Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: The Thing (2011)

  		Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Future Films >> RE: The Thing (2011) Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The Thing (2011) - 21/9/2011 5:00:19 PM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1846
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
 Maybe the creature is presented as being it's 'full self' at, first, less cautious at first and as a result of being very obviously what it is, attacked effectively whenever it goes on the hunt, then learns to become more cautious as the film goes on (thus ending up as the creature is in the Carpenter film, having adapted to survive, rather than the presentation of the creature being exactly the same as before, which would be as redundant as people think the film is, full stop)?

Maybe it starts off bombastic and as the creature becomes more sneaky, becomes more paranoid and desperate, what we see in the trailer may give nothing away because its from a section of the film during which there isn't any need to hide the identity of the assimilated in the trailer because the film has (possibly) an agenda of showing assimilation take place to establish what is happening for the characters, who will then (possibly) be in the situation of wondering where it is, where it has gone, when the creature has learned it gets hurt less if it sneaks around?

Anyway, surely the only way anybody is going to survive in this film is if they leave the story before shit kicks off/gets too serious?

That leaves the way open for a sequel to the thing (Carpenters) since the possibility arises of the departer trying to get help for their own team and this help arriving in time to encounter Mcrae and the other guy (which, given the fucking huge hair/beard combo Kurt Russel sported in the first film, leave the door open for him to return to the role) and the scenario can be what the ravenous fans always wanted to be, a Thing/Things pairing to compare with the Alien/Aliens one. Alternatively, somebody leaving before the end opens the door to the person being 'infected' and taking the story into a different setting, becoming a thing with many more places to hide in a sequel.

I guess I'm trying to say I'd rather hope for the best then have hopes dashed if they have to be, rather than go around without hope (basically as a general perspective, not just about film).

< Message edited by jobloffski -- 21/9/2011 5:15:58 PM >

_____________________________

Yes, dreamers dream and doers do. But if dreamers DON'T dream, doers don't have anything TO do. Everything that is only here because people exist, only exists because someone thought of it., or in other words, dreamed it.

(in reply to Gazz)
Post #: 31
RE: The Thing (2011) - 21/9/2011 5:12:24 PM   
Gazz


Posts: 874
Joined: 30/9/2005
I'm sure there are plenty of reasons people can come up with to explain away the vast differences between the actions of the creature in this prequel to how it acts just a few days later at Outpost #31 but I doubt the film is going to offer any. Nontheless this is a largely uninteresting way of finding out how the creature mentally evolves to it's threat. What would be interesting is to compare how it acts in Outpost #31 to how it would in a more densely populated area (as in Frank Darabont's failed The Thing mini-series for sci-fi that had the creature loose in an American town). Instead the prequel is offering us the same situation, with similar people, at around the same time in about the same place. Oh but it's not a remake!!

Normally I would share your optimistic outlook on the future release of a film in a series I care about (I'm stoked for Prometheus) but the advertising campaign has really pulled out all the stops in turning me off this film. I may have been cautious from the start but I was open and somewhat excited. Now I'm I find it hard to see a reason why this film is going to be worth my time based on it's advertising campaign.

< Message edited by Gazz -- 21/9/2011 5:13:17 PM >

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 32
RE: The Thing (2011) - 21/9/2011 5:17:25 PM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1846
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
 Hey, probably not even gonna see it till its a cheap DVD (I am very poor), just playing Devil's Advocate

_____________________________

Yes, dreamers dream and doers do. But if dreamers DON'T dream, doers don't have anything TO do. Everything that is only here because people exist, only exists because someone thought of it., or in other words, dreamed it.

(in reply to Gazz)
Post #: 33
RE: The Thing (2011) - 21/9/2011 5:49:06 PM   
directorscut


Posts: 10006
Joined: 30/9/2005
Should be called The Teal.

_____________________________



Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to Gazz)
Post #: 34
RE: The Thing (2011) - 21/9/2011 6:11:45 PM   
Gazz


Posts: 874
Joined: 30/9/2005
The Thing II: The Tealing

(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 35
RE: The Thing (2011) - 21/9/2011 6:22:44 PM   
bub


Posts: 2816
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: A soon to be undead filled missile silo
 The Thing is always in my top 5 films but I'm not getting nerd rage over a remake. If it turns out to be good we get a slighty different version of something we love. If it turns out to be shit... well just don't watch it again. So far from the trailer and stills shown it look like it captures the feel of the first one perfectly. My only concern is Mary Elizabeth Winstead who was so mind numbingly arwful and boring in Scott Pilgrim, although that maybe down to the general shitness of the film itself.

