The Thing

I saw Carpenter's "The Thing" back in the 80's when it first came out and it immediately became a favorite for me, after all, it's a classic. Last night for a Halloween double feature I first watched this 2011 prequel (which I'd never seen) and then the '80's original. The '80's horror film aesthetic recreation in 2011 was perfect, brilliant conceptually and in production and even characterization. And thanks to excellent editing and the film maker's great sense for continuity the films fit together seamlessly. The action at the end of the 2011 prequel perfectly recreates and sets the scene for the '80's film story to pick up. But what a different experience of Carpenter's '81 film with having the 2011 prequel coming into it. The opening of Carpenter's movie leans heavily on viewer confusion as we're presented with action without context (shooting at and trying to kill a fleeing dog from a helicopter) that violates our natural morality and so makes no sense to us. Of course this is key to the whole plot of Carpenter's movie as we discover along with the station crew just what was going on. Replacing that initial viewer confusion with foreknowledge from the previous film chapter of just how that dog came to be out there being shot at and chased by a helicopter, and what must then inevitably follow takes nothing away from Carpenter's epic film. Instead it creates an entirely new twist to to the experience, curiously effective despite the fact of already being quite familiar with the plot.

Without a doubt the best prequel I've ever seen. I just watched this one first, and am now watching The Thing (1982) as I type this. It ABSOLUTELY ends where The Thing (1982) begins. The job they did with the accuracy of the camp was like previous reviewers said. I think it’s perfect. Both movies are not comedy horror, they are pure horror, and so very well done. Both movies have smart characters, with enough curiosity to get them well into trouble. It’s not campy, not low budget, but just plain excellence. The Thing (1982) with Kurt Russell was one of my all-time favorite movies when it first came out. I wore out the first disk and had to buy it again. I'm a female, and one of the things I enjoyed about the The Thing (1982), was the fact that there were "no" brain dead women in it, no "T & A" distractions, just plain horror. The female actress in The Thing 2011, was very very good. She wasn't some silly woman who was afraid to break a nail, and she took matters into her own hands when necessary. I was so excited to come across this 2011 prequel tonight. I had NO idea it even existed. I just happened to find it by accident as I was thinking of buying The Thing (1982) and watch it again streaming, while adding it to my Amazon movie collection. You're reviews are great, it made me purchase this movie no hesitation whatsoever. I highly recommend watching this first before you watch The Thing (1982) and grab your drink, turn out the lights, put the kids to bed, have NO distractions and completely enjoy both movies back to back. Best money spent in a very long time for me on Amazon. I don't know if John Carpenter was involved in this movie, but if not, he should be so proud they did such a great job, where he left off. Enjoy!

As a HUGE fan of the John Carpenter film by the same name, I was interested to see this movie, if for no other reason than to find out the details of what happened prior to the Thing's arrival at the American base, but wasn't expecting much from it otherwise. After all, we've all seen how Hollywood can take a great idea and reduce it to 2 hours of pointless drivel. Having read a number of reviews for this film, both positive and negative, I was set to dislike it. The biggest negative points I read were how stupidly the Thing behaved in comparison to the methodical cunning of Carpenter's creature, how fast it transformed in relation to the original, and that the plot moved too fast and made little sense. The attack in the helicopter was a pretty idiotic move, and Carpenter's creature would never have attacked the entire group in the open, preferring instead to pick them off and assimilate them one by one when alone with them. But perhaps, as this was it's first encounter with humans, it realized its mistakes and adopted a different approach in its next encounter. As far as its speed, I saw little difference between this movie and the first. The dog-thing transformed in less than a minute, the mouth in Norris' belly opened instantaneously, and Palmer transformed in a matter of seconds. Also, Carpenter's Thing moved very quickly at times, and tended to shoot out tentacles as well. I also found few flaws in the plotline and wasn't disappointed by the pacing at all; though it could have been drawn out a little more to increase the tension and suspense, it still worked just fine. If I didn't get the same sense of isolation and fear as I did from the 1982 version, that can be chalked up to the fact that I already knew what was going to happen. My biggest question is, if the alien ship was so apparently undamaged that it could be fired up in minutes, why did the creature leave in the first place? Otherwise, I found little to dislike in the storyline, though the 1982 movie showed the Norwegians using Thermite charges to uncover the ship, and showed no evidence of any tunnel leading to it. Those are minor flaws in my opinion however. All in all, while not the cinematic masterpiece Carpenter directed, it was far from bad. It's worth watching at least once, particularly for fans of the original. (And yes, I know that Carpenter's version wasn't technically the original, but in my opinion, The Thing From Another World was so completely different that 1982's The Thing is basically its own movie).

