The Thing Remake-(I can hear Wilhelm's pain and anger from here:()

[zer00]

And humanity is hopeless

 

[Elisha Cuthbert]

Um...you guys do know that Carpenter's version was a remake, so it doesn't make any sense to remake a remake...
Why not just make a different but better version of the Howard Hughes masterpiece, instead of remaking a remake?

 

[Dangerous]

Well, JC version was kinda a reinvisioning.

No point in making another cause it wont be as good as either of the previous.

 

[zer00]

Carpenter version was a faithful adaption of the story.

 

[thedeadite]

i'm not surprised by this in the least...i think it's rediculous..but not surprising. I mean, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Dawn of the Dead, Halloween and more have been remade or are being remade. I won't go see it.

 

[black_dust]

LAME! ****ing hollywood

 

[enterthemadness]

The only good thing that will come form this is that Universal will double dip the JC version on dvd, again, hopefully with all of the deleted scenes this time. (See link below)

http://www.outpost31.com/movie/deletedscenes.html

The Thing is a great movie. Didn't see the movie or read the short story it is based on, but it was still a great movie. Sadly, last time I saw it I fell asleep. I wasn't in the mood to see it. It's....great movies are movies I probably should watch once a year...when the time is right. I know I'll watch it again before I see the remake.

 

[Cаrter]

I love the movie already, but I'll go see a remake.

 

[Weadazoid]

Source: Variety
November 17, 2006


Strike Entertainment and Universal Pictures will remake John Carpenter's The Thing, reports Variety.

The script will be written by "Battlestar Galactica" executive producer Ronald D. Moore. The 1982 original dealt with a shape-shifting creature from outer space that terrorizes researchers at an Antarctic facility.

Strike partners Marc Abraham and Eric Newman will produce and the company will co-finance the remake, to which Universal owned the rights. David Foster, who produced the original film, will executive produce.

Carpenter's film continued the storyline of the Howard Hawks-directed The Thing From Another World. That 1951 film starred James Arness as an alien monster that wiped out workers at an Army radar station.

Carpenter's film opened with a team arriving to find that encampment has been wiped out. The alien moved from the body of one team member to another, so it was never quite clear who the villain was.

The producers said they consider the new film to be more "a companion piece" to the Carpenter film than a note-for-note remake



I think that report is quite flawed

Carpenters film while being somehwat origional was a remake itself it did not pick up where the 1951 left off it was not a continuation but a reivision of the basic alien found in the ice plot.

The origionla actualy pegged the alien as being more a type of plant life I believe and it was never really given the ability to mimick other organisms if memory serves me correctly.


Just as was the case with the 1982 remake bringing in a fresh idea the only way this can work is to totaly scrap the idea of it being able to mimick another organism and come up with something far more terrifying


perhaps they could go wtiha more pyschological horror aided by CGI..say the alien's presneces causes the occupants of the base to halucinate, an idea I think could work. sya the interatcion between the aliens imune system and our atmospheare cuases humans to halucinate.

the Alien is the same threat to humanity basicaly it must be killed and not allowed to escape the confines of the base because the proximity halucinations spread and seem incurable.

c5reates the same kind of tension in the idea that CGI could be used to give us the terrifying nature of what the base coccupants are seeing and are going through..paranoia was a big part of the 1982 flick make it an even bigger part of the new flick.

 

[zer00]

The reason the 50's film didn't have that was because special effects wise it was impossible at the time. And the plant life and most of those other things it did weren't from the original story. Carpenter's version was 'Who goes there?'

 

[Weadazoid]

The reason the 50's film didn't have that was because special effects wise it was impossible at the time. And the plant life and most of those other things it did weren't from the original story. Carpenter's version was 'Who goes there?'

yes but the reprot seems to put forth the idea that Carpenters movie is a sequal rather then a remake

 

[Apocalypso]

Carpenter's wanted to make a sequel for years...but obviously the studio s***heads are in charge here.