The idea of hyper advanced space faring aliens facing the same fate as the Norwegian team is such a cool concept. The amount of dread you get thinking “if they couldn’t contain it, what hope do we have”? Is unparalleled.
The big problem with this film is that it "shows" too much. In the 82 The Thing, you didn't see the assimilation of the Thing, you didn't know who the Thing was. Here they went down the path of body horror, and completely lost the message of the original, which was about loneliness and paranoia.
one thing the prequel did do right in regards to the theme of paranoia is the language barrier between the Norwegians and the Americans. I just wish they would have expanded on that more.
@@isenhartproductions2677 I think it's a mistake that the Americans were even there. The original film makes it pretty clear that the other station is entirely Norwegians. The chaos begins because the one survivor is shouting at them in Norwegian, whereas if he'd been part of a mixed US/Norway team he would have spoken to MacReady's crew in English. When Mac and Doc inspect the Norwegian camp, they can't understand the text data because it's all in Norwegian which it wouldn't be in a mixed nationality centre. Adding Americans to the prequel was clearly just about getting names with recognition on the poster.
The only problem with the prequel is what the studio did to it, it's not as great as the original, but its nowhere near as bad as some like to make out, and had it been made as intended, it would a been a great addition.
@@specialnewb9821 I don't think the film should even exist, to be clear, but if it had to then this was a core thing that could have given the project a more interesting identity, and potentially different reactions to the creature. It also didn't feel like it was happening c.1982
The love and respect the prequel for the OG was actually so commendable. The team genuinely made sure that everything fit into the canon, they made sure that practical effects were used (and from BTS footage it looked like it was damn good), and the new addition to the lore from the original ending was genuinely just so cool as it still adds to the mystery and horror of the creature but still doesn't tell us outright what it is. And then came the studio, I was robbed of an amazing prequel to one of my favorite films and I will never forget this. This was probably one of THE biggest fumbles in horror cinema just because of how bad this film turned out, and the fact that every single bad thing wasn't actually supposed to be in the film. For that, I will always defend this prequel.
Absolute crime we never got a dual cut release of the film. I would love a release with both versions on it on there. Really wish the petitions had been successful.
I bet there was extensive CGI needed to cleanup the animatronic shots removing cables and extending creatures ect. And they won't ever release the cut because those shots were never even started, they just abandoned the idea of completing those shots and did the CGI redos instead
I just can't fathom the idea of covering up all these awesome looking practical effects with subpar CGI. Why cover up all this great work with something worse? Putting the whole effects debacle aside, this movie is just like the titular creature: a pale imitation. Bland characters, shoddy effects and creature designs, and numerous continuity issues with the 1982 classic lead to this film being an unremarkable creature feature. Also, I can't believe the guy who wrote this would go on to write Arrival. What a turnaround!
I wonder what 'The Thing' from a 100% Norwegian POV would have been - You and your mates dig up this frozen *thing* and take it back to base, and it breaks out and one by one your mates start to become 'not' your mates anymore. Removing any connection/ connotation to the American base might provide more freedom (I.e - You don't need to figure out how that axe gets there, nor where the two headed thing comes from)
A friend of mine has literally seen The Thing (original) hundreds of times and when she recommended the prequel I gave it a try. Watching the prequel she feels the movie-makers affection for the original, and says that it should be enjoyed as well-done fan fiction. With that intro from her, I did enjoy it. I will say that the acting in the 2011 one is quite good, and they captured something I like about the original a lot, which is the tense relational dynamics.
When I saw The Thing in the theater back in 1982 I was taken aback by how outright bad the acting is. Seriously. Otherwise the movie is glorious, including the Morricone score. The remake/prequel isn't bad; just disappointingly ordinary. The 1951 original, Carpenter's remake, and this prequel are available in a bargain DVD set.
I never hated it it's a fine prequel that doesn't deviate from what Carpenter set up but it also adds some new layers(The Thing can't replicate non organic stuff such as fillings or earrings) . Hell I loved the inclusion of Americans to the Norwegian camp ,it adds a somewhat paranoia . Now the visuals were just not it
Just hearing u matter of factly describe the plot where the alien pilot sacrifices themself to try n kill the thing made me Feel so much in a single moment i cant imagine what a whole movie building up to it couldve been like
The Thing was my first ever Rated R movie, which I saw when I was four. Growing up watching the original with my dad (which he saw as a kid), and then getting to see the prequel in the theater with him was a great bonding moment for us. But sadly we both left the theater so underwhelmed by it. Then we bought it on DVD and saw the special features, and the thought of this movie just makes us both mad now lol
I know a lot of people don't really care about anyone in Hollywood at the moment, and there's plenty of reasons why it's become a garbage fire, but this is one of those times when I actually feel pity for everyone working on a film. I saw those practical effects years back and they looked really creepy, which is a GOOD thing. They looked so lifelike and just so...Thing like. And knowing now that chunks of the script were cut out just so the movie was faster, and said chunks contained bits of character development is just infuriating. Seriously, upper execs and test audiences should not be the end all be all of what is put into a movie. This movie's story also reminds me of another movie called Small Soldiers. Originally it was supposed to be a darker, more edgier 90s action flick that incorporated really nice practical effects for the living toys, but ultimately the higher ups told them to tone the movie down and instead of practical effects, use CGI. Granted, that movie, imo, was a really fun and cheesy watch, but it still wasn't what the director and others wanted for it.
