Actually no. 1951's The Thing from Another World was based on a novel and changed the story radically. Carepnter's The Thing was also an adaptation of the novel and this time with very faithful representation of ther story. It wasnt a remake in its true sense, it was another and completely different take on bringing the written story called Who Goes There to life
It's only more faithful in the sense of "shapeshifting alien" really. The Thing from Another World is more faithful in the sense of "we'll pull together and figure our way out of this problem". And, the original story of "we'll thaw an alien out of the ice and it will awaken and kill the expedition" comes from Lovecraft's At the Mountains of Madness.
The only way I can see this being worthwhile is if they have some twist worked up, rather than being a CGI rehash. Survivors who were chasing after another Thing when Macready and co. visit, for instance. And, who are perhaps mounting up to attack the American base at the end.
Actually no. 1951's The Thing from Another World was based on a novel and changed the story radically. Carepnter's The Thing was also an adaptation of the novel and this time with very faithful representation of ther story.
It's only more faithful in the sense of "shapeshifting alien" really. The Thing from Another World is more faithful in the sense of "we'll pull together and figure our way out of this problem".
Actually, both versions are about 50 percent "Who Goes There?"; it's just a question of which movie has which 50 percent.
The Hawks/Nyby version does carry over certain elements of the original story, including:
* The American camp discovering the shipwreck and digging out the Thing (no Norwegians or any other camp are involved)
* The basic argument between the two most prominent scientist characters over whether the Thing should be thawed or not
* The Thing thawing out when someone is supposed to be guarding over its frozen carcass
* A brief moment where the Thing attacks some sled dogs
* About thirty-some crew members in the camp, as opposed to a mere dozen
* The Thing (or rather, several of them) being taken out via electrocution
* A more positive ending
The Carpenter version retains:
* The names and/or ranks/positions of several of the major characters - Macready, Garry, and Clark, among others
* The biological nature of the Thing (although the original story does go into a basic description of its base form, blue with three red eyes and tentacles)
* The idea of the ship having crashed on Earth thousands of years back, as opposed to in the middle of the night before
* Blair apparently losing his marbles in front of everybody
* The blood-test scene
* No women
* The last handful of still-human characters discovering that the Thing has been building something to help it escape (in this case, a flight pack)
Carpenter's version edges out Hawks and Nyby's in terms of faithfulness just for the characters and the whole premise of the story; he just didn't use those components of the story that had already been used by Hawks and Nyby, with the exception of the dog scene.
Actually, both versions are about 50 percent "Who Goes There?"; it's just a question of which movie has which 50 percent.
The Hawks/Nyby version does carry over certain elements of the original story, including:
* The American camp discovering the shipwreck and digging out the Thing (no Norwegians or any other camp are involved)
* The basic argument between the two most prominent scientist characters over whether the Thing should be thawed or not
* The Thing thawing out when someone is supposed to be guarding over its frozen carcass
* A brief moment where the Thing attacks some sled dogs
* About thirty-some crew members in the camp, as opposed to a mere dozen
* The Thing (or rather, several of them) being taken out via electrocution
* A more positive ending
The Carpenter version retains:
* The names and/or ranks/positions of several of the major characters - Macready, Garry, and Clark, among others
* The biological nature of the Thing (although the original story does go into a basic description of its base form, blue with three red eyes and tentacles)
* The idea of the ship having crashed on Earth thousands of years back, as opposed to in the middle of the night before
* Blair apparently losing his marbles in front of everybody
* The blood-test scene
* No women
* The last handful of still-human characters discovering that the Thing has been building something to help it escape (in this case, a flight pack)
Carpenter's version edges out Hawks and Nyby's in terms of faithfulness just for the characters and the whole premise of the story; he just didn't use those components of the story that had already been used by Hawks and Nyby, with the exception of the dog scene.
I'd agree with that in general. Both versions were faithful in some ways and wildly different in others. They both pulled different things from the same story. A truly faithful version would blend the two in about equal parts.
I prefer Carpenter's version simply as a better film.
I have this score on my iPod. One night I was lying in bed, pitch black, listening to some of my music when the song "Bestiality" came on. Scared the **** out of me. Blimey that is a scary piece of music.
I have this score on my iPod. One night I was lying in bed, pitch black, listening to some of my music when the song "Bestiality" came on. Scared the **** out of me. Blimey that is a scary piece of music.
I thought someone said at one point Mr. Morricone was nominated for a razzy because of the score to the film. I think compared to some of his others it was very low key but helped set the tone for the film. And he definately helped accomplish that.
Btw I have alot of Ennio Morricones work on the ipod. Humanity, The Crisis and of course for when I go running The Ecstasy of Gold
I agree that making this movie is a big pointless mistake. They won't be able to top the original, the whole "MacReady's brother" story arc makes no sense, and you just know they're gonna stick a bunch of people in front of a green screen and film the thing almost entirely in CGI.
