...I saw Matthijs van Heijningen's "The THING" prequel this weekend, and I have to say that it's a pale shadow compared to John Carpenter's 1982 masterpiece.
I find it amazing that Carpenter's film made almost 30 years ago without computers ( all the effects had to be practical ) works better on every level: Better story, Better acting, Better direction, Better lighting, Better effects, etc...
This prequel has none of the knuckle-biting tension or freakiness of Carpenter's work, and the characters are so poorly established that I really didn't care for any of them as they are being off'd by the alien beastie.
I also thought the design of the alien was pretty poor, basically appearing in one of two different forms, where in Carpenter's film the alien kept morphing in to something else as the story progressed, so you were never sure what was coming around the corner. ( and Carpenter's alien was all practical effects )
...Ah well, I guess it's time I get around to writing my sequel to Carpenter's "The Thing", which I've had rolling around in my head for the past 20 years.
I find it amazing that Carpenter's film made almost 30 years ago without computers ( all the effects had to be practical ) works better on every level: Better story, Better acting, Better direction, Better lighting, Better effects, etc...
This prequel has none of the knuckle-biting tension or freakiness of Carpenter's work, and the characters are so poorly established that I really didn't care for any of them as they are being off'd by the alien beastie.
I also thought the design of the alien was pretty poor, basically appearing in one of two different forms, where in Carpenter's film the alien kept morphing in to something else as the story progressed, so you were never sure what was coming around the corner. ( and Carpenter's alien was all practical effects )
...Ah well, I guess it's time I get around to writing my sequel to Carpenter's "The Thing", which I've had rolling around in my head for the past 20 years.