i liked it, but didn't like all the americans in a norwegian camp, they still cud have done it in english but it would have been more interesting that way.
Deffo liked all the bits which tied the films together, why the fella slit his wrists ect'.
Not a bad film though, better then the usual hollywood crap
I felt the Grenade dropping scene wasn't that objectionable when you realize that the guy had been up for days in a high adrenaline state. He's lucky he was walking around at that point, much less possessing the manual dexterity needed to pull off military maneuvers.
I agree with your take; people are hating way too much on this movie. It's not the masterpiece the original was, but its way better than it could have been and even had some great tense moments (filings anyone?).
@BadInfluenceMan Yes, there are some great tense moments. The filings idea was interesting and something I hadn't even thought of before as a way to detect the thing. It's not so much the dropping of the grenade that bothers me, it's more the comical throw over the shoulder that bugs me. If he had just fumbled it to the ground it would have been fine.
I think the movie was OK, but I felt using CGI in this movie was Blasphemus. What made the 1982 original version so special was the animatronics used in it, I know its hard to top that Masterpiece. Why the hell use CGI when they can take their time and do some pretty sick animatronics with today's technology. Let's hope the SEQUEL have some real THING instead of a "CGI THING".
@videotitan1 I agree mate. Have you watched the video I posted in the description? It shows you the physical effects they used before being replaced by CG and they are awesome. I just hope we get a cut of the film with the physical effects and a few of the plot changes which happened a long the way. It is definitely a film that has had too much interference.
Haven't seen the 2011 one yet sadly. I did read the novella a couple of weeks back, such a genius concept especially for the 1930's! Not brilliantly written but it doesn't detract from it. It does get a little bit silly towards the end (what the alien was going to use to escape wasn't a spaceship, it was a nuclear powered anti-gravity machine to "jump" onto main land America). You can read it for free on a website dedicated to it in Word of PDF.
@theakstonsrock I downloaded it for my Kindle and finished reading it the other night. I totally agree, it has some fantastic ideas, and I was shocked at how much of Carpenter's film is actually drawn from the novella, but it is really poorly written. It's garbled and difficult to follow at times because of this imo. I still enjoyed it though for the fantastic setting, atmosphere, and situation!
I love the 82 Thing, one of my fav films ever, I have never read the novela though, although it is on my list of things to do. I def want to watch the 51 version, I take it you can buy it on DVD? I've heard such bad things about this movie that I wasn't even going to bother but this video has given me food for thought, I will see it but the CG effects will still make me approach it with a slight negative attitude.
@lawnboyspost1975 I would check it out mate, It has issues, and is no where near as good as the original, but it is entertaining and acts nicely as a companion piece. The 1951 film is awesome! Get the DVD mate, it has John carpenter doing a commentary over it, in fact I'm convinced you'll love it! I just read the novella the other night, great ideas in it, but it's not very well written; a bit garbled at times. Still a lot of fun though!
This is so irresponsible, you should loose your channel for supporting this film. As i said its like watching a high school theatre production of the original Thing. I'm all for free speech but this is reckless!
I wanted to like it. Ok, I wanted to lurve it. I did. I so did. Maybe part of my problem is Carpenter's 'The Thing' is one of my favourite films ever. As you well know. I watched this back in November and was utterly disappointed. There are good bits, yeah. But as compared to the entirety of the atmosphere of Carpenter's one...bollocks. Sorry. I would see again (that is good). I want to be proven wrong. So much potential yet so little atmosphere. Sadly. And sorry - for me.
@23penguins32 Dont worry about it mate, I think most seem to agree with you. I actually thought the tone was fine, it was more to do with the pacing which leaves the prequel in the original's shade. In Carpenter's flick we get long, drawn out scenes of dialogue and discussion punctuated with short, onslaughts of hellish visions. In the prequel some of the scenes revealing the creature were too quick, with the camera lingering for too long. I still liked it though ;P
I haven't seen it yet, but perhaps what we have is a "2001" / "2010" situation.
When "2010" was released, it was skewered by critics and filmgoers alike. But the reason was because they were comparing it to "2001." That film was such a unique and brilliant work of art, that nothing could compare favorably to it. In the fullness of time, people have realized, I think, that "2010," while not in the same class as it forebear, is a decent, watchable film.
@PhiloYT1 That's a great analogy Philo. I do like 2010 very much, but when compared to 2001, I can see why people may have been disappointed. I think it does come down to judging a film first and foremost on its own merits. Once you have done that, then you can draw comparisons with the source material. For me, this prequel works as a film, and while it has issues, I was never bored and I am quite happy that they added to the franchise in this way.
i liked it, but didn't like all the americans in a norwegian camp, they still cud have done it in english but it would have been more interesting that way.
Deffo liked all the bits which tied the films together, why the fella slit his wrists ect'.
Not a bad film though, better then the usual hollywood crap
anlaff 1 month ago
I felt the Grenade dropping scene wasn't that objectionable when you realize that the guy had been up for days in a high adrenaline state. He's lucky he was walking around at that point, much less possessing the manual dexterity needed to pull off military maneuvers.
I agree with your take; people are hating way too much on this movie. It's not the masterpiece the original was, but its way better than it could have been and even had some great tense moments (filings anyone?).
BadInfluenceMan 1 month ago
@BadInfluenceMan Yes, there are some great tense moments. The filings idea was interesting and something I hadn't even thought of before as a way to detect the thing. It's not so much the dropping of the grenade that bothers me, it's more the comical throw over the shoulder that bugs me. If he had just fumbled it to the ground it would have been fine.
