Share Evilpeety's profile
Evilpeety
Evilpeety's stats
- Review count1
- Helpfulness votes0
- First reviewOctober 15, 2011
- Last reviewOctober 15, 2011
- Featured reviews0
- Average rating3
Evilpeety's Reviews
Overall rating
3
/
5
All Things Considered...
PostedOctober 15, 2011
Evilpeety
from LA
What do you get when you try to improve on genius? Regardless of the premise of the moive, "The Thing," certain things just can't be duplicated. I remember seeing the John Carpenter version in a theater full of 8people and thinking that this was a milestone in movie history. The idea of what the brain cannot comprehend or calculate is truly what scares us all and the Carpenter version had no shortage of this. The idea of horror was not realized in the so-called "prequel". Granted, I goto movies to escape the grinds and misconceptions life will bring, and I did indeed escape, but I was unable to immerse into my 'inner Arctic regions' with the new version.
The potential of having characters that we knew NOTHING about in the first movie, save for acouple of panicked Norwegian helicopter fellas, was inspirational to me. Where did it all begin?
Having almost 30years to comeup with answers to these questions, seemed to me, to be an allowable timeframe to construct ideas and storylines. Nope. Just, nope. There are holes that do not get filled with alien slime that leaves you to question. The special effects/CGi were of a grand scale, but comparing them to the non-CGi1982 version of the similar? It's not even a close race. 1982 wins by an Arctic mile.
Winstead plays a decent character lead as our female heroin, but there were no remarkable developments in anyone's character through the entire film. Nothing notable. No dialogue that will be remembered.
The movie was nearly a carbon copy of ideas and nothing original was seen. The movie at face-value is entertaining, but fans of the Carpenter version, such as myself will be for the most part, disappointed. The ties-in's to the original come together in a unique way and that keeps me in a 3-star frame of mind. If you wanted to await a blu-ray version of this, you can. It's good enough to watch it again. But please Hollywood? We have enough 'things' we dont need. Let's not destroy the sacred and release yet another version of this movie. Thanks.
The potential of having characters that we knew NOTHING about in the first movie, save for acouple of panicked Norwegian helicopter fellas, was inspirational to me. Where did it all begin?
Having almost 30years to comeup with answers to these questions, seemed to me, to be an allowable timeframe to construct ideas and storylines. Nope. Just, nope. There are holes that do not get filled with alien slime that leaves you to question. The special effects/CGi were of a grand scale, but comparing them to the non-CGi1982 version of the similar? It's not even a close race. 1982 wins by an Arctic mile.
Winstead plays a decent character lead as our female heroin, but there were no remarkable developments in anyone's character through the entire film. Nothing notable. No dialogue that will be remembered.
The movie was nearly a carbon copy of ideas and nothing original was seen. The movie at face-value is entertaining, but fans of the Carpenter version, such as myself will be for the most part, disappointed. The ties-in's to the original come together in a unique way and that keeps me in a 3-star frame of mind. If you wanted to await a blu-ray version of this, you can. It's good enough to watch it again. But please Hollywood? We have enough 'things' we dont need. Let's not destroy the sacred and release yet another version of this movie. Thanks.
No, I do not recommend this movie.
Share:
0points
0of 0voted this as helpful.