THE THING (2011): Discussion, Spoilers, Reviews

[Trekker4747]

Well, we don't see a LOT of characters in both the 82 movie and this one get taken over by the creatures yet at some point they did. That's sort of the whole point in these types of suspense/"who did it" movies. We do lose track of him as an audience between scenes during which time he could've been duplicated.

And, again, it wasn't a helicopter. It was a land-based snowcat.

And, yes, she comes to the conclusion after not seeing the ear ring because as she said earlier in the movie, the alien cannot duplicate metals, only the creature itself. It wouldn't be able to duplicate the earring and I doubt it'd even be able to duplicate the hole in the ear. And when she asks the guy about this he even reaches for the wrong ear he had the ring in. This all clues MEW that he's a thing.

Why he doesn't change is mostly unknown, but there's a couple of times in the Carpenter movie where the thing doesn't reveal itself on death, and this could either mean we're supposed to wonder if she really killed the thing or the actual guy or that maybe the thing had "learned enough" to not reveal itself.

[OsmiumJohnnycake]

Trekker4747 wrote:

---

We don't know at this point. One one hand we can say her fate is as unknown as what happens to Giles and MacReady after the Carpenter movie. On the other hand its inferred the snow-trucks have the gas to reach a nearby Russian base which she'd probably head for and we'd see the results of that in a sequel if one is to be made.

Traveling 50 miles in that truck, depending on its speed and terrain, probably would have taken a couple of hours and that's assuming she even has a direction to go in. She's probably there by the time the Carpenter movie "starts" and whatever adventure or events happens there would occur during the course of the first movie's time line (spanning several days.) It's possible, that the events could be times to allow also for the survivors of the Carpenter movie to meet up with her and the Russian base.

Your take on the possibilities is a bit more optimistic than mine was. I automatically assumed she was done for (perhaps just viewing the 1982 film the night before had something to do with that, as those characters have no vehicle to escape in). Did they say the Russian base was 50 miles from the Norwegian base? Did they mention how far the spaceship was and where it was in relation to the Russian base? I know they showed at least one map/image but the information did not stick in my brain.

Not mentioning the American base is slightly irritating. I mean it can't be too far. Or maybe it was very far away from the Norwegian base and the guy in the helicopter is just a really, really bad shot. And has a ton of ammo.

[Mike Farley]

OsmiumJohnnycake wrote:

---

*Which is possibly the only flaw I see that the prequel introduces - in the 1982 film, one assumes the helicopter seen at the beginning is just one that's normally at the Norwegian base. In the prequel, they show it's one that arrives to pick up the woman (I guess?) and take her back to some other base where she'll catch a flight home. Yet there is no search party for that helicopter, which I guess you can blame on the storm in the 1982 version. So right there I answered my own question and it's not a hole and nevermind.

Actually, the helicopter is based at the Norwegian base. In the movie they mention that it was off at the Russian base for repairs or refueling or something. So it's just returning "home" at the end.

[OsmiumJohnnycake]

Mike Farley wrote:

---

Actually, the helicopter is based at the Norwegian base. In the movie they mention that it was off at the Russian base for repairs or refueling or something. So it's just returning "home" at the end.

Well then double nevermind! Shows how much attention I was paying to the giant screen in front of my face.

[Unicron]

Trekker4747 wrote:

---

And, yes, she comes to the conclusion after not seeing the ear ring because as she said earlier in the movie, the alien cannot duplicate metals, only the creature itself. It wouldn't be able to duplicate the earring and I doubt it'd even be able to duplicate the hole in the ear. And when she asks the guy about this he even reaches for the wrong ear he had the ring in. This all clues MEW that he's a thing.

I tend to think we're intended to wonder whether MEW was right or wrong, since he had a lot of other things on his mind and could have just forgotten what ear he used. if he'd already been duplicated at that point, he could have easily killed MEW and lifted the ship off rather than helping her, or alternatively could have simply stayed on Earth to spread.

[Trekker4747]

OsmiumJohnnycake wrote:

---

Your take on the possibilities is a bit more optimistic than mine was. I automatically assumed she was done for (perhaps just viewing the 1982 film the night before had something to do with that, as those characters have no vehicle to escape in). Did they say the Russian base was 50 miles from the Norwegian base? Did they mention how far the spaceship was and where it was in relation to the Russian base? I know they showed at least one map/image but the information did not stick in my brain.

Not mentioning the American base is slightly irritating. I mean it can't be too far. Or maybe it was very far away from the Norwegian base and the guy in the helicopter is just a really, really bad shot. And has a ton of ammo.

In dialogue they say that the Russian base is 50 miles from their location just as they're climbing into the snowcat at the end and that the cat has enough fuel to make it. This is just before MEW toasts him.

In the original the Norwegian base is an hour away from the American one by helicopter, depending on terrain and other factors it's possible the American base cannot be reached or is too far away to be considered before the American one is. It would've been nice if we were told this or the American base was given some mention, but for whatever reason we weren't.

[Set Harth]

Trekker4747 wrote:

---

there's a couple of times in the Carpenter movie where the thing doesn't reveal itself on death

I don't think so... unless you mean the fact that the remains weren't totally dead?

[Base_Delta_Zero]

The spaceship's control center was destroyed by the grenade, so it's not going anywhere.

I just rewatched Thing '82. The paint scheme on the helicopters are the same. Not close. Identical. What's funny is I just now noticed MacReady's chopper is actually Lars' chopper with different decals. Obviously they blew up a mock-up and saved rental fees on another chopper.

In the original, BenningsThing only managed to scream before they torched his ass, same with WindowsThing as he was torched, and PalmerThing stopped shapeshifting as he was torched and just screamed before bursting through the wall and collapsing.