@@isenhartproductions2677 It's actually a pretty interesting story. Something else neat that happened, that sadly probably won't go anywhere, was this proof-of-concept reimagining of the movie in full CGI with new characters. It was actually well done for a short. ua-cam.com/video/bcPqSTUt5D8/v-deo.html&pp=ygUWU21hbGwgU29sZGllcnMgaGlzdG9yeQ%3D%3D
Is extremely sad how the studio butchered this movie. I think it was ok, but the ending was the thing could have made it so distinct to the first one and launch a saga. Lovely video, as usual 👌🏼
The problem with the movie is that its trying to be a stealth remake of the 1982 version, but with a female lead. If it had been a subtitled film with all Norwegian characters, it could have brought something new to the story, and the language barrier could have also added to the paranoia.
well done bro you knocked it outta the park once again, now Push 2009, Green Lantern 2011, Fantastic Four 2015 and The Last Airbender 2010 are definitely ones I wanna see you tackle next whenever you get the chance and keep up the good work love your videos.
Fantastic Four failed because Josh Trank did not want to do a traditional superhero film but a body horror story like something that David Cronenberg would do and that should of been a red flag and also the first screen writer hired to write the film had something good going but Fox did not want to give a huge budget for Fantastic Four which was a big deal
I lie to myself and say I like it, but that's just my crush on MEW talking. It's ironic that the more the studios interfere to make films better, the worse they become.
If you had told me the thing the 2nd used exclusively cg id have believed it, such a shame that we'll never actually see the full vision as it was intended
If you all want to see what this could've been like, then go seek out Harbinger Down. It was mostly produced by Amalgamated Dynamics themselves and it's basically The Thing on a boat. The script and acting are Sci-Fi channel levels, but you do get to see the practical horror in action. And it reviewed better than The Thing II did.
As for the name, I agree, huge problem because it intimates a remake. In reality a prequel. But the idea of going practical is awesome. A great throwback to the 1982 movie and the ground breaking effects done by Rob Bottin. At only 23, Rob was way ahead of his time. He set a very high bar to meet.
The opening really says it all: two producers saw another film making money, so they attempted to do the same. I feel like when test audiences get involved, producers will just use whatever reactions they get to justify any changes or cuts they wanted in the first place.
Saw this in theaters when it came out. I can't say I have a lot of love for it... Studio execs had absolutely no understanding of The Thing, so we end up with an obvious antagonist that, of course, must be the _final boss_ for our hero to defeat. There are good things here, like The Thing going from an aggressive animalistic monster, to a more careful manipulator. The idea that The Thing will simply spit out metal is clever, but boils down to the characters questioning each other's dental hygiene... I think I would have preferred the camp be entirely foreign actors, without any US actors being shoehorned in.
I like your presentation here, and I totally agree with everything; Carpenter's film is a classic. But there's just one element I felt you should've mentioned; you kept referring to the '82 film as "the original", but neglected to mention that it is itself a remake of 1951's 'The Thing From Another World', which is considered a classic in its own right. The whole reason Carpenter wanted to make his version in the first place was because he's a huge fan of the '51 film, and even used footage from it in his remake as a "home movie" depicting the events of this prequel. Just thought that deserved mentioning. =)
That ADI three-eyed alien, known as the "pilot", would have suited the three-eyed monster mentioned in "Who goes there". A absolute shame they messed that up and cut it from the film alltogether.
I was like 13 when I came across this movie without seeing the original, and I really liked it at the time. But after seeing the '82 film, I understood that all of the best elements of the prequel were ripped straight from the original. I do like the ending of the prequel tho. That's cool stuff
People tend to blame the decision to replace the practical FX with shoddy CGI for the film's quality, but it's more than that. The premise, the set, the acting are just as good as the 1982 film. But the pacing, the reliance on cheap jump scares and the many many "crew fights the creature" scenes, which did nothing but reduce the overcrowded cast, made this one a generic creature feature. And the 1982 film still stands as an absolute classic in subtle horror, amazing atmosphere and brilliant practical effects to this day.
i worked with an actor who had one of the bigger parts before he backed out of the film(or maybe replaced by force). He had some interesting stories to tell...
The John Carpenter the thing is such a great movie that I can't find any movies like that, I watched it at least five times already and last week I watched it again and I wish there was any movie that could give me that feeling this movie does but unfortunately there isn't
Even if the effects would’ve been untouched, the whole movies WAS designed to be a remake from the very first script stages. There’s really only this one story and nothing more. And since the fandom of that film is such a dedicated one, they could’ve easily seen this coming, with or without cgi
I just watched the original a couple nights ago, and while, in my opinion, it's still a flawed film, "John Carpenter's The Thing" absolutely deserves the acclaim it has received over the years. Now, the prequel does open well, the ending that catches up to the beginning of the '82 film is interesting, and I do like Mary Elizabeth Winstead's performance in the lead role. However, yes, the cg effects are poor, there were no moments in the prequel that could compare to the thrill of the scene in the kennel from Carpenter's film, or the amazing blood test sequence ("Open your mouth" just doesn't measure up to it). However, I would now very much like to see the "pilot version" that you describe. Very good and informative video.