(in reply to Gazz)
Post #: 36
RE: The Thing (2011) - 21/9/2011 6:52:23 PM   
kumar


Posts: 5092
Joined: 2/10/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

Maybe the creature is presented as being it's 'full self' at, first, less cautious at first and as a result of being very obviously what it is, attacked effectively whenever it goes on the hunt, then learns to become more cautious as the film goes on (thus ending up as the creature is in the Carpenter film, having adapted to survive, rather than the presentation of the creature being exactly the same as before, which would be as redundant as people think the film is, full stop)?

Maybe it starts off bombastic and as the creature becomes more sneaky, becomes more paranoid and desperate, what we see in the trailer may give nothing away because its from a section of the film during which there isn't any need to hide the identity of the assimilated in the trailer because the film has (possibly) an agenda of showing assimilation take place to establish what is happening for the characters, who will then (possibly) be in the situation of wondering where it is, where it has gone, when the creature has learned it gets hurt less if it sneaks around?



I think this sums up my thoughts quite well. I only watched the breakout clip and I instantly noticed the difference between this and the previous film, mainly going for the loud, noisy almost clumsy scare. It did make me jump though and maybe thats why I dont mind it as much as other people- atleast it didnt purely retread what has gone before- a slow thaw and reawakening.
While essentially it is the same alien I think im glad that clip showed me it will act differently- its a thing! it does what the fuck it wants! There must be some learning curves for it in this film for it to turn into the slower and stealthier version we saw in Carpenters film.
While I havent seen the redband trailer to avoid the spoilers I did see the other trailer and IMO it channeled the atmosphere- there was a slight variation of that simple score and the lingering shot of the hallway- im still optimistic about this film.


_____________________________

"Darth Silas - I love Craig as Bond too. Genius. "- Jackmansgirl 15/7/2008

Last films watched:

The Road - 4/5
Chronicle - 4/5
Twilight Breaking Dawn p1 - 1/5
Warrior - 5/5
Super 8 - 5/5
Paranormal Activity 3 - 3/5
MI 4 - 2/5

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 37
RE: The Thing (2011) - 21/9/2011 6:56:45 PM   
MonsterCat


Posts: 6411
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire
 I honestly can't see how you can make a judgement on this film based on just four minutes of footage from a two hour film.

I'm definitely interested in this and I liked the first trailer. Although, I think just calling it The Thing is a bit odd. The Thing Begins, maybe?

< Message edited by MonsterCat -- 21/9/2011 6:58:17 PM >

_____________________________

Films watched in 2013

(in reply to kumar)
Post #: 38
RE: The Thing (2011) - 21/9/2011 7:39:39 PM   
Gazz


Posts: 874
Joined: 30/9/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

I honestly can't see how you can make a judgement on this film based on just four minutes of footage from a two hour film.


Did I not explain myself clear enough with the last couple of posts (which included direct examples as shown in the trailers/ clips so far)? To be honest, if you want to remain unspoiled by a couple of bits revealed so far I wouldn't read my earlier post until after you've seen the film or given in to pressure

My write up is very much a review of the advertising campaign just as much as it sums up my cautiousness when approaching the film itself. I've not commented on the actors, editing, cinematography (other than that "The Tealing" comment) or anything of that sort since I really have no frame of reference at this point in time but will be sure to add my 2 cents when I do eventually see the film. Simply put the advertising campaign is there to convince me to see this film and so far they have revealed good majority of who is assimilated and at what point including a shot of what appears to be the end of the film in my eyes (ruining twists and any potential paranoia angle), marketed it almost completely on the back of CGI monster shots after claiming the film to be almost completely practical, shown the creature in action and acting out of character and released a clip further detailing that point (not to mention that it already had the fact it's existence is largely unnecessary in my eyes). You add them together and that turns me right off this film. Quite the opposite of what this trailer campaign wants to achieve.

In short: if you smell shit, 99% of the time it's going to be shit.



< Message edited by Gazz -- 21/9/2011 7:43:22 PM >

(in reply to MonsterCat)
Post #: 39
RE: The Thing (2011) - 22/9/2011 7:38:25 PM   
rich


Posts: 4176
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Neo Kobe
quote:


In short: if you smell shit, 99% of the time it's going to be shit.





