failed and no rescue by another THING is coming. It tries to escape taking one final risk that it is now forced to take and starts running. It knows from Greer that there is an American base nearby and if it can make it, then it has a chance. We know it survives and if it watched the above happen then it has learned enough about the dangers of Humans to be the stealthy THING it turns out to be in the 82 film.

[Wiccy of the Fraternity]

Consider that it's by the same guy who directed the remake of A Nightmare On Elm Street. Admittedly I never saw that one because, in my mind, Freddy is and always will be Robert Englund, but I heard similar complaints about that movie.

You missed nothing with ANoES except more overly explained plot devices and some of the best parts of the original cut to almost nothing.

This being directed by the same guy says it all for me.

[High Priest Mikhal]

Consider that it's by the same guy who directed the remake of A Nightmare On Elm Street. Admittedly I never saw that one because, in my mind, Freddy is and always will be Robert Englund, but I heard similar complaints about that movie.

You missed nothing with ANoES except more overly explained plot devices and some of the best parts of the original cut to almost nothing.

This being directed by the same guy says it all for me.

Yikes! This guy sounds like the Uwe Boll of remakes. And looking just at Wikipedia on Boll, that's no minor insult.

[ScS of the Fraternity]

I went to great lengths to avoid reading any commentary on this remake, and avoided watching the traillers for one reason:
I knew it was going to suck.
I love John Carpenter's The Thing, and it may very well be my favorite movie of all time. So, there was no way that this movie could really live up to that standard. But still, I knew from what glimpses I saw of it that it was bad.
Still, I was reserved to see this movie because of loyalty. So, I have no regrets.
I only wish that this film had been made by someone who loved The Thing. This new film has no love for the original - it has only a disdain for the original. We see this in the painfully pathetic methods it uses to connect to the original.

The most beautiful thing about Carpenter's The Thing was its stillness. Carpenter was able to show scenes without any characters even in the shot - just the hallways as his signature pulse-like music played. Those moments allowed the audience to think, to contemplate this dreadful situation, to let the audience's imaginations work. It was brilliant! The audience became as fearful and paranoid as the characters.

This film, by comparison, is a jolting ride in a bumper car. The audience watches a nonstop rampage of terrible CGI effects and flamethrowers.

My final thought:

VIEW CONTENT:

The thing that copied the dog and the last Norweigian both vanished for most of the movie and didn't even show up until the credits. What the heck were they doing for all of those hours and hours as other Things rampaged around the base? Were they playing poker or something? Is that that why the guy wanted to kill the Thing - he caught it absorbing the cards? That makes about as much sense as why a single helicopter pilot just showed up out of the blue.