The same scenarios played out in Thing '11. My impression is we are meant to think Braxton is a Thing trying to talk his way out right up until she torches him, and then second guess the decision afterwards. His scream as he burned definitely sounded like a Thing dying, though, and it's been proven in both films that once burned, the Thing can't shapeshift.

As for whether Kate makes it to the Russian base (I hope she does for the Kate/MacReady team-up sequel), BraxtonThing said the snowcat he was driving had enough fuel to make it. There's no telling whether SanderThing's snowcat had any fuel left.

I was also watching MacReady closely during Thing '82. That beard covers most of Kurt's face, and half the time he's in shadow, wearing a hat and goggles or squinting into flares, plus they never say how old he is. I'd say you could throw another beard on him and call any stray wrinkles wear from the ice-storm and call it even. Keith David would be tougher, but they could always say he froze to death, like the semi-official sequel storyline of the The Thing videogame does.

[RAMA]

Trekker4747 wrote:

---

I just re-read it. I may have over stated things, but he does spend more time nit-picking the movie more than he does discussing the actual aspects of the movie like plot, story, acting, stuff like that.

Anyway....

The Thing

My Grade: B+

John Carpenter's "The Thing" is one of those 1980s classics that's just a testament to the kind of story teller and craftsman he is. The movie focused on an isolated group of Americans at an Antarctican base dealing with fear and uncertainty when faced with a new danger. The movie would work alone if everything was just manifestations of their madness while isolated during a Antarctican winter storm but whole new element of terror is brought in with the memetic-creature that terrorizes the base over the course of the movie.

Itself a remake of a 1950s movie, Carpenter's "The Thing" is a classic that is often imitated or referenced to in other places -most notably an early episode of "The X-Files."

Here we are over 20 years later and we're presented with a "prequel" movie that gives us some back story about what happened at the Norwegian base an hour away from the American one from several days before hand literally right up to when the first movie began.

It's 1982 and an American researcher/scientist in the field of paleontology is tasked with traveling to The South Pole for a group of Norwegians to give her professional opinion on an amazing discovery. That amazing discovery turns out to be a space-ship buried under the Antarctic ice for 100 millenia along with the frozen form of an unknown creature.

Before too long the frozen creature escapes and the researchers discover that the being is able to imitate the form of a biological creature in comes into contact with almost perfectly.

The movie is almost note-for-note the same as the original, paranoia sets in with the group over who is real and who isn't, a simple test is worked out to figure out who is human and who isn't, and we're shown that high-level explosives, fire-arms, and flame-throwers are apparently standard equipment for South Pole research.

Mary Elizabeth Winstead is our lead character, the called upon American scientist, and pretty much plays the Kurt Russel role although with a lot less badassness and a lot more hotness, though she certainly has her moments of badassery.

The special-effects (re: CGI) is used pretty well here in depicting the creature and how it imitates life forms and the movie does a great job of showing nods to the original even setting up a few key, and subtle, plot points and details. The usual paranoia sets in with the usual suspects given the unreasoned stink-eye, the lovable screw-ball characters and maybe the occasional "oh no, that guy got it!"

In short, it's a fun movie that any fan of the original is sure to enjoy. The effects are good, action pretty decent but much of the charm just comes from the cues to the original and setting things up. There's even a crack in the door open for a possible sequel. Or a coincide-quel? A genuine, chronological sequel?

Just a couple of nit-picks I want to make: (SPOILERS)

1. When Katie Lloyd (MEW) rides in the helicopter en route to the Norwegian base a fellow American -working at the base- asks her how a basketball team he follows is faring, seemingly under the impression they're playing. We're told through both dialogue and opening credits that it's Winter in Antarctica (as it is in the original movie) which means it's Summer in the Northern Hemisphere and basketball is played in the Winter. This is fairly "common" in movies or stories that take place in the SH but with reference to the NH (or vice/versa), they don't always acknowledge the seasons in the NH and SH are opposite one another.

2. The movies explains quite a bit about the events between the two movies, but doesn't seem to explain why the spaceship is missing by the time the Americans get to it in the opening to the original.

3. Close to the end our surviving characters mention traveling to a nearby Russian base, little to no mention is made of the American one that is either just as far away if not closer. (At one point it's said the Russian base is 50-miles away from the Norwegian one, in the original the Norwegian base is a one-hour helicopter ride away from the American base. It's possible the Russian base is closer to the Norwegian one if only by a bit, but it seemed odd little to no mention is made of the American base.

4. I could quibble the helicopter at the end of this movie differs in color and livery from the helicopter at the beginning of the original.

The technology and other references to time period lines up nicely with the movie being set in the 1980s accepting that doctors and scientists would have access to computers and specialized equipment. This movie takes place from four days or so before the events of the first movie literally right up to the moment the first movie begins after its title card.

Wow...ok so I like it better than I did when I originally saw it, but it's really hard to wrap my mind around the idea that anyone thinks the Carpenter version is a "classic".

[Trekker4747]

It's a "cult-classic" it's just a good, enjoyable, action/thriller/horror movie.

[Mr. Laser Beam]

AFAIK, Kurt Russell's up for the idea of a sequel. The age difference? Frostbite.

[RAMA]

Well I may see it, I can now go see movies in the theater for free.

[Praetor_Shinzon]

but the Carpenter version is a classic.

[Base_Delta_Zero]

So, an American scientist was recently evacuated from Antarctica after suffering an apparent "stroke" and insisting on being taken back to the mainland...

Count Down to the End of Humanity: 27,000 hrs

Time to break out the flame throwers.

[Trekker4747]

Base_Delta_Zero wrote:

---

So, an American scientist was recently evacuated from Antarctica after suffering an apparent "stroke" and insisting on being taken back to the mainland...

Count Down to the End of Humanity: 27,000 hrs

Time to break out the flame throwers.

Eh, I got time.