It kind of explains the 1983 movie the 1983 movie is better this movie is okay I watch it a couple of times a year The 1983 special effects are better in my opinion it's a good movie

Great prequel. Totally worth it

But especially for Fans of John Carpenter's Classic version of "The Thing" (1982) ... Please Note, this is NOT a remake NOR is it a sequel! This is a PREQUEL; an original story and lovingly crafted film that painstakingly details the history and sequence of events that graphically explain just what happened at the Norwegian's Camp in Antarctica and reveals why the Norwegians are using a Helicopter to chase after and are trying to kill the "dog" (the Husky) that runs into the American's Scientific Outpost at the very beginning of John Carpenter's film. For what it's worth, I saw the Carpenter's film several when it first came out in theaters back in 1982... and I consider myself to be far more than just your average Sci-Fi & Horror film fan (or critic) as I actually have worked in live action film production in Los Angeles for well over 30 years... And as Carpenter's film is among my favorite in this genre, I was pretty skeptical when I first heard that this was being made. But upon leaning that Alec Gillis and Tom Woodruff Jr (ADI) were involved with the Make-Up and Mechanical FX, my skepticism evaporated. If you're not familiar with ADI, they are the guys responsible for the Oscar-winning Effects in Jim Cameron's T-2; Aliens; and a bunch of other awesome FX-laden films. Needless to say, you won't be disappointed! This is nothing short of an incredible homage and companion piece to Carpenter's film. Taut, suspenseful and even nerve-wracking at times, it fills in all the gaps and mysteries that are only alluded to in the 1982 film. Excellent Direction, casting, acting, art direction, editing, lighting, music and absolutely outrageous Special Effects... this is a fun and fantastic journey into the icy unknown. Here's my suggestion... Get this and (if you don't already have a copy) buy a copy of John Carpenter's film... and then watch them as a "back to back" Double Feature to see what an incredible job they did in making this film compliment and "merge" so seamlessly together with Carpenter's classic.

Taken from me Blogsite! After reading all the lackluster reviews for the updated The Thing movie, I passed on the theatrical release and figure I'd wait for the DVD rental. Before picking up on the re-imaging, I thought it might be wise to watch the original 1951 Howard Hawking version along with John Carpenter's The Thing 1982 update. The Thing from another World (1951) I remember this B&W classic from my childhood and being creeped out by the huge humanoid monster stalking through the hallways like an unstoppable Juggernaut. You didn't need special effects or sophisticated graphics to turn a man into an alien beast. Giant hands and a helmet, along with good physical acting, was enough to convince anyone back then. Watching the dialogue now reminds me of the different deliveries and sense of timing actors used in those early days of cinema. The rapid fire speeches gave a sense of military formality, efficiency and added a rushed importance to every line. We have the classic commander who is respectfully chided by his men and who is in full command, but also willing to listen to solid ideas from the men under him. He comes off as not knowing everything, but still being the smartest. Yes, they chose a military officer who uses common sense. The scientist is still the early cliché of wanting knowledge of the unknown and is willing to sacrifice everything - including human life to get it. To his un-cowardly credit, he is willing to trade his own life in exchange for furthering our understanding of the universe. Of course, he does an ill-advised, morally questionable experiment that does give us our only look into the habits of the monster. In this case, the alien visitor is a humanoid beast that has apparently evolved from plant life and feeds on blood. The sled dogs are fodder and food and have little involvement with the creature besides attacking the intruder early on. This is a great movie that stands as a perfect example of our early paranoia about alien visitors and invasions. It ends with the memorable line "Keep Watching the Skies". The Thing 1982 John Carpenter takes the basic concept and updates the science while keeping the atmosphere intact. He takes environmental factors like the cold and isolation and turns them into major plot points. He uses a research station as the backdrop and assembles regular men to go up against the threat from outer space. The monster has been turned up a few notches too. The original was a menacing brute and this version pits the humans against a shape-shifting alien that can impersonate any living organism it comes in to contact with. Assimilation after annihilation. Our paranoia over space invasions has been replaced with paranoia over who you can trust as it isn't clear who is friend and who is foe- who you can turn to and who's been turned. We still have the alien saucer under the ice as the initial point of contact, but even that idea is pushed further as the alien tries to build another ship using spare parts from around the base in order to make his escape. The original alien was pretty smart for cutting the power, but this guy is really sharp (no pun intended). The surrounding cast is composed of well crafted characters and the main protagonist is the helicopter pilot J.R MacReady played by Kurt Russel. The movie has more of a singular focus as we mostly follow MacReady and learn as he learns. Like the best of horror movies, our characters are placed in a near hopeless situation and it's only their spirit and willingness to live that keeps them going. If the original ended with the line Watch the Skies, this one should end with "watch the man next to you". This is one of the few times where a remake does justice to the source material. The Thing 2011 The newest version is listed as a prequel and although the events of this film bring us within a few hours of the 1982 John Carpenter classic, it still feels like a modern translation since several key scenes are recreated. I'm not sure why director Matthijis van Heijningen Jr would choose to helm this movie as his first big release. It wasn't as though the 82 version was dated or The Thing represents some sort of big money franchise that needed to be restarted or reinvigorated like Star Trek. Most modern horror flicks reply on jump gags where there's a meaningless, but sudden action meant to deliver a quick jolt of fear. It's the old cat jumping out of the cupboard and unfortunately that's the engine behind this movie. It lacks the hard science and joy of discovery from the first movie and misses the `who can I trust?' paranoia of the second. There is a good attempt to recreate that tension, but it falls flat since all the characters are fairly generic. It's pretty much a few random Americans and a bunch of crazy Norwegians. When you compare this cast with stand-out characters from John Carpenter's take, you'll quickly realize why the deaths are meaningless. The writers Eric Heisserer, John W. Campbell Jr. never gave us any personalities to connect with. The main character, a Kate Lloyd played by Mary Elizabeth Winstead does a fine job as the one sensible character. It's obvious from the beginning that she deserves to live and everyone else deserves to die for being so stupid. The 1982 Thing did its best to show us a monster that was doing things on-screen that we had never seen before- from growing heads - to assimilating dogs- to, damn, just being gross and scary. The monster in this affair is a multi-lobster-limbed crawler and, I must admit, quite formidable. It copies the big punch-line or becoming a grotesque merging of all the victims it's absorbed, but in this case, it looks kinda silly. When you finally get the payoff of seeing a version of the monster in full light, it's a little disappointing and honestly, non-scary. Still, it does better to deliver the chills than the current crop of disposable horror-flicks Hollywood has been churning out in recent years. In the original movie, it's science verse the military when the army men want to destroy the dangerous alien and the mad scientist wants to be friends and preserve the monster at all costs. And although that was the same foolish opinion held by the upper branches of the military, it didn't seem so sinister. The 1982 film simply stands us up against a monster we don't understand and survival is the only goal. The 2011 thing brings us another dumb scientist, but you could argue that his interest also lie in a quest for personal glory. "We May lose this find" yes, he has a personal interest and is in it for his own immortality and legacy. The music/soundtrack borrows or pays homage to the 1982 score by Ennio Morricone. Those two ominous tones drop at the very start and at the end of the movie. It makes for a nice wrapper. Speaking of endings, 1982 left us with two characters staring at each other with complete distrust. This is an amazing stalemate and a good way to end a classic. This movie, in perfect step with the younger generation, cannot leave anything to the imagination and we get a big impact. Yeah, I must admit this is a welcome twist. Overall, I consider the 2011 The Thing to be a good movie. It's worth seeing if you're a fan of the original and the 1982 revisit. The original was a statement of our time and left a marker that exposed how we felt about first contacts. The second was a statement about the human condition and what it would take to break down the bonds that hold us together as a species. This third version details who we are in 2011 and beyond. Simply put: we are creatures that seem capable of holding on to every memory and experience while we refuse to let anything with $entimental value go. Once, we had a disposable culture, but now we have one of recycling: it's all old- fashion, phrases, influences and ideas. The big question for every revisit or re-imaging is what are you going to add? Are you going to give us useful background information? Are you going to develop a beloved character more? Are you fixing technical flaws or enhancing an experience? The problem I have with most rehashes is that the priority lies in bringing us the memorable moments while forgetting to include the WHY as far as why we chose to hang on to those moments to begin with. I think I'm going to watch the 1982 version again. Thank you John Carpenter for including the why.