_____________________________

THINGS
WRITINGS

(in reply to Gazz)
Post #: 40
RE: The Thing (2011) - 22/9/2011 11:40:45 PM   
The REAL Bozz


Posts: 3273
Joined: 15/5/2007
All the reviews I've read (it's screened quite a bit) have been positive. Personally I'm keeping an open mind, I think it looks solid. There's tons of practical effects on display. Word from the screenings is the cgi is kept to a minamil. I'm waiting till I still the flick to pass judgement.

_____________________________

Films I've watched
Star Trek Into Darkness ***
Iron Man 3 *****
Evil Dead (2013) ***
Bait 3D ***

(in reply to rich)
Post #: 41
RE: The Thing (2011) - 23/9/2011 12:44:41 AM   
Gazz


Posts: 874
Joined: 30/9/2005
I've only read one screening review that seemed to indicate that the monsters were brought to life using CGI but this was before we got glimpse of them in the red band trailer (and they don't look great imo). It also went on to stress how little the film brings to the table in terms of new content. Overall though he seemed to enjoy it despite it's flaws. It's the only review I've managed to find so far. Do you know where would I find any others?

Also, I will be seeing the film with everyone else and despite my somewhat rare pessimistic outlook on its quality I'd much rather be wrong and eat my words than be right. I'm really just not happy with the way the film is being sold regardless of its quality, really.

(in reply to The REAL Bozz)
Post #: 42
RE: The Thing (2011) - 23/9/2011 12:50:24 AM   
The REAL Bozz


Posts: 3273
Joined: 15/5/2007
Well theres the AICN one, which sounds like is the one you read but I don't remeber him going on about using cgi to bring them to life, bear in mind I read that one months back so I could be wrong. There was a few on the IMDB aswell. I think it started screening earlier in the year, it's been ready for a while now but the date got pushed back I think.

As for offering up new content, well I'm glad it doesnt to be honest mate. It would be worst it they tried to exapand the story and in so doing happened to fuck up the mystery of the film. At the same time I can undertand why some people may want to see the world expanded. It seems like, going off what I read, to be a solid, if not exactly required companion piece to Carpenters. The only part about the film I don't like it's it's basis, being a prequel. There's gonna be zero suspecne with the characters seeing how obviously none of em are gonna make it out alive based on the fact it's prequel.

_____________________________

Films I've watched
Star Trek Into Darkness ***
Iron Man 3 *****
Evil Dead (2013) ***
Bait 3D ***

(in reply to Gazz)
Post #: 43
RE: The Thing (2011) - 23/9/2011 2:21:20 PM   
Gazz


Posts: 874
Joined: 30/9/2005
So I decided it would be best to put this little rant in video form so I could provide examples as I go.

SPOILER WARNING: If you're staying away from the advertising campaign don't click this link. It heavily features released footage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jn0yPdhTyGA

< Message edited by Gazz -- 23/9/2011 7:38:25 PM >

(in reply to The REAL Bozz)
Post #: 44
RE: The Thing (2011) - 23/9/2011 7:32:02 PM   
The REAL Bozz


Posts: 3273
Joined: 15/5/2007
Gazz i just watched some of that, some of the cgi does look like it's a lot Oh dear. I knocked it off though since you were using clips from the redband trailer. Rather not have the DEATHS spoiled.

_____________________________

Films I've watched
Star Trek Into Darkness ***
Iron Man 3 *****
Evil Dead (2013) ***
Bait 3D ***

(in reply to Gazz)
Post #: 45
RE: The Thing (2011) - 23/9/2011 7:37:29 PM   
Gazz


Posts: 874
Joined: 30/9/2005
Shit, sorry mate. I thought I had a spoiler warning. I really do apologise. Actually, that the trailers reveal who is infected and when is a point I make at the end of the clip. They're selling the film all wrong.

There's also a new Russian redband trailer that I posted moments ago but it looks like an admin has deleted it. The trailer just further proves my point by providing us with more examples of how the cgi work pales in comparison to the great practical work in Carpenter's film. I'd steer clear though if I were you.

< Message edited by Gazz -- 23/9/2011 7:39:47 PM >

(in reply to The REAL Bozz)
Post #: 46
RE: The Thing (2011) - 23/9/2011 7:53:57 PM   
DONOVAN KURTWOOD


Posts: 7728
Joined: 6/10/2005
From: PLANET G
 good vid Gazz and i agree with you on every count but im still looking forward to the remake. Im going to enjoy it as an FX driven modern monster movie rather than anything too closely linked with Carpenter's original. Obviously the story looks exactly the same but i've found i enjoy modern remakes much more if i take them on their own merits rather than constantly compaering them to the original. I love The Thing nd it will always be amazing. Maybe this movie will be a big missed opportunity as a continuation of the franchise that Carpenter established, but to me it still looks like a fun monster movie.