[COLIN] Around 40 years old, quirky and a bit cynical, he sews some seeds of doubt and suspicion among his new colleagues, Kate and Adam, and he plays poker with Jonas to blow off steam. Colin would rather commit suicide than be consumed by the THING...SUPPORTING (27) Submit British, East Indian, Spanish, Asian, etc, scientist types
Far too many American leads for a Norwegian base. It just sounds pointless and horrible. I don't know anyone who is looking forward to this film. The brilliant Carpenter movie does not need any prequel or sequel.
Universal Pictures prequel to John Carpenters cult classic thriller The Thing is gearing up to begin shooing in Toronto in mid-March, and the studio has begun to announce the cast line-up. Heat Vision has learned that Mary Elizabeth Winstead (Grindhouse, Scott Pilgrim) and Joel Edgerton (The Secret Life of Us, Kinky Boots) have been cast as the leads. We have a lot of information on both of their characters after the jump.
The screenplay, which was written by Ronald D. Moore, and rewritten by Eric Heisserer, tells the story of a shape-shifting alien terrorizes researchers at a Norwegian Antarctic facility. Heres the logline:
In a remote Antarctica outpost, an alien spaceship is discovered far beneath the ice. When a group of ambitious scientists decide to thaw out one of the creatures inside, theyre in for the terrifying fight of their lives
Winstead will play Kate Lloyd, who was described in the leaked casting breakdowns as follows:
pretty, bright-eyed, intelligent, shes a graduate of Columbia and a Ph.D. candidate in paleontology (the study of prehistoric life). On the recommendation of her friend Adam Goodman, Kate is tapped for a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity by Dr. Sander Halvorson to join his research team in Antarctica, where an extraordinary discovery has been made. Upon arrival, Kate soon finds herself at odds with Halvorson about how best to proceed with the discovery an alien spaceship with a mysterious and sinister frozen THING found nearby specifically whether to transfer the specimen undisturbed to a more appropriate facility for analysis, or, per Halvorsons wishes, to drill into the specimens ice encasement for a definitive tissue sample.
Edgerton will play Sam Carter, a blue-collar mercenary helicopter pilot who Lloyd is forced to team with in an effort to stop the rampage. Here is his casting breakdown:
In his early 30s, rugged, handsome, blue-collar, hes a helicopter pilot with a private charter service that transports personnel and supplies from McMurdo Station to remote research sites across Antarctica. Carter is a mercenary. He flies when he wants, where he wants, and he flies for one reason: money. But his resourcefulness, experience and get-it-done mentality make him indispensable.
And it seems as if there is a third lead character who has yet to be cast. Here is the breakdown:
[DR. SANDER HALVORSON] In his late 30s to early 50s, austere, scholarly and imperious, hes a microbiologist from NYU who leads a science research team to Antarctica to help his old friend Edvard interpret and analyze an extraordinary discovery made beneath the ice. Sander, a brilliant scientist and a master of self-promotion, knows that his involvement in such an historic discovery will bring him fame and fortune. Blinded by ambition, he refuses to abandon the project even as the bodies pile up around him.
I just watched The Thing for the first time yesterday, and really, there's no point to this sequel. They coveredit enough in the original that you know that the Norwegians found a ship in the ice that crashed there "about a hundred thousand years ago" (If I remember correctly), dug it up, and the same events from The Thing ensued, except the ending is the beginning of The Thing. Granted, it's better than a remake, but it's still insanely pointless.
Norwegians find frozen alien. They thaw alien out. Alien shapeshifts and kills other Norwegians. Surviving Norwegians discover the plot. Alien shapeshifts into dog and runs into the wintery wasteland. 2 surviving Norwegians chase it in a helicopter. ::cue ominous music::, fade to black, The End.
I think this movie is more for people who haven't discovered The Thing (1982)...a lot of people still dont know this movie and just how brilliant it is (This movie is in my top 5 for horror EASILY). Obviously, its going to suck. You just can't top it...and its the same story but Im happy they didnt make a remake.
Who is directing? If it is John Carpenter I may be semi-interested. However, maybe a sequel would've been better? I think its quite obvious that Childs was a thing.
The best thing would be to leave it alone but obviously thats not happening. Anyway its a shame more people haven't seen this amazingly creepy film. Its John Carpenter's best.
Who is directing? If it is John Carpenter I may be semi-interested. However, maybe a sequel would've been better? I think its quite obvious that Childs was a thing.
Norwegians find frozen alien. They thaw alien out. Alien shapeshifts and kills other Norwegians. Surviving Norwegians discover the plot. Alien shapeshifts into dog and runs into the wintery wasteland. 2 surviving Norwegians chase it in a helicopter. ::cue ominous music::, fade to black, The End.
I'll put good money down that there will be one twist along the lines of helicopter takes off after dog thing while other survivors take a snowcat in another direction chasing after a second thing.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
:heart: Yay!
. Maybe he might be good. I hope has common sense to put no cgi in this. All the gore has to be practical effects.