I appreciate this movie. I appreciate all the love and respect the filmmakers had for the 82 film. Watching this and its predecessor back to back made me like this movie more. I don’t think it deserves all the hate it got
I don't understand how the subplot of the aliens also collecting the Thing would have been difficult to understand. It's basically the same instance as Alien (the crashed wreckage, the dead pilot, the cargo hold, etc.) and I never found any difficulty understanding the connection between the pilot and the eggs.
I haven't seen this one (and forgot it even existed), but it's main problem is that it doesn't need to exist. The 80s version was are rare good reboot that did everything right and told a complete story. It didn't need prequels or sequels.
1. Many, including me, feel the 1982 movie works best as a standalone. 2. I would love to see the pilot version and my name is on that petition. 3. I saw it in theaters and I knew it was going to be bad. 4. The movie does have a nice lull to it. While it was on Netflix, I would put it on to fall asleep. Apparently, many others had the same idea because it got a major boost of viewers which got it media news articles.
What really urked me about this movie was the missed potential. The potential for false positives in their version of the 'bloodtest' was such an awesome set up with tons of room for tension and paranoia... Then literally the very next scene is all hell breaking loose, most of the cast dying, and all tension being thrown out the window. Why? Why throw away and waste the best idea the film introduced? It bugs me.
I'm not good at dissecting a movie, even I really knowing what makes a good movie versus a bad one. I watched the prequel a few times before I ever watched John Carpenter's, and quite likely have defended it once or twice. Then I got John Carpenter's The Thing on DVD for myself. I gave it a little while, then watched the prequel first and then what I will from now on say is the good one. I can still watch the one from 2011, but the one from 1982 had me turning lights on until I was falling asleep.
When you see stories about Alien Romulus going back and fixing the digital mask over the animatronic Rook for its home video release, it makes me wonder if we'll ever see the Pilot cut of The Thing and undo the CGI mess they released in theaters. I know it won't fix the movie's structure, but at least let us see what they originally wanted.
As a massive fan of the original, I certainly don't think we needed a prequel. Going back to the previous team and seeing how they dealt with the monster is fun, but there are certainly plenty of moments that feel like normal prequel bait. "These two men are weirdly conjoined. See how that happened!" It's a film answering questions we didn't have, solving a mystery the first film already solved. On that front, it doesn't really do much. With that said, it's pretty clear even from the compromised version of the film we did get that a lot of thought and care went into this movie. They tried really hard and that comes out on screen. Despite the bad hack job of an edit, and the CGI that hasn't aged that well in retrospect (although I did watch the film in theaters and it certainly wasn't the worst CGI we were getting at the time), there was a core of a decent film in here that at least makes it watchable. It's not as good as the original, but then, how many horror films really can be?
Always felt like the idea of the Thing being a passenger that takes over alien pilot’s to be tiptoeing into being convoluted for really no good reason. I prefer to think of the Thing as a unique alien that simply lost control of its ship. Just as it was in the original novella.
no, they show the second lead in great peril, not like they show the corpse, or a bullet to the head (I mean it would be some serious deus ex machina to survive). It is actually a good tactic, if one of the main characters looks to be in that level of peril, then no-one is safe. It doesn't work for an action film, but it does for horror, besides if you know it is a prequel, you know they are all done for
So what I'm getting from this is, some folks thought they knew better and was fucking wrong. But then again when The Thing came out in 1982 it didn't do so well at first and it found following. The 2011 will never have a following.
You educated me! I assumed it was a crappy remake so I never watched it (exactly as you suggested). Maybe I'll give it a try although it sounds like I might be watching a substandard version instead of something that could have been decent. 😏
Great video and I personally don’t hate the film either and in fact I show it to my sister for the first time yesterday but I like the film but I do feel and believe that they is a better version or cut of that movie somewhere with the practical effects and more character development and the plot alien ending firgures cross that the likes of shout factory and arrow can get the director’s cut on blu ray or 4K in the future
I think it’s a shame because maybe it just came out too early, if this was made post stranger things I doubt the practical effects looking like an 80’s movie would be an issue
A sequel in an oil rig wouldn't be that much different than that movie Virus, starring Jamie Lee Curtis and one of the lesser Baldwin brothers. (which incidentally also bombed)
I liked this film. I blocked out the Tetris thing... When this film works, it works well, when it doesn't it is bad... I would buy the Pilot cut if they released it.... maybe that's the way to get it released... open up pre-orders for a Blu Ray release
10:30. How can CGI be tweaked 24 hours before the film debuts in theaters? There is a time where copies of the film need to be printed and sent to the theaters.
I think audience must have been seduced with what cgi could do at the time (avatar) and thought it was possible to do on a project like this maybe? Really feels like the film deserves the cut and effect it was meant to have.
To be honest I do like the Thing (2011). I think it's a great sci-fi/horror movie. Maybe it's because the first time I saw the movie I haven't seen the original yet. Sure, if we compared the 2011 the Thing to the original, the original the Thing is definitely much better. But I still like the movie.
I was so happy when I heard about the movie and was happy to hear that they were going to do practical effects and then saw the movie. But was disappointed when they didn't follow through with the practical effects they promised. It is a good movie but not as good as the John Carpenters movie. I wish they would release the practical effects version with the pilot ending.