_____________________________

Pack your bags, we're going on a guilt trip!

(in reply to Gazz)
Post #: 47
RE: The Thing (2011) - 23/9/2011 8:33:51 PM   
The REAL Bozz


Posts: 3273
Joined: 15/5/2007
Don't worry Gaz, I copped one of the deaths I think, lol, so no biggie. Managed to avoid who was infected etc. But the little I did see did have a heap of CGI. I do agree with the early points you mentioned in the vid about film makers promising fans the world. Sad truth is Gaz the big studios don't make films for 'fans'. It doesn't happen. I'm still holding out hope for this one though. Hopefully thats the extent of the cgi. Bear in mind I'm not totally anti cgi but I reckon it's lazy to use it for effects on this level, it's is after all a monster movie and it was proven to be done to great standard practically way back in the early 80s.

_____________________________

Films I've watched
Star Trek Into Darkness ***
Iron Man 3 *****
Evil Dead (2013) ***
Bait 3D ***

(in reply to DONOVAN KURTWOOD)
Post #: 48
RE: The Thing (2011) - 24/9/2011 9:47:52 PM   
Gazz


Posts: 874
Joined: 30/9/2005
Thank you for watching guys and I really do appreciate the feedback. I wish I could walk in to the film with the same optimism and clear my mind of the memory of Carpenters film but as I said earlier I really do wish i'm wrong and eat my words rather than be right about this one.

And I agree about the CGI comment Bozz. I say much later in the video that I am in no way anti-cg and think many films have shown just how well the practice can be used (look at LOTR, District 9 and Avatar) but after promising us great practical work I'm left wondering why they're selling this on the back of CGI money shots and poor ones at that.

(in reply to The REAL Bozz)
Post #: 49
RE: The Thing (2011) - 30/9/2011 2:18:50 PM   
Gazz


Posts: 874
Joined: 30/9/2005
New Clip: http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=82734

It's better than the last clip they released but I'm feeling yet another case of deja vu with this one.

(in reply to Gazz)
Post #: 50
RE: The Thing (2011) - 12/10/2011 10:23:22 PM   
matty_b


Posts: 13121
Joined: 19/10/2005
From: Outpost 31 calling McMurtle.
 Well, read the first review for this.

Predictably, it's shit.

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze
Mattyb is a shining example of what the perfect Empire Forum member is.


(in reply to Gazz)
Post #: 51
RE: The Thing (2011) - 12/10/2011 11:35:25 PM   
The REAL Bozz


Posts: 3273
Joined: 15/5/2007
Really? I've read a few that said it's okay.

_____________________________

Films I've watched
Star Trek Into Darkness ***
Iron Man 3 *****
Evil Dead (2013) ***
Bait 3D ***

(in reply to matty_b)
Post #: 52
RE: The Thing (2011) - 13/10/2011 10:34:51 AM   
matty_b


Posts: 13121
Joined: 19/10/2005
From: Outpost 31 calling McMurtle.
 Nah, apparently it does everything I feared it would - overuse of bad CGI, no real tension, no real characterisation.

And I don't want a remake of The Thing to be "OK". I want it to be excellent.

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze
Mattyb is a shining example of what the perfect Empire Forum member is.


(in reply to The REAL Bozz)
Post #: 53
RE: The Thing (2011) - 13/10/2011 10:47:34 AM   
Gazz


Posts: 874
Joined: 30/9/2005
Yeah, it's currently sitting at 37% on RottenTomatoes. Even the fresh reviews on RT seem to be rating it a slightly above average 3/5.

I know the first film was critically panned but most of these new reviews seem to be crediting Carpenter's film as the classic it is.

(in reply to Gazz)
Post #: 54
RE: The Thing (2011) - 13/10/2011 10:56:42 AM   
Wild about Wilder


Posts: 1508
Joined: 9/4/2010
From: Hertfordshire
 Gonna be interesting how Joel"The Human Punchbag"Edgerton gets on as I think Hollywood saw him as the next big thing (no pun by the way) when puting him above Hardy in The Warrior BOY DID THEY GET THAT WRONG!

(in reply to Gazz)
Post #: 55
RE: The Thing (2011) - 13/10/2011 11:27:30 AM   
kumar


Posts: 5092
Joined: 2/10/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gazz

Yeah, it's currently sitting at 37% on RottenTomatoes. Even the fresh reviews on RT seem to be rating it a slightly above average 3/5.

