Gazz
Posts: 874
Joined: 30/9/2005
|
Prepare for a rant...
The Thing ranks among my favourite films of all time and though I'm largely open to the idea of some kind of continuation of the mythos I've approached this particular prequel with some caution. I was willing to look beyond the fact that a prequel to Carpenter's film is completely unnecessary (since his film had already provided the answer as to what had happened to the Norwegian crew as the exact same thing befalls their American counterparts on Outpost #31). See, I do understand that they're trying to re-establish a franchise by taking it to it's roots. However, when the trailer came about it became clear to me that what we were looking at was technically a remake. It appears to be hitting all the same beats but with none of the class, taking it's redundancy to a whole new level.
But they can at least get the monsters right, right?
Early in production when the filmmakers and special effects crew (ADI: the men who turned the Aliens into 'Pumpkinhead' clones) began talking of how the effects would be 90% practical and 10% digital I took some flak on various message boards for reminding folks that we've been through this sort of bullshit fan pandering from filmmakers and studios before. I went on to say that the film's biggest hurdle effects wise would be with the filmmakers and whether or not they'd lose faith and simply CG scan the practical creatures they had. Looking at the latest trailer that exact scenario appears to be the case and another horror fanbase is up in arms about the fact that they may have been lied to once more.
Now, I'm not one of those people who automatically dismisses any use of CGI and i think many films have shown that the practice has more than it's fair share of uses, but not one CGI monster shot from any of the current trailers or clips has me sold on it's use in this film so far. Nor has any monster shot come close to some of Bottin (and to a lesser degree Winston's) amazing work with the Carpenter original. I mean look at this:
http://planetmut.com/wp-content/uploads//2011/08/splitface.jpg
And compare it to this:
http://i56.tinypic.com/11ii9tw.jpg
I know which one I find more horrific.
The effects just look like average CGI work and probably for the reason that it would have been extremely difficult to execute the creature practically, especially because it appears they've changed it's attitude from being a stealthy imitator of men and woman, moving in the dark and assimilating those it catches alone, to a more action orientated and generic horror monster willing to expose itself to rush groups of people. And I guess that's part of the problem for me. Here we have a creature known for creeping in the dark and yet we are being shown it to act completely out of character, attacking groups of individuals without being provoked and essentially bum rushing it's victims in clear view of others. For what? A couple of cheap scares it appears. Talking of cheap scares lets move on to this clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACP-h4W9xHM
In the above clip for the film we see the creature burst from it's ice coffin and through the roof, in direct view of one of the camps individuals. This is not later in the film when the group has been whittled away or when the creature is making a desperate effort to assimilate an individual after being found out. This is how we're introduced to the creature, not as a methodical eerie presence that roams freely throughout the compound but as a mindless monster that simply explodes onto the screen. These are the types of actions that simply wouldn't have took place in Carpenters film. Wouldn't it have been scarier if the creature would have escaped silently much like when it attempts to take over Bennings? It simply lies in wait for it's moment alone with the character, moving slowly and cautiously. There are no loud noises, screams or even signs of a struggle on the same magnitude as shown in that MTV clip. What if the characters return to the ice block the following day to find it mysteriously empty? That way it would have also had a whole night to silently assimilate anyone it finds alone. But instead the creature just bursts out of the fucking ice like "fuck Y'all, I'm outta this muthafucker!!!".
All signs appear to be pointing towards this film being a complete mess. It was redundant from the start but had potential to give us a few old school scares but looking at this trailer campaign it seems to me that the filmmakers simply have no idea what made Carpenter's film so special. And that they're willing to give away so many of the film's potential twists, like in who the creature is hiding (y'know, exactly the kind of paranoia inducing mystery that made the original work) is a telling sign indeed.
I guess what I'm really trying to say is 'fuck this film'.
|
Printable Version
The Thing (2011) - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread