Carpenter's The Thing and its prequel [SPOILERS GALORE]

Cafe Society
1

I’m really not a horror fan, and generally avoid the genre. I would not willingly go the the theatre to see a horror film. But this weekend we got together with some friends, and with the lights on and complete control over the pause and stop button I felt comfortable enough to watch not only the 1982 original, but also the 2011 prequel.

I must say, even with the jovial atmosphere created by the presence of good friends and liquor, the original left me feeling… uneasy, and I was really glad I was not sleeping alone that night. And then I wasn’t. Trying not to think about alien impostors can at certain times be more difficult than at others.

I loved the music (and the sounds), and the effects really hold up. I knew (through cultural osmosis) that no-one gets out alive, and still the tension was palatable. To me, that is a testament to Carpenter’s skill.

The prequel, which we watched second, was quite good. The music was nowhere near the original’s level, but I suppose that’s understandable.
The plot was basically the same, and I already knew what the final scene would look like. Still, a good effort. I kept wondering how they’d explain the facy-melty corpse, and was not disappointed, though maybe I missed something, viewing the scene through parted fingers. The effects were smoother, but somehow less disturbing and less scary. Maybe it’s because computer-generated monsters are co common-place nowadays, even in non-horros films and shows.

After the film we went back to the original to watch the Americans exploring the Norwegian outpost, to see what the filmmakers got right, and I think some real fans of the original were involved, because the detail was amazing.

I was left impressed with both, and had to share. Maybe, when the circumstances are favourable, I’ll watch some other horror classics. (Recommendations welcome :slight_smile: )
I also learned to always take a flame-thrower with me when traveling in the Arctic.

Any fans of the Thing on the SDMB?

2

The Thing is probably the greatest horror movie ever created.

3

Then I’m glad I buckled down and watched it. :slight_smile:

4

Nitpick: Palpable.

Huhn. I had been under the impression that at least Carpenter was involved, but I see I was wrong. I wonder how I got that idea.

As for recs…you’ve watched both modern movies, why not the first adaptation of the story, 1951’s The Thing From Another World…it’s very different from the later movies (or their mutual source novella), but…you might like it, even so.

5

D’oh!

How different is it? And how like a lot of 50s horror films? (Cheesy and overacted?)

I suppose I wouldn’t be watching it to get scared (but then that suits me just fine). Is it good on its own, or is it interesting in relation to the newer versions?

6

Well, it’s more of a ‘science gone wrong’ film than a ‘paranoia’ film - the nature of the Thing is different, not a shapeshifter, is the major thing. (Why Hawkes did that, I do not know.)

Quite a bit, to be sure.

I think it’s fine as a standalone, but it’s more interesting to take it in comparison to Carpenter’s version.

7

You gotta be fuckin’ kidding.

I didn’t see the original ('51 version) until I was 24, and there was a quick scare that brought me out of my seat. COOL! And it wasn’t just me, my brother (3 years younger) was watching with me, and the scene brought a jump out of him, too.

I think the original is good on its own.

8

The Thing (the original) is probably my favorite sci-fi horror movie. Glad you enjoyed it. I’d heard that the prequel was disappointing, but never saw it myself.

If you’re interested in more Thing stuff, there’s a (third-party non-cannon) short story that’s from the alien’s perspective that I found to be an interesting read. I can’t remember the name, but I remember hearing about it on this very message board.

9

The Things by Peter Watts.

Here it is in Clarkesworld.
Really good short story.

10

The Things. Which I just finished reading and was coming into the thread to post. :smiley:

[Edit - clearly Yancey and I are slightly out of sync offshoots of the same soul.]

11

The story from the thing’s (things’?) perspective sounds interesting.

After we finished the prequel we were joking about a pre-prequel, which would tell the story of alien crash survivors who get killed off by a human, who confuses them, as he always stays the same shape.

(Now no-one take on the shape of that creature. Especially you, Florbax. Florbax? Oh my god, it’s actually the human!) (Did I mention the liquor?)

12

The original Thing is one of the great SF films of the 1950s – intelligently written, well-acted, and with bunch of just plain guys in the military dealing with a cosmic catastrophe. Overlapping dialogue and nifty humor.