I know the first film was critically panned but most of these new reviews seem to be crediting Carpenter's film as the classic it is.


Oh. .

Maybe I was daft for being optimistic but I was really looking forward to seeing it in the cinema. Think I will give a skim over more reviews when they are released before I make a final decision.

_____________________________

"Darth Silas - I love Craig as Bond too. Genius. "- Jackmansgirl 15/7/2008

Last films watched:

The Road - 4/5
Chronicle - 4/5
Twilight Breaking Dawn p1 - 1/5
Warrior - 5/5
Super 8 - 5/5
Paranormal Activity 3 - 3/5
MI 4 - 2/5

(in reply to Gazz)
Post #: 56
RE: The Thing (2011) - 13/10/2011 11:33:57 AM   
Mojo


Posts: 6044
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: The CIC, next to the old man.
 I know I'll end up going to see it anyway. The Thing is my favourite film and although a remake/prequel should offend me, I'm interested to see how it turns out. I just wish they could have steered away from CGI for the transformations. I haven't watched the red band trailer so I dunno who it looks but it simply can't look as good as Rob Bottin's effects. It will be cool to see how it all went down at the Norwegian camp, even if they have thrown in a few token Americans for good measure.

_____________________________

Let's shove a stick up that wolf's ass.

(in reply to kumar)
Post #: 57
RE: The Thing (2011) - 13/10/2011 4:48:24 PM   
Snake-Eyes


Posts: 9970
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: ZONE 2
 a couple of reviews -

http://www.fangoria.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5797:the-thing-2011-film-review&catid=50:movies-tv&Itemid=181

http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/film/1408/review

_____________________________

"When you have to shoot, shoot don't talk."

http://www.expendablespremiere.com/index.html

(in reply to Mojo)
Post #: 58
RE: The Thing (2011) - 13/10/2011 5:35:29 PM   
Spaldron


Posts: 10487
Joined: 6/10/2006
From: Chair
quote:

ORIGINAL: Snake-Eyes

a couple of reviews -

http://www.fangoria.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5797:the-thing-2011-film-review&catid=50:movies-tv&Itemid=181

http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/film/1408/review


So in short, crap and pointless yes?

_____________________________

And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts
And I looked and behold, a pale horse
And his name that sat on him was Death
And Hell followed with him.

(in reply to Snake-Eyes)
Post #: 59
Saw 'The Thing' yesterday. - 13/10/2011 11:49:05 PM   
BooRadley


Posts: 51
Joined: 11/10/2005
From: Sydney, Australia
 Seriously guys, do you actually like going to the movies? Some of the posts above and that taking it all way too seriously YouTube video seem to suggest that you are working yourselves up to hate the prequel no matter what. Why would you bother seeing it at all? Carpenter's film is a classic but it's not a sacred text and it can't actually be spoiled. Relax already. Have fun Have an open mind. It's not that important.

I saw the Carpenter version of 'The Thing' in October 1982 at the end of my first week at university and was scared shitless. I saw the prequel yesterday afternoon on its opening here in Sydney and came away quite pleased that they didn't fuck it up. Sure, the 1982 film is so well known that you already expect what might happen so the 'HOLY COW!' response is a bit muted. Yes, there are obvious similarities and reruns of situations but these are people in a similar situation to the Americans and they are trying to figure things out for themselves so they follow a similar logic. There are neat differences in the figuring, though.

Characterisation: OK. Not great. This is a horror/SF movie. No surprises there. Anyone with an ounce of compassion would be concerned for the poor sods stuck in the Antarctic with this creature.

Tension: I was pretty darn tense. Plenty of edge of seat and at least one heart attack moment that sent me skyward.

The CGI: hmmm. A few VERY effective and horrifying moments but some 'Mummy Returns' too. Even though Rob Bottin's creations look a bit rubbery these days there was something very solid about them that CGI doesn't always get. Nothing to match the walking head moment but certainly a few, 'YUK! that's bloody horrifying' things. The creature is no respecter of human anatomy.

The most pleasing element was the way this prequel IS most definitely a prequel and manages to just about match-up every clue given in the original about what happened at the Norwegian base. Worth it just for some very nostalgic moments. Hint: sit through the credits.

Not great. Not terrible. I'm happy. Looking forward to lots of repeat viewings. I enjoy movies. I like going to the cinema.



< Message edited by BooRadley -- 14/10/2011 12:25:07 AM >

(in reply to Spaldron)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Future Films >> RE: The Thing (2011) Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





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
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.093