Added: 5 months ago
From: TheThingPrequel
Views: 35,987
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (100)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Prequel!

    In swedish, prequel.

  • 2011 version is a P R E Q U E L to 82- version. But its a remake of the -51 movie "the thing from another world". And why r so many of you oldies bitching about the CGI? C`mon, guys, you were probably easily scared kids watching the "original" in -82, but hey; though it was pretty well made, it wasnt convincing at all. 2011 rocks as a prequel, and is relatively faithful to Carpenters version. The only thing I didnt find matching -82 version was /MINOR SPOILER/ how the Norwegians dug up the ufo.

  • @Fettsomf

    Actually 1982's movie was a faithful re-adaptation of Who Goes There by John Campbell which inspired the 1951 version

  • I personlly enjoyed the prequel but i found a major inconsistency in the plot (SPOILERS), in the John Carpenter film the American crew finds tapes of the Norwegians when they discovered the space ship and it clearly explains that they dug the ship out by using thermite charges while in the prequel it is shown tht the ice above the ship was melted away by the ship's engins. I usually don't bover about continuity holes but this was a bit hard not to notice on the producer's behalf

  • Comment removed

  • what's the deal with this? if you watch the trailer carefully enough you can tell right away who will become the thing!! there's no mystery and no fun!

  • @yujifanik Agreed.

  • I thought they were supposed to be norwegin, o_O where was she when those teo guys were trying to blow up the dog in order to translate o_O

  • it's like dead space but antartida coool

  • CGI SUCKS!!!! IT'S NOT SCARY!!!! PLEASE LOOK AT THE 1982 AND SEE WHAT I MEAN!!!

  • @72281livefreeordie : Exactly, The first one with Kurt freaked me out as a kid.

  • @72281livefreeordie CGI rules. And these movies isnt scary anyways. I`ve seen all the thing films, and I dont at all understand what you mean!!!!!!!!!

  • Looks shitty

  • Just got back from seeing it, it wasn't really bad on its own, just so-so with some really bad design choices. I really hate to be a 'CGI snob' but it just doesn't cut it, most of the time it looks really, really fake, but some of the practical effects are decent. The characters are boring, there's two major plot holes, and the Thing's way too into jump scares and 'ogga bogga bogga' moments which completely destroys any kind of fear. All and all, ok creature flick, bad Thing movie.

  • TheThing number 3.............. F**k!

  • The so called "professional" reviewers saying this movie sucks can SUCK IT!! This movie was made BY fans..FOR the FANS!! This was an excellent companion piece to John Carpenter's movie, me as a The Thing fan was impressed by this movie. By no means can it touch Carpenter's classic, but even the producers knew they could never even dream of doing such a thing, that's why they set out to do their own thing, and excellent it was!!!

  • @venacagar222 Very well said. Finally someone who understand!

  • I'm really tired of people calling it a "remake" For Gods sake! It's a prequel!!! and I don't know if they can make it anymore clearer than that! Several hints in the trailers. You hear and see them discover the thing buried in the ice! C'mon people!!

  • @NuttyButties its a premake :) jk

  • The thing is a killer who mutilated his victims and hid inside of them, so clearly he is a role model for children everywhere.

  • I WATHCED THIS MOVIE: i watched the original 1950's The Thing and the 1980 remake, and now the 2011 preguel. And i also played the "The Thing' xbox game. I am a huge fan of The Thing and try to keep my opinion as non bias as possible but i thought the movie was awesome. Looked great, felt great. The speed was good, and the level of fear and anticipation throughout the movie was good. The ending started to get a bit dull but was topped off with what i thought was a pefect ending. 5/5!

  • for all the retards out there. this is a prequel! say it with me! prequel!

  • @26Deacon

    PREQUEL!!!!!

  • Guys i HIGHLY recommend you see this! Trust me! I just came from it and I WILL have nightmares of that creepy space thingy. If your looking for a scare, then try this on for size!

  • @LoveableHybrid I just saw it and left the theater feeling very satisfied. It's a fine, frightening film and ties in perfectly with Carpenter's 1982 film. Now it's like there are two halves of one long movie.

  • @culversketch that's cool and I agree with ya even though I didn't see the old one. *Laughs*

  • When that thing morphs behind Winstead at the end of the trailer, I shit my panties.

  • U have a point ,but i think its gona start off low key, then become a full on up front attacker movie, we could be wrong....? tho

  • This trailer proves enough that it will not compare to the 82 Movie remake, the 50's one and the novel. What made the Thing scary was the lack constant attack. When the creature was trapped or cornered then it would go full out but it would always attack from the shadows. This prequel will most likely make it a straight front attacker instead of something you barely see. My expectations are very low for this film but hopefully it will deliver

  • I've always loved how Mary Elizabeth Winstead screams.

