[Assassin42]

Should be interesting.

I read the article in the original post and it said why paint a mustache on the Mona Lisa so that is why they didn't remake a classic. John Carpenter remade a classic when he did his version in 1982. I still think The Thing From Another World from 1951 is a horror classic. Carpenter did do a good job though updating it. Just hope the prequel doesn't go overboard and make it look too modern. There shouldn't be the latest in laptops and lab equipment everywhere (like you see in some prequels).

[Kemper]

Hopefully, there isn't a ragtag group of college students out with their professor.

[Bad Zombie Night]

Assassin42, on 09 September 2011 - 04:42 PM, said:

Should be interesting.

I read the article in the original post and it said why paint a mustache on the Mona Lisa so that is why they didn't remake a classic. John Carpenter remade a classic when he did his version in 1982. I still think The Thing From Another World from 1951 is a horror classic. Carpenter did do a good job though updating it.

I duuno but I never considered the the original 1951 version to really be a 'classic.' Wasn't the space monster in the original film supposedly a vegetable man?

Assassin42 said:

Just hope the prequel doesn't go overboard and make it look too modern. There shouldn't be the latest in laptops and lab equipment everywhere (like you see in some prequels).

Oh, you know they will! That is a given... Just watch the new TV spot below just released. It looks like they've taken JC's version and 'supercharged' it.





Here's TV Spot #1 for your viewing pleasure.

[Kemper]

Well, JC's movie wasn't just great effects. It was probably the best mix of horror and humor that I've ever seen. It had great characters that you cared about.

[Bad Zombie Night]

New Red Band Trailer released! Some super cool scenes.








Source: jigsawtrailers on YouTube

[jackskellington]

Finally went to see this yesterday afternoon and was pretty bored with it. The ending tied in nicely with Carpenter's beginning but the movie as a whole felt pretty empty.

[RIP]

I watched this last night and I enjoyed it. It wasn't as great as 1982 The Thing but this film is a prequel to it and shows the 1st Norweigen group that was there on Antartica and they discover The Thing. It has elements that were in the 1982 film where it shows how some of them started torching the place and it shows the creature with 2 faces that is out in the snow that was in the 1982 film. Also be sure to watch through the screen ending credits to the prequel cause it shows the wolf escaping and what survivors are after it which is then leads to the beginning sequence of the 1982 film.

[Morbidfilm]

I enjoyed it as well. I thought they did a good job telling the Norwegian story. The filmmakers attention to detail was also well done. There were scenes where it looked like they were filming on the sets built for Carpenter's movie. Of course the effects do not compare to Rob Bottin's amazing work and there is allot of cgi. The movie it's self was good.

spoiler........................................................
The ending is the best part as it blends nicely into the beginning of John Carpenter's The Thing.

[RIP]

Morbidfilm, on 08 February 2012 - 01:33 PM, said:

I enjoyed it as well. I thought they did a good job telling the Norwegian story. The filmmakers attention to detail was also well done. There were scenes where it looked like they were filming on the sets built for Carpenter's movie. Of course the effects do not compare to Rob Bottin's amazing work and there is allot of cgi. The movie it's self was good.

spoiler........................................................
The ending is the best part as it blends nicely into the beginning of John Carpenter's The Thing.

This is a quote from Fangoria back in October 2011 issue by one of the actors who had a lead in the prequel which sums it up nicely:

"The excitement will be witnessing how a few of the things you know about the original came to be: the man who appears to have committed suicide, the ax in the door, the morphed human/alien figure(burned in the snow). How did that happen? Who are these people? It crosses a lot of t's and dots a lot of i's from that first half hour of Carpenter's movie. And it tells a great story of the mixture of kind of grunt workers and scientists who get caught in this terrible mess."

I liked how it did show the morphed twin faced alien that was shown in the 1st film in the snow when MacReady and crew came across it at the Norweigen outpost. One thing I noticed the other night while viewing it was that the lead character was very similiar to MacReady but the actor in it is no Kurt Russell lol.

I agree with ya Brian on how the makeup was done pretty well compared too all the CGI that is out there these days and I liked it when they cut open that 1st thing and the 1st guy whose killed in the film is inside it changinig and that looked real and more like Bottin's makeup in the original /82 film.