I personally think it was more of a disappointment than a bad movie, and I don't mean that they should have kept the practical effects, which if done well would of course have given the movie a quality boost, but the story was actually perfect, the movie fits in well with the original and has good points of connection, The problem was the bad characters, tension and editing, but that doesn't make it a bad movie, there was a lot of crap that came out in the meantime that is more highly regarded
the 82 version is better than the book. so a new film based on lost material still won't satisfy or live up the 82. hopefully they one day release pilot 2011 version
It was most certainly what I heard about the practical effects being replaced by CGI that turned me off the idea of buying a ticket for this. I actually thought it was a great idea for a prequel. I wanted to see what happened at the Norwegian camp. The moment I heard about the switcharoo in the effects I immediately became despondent in my attitude to the film. Never did see it. Would like to see the original version. Refuse to watch the Tetris version.
While I think this was an amazing horror movie I prefer the Original black and white "Thing from another world". I did'nt even know they made another Thing movie ??
Several things: - I don't care about FX being incredible or medicore wether practical or CGI as long as the idea in fun. I can still thoroughly enjoy Ray Harryhausen! Blaming the CGI is an excause. - Yep, giving the NOT-prequal (I get to that and you'll be surprised) the exact same title was beyond idiotic. Some fans might have thought the producers desired to replace the Carpenter movie. - Making a prequal based on one mere sequence of the Carpenter movie, ending up having the exact same movie again is also idiotic. It's a remake camoflaged as a prequal! Nobody buys that. - Injecting this Ridley-Scott "Alien" theme with the back story was also idiotic. It's two movies now. - Not understanding the source material and coming up with an entirly different species was also idiotic. Read further and be surprised ... the one thing you all didn't saw: In Carpenters film the species NEVER attacks! The absolute priorety is to HIDE! The species SOLELY goes into action when self defense is the last resort aka being discovered -> remember the blood test scene and how long it took for the alien to jump into action. But you can check any other scene, the alien NEVER attacks, only defends. In the NOT-prequal the alien goes on a hunting spree, unnecsassarely killing people when it's perfectly safe from discovery. The NOT-prequal shows a completely different lifeform. "The Thing 2011" simply is lazy as faak, trying to cash in on the name while at the same time not giving the audience an original idea but boring nonesense (alien space crew/Tetris). Everything else is just blame shifting.
The problem with 2011 the thing is that it feels just like a stupid slasher movie, the original thing has atmospheric sound design, every time you see anything mind-boggling there is no music, it's just loud sound of the thing, no loud music or unnecessary loud sound, it's either the thing making some strange sound or the small creatures making some kind of sound it's always the part of the thing, but the remake is just too much shouting and too much loud music and the thing is just a big giant brain dead creature, it just feel like a stupid movie with a stupid monster, people blame the makeup or CGI but I don't think even if they did the practical effect the movie would still be shit, because of all other aspect of the movie was bad, just as I mentioned the loud sounds and the thing is just so fast it's breaking everything and just chasing everyone around is another aspect which is a typical stupid monster movie trope, All the characters are just one dimensional either they are good or bad, There is no middle ground They don't even feel like real people ,They just feel like good guy or bad guy, so there is lots of things wrong with 2011 the thing, and the worst thing is that the atmosphere the original thing feels like something that no movie ever made me feel like and I don't even know how to explain it,,
No one wants to spit on that Thing
Well said
Is this a Hawk Tuah reference?
The idea of hyper advanced space faring aliens facing the same fate as the Norwegian team is such a cool concept. The amount of dread you get thinking “if they couldn’t contain it, what hope do we have”? Is unparalleled.
The big problem with this film is that it "shows" too much. In the 82 The Thing, you didn't see the assimilation of the Thing, you didn't know who the Thing was. Here they went down the path of body horror, and completely lost the message of the original, which was about loneliness and paranoia.
one thing the prequel did do right in regards to the theme of paranoia is the language barrier between the Norwegians and the Americans. I just wish they would have expanded on that more.
@@isenhartproductions2677 I think it's a mistake that the Americans were even there. The original film makes it pretty clear that the other station is entirely Norwegians. The chaos begins because the one survivor is shouting at them in Norwegian, whereas if he'd been part of a mixed US/Norway team he would have spoken to MacReady's crew in English. When Mac and Doc inspect the Norwegian camp, they can't understand the text data because it's all in Norwegian which it wouldn't be in a mixed nationality centre. Adding Americans to the prequel was clearly just about getting names with recognition on the poster.
The only problem with the prequel is what the studio did to it, it's not as great as the original, but its nowhere near as bad as some like to make out, and had it been made as intended, it would a been a great addition.
@joechapman8208 honestly i think thats nitpicky but the film has other issues
@@specialnewb9821 I don't think the film should even exist, to be clear, but if it had to then this was a core thing that could have given the project a more interesting identity, and potentially different reactions to the creature. It also didn't feel like it was happening c.1982
The love and respect the prequel for the OG was actually so commendable. The team genuinely made sure that everything fit into the canon, they made sure that practical effects were used (and from BTS footage it looked like it was damn good), and the new addition to the lore from the original ending was genuinely just so cool as it still adds to the mystery and horror of the creature but still doesn't tell us outright what it is. And then came the studio, I was robbed of an amazing prequel to one of my favorite films and I will never forget this. This was probably one of THE biggest fumbles in horror cinema just because of how bad this film turned out, and the fact that every single bad thing wasn't actually supposed to be in the film. For that, I will always defend this prequel.
I feel like in a post-substance/ terrifier world, a nee adaptation of The Thing using practical effects would do really well.