  • DITTO

  • I hate it when people think the 80's "the thing" is the original when it's a remake from the 1950's " the thing" which is made from a novel called " who goes there"

  • Drives me mad when people say this is a remake

  • I love that so many people are mad at this film, so far away from it's release, if I have but one complaint, it's that poor Jed, the dog from the first movie has died now, so can't return :( RIP Jed, the highest hopes for this movie

  • It's crazy how many people believe this is a remake and not a prequel. If you watch the many trailers released for this movie, you can clearly find that it's about the Norwegians.

  • Well technically they all don't die in the movie, because two of them get killed in the first movie, so we are routing for at least two survivors to die in the first film.

  • holy shit.

  • Ssoooo pumped for this I am a huge fan of the original ....and I'm sure this won't disappoint us fans........let's hope not ha

  • this looks crazy as fuck! cant wait to watch it. i dont think fans will be disappointed

  • pause at 0:55

  • That very last shot was a spoiler. It reveals that Kim Bubbs' character becomes infected.

  • Gone are the days where they thought it was a Super-Carrot.

  • wow this gonna be awesome they took the old version the guys form DAWN of the dead remade this!!

  • CGI can be good as long as it`s not overdone. I do know the director is a huge fan of the original and continuity was a main part of what he wanted to do, mainly by explaining everything from the original from the axe in the door to how that guy slit his wrists and throat. I am intrigued.

  • I think Dead Space for some reason whenever I see a preview for this movie....

  • @GEEKinITatHOME THE THING CANT COMPARE TO DEAD SPACE FOR 1 ITS NOT IN SPACE TWO ITS IN ANTARTICA AND I AM A BIG FAN OF BOTH. :))))

  • @xXTRITONXLXx I was thinking more about how the monster looks, and behavior of it.

  • @GEEKinITatHOME true true :) somewhat atleast

  • Damn 12 more days I cant wait! Excuse me while i go watch this trailer again...

  • All we can do is wait and view it for ourselves. This may be the prequel to the 1982 "The Thing" that Carpenter did, but remember, we are only seeing things on a new level, but how the others who originally discovered this alien handled it. Either way, let us just wait and view it on Oct 14th. Once you've seen it, then it will either be a collection to have, a movie to pass up time, or a movie to just throw in the box when it is all over. Have faith everyone! We will see how good this one is....

  • at least it's not in 3D amen!:]

  • Split-Face is a cool dude.

  • I think thus far it looks pretty good. People should stop complaining and just be happy they decided to do a prequel so at least we will know what happened at the Norwegian camp. Of course the special effects are not going to appear like they did in 1982, technology has advanced significantly and that needs to be taken advantage of but at least they are incorporating animatronics with a CGI blend to pay homage to Carpenters film and the grotesque thing.

  • i have no faith in prequels- sequels- and remakes anymore... but ill call the director a cool person if this lives up to the original...still too much CG i did read that the director said the majority was gonna be animatronics but this hasnt really convinced me thats true, it makes me assume during pre production the studio seems to pressure movies to have alot of fucking stupid fake cg

  • It will be both practical and CGI i´m fine with that we are supposed to take it one step FORWARD and make it look better and in the same universe as John Carpenters not take one step back and make it look like animatronics cause that only looks stupid. Even ROb Bottin was not happy with how it looked in the end cut!

  • i am sooooo seeing this. i think they should show the prequel then show john carpenters the thing...give everyone a double feature...that would kick ass!

  • @nj4kd Agreed, this trailer reminded me of George Lucas saying something to the effect of "People have never seen Yoda fighting before, so we'll show them, they'll love it!" And we all know how that turned out...

  • looks ok. i hope theres more practical effects than we see here. and this trailer reveals too much

  • mmmhhhh...... as a huge fan of JC's version, this new one better be good otherwise.....

    But who knows, it might surprise us.

  • @insanelook Otherwise what? Otherwise it will be bad?

  • It looks decent imo.Looking forward to it.

  • Hmm, this reminds me of an older movie. . Is it a remake or just a continue?

  • @Deadneek PREQUEL =)

  • @TheThingPrequel The usename. . attention activated!

