Share superc903's profile
superc903
superc903's stats
- Review count1
- Helpfulness votes0
- First reviewOctober 15, 2011
- Last reviewOctober 15, 2011
- Featured reviews0
- Average rating5
superc903's Reviews
Overall rating
5
/
5
A Great Movie
PostedOctober 15, 2011
superc903
from Torrance, CA
Thirty years ago Carpenter's unleashed his singular masterpiece, but left us with some questions. Not the least of which was what had happened to the Norwegian camp. He offered several clues that revealed their tragic
fate and thirty years later Matthijs van Heijningen Jr. has answered that question in more detail and in the process manages to pose of his own.
Some people would argue that a prequel lacks any suspense since the ending is already foretold. This is particularly true in the case of "The Thing". But that shouldn't
(or won't) stop fans from watching the tragedy unfold.
The story begins with the Norwegians making
the discovery of the century and enlisting the help of two American scientists. Unfortunately, the specimen revives and escapes, unleashing a fight for survival that for the stronger species. Mary Elizabeth
Winstead's character quickly asserts herself as the voice of scientific reason among chauvinitic protest's. She quickly deduces what the thing is and what it does. She even
discovers an interesting weakness that inspires a unique test akin to Macready's blood test in Carpenter's film.
As in the previous film, the thing jumps from one host to another in it's attempt to escape the frozen Antartic wasteland, pitting everyone against each other as to who might be human and who might be the thing.
The biggest difference between this film and the previous fim are the special effects. Carpenter relied mostly on pratical creature effects as well as some stop motion animation while this film takes advantage of present CG effects. This by no means should be taken as a commentary that the prequel is superior to Carpenter's classic in any way. I would argue that had Carpenter had access to present CG technology, he would've used it on his own film.
Fans of seeing this film tie in with the previous film including Ennio Morricone's haunting score at the end.
Fans should see this film not as a threat to Carpenter's film but as a companion. In fact, I bet many raced home to rewatch "The Thing(1982)" after watching "The Thing(2011). I did.
fate and thirty years later Matthijs van Heijningen Jr. has answered that question in more detail and in the process manages to pose of his own.
Some people would argue that a prequel lacks any suspense since the ending is already foretold. This is particularly true in the case of "The Thing". But that shouldn't
(or won't) stop fans from watching the tragedy unfold.
The story begins with the Norwegians making
the discovery of the century and enlisting the help of two American scientists. Unfortunately, the specimen revives and escapes, unleashing a fight for survival that for the stronger species. Mary Elizabeth
Winstead's character quickly asserts herself as the voice of scientific reason among chauvinitic protest's. She quickly deduces what the thing is and what it does. She even
discovers an interesting weakness that inspires a unique test akin to Macready's blood test in Carpenter's film.
As in the previous film, the thing jumps from one host to another in it's attempt to escape the frozen Antartic wasteland, pitting everyone against each other as to who might be human and who might be the thing.
The biggest difference between this film and the previous fim are the special effects. Carpenter relied mostly on pratical creature effects as well as some stop motion animation while this film takes advantage of present CG effects. This by no means should be taken as a commentary that the prequel is superior to Carpenter's classic in any way. I would argue that had Carpenter had access to present CG technology, he would've used it on his own film.
Fans of seeing this film tie in with the previous film including Ennio Morricone's haunting score at the end.
Fans should see this film not as a threat to Carpenter's film but as a companion. In fact, I bet many raced home to rewatch "The Thing(1982)" after watching "The Thing(2011). I did.
Yes, I recommend this movie.
Share:
0points
0of 0voted this as helpful.