The Thing (2011) movie trailer

Well it took 29 years, but one of the greatest sci-fi horror films ever made finally has a sequel (a prequel actually). The Thing will be released in October.

I don't often get excited over a movie, but I've been waiting a long time for this film. It was directed by Matthijs van Heijningen Jr, a Dutch filmaker who is a huge fan of John Carpenter's The Thing, and will feature a cast of American and Norwegian actors.

It's not a big-budget Hollywood flick (thankfully), and doesn't feature any huge stars. It focuses on the events that took place in the Norwegian camp that was briefly featured in the original film.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Txjm94GnrPA

I wish I could share your optimism, as The Thing (1982) is a fantastic movie. The original isn't bad either.

But when they chose to cast a 17-year old pretty teenager as the lead, I kinda lost hope

One of the biggest strengths of the 1982 picture was the tense and believable environment with a male-only cast. I hope they have a good story-reason for having such a young girl there, and that she's not just here to sell it. She's a "student" apparently - and that's one reason I guess, but still…..

Maybe I'm wrong, and Ulrik Thomsen is actually very talented - and should be interesting to watch in a more prominent role in a foreign film.

Ulrik ? Is he a relative to Alrik ?

Sorry, but I heard that the TDE nme of Alrik (and its various variations) was actually borrowed from Scandinavia.

Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer
Ulrik ? Is he a relative to Alrik ?

Sorry, but I heard that the TDE nme of Alrik (and its various variations) was actually borrowed from Scandinavia.

Hehe, well it's a very common Danish name, that much I know.

Okay, thanks, I didn't know that (altough I had suspected it).

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
I wish I could share your optimism, as The Thing (1982) is a fantastic movie. The original isn't bad either.

But when they chose to cast a 17-year old pretty teenager as the lead, I kinda lost hope

One of the biggest strengths of the 1982 picture was the tense and believable environment with a male-only cast. I hope they have a good story-reason for having such a young girl there, and that she's not just here to sell it. She's a "student" apparently - and that's one reason I guess, but still…..

Maybe I'm wrong, and Ulrik Thomsen is actually very talented - and should be interesting to watch in a more prominent role in a foreign film.

Er.. Mary Elizabeth Winstead is 26, not 17. Big difference.

One of the reasons I have hope for this movie is because it doesn't appear to be the usual attempt by a studio to just cash in on a name. van Heijningen has stated that the John Carpenter original is his favorite movie, along with Alien, which apparently had an influence on him casting a female for the lead role.

I was sold as soon as I read an interview where he talked about using live-action props (instead of CGI) as part of trying to recreate the feel of the original.

Of course it won't be as good as John Carpenter's film. I don't expect that will ever be surpassed in my book.

Originally Posted by JDR13
Er.. Mary Elizabeth Winstead is 26, not 17. Big difference.

Wow, you're right - sorry. I read some comments about her on another forum where a bunch of people claimed she was 17. Teaches me not to listen to silly rumors.

That actually makes a big difference

One of the reasons I have hope for this movie is because it doesn't appear to be the usual attempt by a studio to just cash in on a name. van Heijningen has stated that the John Carpenter original is his favorite movie, along with Alien, which apparently had an influence on him casting a female for the lead role.

I was sold as soon as I read an interview where he talked about using live-action props (instead of CGI) as part of trying to recreate the feel of the original.

Of course it won't be as good as John Carpenter's film. I don't expect that will ever be surpassed in my book.

Now that I stand corrected, I can have more hope for the project. I must say my experience with these "reboots" or whatever we want to call them has NOT been good. But from what you're telling me, there's hope yet

At least they have (afaik) a couple of Norwegians among the actors, so any spoken Norwegian should be handled properly. Although the few lines in The Thing "det er ikke en bikkje…" isn't too bad.

Says pibbur who also enjoyed the game.

EDIT: I noticed the background music in the video: A joik from Samiid Ædnan, a Norwegian contribution to the European Song Contest.

Originally Posted by pibbur
At least they have (afaik) a couple of Norwegians among the actors, so any spoken Norwegian should be handled properly. Although the few lines in The Thing "det er ikke en bikkje…" isn't too bad.