  • @TheThingPrequel It kinda sucks that we (the ones who watched the John Carpenter (1982) film), knows what happens to them at the end. >:

  • @Fubukio THEY ALL DIE :)

  • @Steven77769 God Dang It. >: Why did you have to spoil it for those who haven't watch it? >:

  • @Fubukio Cause those who haven't seen the original 1982 version Don't deserve to see this one! lol John carpenter said the true fans are the one who watched the original and loved it the first time they saw it :D

  • @Steven77769 You know, you actually can't be too sure about that. Obviously, this movie starts off before the events of the original, which I happen to be a huge fan of. However, what if, at one point, this movie runs parallel to its predecessor?

  • @Steven77769 Yeah but just let them watch this one first then watch the John Carpenter one as a continuous timeline. Rather than future first then the past like Star Wars.

  • @TheThingPrequel Yup i thought it was a shock they used the old universal logo just to show us it's an prequel. in fact i was hoping near the end we'd see mcredy looking out his cabin when the dog and the helicopter are running in the distance toward the camp. But where they ended it was fine.

  • @Deadneek yeah, it's a prequel. It's set in the norewegian camp from the first film.

  • This looks fucking terrible.

  • Maybe this is the only horror movie where CGI looks right!? and I hate CGI...

  • The 2faced Norwegian thing looks alot more dangerous than in carpenter's movie, :P Probably because it was just a death body.

  • I'm starting worry now. My experience tell me if a movie show so much scene in a trailer. That mean they already show every or at least 70% of the greatest moment in the movie.....

  • Bottin did a fine job with practical effects in 1982......CGI with flesh and blood never quite looks right....!  but we will see......

  • Dudes chill... this was a freaking 1:07 trailer. The director said countless times is 70% Practical effects, 30% CGI. Have some faith men!!!!

  • @KronnangDunn Really?? Oh, thank GOD.

  • @KronnangDunn Agreed. If more movies took it from the past... Practical effects scare the shit outta me...I can see CGI immedialty but practical effects, though blatant and in your face look real.

  • @KronnangDunn

    I agree there where a LOT of practical effects in the movie!

    Too many people have the problem that if its not 100% practical or 100% CG its crap! Which is stupid! GoW or any other video game never NEVER got the kind of flak that CG effects get!

    Plus! When they look at video game 3D stills they all say "WOW! THAT AMAZING!!!" Hm? I smell a little hypocricy in the air, don't you???

  • @KronnangDunn nope, all CGI....

  • I must say that while it looks good (story wise), the CGI has hit a sour note with me. I undersatnd that it's 2011 but I believe that enhancing practical effects would've made it look more realistic. As it is it looks shitty. I will reserve COMPLETE disappointment until I see the finished released theatrical print. I pray that Im impressed and proven wrong! I want to be so wrong!

  • @positivityforever Imagine if they used still shot motions like they did with the cut scene on the Blair model? It's all a state of mind my brotha.

  • I must say that while it looks good (story wise), the CGI has hit a sour note with me. I undersatnd that it's 2011 but I believe that enhancing practical effects would've made it look more realistic. As it is it looks shitty. I will reserve COMPLETE disappointment until I see the finished released theatrical print. I pray that Im impressed and proven wrong! I want to be so wrong!

  • Oh dear, a real shame about all the unreal looking CGI... We were told it would be practical effects augmented with a little CGI (to cover up the seams so to speak) - judging by this trailer, it seems to be the other way around! Still, I refuse to just be a hater spreading hate and negativity, but this has extinguished my fire somewhat... :(

  • @rjbetty84 I still think they're covering up most of the practical effects to shock the audiences who never saw the original. I always thought one thing lacking from the original is the fact that the creatures couldn't do much as far as moving around, walking, etc because of the limitations of the practical effects. Today's CG allows them to let the creatures actually do some damage. But like I said before, I think they added some CG to the trailers to fool people. Can't wait for this movie.

  • @leviathan3k2000 I hope so! Appreciate your positivity.

  • @rjbetty84 np. I've been defending this movie from day one, I have always had the attitude that if we haven't seen the full movie yet we don't know anything yet. Trailers have been known to do stuff like that before so I guess we'll see. Even if there is a lot of CG, it won't bother me at all as long as the movie is still good.

  • @rjbetty84 I can understand how you feel. But keep an open mind. They might be showing what we are seeing intentionally knowing the people are going to see it any ways. Then get TOTALLY blindsided when we see the movie. At least they made on, period.  Because we didn't even have a prayer before they decided to do another Thing. :)

  • KILL IT WITH FIRE!

  • DO WANT!

  • Holy shit! Gonna love it. A true horror atlast!

  • Now that looks tight. :)

  • I CANNOT WAIT! 

  • goodamn hardon

  • IMPRESSIVE!!!

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more