The Thing re-remake

[Zapranoth]

So I've seen media that show a The Thing remake remake -- due October.
Watched the trailer online.

Anyone know anything more about it?  Will it suck?  Will it even belong in the same conversation as the ultra-gory and wonderfully claustrophobic John Carpenter film?

[RCMerchant]

When Carpenter remade the 1951 classic,he went back to the original source-John Campbell's "Who Goes There?" Unlike the 1951 version-which showed very little of the monster,the Carpenter movie went all out.
The remake doesn't seem very original....and the director of the new one...this is his first movie! Carpenter is a great horror and action director.
I'm not optimistic.

[Skull]

I would believe the story would be more justified with a research crew finds R.J. MacReady and Childs frozen bodies and neither of them are infected, but the scraps are also found and then thawed out.

It seems that the re-make version is a Norwegians prequel to the 1982 movie, but it also seems "modern" based upon the trailer.

I'm not sure why they need to remake the 1982 version at the first place, the special effects are still standing and I bet all new viewers will jump in the heated blood scene. I also feel a justified remake should be NC-17 or it makes no sense. I dont see it happen especially since we are in the age of lite R (PG-13).

[Jack]

I'm not very optimistic.  From the trailer it looks like one of those movies that will be a moderately entertaining waste of 90 minutes, and by the next day you'll have forgotten you ever watched it.  Of course there's also a pretty fair chance that it will absolutely suck.

[InformationGeek]

Well first of all, it's not a remake at all.  It's a prequel that tells of the events 3 days before the team from John Carpenter's film shows up (Personally, I think they should have added a subtitle to avoid the confusion).  Frankly, I'm not really interested in seeing this film.  Not out of the fact that it could be bad, but for the fact that I know how it already ends.  Everyone's going to end up dying since this leads into the 1982 film.  That and I don't like the 80's film anyways.

[dean]

Well first of all, it's not a remake at all.  It's a prequel that tells of the events 3 days before the team from John Carpenter's film shows up (Personally, I think they should have added a subtitle to avoid the confusion).  Frankly, I'm not really interested in seeing this film.  Not out of the fact that it could be bad, but for the fact that I know how it already ends.  Everyone's going to end up dying since this leads into the 1982 film.  That and I don't like the 80's film anyways.

One saving grace to that one would be if they were gunning for a sequel to this new version, and did a retcon of the story, or a reboot if you will, but rebooting it from the 'prequel' rather than from the Carpenter version.  That'd be interesting in any case as it'd throw fans off guard.


I'm still with you though, in that I can see the film ending with that helicopter guy chasing down the dog, credits roll.

[Skull]

Well first of all, it's not a remake at all.  It's a prequel that tells of the events 3 days before the team from John Carpenter's film shows up (Personally, I think they should have added a subtitle to avoid the confusion).  Frankly, I'm not really interested in seeing this film.  Not out of the fact that it could be bad, but for the fact that I know how it already ends.  Everyone's going to end up dying since this leads into the 1982 film.  That and I don't like the 80's film anyways.

Or... one of the female scientist rescues MacReady and Childs from the cold with some snow vehicle and it took her a good number of days to reach the American base. (odd that the Norwegians girls seems *hot* while the American scientist in the 1982 movie seemed like they have not washed in weeks...)

I've personlly would like to see the movie where the alien craft picked up the thing and had to crash onto Earth. Everybody seems to assume the thing is the owner of the spaceship, I would like to believe he was a hitchhiker.

[Flick James]

Well first of all, it's not a remake at all.  It's a prequel that tells of the events 3 days before the team from John Carpenter's film shows up (Personally, I think they should have added a subtitle to avoid the confusion).  Frankly, I'm not really interested in seeing this film.  Not out of the fact that it could be bad, but for the fact that I know how it already ends.  Everyone's going to end up dying since this leads into the 1982 film.  That and I don't like the 80's film anyways.

So, a prequel. That may be even worse.

[Vik]

It looks like it might be good, seeing it's more of a prequel than a remake. The monster will probably be CGI, though, which is lame in comparison to Carpenter's film.

[Trekkie313]

Numerous interviews have stated that the only CGI used was to augment the animatronic and physical effects. I'm really tired of people fretting over it.

[Vik]

Numerous interviews have stated that the only CGI used was to augment the animatronic and physical effects. I'm really tired of people fretting over it.

... Excuse me for not seeing those interviews. Seeing contemporary Hollywood, it was a valid assumption that the monster would be CGI.

[Psycho Circus]

Looks like a poor copy of the 1982 version. Pointless...

[ChocolateChipCharlie]

5 bucks says they use CGI that looks like your typical Sci-Fi Sunday Afternoon Special.

100 bucks says whatever effects they use don't look half as good as the original.

[The Burgomaster]

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say I never thought Carpenter's version was anything to tell your grand children about.  It's entertaining and has a few good scenes, but I didn't think there was much of a climax.  Overall, just a wild special-effects fest.  (After saying this, I also need to admit I dig this DVD out about once a year and watch it . . . one of those odd movies that's not anywhere near the top of my "favorites" list . . . but I can't stop watching it for some reason.  In fact, I watched it about a week ago!)  Some day, someone will cut open my brain and find strange things in there.

[Flick James]

I love the 1982 film. It's at the top of my John Carpenter list, and just high on my list in general. I love the atmosphere of it. I'll see if this version speaks to me or not. On the surface I don't think it's too jaded to assume that it's just another example of an idea-bankrupt Hollywood cashing in on classics.