Of course it almost immediately strayed from its source material, and when they tried their own hand at science, they bollixed it up. But the visuals are great (the scene with the explorers standing around the ship under the ice and realized that it’s a flying saucer is awesome. So awesome that Carpenter repeated it in his 1982 version – it’s in the Norwegian footage).

even John W, Campbell, who wrote the original story, gave the adaptation his approval when questioned about it.

The 1982 Carpenter version , with script by Burt Lancaster’s son Bill, is one of the closest SF adaptations to the source I’ve seen. I love it. The movie goes on past Campbell’s feel-good ending to an ambiguous one. Call me jaded, but I prefer Campbell’s ending.

As for the “prequel”, I didn’t care for it that much. They tried to “explain” everything at the start of the Carpenter film, but it doesn’t really fit, and they don’t comfortably go together. And why did they throw Americans into it? Why not just make them all Norwegian?

13

:confused: What’s the problem? She can’t develop a taste for horror movies?

:wink:

14

There’s a sequel to Carpenter’s Thing as well, but it’s a video game.

[QUOTE=wiki]
The game is a sequel to John Carpenter’s 1982 film, The Thing and follows the story of Captain Blake, a member of a U.S. Special Forces team sent to the Antarctic outpost featured in the film to determine what has happened to the research team. The game was endorsed by John Carpenter, who appears in an uncredited cameo. The Thing received positive reviews and sold very well.
[/QUOTE]

I thought it was only on the Xbox (the real Xbox, not the 360 or xbone) but apparently it was also on PS2 and PC.

15

I have read the short story, and enjoyed it. Thank you for recommending it.

I am, however, unsure about what the Thing means when it says it was an ambassador, since all life-forms, apart from those on Earth, can and do take part in communion. To me an ambassador is someone who has to deal with different points of view and take others’ interests into account, and here the existence of separate ‘wills’ is presented as an Earth anomaly. Myabe it just means ‘someone who makes contact with a previously uncontacted biomass’.

Still, the question of whether Childs was a Thing or not at the end of the movie, and whether it matters in the grand scheme of things, is interesting. I do think it would take rewatching the movie several times to decide one way or another, and I’m not that kind of fan yet.

16

I have yet to actually sit down with the movie and do this but, I think the answer to that question requires carefully following a little noted character in the film . . . MacReady’s bottle of whiskey.

CMC fnord!

17

And it’s amazing. One of the first games to really do squad-based gameplay right.

18

Ok, so I’m guessing there are some complicated fan theories (or are you actually a member of the Illuminati? :wink: ). Could you elaborate. I remember they shared a last drink in the ice, but what would it point to?

19

I looked, but found nothing. So, I’m pretty sure, the theory is original!
('Course I’m not sure it actually works.)

At some point, it’s clearly not shown on screen or I wouldn’t be the first, SomebodyThing gains access to MacReady’s bottle and leaves a little tissue sample. (Hence the need to really watch the film carefully and track the bottle, which I just haven’t gotten 'round to.)
or
When Nauls ditches him on the way to MacReady’s shack, which remember has the lights on when they shouldn’t be, Mac gets infected most likely from Blair. This is before the test so either; Mac isn’t fully Thing when he does the test or he’s close enough to the blood to control it’s response.
or
Childs get infected off screen and infects MacReady when they share the bottle.

Fuchs’ suggestion that they only eat food from cans that they personally prepared.

CMC fnord!< more a nod to John Carpenter and Keith David’s other great SciFi actioner They Live than anything Illuminati.

20

I originally saw Carpenter’s The Thing on television during one lazy Saturday or Sunday afternoon during the late '80s/early '90s. Loved the realistic set up of the movie. There were no cliche’d caricatures and the setting came across very believable. I got all the way up to the part where they discover the flying saucer in the snow and for some reason couldn’t finish watching it. I later saw it on DVD and felt it was a classic.

If it hasn’t already been mentioned you should check out In the Mouth of Madness directed by John Carpenter. Also, a good companion piece to the original novella, as well as the ‘82 film, is Peter Watts’ The Things. I highly recommend reading it. It’s a short story available to read online for free at Clarke’s Magazine I believe.