|
|
Post by Scifishocks on Feb 17, 2007 17:43:20 GMT 1
A classic. John Carpenter's masterpiece of Horror Sci-Fi.
Released 25 years ago and still has the power to chill.
The FX (barring the dodgy stop motion bit near the end) still stand up extremely well to this day.
Kurt Russell at his best, a standout cast, a creepy oppressive atmosphere. How much better does it get?
I love this film. There should be a sequel. Immediately.
|
|
|
|
Post by richardburton on Feb 17, 2007 18:13:01 GMT 1
Well, you know I'm not going to disagree with ya on this one. I absolutely LOVE this film and all of Carpenter's work. It's a tough one to pick just one of his films as my favourite, but if I had to I'd probably go for this. A classic that really does stand the test of time.
|
|
|
|
Post by killraven on Feb 17, 2007 19:52:36 GMT 1
Brilliant film  (in fact I don't know why I didn't start a thread on it myself! ;D). I would disagree though about filming a sequel (or indeed, a prequel...) as I fear this might tarnish its reputation? Stop motion...I assume you mean the bit where the detonator box is dragged along the ground? I didn't see any problem with that. But then I reckon all the effects guys (and gals) on that film are gods!  KR |
|
|
|
Post by thedonal on Feb 18, 2007 23:13:01 GMT 1
I absolutely LOOOVE The Thing. It's such an amazing and individual film, despite being a remake. And for some reason, the older I get, the more horrific it seems to be. Odd. Or I am..! And the DVD release being the best thing (no pun intended) to happen to it forever- the VHS release on 4front was dire...
John Carpenter and Kurt Russell- a winning combination!
|
|
|
|
Post by rusti on Feb 19, 2007 14:02:13 GMT 1
Brilliant film. nuff said.
|
|
Celera
Newbie!
Monkey Boy
Posts: 34
|
Post by Celera on Feb 19, 2007 17:47:37 GMT 1
Sign of a great film is when not all that much happens, and its still fantastic and doesn't drag.
If you break down what actually happens in this film, you don't come up with much, yet I can't remember a moment where I wasn't hooked by it.
|
|
|
|
Post by darkelastic on Feb 19, 2007 17:56:01 GMT 1
I absolutely LOOOVE The Thing. It's such an amazing and individual film, despite being a remake. And for some reason, the older I get, the more horrific it seems to be. Odd. Or I am..! And the DVD release being the best thing (no pun intended) to happen to it forever- the VHS release on 4front was dire... John Carpenter and Kurt Russell- a winning combination! I wouldn't call it a remake, more a second adaptation of a very good short story. www.amazon.com/Who-Goes-There-John-Campbell/dp/0899667341/sr=8-1/qid=1171904009/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-5528655-9974312?ie=UTF8&s=booksI agree with Killraven, I don't know why I didn't put a thread up about this great film. The end monster does let it down with the stop motion, but the rest of the SFX still hold up today. |
|
|
|
Post by Scifishocks on Feb 19, 2007 19:02:31 GMT 1
As an adaption it actually came closer to the original story than 'The Thing From Another World'.
The film was sheer genius on Carpenter's part, but I don't think the world was ready for something so visceral and intense back then. It's a pity that most of Carpenter's work gets dismissed so easily by critics and movie snobs alike. I love the distinctive feel that each of his movies has. I can't put it into words... but a fan can tell a Carpenter movie straight off.
|
|
|
|
Post by thedonal on Feb 19, 2007 20:24:06 GMT 1
Indeed- but let's not mention recent films- like Vampires, and that one set on Mars. Ore-Ful!
|
|
|
|
Post by David Faltskog on Feb 19, 2007 20:33:50 GMT 1
Indeed- but let's not mention recent films- like Vampires, and that one set on Mars. Ore-Ful! That would be Ghost's of Mars Christine is a great movie and Big Trouble in Little China is a quirky ride of a movie D.F. |
|
|
|
Post by richardburton on Feb 20, 2007 10:19:46 GMT 1
Indeed- but let's not mention recent films- like Vampires, and that one set on Mars. Ore-Ful! Vampires is an excellent film - fantastic performance by James Woods and a great story idea. Effects etc were all top notch too. I can't find anything to complain about with Vampires. Ghosts of Mars wasn't up to his normal par, but I still thought it was a great story with some good performances. |
|
|
|
Post by Lensman on Feb 22, 2007 17:41:24 GMT 1
As an adaption it actually came closer to the original story than 'The Thing From Another World'. The film was sheer genius on Carpenter's part, but I don't think the world was ready for something so visceral and intense back then. *This* viewer still isn't ready for the barf-bag FX which ruin the last quarter or so of this film for me and others. That's really too bad; until then, as you say Nerfy, it was a fairly close adaptation of John W. Campbell's classic SF horror story "Who Goes There". This was playing at a local university campus, and I went there with some friends. I left the theatre just before the point at which I knew the barf-bag FX start, and saw that another of my group had already done the same. There was, to my taste, an entire "lost generation" of horror movies, starting with "The Exorcist", which went in for nauseating its audience instead of scaring it. Thank heaven that trend has waned lately. With such films as "Silence of the Lambs" and "Sixth Sense", film-makers have rediscovered horror should be about *suspense* and not about making the audience want to throw up. (Or, in the case of "Blair Witch", actually *causing* them to barf.) In the case of Carpenter's "The Thing", the end of the movie was ruined for me not just because of the barf-bag FX, but also the absurdly over-the-top way the alien suddenly became so enormous and powerful. Overnight it suddenly became bigger than an elephant? Please! My willing suspension of disbelief simply can't stretch as far as this critter did. Campbell's story didn't need to go to such ridiculous extremes to tell a good story or provide suspense. in fact, the *very* end of the movie gets back to the atmosphere of quiet menace that pervades most of Campbell's story. To bad Carpenter had to make a wrong turn before he got there. |
|
|
|
Post by killraven on Feb 23, 2007 13:44:02 GMT 1
I didn't have a problem with it growing so big. It did absorb quite a lot of humans after all, plus an entire train of sled dogs ;D
KR
|
|
|
|
Post by richardburton on Feb 23, 2007 16:09:10 GMT 1
I have no problem with it growing so big either because all of the lifeforms that it had taken over could all come together to create one big lifeform. I didn't consider the fx to be poor or barf bag at all given the technology of the time and given that it had already done a sterling job with building the suspense. It was a good climax.
|
|
(in fact I don't know why I didn't start a thread on it myself! ;D). 
Prepare For The Future