Executives and hack creatives would ruin it by insisting on too much under-rendered CGI
Absolute crime we never got a dual cut release of the film. I would love a release with both versions on it on there. Really wish the petitions had been successful.
I bet there was extensive CGI needed to cleanup the animatronic shots removing cables and extending creatures ect. And they won't ever release the cut because those shots were never even started, they just abandoned the idea of completing those shots and did the CGI redos instead
@@peterkominek2681 apparently, there was a clean version because the test audiences didnt' indicated unfinished shots, but a perceived dated look
@@uqbar42 🤔 interesting.... I would like to see that
I like to see you cover Cats next, talk about the thing of nightmares with its CGI usage!
I just can't fathom the idea of covering up all these awesome looking practical effects with subpar CGI. Why cover up all this great work with something worse?
Putting the whole effects debacle aside, this movie is just like the titular creature: a pale imitation. Bland characters, shoddy effects and creature designs, and numerous continuity issues with the 1982 classic lead to this film being an unremarkable creature feature.
Also, I can't believe the guy who wrote this would go on to write Arrival. What a turnaround!
Besides the cgi, the characters are bad
Arrival is adapted from a book
Apparently ADI had 3 months or so to do the practical fx - the legend Rob Bottin had a whole year, worked 7 days a week and ended up in hospital!
this is why sometimes working hard is not the correct thing to do. You work so hard only for your work be criticized as ugly
I wonder what 'The Thing' from a 100% Norwegian POV would have been - You and your mates dig up this frozen *thing* and take it back to base, and it breaks out and one by one your mates start to become 'not' your mates anymore. Removing any connection/ connotation to the American base might provide more freedom (I.e - You don't need to figure out how that axe gets there, nor where the two headed thing comes from)
A friend of mine has literally seen The Thing (original) hundreds of times and when she recommended the prequel I gave it a try. Watching the prequel she feels the movie-makers affection for the original, and says that it should be enjoyed as well-done fan fiction. With that intro from her, I did enjoy it. I will say that the acting in the 2011 one is quite good, and they captured something I like about the original a lot, which is the tense relational dynamics.
When I saw The Thing in the theater back in 1982 I was taken aback by how outright bad the acting is. Seriously. Otherwise the movie is glorious, including the Morricone score. The remake/prequel isn't bad; just disappointingly ordinary.
The 1951 original, Carpenter's remake, and this prequel are available in a bargain DVD set.
I never hated it it's a fine prequel that doesn't deviate from what Carpenter set up but it also adds some new layers(The Thing can't replicate non organic stuff such as fillings or earrings) .
Hell I loved the inclusion of Americans to the Norwegian camp ,it adds a somewhat paranoia .
Now the visuals were just not it
Just hearing u matter of factly describe the plot where the alien pilot sacrifices themself to try n kill the thing made me Feel so much in a single moment i cant imagine what a whole movie building up to it couldve been like
The Thing was my first ever Rated R movie, which I saw when I was four. Growing up watching the original with my dad (which he saw as a kid), and then getting to see the prequel in the theater with him was a great bonding moment for us. But sadly we both left the theater so underwhelmed by it. Then we bought it on DVD and saw the special features, and the thought of this movie just makes us both mad now lol
Yes it will never be better then The Thing 1982 that was a classic horror monster film one of my all time favourites.
I know a lot of people don't really care about anyone in Hollywood at the moment, and there's plenty of reasons why it's become a garbage fire, but this is one of those times when I actually feel pity for everyone working on a film. I saw those practical effects years back and they looked really creepy, which is a GOOD thing. They looked so lifelike and just so...Thing like. And knowing now that chunks of the script were cut out just so the movie was faster, and said chunks contained bits of character development is just infuriating. Seriously, upper execs and test audiences should not be the end all be all of what is put into a movie.
This movie's story also reminds me of another movie called Small Soldiers. Originally it was supposed to be a darker, more edgier 90s action flick that incorporated really nice practical effects for the living toys, but ultimately the higher ups told them to tone the movie down and instead of practical effects, use CGI. Granted, that movie, imo, was a really fun and cheesy watch, but it still wasn't what the director and others wanted for it.
I love Small Soldiers but I didn't know that history. I'll have to look into it
@@isenhartproductions2677 It's actually a pretty interesting story. Something else neat that happened, that sadly probably won't go anywhere, was this proof-of-concept reimagining of the movie in full CGI with new characters. It was actually well done for a short.
ua-cam.com/video/bcPqSTUt5D8/v-deo.html&pp=ygUWU21hbGwgU29sZGllcnMgaGlzdG9yeQ%3D%3D
@@isenhartproductions2677 would make for a good video Small Soldiers is such an icon
Is extremely sad how the studio butchered this movie. I think it was ok, but the ending was the thing could have made it so distinct to the first one and launch a saga. Lovely video, as usual 👌🏼
Originally the 2011 remake was supposed to have practical effects....Something went terribly wrong obviously😢
The problem with the movie is that its trying to be a stealth remake of the 1982 version, but with a female lead. If it had been a subtitled film with all Norwegian characters, it could have brought something new to the story, and the language barrier could have also added to the paranoia.
well done bro you knocked it outta the park once again, now Push 2009, Green Lantern 2011, Fantastic Four 2015 and The Last Airbender 2010 are definitely ones I wanna see you tackle next whenever you get the chance and keep up the good work love your videos.
