Written by: Eric Heiserrer
Starring: Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Joel Edgerton, Ulrich Thomsen
I am a massive fan of John Carpenter's 1982 film The Thing. It's one of my favourite horror movies of all time, so I can't deny that I have a bias that may lead me to be overly critical of this film.
The Thing (2011) is a serviceable horror movie that's better than a lot of modern horror, but unfortunately doesn't live up to the quality of its predecessor.
*Warning: Spoilers Ahead*
For the uninitiated, this isn't a remake of the 1982 film as I had first thought; it's actually a direct prequel that tells the story of the Norwegian camp that encounters the Thing before the Americans.
In this regard, this movie actually has a moment of brilliance in the way it connects the two films. The ending of this movie is set up so that two men in a helicopter end up chasing after a husky across the snow, transitioning perfectly into the 1982 film.
The plot involves the crew who initially discovered the alien craft, frozen under Antarctic snow. They extract the Thing, which wakes up from its slumber and begins assimilating people at the site. It's essentially the same plot as the first film, but with a slightly different set up, as the characters here discover the Thing, rather than getting the Thing set upon them.
This is what I want to focus on first, because the plot is where some of the best and worst of the film come out. The best involves a clever new way of identifying the Thing: because it can only assimilate organic material, people are ruled out as the Thing if they have tooth fillings. It's one of the only aspects of the film that's original, compared to the rest of the film's ideas which are generally derived from the 1982 film. The worst is the lack of the Thing's consistency; it's supposed to attack people when they're alone, and behave entirely human until then, but at a critical moment in the film the Thing has an opportunity to assimilate someone, and for no apparent reason it chooses not to. In addition to this, the Thing is supposed to hide in plain sight with its abilities, but more than one scene in the movie involves the creature lumbering about in full monster form.
This is where we meet another of the film's weaknesses: The CGI. The monster looks fake, which contrasts greatly with the previous film's entirely practical effects, and in general just don't look all that impressive. Outside of the CGI, this film borrows heavily from the 1982 version for its aesthetic; the sets are mostly the same, except for the areas which they made to look exactly the same as they did in 1982. In this regard, the look of the film is impressive, but obviously derivative. This extends the characters, too. Joel Edgerton's Carter is the spitting image of Kurt Russells' MacReady, and Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje's Jameson has a similar look and attitude to Keith David's Childs. It's uncanny how similar these films look.
The acting
is fairly standard; not much stands out but there weren't any laughably bad
moments. Winstead is strong as the lead, capable, smart, essentially everything
a horror character usually isn't. Edgerton may have MacCready's look, but
Winstead inherited his attitude.
Rating: 5.5/10
Published July 25th, 2016
No comments:
Post a Comment