HorrorOfMike 1 month ago
I think the movie was OK, but I felt using CGI in this movie was Blasphemus. What made the 1982 original version so special was the animatronics used in it, I know its hard to top that Masterpiece. Why the hell use CGI when they can take their time and do some pretty sick animatronics with today's technology. Let's hope the SEQUEL have some real THING instead of a "CGI THING".
videotitan1 1 month ago
@videotitan1 I agree mate. Have you watched the video I posted in the description? It shows you the physical effects they used before being replaced by CG and they are awesome. I just hope we get a cut of the film with the physical effects and a few of the plot changes which happened a long the way. It is definitely a film that has had too much interference.
HorrorOfMike 1 month ago
Haven't seen the 2011 one yet sadly. I did read the novella a couple of weeks back, such a genius concept especially for the 1930's! Not brilliantly written but it doesn't detract from it. It does get a little bit silly towards the end (what the alien was going to use to escape wasn't a spaceship, it was a nuclear powered anti-gravity machine to "jump" onto main land America). You can read it for free on a website dedicated to it in Word of PDF.
theakstonsrock 1 month ago
@theakstonsrock I downloaded it for my Kindle and finished reading it the other night. I totally agree, it has some fantastic ideas, and I was shocked at how much of Carpenter's film is actually drawn from the novella, but it is really poorly written. It's garbled and difficult to follow at times because of this imo. I still enjoyed it though for the fantastic setting, atmosphere, and situation!
HorrorOfMike 1 month ago
@HorrorOfMike I should add, the telepathy idea was interesting, but I'm glad they didn't use it in the film.
HorrorOfMike 1 month ago
I love the original and I love the 2011 film just as much.
poisonxindustry 1 month ago
@poisonxindustry Great to hear someone enjoying both films like I do :)
HorrorOfMike 1 month ago
I love the 82 Thing, one of my fav films ever, I have never read the novela though, although it is on my list of things to do. I def want to watch the 51 version, I take it you can buy it on DVD? I've heard such bad things about this movie that I wasn't even going to bother but this video has given me food for thought, I will see it but the CG effects will still make me approach it with a slight negative attitude.
lawnboyspost1975 1 month ago
@lawnboyspost1975 I would check it out mate, It has issues, and is no where near as good as the original, but it is entertaining and acts nicely as a companion piece. The 1951 film is awesome! Get the DVD mate, it has John carpenter doing a commentary over it, in fact I'm convinced you'll love it! I just read the novella the other night, great ideas in it, but it's not very well written; a bit garbled at times. Still a lot of fun though!
HorrorOfMike 1 month ago
This is so irresponsible, you should loose your channel for supporting this film. As i said its like watching a high school theatre production of the original Thing. I'm all for free speech but this is reckless!
Areashiftybun 1 month ago
@Areashiftybun Not as irresponsible as your consistent spelling of the word 'lose'.
HorrorOfMike 1 month ago
@HorrorOfMike Sorry Alan wrote that comment... You know what he's like, a total free spirit.
Calum
x
Areashiftybun 1 month ago
@Areashiftybun Damn you Alan! I'll get you next time Gadget.
HorrorOfMike 1 month ago
IT'S CLOBBERIN' TIME!!!!
(sorry. i was unable to resist.)
maxmercury 1 month ago
"This is Jack Burton in the Pork Chop Express, and I'm talkin' to whoever's listenin' out there." Yes and yes. I'll take my Big Trouble :P
23penguins32 1 month ago
I wanted to like it. Ok, I wanted to lurve it. I did. I so did. Maybe part of my problem is Carpenter's 'The Thing' is one of my favourite films ever. As you well know. I watched this back in November and was utterly disappointed. There are good bits, yeah. But as compared to the entirety of the atmosphere of Carpenter's one...bollocks. Sorry. I would see again (that is good). I want to be proven wrong. So much potential yet so little atmosphere. Sadly. And sorry - for me.
23penguins32 1 month ago
@23penguins32 Dont worry about it mate, I think most seem to agree with you. I actually thought the tone was fine, it was more to do with the pacing which leaves the prequel in the original's shade. In Carpenter's flick we get long, drawn out scenes of dialogue and discussion punctuated with short, onslaughts of hellish visions. In the prequel some of the scenes revealing the creature were too quick, with the camera lingering for too long. I still liked it though ;P
HorrorOfMike 1 month ago
@HorrorOfMike They did keep that awesome bass pulse :P Gods that's brilliant :D
23penguins32 1 month ago
I haven't seen it yet, but perhaps what we have is a "2001" / "2010" situation.
When "2010" was released, it was skewered by critics and filmgoers alike. But the reason was because they were comparing it to "2001." That film was such a unique and brilliant work of art, that nothing could compare favorably to it. In the fullness of time, people have realized, I think, that "2010," while not in the same class as it forebear, is a decent, watchable film.
The prequel was doomed to this reception.
PhiloYT1 1 month ago
@PhiloYT1 That's a great analogy Philo. I do like 2010 very much, but when compared to 2001, I can see why people may have been disappointed. I think it does come down to judging a film first and foremost on its own merits. Once you have done that, then you can draw comparisons with the source material. For me, this prequel works as a film, and while it has issues, I was never bored and I am quite happy that they added to the franchise in this way.
HorrorOfMike 1 month ago