Thank you I'm hoping to cover Green Lantern soon
Fantastic Four failed because Josh Trank did not want to do a traditional superhero film but a body horror story like something that David Cronenberg would do and that should of been a red flag and also the first screen writer hired to write the film had something good going but Fox did not want to give a huge budget for Fantastic Four which was a big deal
Haven’t watched the video yet but I already know it’s great!
Ronald D Moore wrote a BUNCH of awesome episodes of Star Trek: TNG and DS9. I really want to see his script for this movie now.
I lie to myself and say I like it, but that's just my crush on MEW talking. It's ironic that the more the studios interfere to make films better, the worse they become.
They were planning on a sequel to the prequel to The Thing
I get a headache just reading that sentence 😁
aaah my head
I’ve seen a bunch of videos on the production of this film, yours is by far the best one 👏🏽
If you had told me the thing the 2nd used exclusively cg id have believed it, such a shame that we'll never actually see the full vision as it was intended
If you all want to see what this could've been like, then go seek out Harbinger Down. It was mostly produced by Amalgamated Dynamics themselves and it's basically The Thing on a boat. The script and acting are Sci-Fi channel levels, but you do get to see the practical horror in action. And it reviewed better than The Thing II did.
As for the name, I agree, huge problem because it intimates a remake. In reality a prequel. But the idea of going practical is awesome. A great throwback to the 1982 movie and the ground breaking effects done by Rob Bottin. At only 23, Rob was way ahead of his time. He set a very high bar to meet.
I still have to watch it. Michel Abramowicz, the cinematographer, is à very good friend. Strangely we never talked about it.
Man, I forgot about this fiasco. Ever since I saw the practical effects footage I always wanted to see the original cut.
The opening really says it all: two producers saw another film making money, so they attempted to do the same. I feel like when test audiences get involved, producers will just use whatever reactions they get to justify any changes or cuts they wanted in the first place.
Look at the 2017 Mummy and Dark Universe.
Saw this in theaters when it came out. I can't say I have a lot of love for it...
Studio execs had absolutely no understanding of The Thing, so we end up with an obvious antagonist that, of course, must be the _final boss_ for our hero to defeat. There are good things here, like The Thing going from an aggressive animalistic monster, to a more careful manipulator. The idea that The Thing will simply spit out metal is clever, but boils down to the characters questioning each other's dental hygiene... I think I would have preferred the camp be entirely foreign actors, without any US actors being shoehorned in.
I like your presentation here, and I totally agree with everything; Carpenter's film is a classic. But there's just one element I felt you should've mentioned; you kept referring to the '82 film as "the original", but neglected to mention that it is itself a remake of 1951's 'The Thing From Another World', which is considered a classic in its own right. The whole reason Carpenter wanted to make his version in the first place was because he's a huge fan of the '51 film, and even used footage from it in his remake as a "home movie" depicting the events of this prequel. Just thought that deserved mentioning. =)
The most surprising part for me was the reveal of a footlose remake released in 2010
That ADI three-eyed alien, known as the "pilot", would have suited the three-eyed monster mentioned in "Who goes there". A absolute shame they messed that up and cut it from the film alltogether.
I was like 13 when I came across this movie without seeing the original, and I really liked it at the time. But after seeing the '82 film, I understood that all of the best elements of the prequel were ripped straight from the original.
I do like the ending of the prequel tho. That's cool stuff
People tend to blame the decision to replace the practical FX with shoddy CGI for the film's quality, but it's more than that. The premise, the set, the acting are just as good as the 1982 film. But the pacing, the reliance on cheap jump scares and the many many "crew fights the creature" scenes, which did nothing but reduce the overcrowded cast, made this one a generic creature feature. And the 1982 film still stands as an absolute classic in subtle horror, amazing atmosphere and brilliant practical effects to this day.
i worked with an actor who had one of the bigger parts before he backed out of the film(or maybe replaced by force). He had some interesting stories to tell...
Go on….
they ran a train on Elizabeth didn't they?
What were the stories?
Source: trust me bro?
@@southlondon86 its well known in norway since many of the actors were norwegian. he just told the details.
The John Carpenter the thing is such a great movie that I can't find any movies like that, I watched it at least five times already and last week I watched it again and I wish there was any movie that could give me that feeling this movie does but unfortunately there isn't
Even if the effects would’ve been untouched, the whole movies WAS designed to be a remake from the very first script stages. There’s really only this one story and nothing more. And since the fandom of that film is such a dedicated one, they could’ve easily seen this coming, with or without cgi
Ok the idea for the prequel sequel is literally the plot for the cancelled The Thing 2 game
I just watched the original a couple nights ago, and while, in my opinion, it's still a flawed film, "John Carpenter's The Thing" absolutely deserves the acclaim it has received over the years. Now, the prequel does open well, the ending that catches up to the beginning of the '82 film is interesting, and I do like Mary Elizabeth Winstead's performance in the lead role. However, yes, the cg effects are poor, there were no moments in the prequel that could compare to the thrill of the scene in the kennel from Carpenter's film, or the amazing blood test sequence ("Open your mouth" just doesn't measure up to it). However, I would now very much like to see the "pilot version" that you describe. Very good and informative video.