Ok, I have been watching Carpenter's version since 1982. Saw it at the theatre and fell in love with it from the start, but always wondered what happened to the Norwegians that started all of the drama... Went to see this pre-qual in the theatre's last year and was blown away by their attention to detail in tieing the two events together! Told my wife that as soon as this comes out on blue-ray, I'm buying it and watching BOTH films back to back to get the full experience. Well, I just did this last night and let me tell you, it was AWESOME!!!! They did such a good job on this film!!! And the extra features really help to explain some old questions from the original film. If you loved the Carpenter version, you'll love this version!!! Be sure to watch them back to back, it's GREAT!!!! Hope they come out with a sequal next!!!! COOL!!! 10/07/2015 - UPDATE to this review: Just last night I once again watched this PREQUEL and immediately put in Carpenter's 1982 original. Every time I do this, it's a totally amazing experience! I'm still blown away at the GREAT JOB these folks did in creating the prequel! Some have stated that they wished they had not used CG etc. etc. etc. Well, first, it's important to know that in fact they mostly used highly sophisticated props. They only used CG to enhance certain areas where it simply made more sense to do so. I'd have to say that 80% of creature creations are props and NOT CG, based on the behind the scenes footage that comes with this disc. What really amazes me is that they used REAL flamethrowers! If anything probably should've been CG from a safety perspective, it probably should've been this area. BUT, as the creators state, CG flames suck! LOL!! So, there you have it ;) Also, lets face it, only old school people want to see analog. In order to keep in the running and make some $, the majority of the crowd that would go see a film like this today were not even born in 1982! So, from that perspective, you have to understand the business side of showbiz... However, it's clear that they tried to use as little CG as they could, and for that I thank them greatly, coming from an old school dude like myself ;) I think their job on the FX was high quality and superior in craftsmanship. The creature makers were of the level of Rick Baker, Dick Smith, Tom Sevini, etc. SUPER professionals and craftsmen! I can totally see them do a sequel to these 2 films now, if they wanted to. They could tie in the girl from the prequel to the "frozen" corpses at the USA site... etc... totally can see this happening, and it would be correct if you think about it. And in truth, they could potentially even use the original actors from 82, cause those guys really have held up pretty well over the years ;) Could simply "Thing" one of them from the start, and move on to new characters ;) Hope they do!