More than a couple from what I understand…

Actual Norwegian actors were cast in the film to play the Norwegian characters, and the director allowed the actors to improvise elements different to what was scripted when they felt it was appropriate, such as a scene where the characters sing a Norwegian folk song. Many scenes involving characters speaking Norwegian will be subtitled, and the language barrier between them and the English speaking characters is exploited to add to the film's feeling of paranoia.

Sounds even better now… Don't get my hyped

I still consider the beginning of The Thing one of the strongest of the genre. I'm a sucker for things that don't make much sense, but end up being VERY understandable.

If they refer to "Samiid Ædnan" as a Norwegian folksong, that is not correct - see my edit above. Although joik is a traditional way of singing among the sami, this particular example was not a folk song.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
Sounds even better now… Don't get my hyped

I still consider the beginning of The Thing one of the strongest of the genre. I'm a sucker for things that don't make much sense, but end up being VERY understandable.

The Thing is a movie you - IMO - have to see twice, as the behaviour of the dog when it goes around the base, watching, adds to the experience when you know what will happen.

Originally Posted by pibbur
The Thing is a movie you - IMO - have to see twice, as the behaviour of the dog when it goes around the base, watching, adds to the experience when you know what will happen.

Definitely

I've seen it 10 times or so…..

The "blood testing" scene is also one of the most tense moments in cinema history

That said, I'll never figure out how MacReady could be so certain it would react like that.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
I still consider the beginning of The Thing one of the strongest of the genre. I'm a sucker for things that don't make much sense, but end up being VERY understandable.

The scene in the original film where they were exploring what was left of the Norwegian camp was one of my favorite parts, and I always tried to imagine what had happened there. I'm not sure if van Heijningen could have picked a better scenario to focus on.

Originally Posted by JDR13
The scene in the original film where they were exploring what was left of the Norwegian camp was one of my favorite parts, and I always tried to imagine what had happened there. I'm not sure if van Heijningen could have picked a better scenario to focus on.

Very true, and I remember the effects were particularly good there - with people having cut their own throats sitting at their desks - frozen, etc. Nasty stuff

Sometimes, however, I think these things are better left to the imagination. It will take a very talented group of people to replace our imaginary scenarios with something real.

Still, I can't get enough of this kind of film - if it's indeed done by someone taking the source material seriously.

I have similar hopes for the semi-Alien prequel that Ridley Scott is working on. But I have little faith left in Scott after his last few films.

Are you sure it's a prequel and not a remake? I mean I realise the plot is different because in the '82 version the Americans didn't find the original being, the Norwegians dug it up and it made it to their camp in the dog. But they could have merged the stories and given it a bit of a rewrite.

If it's a prequel it's going to be rather dull because you know exactly how it will end. In the '82 version there were two survivors who chased it to the American camp and were both killed. They will probably change the details but I think its a fairly safe bet that the alien wins, as it did in the '82 version. And another thing that makes me think that, is the trend with modern horrors, to be as intense as possible and have a completely downer of an ending (well a downer from my point of view). Everyone dies. Or if they don't die you see them get dragged off into the darkness into an air duct or they completely lose their mind and imagine they're safe when really they're still in the cave or the virus makes it across the channel to France… or whatever.

Woopie.

Did you check out the Wikipedia link above? It's a prequel, and I think it's a great idea. It could be a sequel, remake, or whatever, but that isn't going to determine whether or not it ends up being a good movie.

Personally, I love what they're doing, or at least the way it sounds so far.

It’s a really fascinating way to construct a story because we're doing it by autopsy, by examining very, very closely everything we know about the Norwegian camp and about the events that happened there from photos and video footage that’s recovered, from a visit to the base, the director, producer and I have gone through it countless times marking, you know, there’s a fire axe in the door, we have to account for that…were having to reverse engineer it, so those details all matter to us ‘cause it all has to make sense.”

— Eric Heisserer describing the process of creating a script that is consistent with the first film

Here's a little nostalgia for fans of the original…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ghk-B…eature=related

Just for fun, have a look at Spoony trashing the vidoegame;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfVRnVCzq5c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16dfCv-yQgE

So, I finally took a look at that trailer and, while the movie looks ok, it's missing something…. Kurt Russel ! Or, more seriously, a strong lead. Does anyone else miss the days of Russel, Stallone, Arnold, Willis? Movies today seem so devoid of strong action heroes.