Everyone should see THE VOID it’s the things spiritual successor when it comes to practical effects. It’s also on UA-cam for free
I appreciate this movie. I appreciate all the love and respect the filmmakers had for the 82 film. Watching this and its predecessor back to back made me like this movie more. I don’t think it deserves all the hate it got
I don't understand how the subplot of the aliens also collecting the Thing would have been difficult to understand. It's basically the same instance as Alien (the crashed wreckage, the dead pilot, the cargo hold, etc.) and I never found any difficulty understanding the connection between the pilot and the eggs.
Look up Jem and the Holograms, Bratz the Movie and the 2010 Avatar The Last Airbender movie
I haven't seen this one (and forgot it even existed), but it's main problem is that it doesn't need to exist. The 80s version was are rare good reboot that did everything right and told a complete story. It didn't need prequels or sequels.
1. Many, including me, feel the 1982 movie works best as a standalone.
2. I would love to see the pilot version and my name is on that petition.
3. I saw it in theaters and I knew it was going to be bad.
4. The movie does have a nice lull to it. While it was on Netflix, I would put it on to fall asleep. Apparently, many others had the same idea because it got a major boost of viewers which got it media news articles.
What really urked me about this movie was the missed potential.
The potential for false positives in their version of the 'bloodtest' was such an awesome set up with tons of room for tension and paranoia... Then literally the very next scene is all hell breaking loose, most of the cast dying, and all tension being thrown out the window. Why? Why throw away and waste the best idea the film introduced? It bugs me.
When studio executives start making creative choices you know it's going to crash and burn.
I liked the prequel, I agree, I feel it should have longer with some extra scenes
I'm not good at dissecting a movie, even I really knowing what makes a good movie versus a bad one. I watched the prequel a few times before I ever watched John Carpenter's, and quite likely have defended it once or twice.
Then I got John Carpenter's The Thing on DVD for myself. I gave it a little while, then watched the prequel first and then what I will from now on say is the good one.
I can still watch the one from 2011, but the one from 1982 had me turning lights on until I was falling asleep.
When you see stories about Alien Romulus going back and fixing the digital mask over the animatronic Rook for its home video release, it makes me wonder if we'll ever see the Pilot cut of The Thing and undo the CGI mess they released in theaters. I know it won't fix the movie's structure, but at least let us see what they originally wanted.
As a massive fan of the original, I certainly don't think we needed a prequel. Going back to the previous team and seeing how they dealt with the monster is fun, but there are certainly plenty of moments that feel like normal prequel bait. "These two men are weirdly conjoined. See how that happened!" It's a film answering questions we didn't have, solving a mystery the first film already solved. On that front, it doesn't really do much.
With that said, it's pretty clear even from the compromised version of the film we did get that a lot of thought and care went into this movie. They tried really hard and that comes out on screen. Despite the bad hack job of an edit, and the CGI that hasn't aged that well in retrospect (although I did watch the film in theaters and it certainly wasn't the worst CGI we were getting at the time), there was a core of a decent film in here that at least makes it watchable. It's not as good as the original, but then, how many horror films really can be?
Always felt like the idea of the Thing being a passenger that takes over alien pilot’s to be tiptoeing into being convoluted for really no good reason. I prefer to think of the Thing as a unique alien that simply lost control of its ship. Just as it was in the original novella.
5:15 did they seriously put the second lead's death in the trailer?
no, they show the second lead in great peril, not like they show the corpse, or a bullet to the head (I mean it would be some serious deus ex machina to survive).
It is actually a good tactic, if one of the main characters looks to be in that level of peril, then no-one is safe.
It doesn't work for an action film, but it does for horror, besides if you know it is a prequel, you know they are all done for
So what I'm getting from this is, some folks thought they knew better and was fucking wrong. But then again when The Thing came out in 1982 it didn't do so well at first and it found following.
The 2011 will never have a following.
The GOAT is back !
I’d like to see you talk about Mortdecai (2015).
Really wish the og cut of the film would get released
You educated me!
I assumed it was a crappy remake so I never watched it (exactly as you suggested).
Maybe I'll give it a try although it sounds like I might be watching a substandard version instead of something that could have been decent. 😏
Wish the original cut was available somewhere
Release the pilot cut.
I enjoyed the 2011 version but practical effects would have been brilliant
Yeah this was something
Great video and I personally don’t hate the film either and in fact I show it to my sister for the first time yesterday but I like the film but I do feel and believe that they is a better version or cut of that movie somewhere with the practical effects and more character development and the plot alien ending firgures cross that the likes of shout factory and arrow can get the director’s cut on blu ray or 4K in the future
I think it’s a shame because maybe it just came out too early, if this was made post stranger things I doubt the practical effects looking like an 80’s movie would be an issue
Fwiw, I really enjoyed this film. The CGI aged poorly, and it's far inferior to the previous film. But it's not a bad Lovecraftian horror film.
I like both movies
Look at The Dark Tower.
2:21
A bit late for a warning dude. You already showed footage from the original.
A sequel in an oil rig wouldn't be that much different than that movie Virus, starring Jamie Lee Curtis and one of the lesser Baldwin brothers.
(which incidentally also bombed)
I liked this film. I blocked out the Tetris thing... When this film works, it works well, when it doesn't it is bad... I would buy the Pilot cut if they released it.... maybe that's the way to get it released... open up pre-orders for a Blu Ray release
10:30. How can CGI be tweaked 24 hours before the film debuts in theaters? There is a time where copies of the film need to be printed and sent to the theaters.