[Gabriel Zero]

Ugh

I really didn't like how fake the CGI made the monster look. I'm sorry guys but I just didn't feel it like the rest of you did.

[Action Avenue]

I have not see the prequel to Carpenter's 82 classic. I've heard that it's not all that great, but now my curiosity is starting to get the better of me and I may have to put this on the rent list. I have the Carpenter/Russell masterpiece on DVD and watch it every once in a while. This was true movie magic. Nothing against CG, but when CG is done well, it is amazing. That being said, Carpenter's crew made that horror scifi movie without the help of computer graphics. The special effects of that film still hold up today and still absolutely incredible. Plus, we saw first rate acting by Kurt Russell and his supporting cast. SCIFI horror does not get much better than this, with the exception of Aliens with Sigourney Weaver.

[chicagowhitesox1173]

I liked the dog chase at the end but other than that I didnt like this too much. I really liked the 1982 version and I was hoping that this one would be more realistic like the 82 version but when you have the women save the world and you knew from the begginning she would be the hero then it gets kinda goofy for me.

[Morbidfilm]

Action Avenue, on 13 February 2012 - 12:23 PM, said:

I have not see the prequel to Carpenter's 82 classic. I've heard that it's not all that great, but now my curiosity is starting to get the better of me and I may have to put this on the rent list. I have the Carpenter/Russell masterpiece on DVD and watch it every once in a while. This was true movie magic. Nothing against CG, but when CG is done well, it is amazing. That being said, Carpenter's crew made that horror scifi movie without the help of computer graphics. The special effects of that film still hold up today and still absolutely incredible. Plus, we saw first rate acting by Kurt Russell and his supporting cast. SCIFI horror does not get much better than this, with the exception of Aliens with Sigourney Weaver.

There is something wrong in hollywood when everyone going in to see a movie made in 2010 knows that it will not be able to compare technically to a movie made 20 years before it. All these cgi guys keep talking about state of the art effects blah blah blah.Sorry cgi artists...all you have done is bring cinema backwards! Why won't producers open their eyes and see this?

[OVERKILL]

AMEN! Practical over CG any day. I do have one question for anybody that has this on DVD, where's the part where the Norweigan team used thermite to uncover the ship? Didn't the ship melt the ice when the Thing started it up at the end? I just saw it once in the theater, maybe I fell asleep and missed it.

Probably the best horror movie I'd seen come out in a while.

[Morbidfilm]

OVERKILL, on 07 March 2012 - 09:08 AM, said:

AMEN! Practical over CG any day. I do have one question for anybody that has this on DVD, where's the part where the Norweigan team used thermite to uncover the ship? Didn't the ship melt the ice when the Thing started it up at the end? I just saw it once in the theater, maybe I fell asleep and missed it.

Probably the best horror movie I'd seen come out in a while.

I was thinking the same thing. I don't think they showed that in the prequel.

[DarthJoe8]

There was no need to have a prequel. It added nothing, in fact it felt more like a remake than a prequel. Also, what happened to the girl at the end?

[SWAT Zombie]

DarthJoe8, on 07 March 2012 - 04:15 PM, said:

There was no need to have a prequel. It added nothing, in fact it felt more like a remake than a prequel. Also, what happened to the girl at the end?

When I watched it I thought it was a remake. I didn't realise it was a prequel until the end with the dog.

[Crombie]

Saw it, liked it, and then I watched the 1982 original on netflix. It is cool how they go together.

[DarthJoe8]

Crombie, on 08 March 2012 - 09:42 AM, said:

Saw it, liked it, and then I watched the 1982 original on netflix. It is cool how they go together.

We watched them back to back also. Still think that the prequel added nothing. Also, still have no idea what happened to the girl at the end... I missed something.

[OVERKILL]

SPOILERS Do not read if you havn't saw the movie.

The best I could figure after burning the guy with the ear ring in the wrong ear she stayed out there to freeze. She saw how he protested and thought he was the real him and began to wonder if she really was who she thought she was. So she thought it was better to sacrafice herself rather than risk starting the process of infection/assimilation all over again.

After reading that I don't even understand it and I wrote it. That's just what I took away after watching it, I'd love to hear what other people think.