The Thing (Prequel) Trailer

[peter noble]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KFrrgkRmSI

[kingfish]

why do the studios have to mess with classics. Kurt Russell was excellent in the john carpenter version.

[TwoBrainedCylon]

I can't quite tell. Is this the prequel version made from Ron Moore's script or a remake with a chick swapped as the hero. Looks like a bit of both.

Russell

[Gemini1999]

I saw this trailer at the movie theatre recently - to me, it just looked like a remake of the 1980's remake of the 1950's film. The idea of a transmorphic alien hiding amongst other human beings doesn't really offer anything new or interesting to the property - we saw that in the last film.

I can wait for the DVD, if I even watch it at all. I prefer the 1950's film myself.

Bryan

[TwoBrainedCylon]

Funny. For me, John Carpenter's version is possibly one of the very rare remakes I can think of where I thought the new version was better than the original. I'd credit "The Omega Man" as the other as I thought that was far better than "The Last Man on Earth".

I thought the idea of a Thing prequel that tied into the Carpenter story might be interesting if it provided more insight into the alien and moved beyond the "who is the doppleganger" scenario. I simply wasn't interested in seeing what Ron Moore would have done with it as his track record for creating stories I liked is abysmally low, sans ST-TNG: "Yesterday's Enterprise" and "All Good Things". As this version focuses on a female lead, portrayed as an obvious stand-in rather than what seems to be a functioning character, I suspect a good number of his influences has survived, which makes me hesitant to even bother watching this.

If its just an outright remake then forget it. Got no use for it at all.

All my best,


Russell

[TwoBrainedCylon]

OK, I've decided.

Not gonna even attempt to "give it a chance".

This clip and article pretty much explains why. This is a remake of sorts no matter how you look at it. Even if its still the prequel slant, its not something that could fit into the Carpenter version. If its a true remake (which is looking more likely), it looks like its gonna absolutely suck. (I'm starting to see a pattern of swapping females for male heroes as the pure test that whatever follows will be just horrid.)

Check the link at http://www.movievine.com/movies/this-clip-from-the-new-thing-explains-my-problem-with-remakes/

Click Link Here (http://www.movievine.com/movies/this-clip-from-the-new-thing-explains-my-problem-with-remakes/)

or copy/paste

http://www.movievine.com/movies/this-clip-from-the-new-thing-explains-my-problem-with-remakes/


All my best,


Russell

[Jubal]

It's a "thing". I think that is the problem I had with all these movies. Even in the 50's they didn't call the "space creature from the arctic" or even "Radioactive Predator Creature", they just call it "The Thing".

That to me is like saying "The Monster". And yes, "Alien" is a good foreboding title because of what we know it to be, though wrong since technically the humans were the new element, on another creature's craftcraft, when they found the "Alien" that was already there. So was the title talking about the humans which were the newest "alien" element in all that?

Seen the 50's Thing (Yawn), seen the 80's Thing (super over the top creepy I thought.) Never really been into these movies.