I wish we saw a sequel to the 2004 Dawn Of The Dead.
The pilot ending was waaaay better.
They have the pilot version right? I think they would have maybe release that
honestly i really don’t think the cgi looks that bad most of the time
I love anything that Mary Elizabeth Winstead is in if she did a hamburger commercial, I would go out and buy it even if I was vegan
I think audience must have been seduced with what cgi could do at the time (avatar) and thought it was possible to do on a project like this maybe?
Really feels like the film deserves the cut and effect it was meant to have.
To be honest I do like the Thing (2011). I think it's a great sci-fi/horror movie. Maybe it's because the first time I saw the movie I haven't seen the original yet. Sure, if we compared the 2011 the Thing to the original, the original the Thing is definitely much better. But I still like the movie.
It wasn't a bad movie, it was a solid film with poor dead space cgi that killed the immersion.
Did you like The Thing 2011
Let me know what you
THINGK
I like the 2011 prequel. It’s too bad the practical effects they filmed were covered with CGI.
The original is a straight ten. The 2011 was fun. And wish we got that today.
I've never seen it, as I thought it was another reboot.
I was so happy when I heard about the movie and was happy to hear that they were going to do practical effects and then saw the movie. But was disappointed when they didn't follow through with the practical effects they promised. It is a good movie but not as good as the John Carpenters movie. I wish they would release the practical effects version with the pilot ending.
I personally think it was more of a disappointment than a bad movie, and I don't mean that they should have kept the practical effects, which if done well would of course have given the movie a quality boost, but the story was actually perfect, the movie fits in well with the original and has good points of connection,
The problem was the bad characters, tension and editing, but that doesn't make it a bad movie, there was a lot of crap that came out in the meantime that is more highly regarded
the 82 version is better than the book. so a new film based on lost material still won't satisfy or live up the 82. hopefully they one day release pilot 2011 version
Its not great but I kind of like it since I am a big fan of MEW since Deathproof.
It was most certainly what I heard about the practical effects being replaced by CGI that turned me off the idea of buying a ticket for this. I actually thought it was a great idea for a prequel. I wanted to see what happened at the Norwegian camp. The moment I heard about the switcharoo in the effects I immediately became despondent in my attitude to the film.
Never did see it. Would like to see the original version. Refuse to watch the Tetris version.
I enjoyed it mostly because MEW is a qt 3.14
While I think this was an amazing horror movie I prefer the Original black and white "Thing from another world". I did'nt even know they made another Thing movie ??
Can someone tell me why these channels so often cover the same movie at the same time?
Several things:
- I don't care about FX being incredible or medicore wether practical or CGI as long as the idea in fun. I can still thoroughly enjoy Ray Harryhausen! Blaming the CGI is an excause.
- Yep, giving the NOT-prequal (I get to that and you'll be surprised) the exact same title was beyond idiotic. Some fans might have thought the producers desired to replace the Carpenter movie.
- Making a prequal based on one mere sequence of the Carpenter movie, ending up having the exact same movie again is also idiotic. It's a remake camoflaged as a prequal! Nobody buys that.
- Injecting this Ridley-Scott "Alien" theme with the back story was also idiotic. It's two movies now.
- Not understanding the source material and coming up with an entirly different species was also idiotic. Read further and be surprised ... the one thing you all didn't saw:
In Carpenters film the species NEVER attacks! The absolute priorety is to HIDE! The species SOLELY goes into action when self defense is the last resort aka being discovered -> remember the blood test scene and how long it took for the alien to jump into action. But you can check any other scene, the alien NEVER attacks, only defends. In the NOT-prequal the alien goes on a hunting spree, unnecsassarely killing people when it's perfectly safe from discovery. The NOT-prequal shows a completely different lifeform.
"The Thing 2011" simply is lazy as faak, trying to cash in on the name while at the same time not giving the audience an original idea but boring nonesense (alien space crew/Tetris).
Everything else is just blame shifting.
It seems like this awful, pointless prequel would have been slightly more tolerable in its original form.
i saw it. i hate it. thanks.
The problem with 2011 the thing is that it feels just like a stupid slasher movie, the original thing has atmospheric sound design, every time you see anything mind-boggling there is no music, it's just loud sound of the thing, no loud music or unnecessary loud sound, it's either the thing making some strange sound or the small creatures making some kind of sound it's always the part of the thing, but the remake is just too much shouting and too much loud music and the thing is just a big giant brain dead creature, it just feel like a stupid movie with a stupid monster, people blame the makeup or CGI but I don't think even if they did the practical effect the movie would still be shit, because of all other aspect of the movie was bad, just as I mentioned the loud sounds and the thing is just so fast it's breaking everything and just chasing everyone around is another aspect which is a typical stupid monster movie trope, All the characters are just one dimensional either they are good or bad, There is no middle ground They don't even feel like real people ,They just feel like good guy or bad guy, so there is lots of things wrong with 2011 the thing, and the worst thing is that the atmosphere the original thing feels like something that no movie ever made me feel like and I don't even know how to explain it,,
I actually kinda liked it 🤷♂️
um the 80's movie is not the first thing, its the second and a remake, first one is the thing from another world and the same story pretty much
I don’t care what anyone says, I like this movie, and I think the visual effects are impressive.