Based on the 1938 novella “Who Goes There?” by John W. Campbell, the story first hit the big screen in 1951 as “The Thing From Another World”, directed by Howard Hawks. Unlike the re-make in 1982, the Howard Hawks film was more your typical 50’s science fiction with an evil humanoid like creature causing harm to anything in its path. The approach may have been the only option special effects allowed from that time period. In a sense, John Carpenter’s “The Thing” is not a remake but a more faithful adaptation to the original novella. The film captures all the paranoia and alienation (no pun intended) the original story captures so wonderfully.
John Carpenter fans had to be excited when they heard about the new “The Thing” film. It’s unclear and a little confusing why the filmmakers decided to title it the same as the 1982 release, since the film is not a sequel but a prequel to Carpenter’s film. Any fan will remember the film starts out with a helicopter manned by two Norwegians, chasing and shooting at a random dog in the Antarctic. Landing at the American Antarctic research station, confusion sets in and before anyone can explain both of the occupants are killed leaving only the dog. Trying to make sense of it all, the American team sets out to the Norwegian camp. Upon arrival, they find no one left alive but evidence that they may have found an alien ship and an alien as well. “The Thing” 2011 version follows the story of that Norwegian research team in Antarctica and what transpired prior to them chasing the dog in the helicopter.
After discovering not just a ship but the pilot of the craft beneath the ice, they call in American paleontologist Kate Lloyd (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) whom is summoned to Antarctica by her friend Adam (Eric Christian Olsen) and his boss, Dr Sander Holvorson, (Ulrich Thomsen). Shortly after arriving, the team confirms and celebrates their find as a genuine new species and alien. The researchers and the helicopter pilots moment is dramatically cut short as the alien escapes its icy prison and proceeds to kill one of the researchers.
The team soon learns that the creature can perfectly imitate the look, mannerisms and even the memories of whomever it can consume. Paranoia and suspense set in as director Matthjis van Heijningen Jr. (in his directorial film debut) perfectly sets up nearly everyone as a potential alien in disguise, waiting to attack again. Despite using the horror movie cliché of utilizing several characters who have a minimum amount of screen time so that they can be fodder for the monster, it is still quite chilling.
However, the director made one crucial mistake; he let us see the too much of the monster. Watching a lumbering hulk of CGI meander down the cold, barely lit corridors in pursuit of a hapless victim becomes more silly than terrifying, and the movie suffers for it. What’s more, you don’t even need to show us the monster; the setting of the film sets that up a scene that is sufficiently terrifying.
Just imagine it; you’re in the middle of Antarctica. You and your team are the only sentient life forms for hundreds of miles in any direction. The only way to safely traverse the area is via helicopter, and it’s been destroyed. A storm has approached and you can no longer see more than a few yards in front of your face, even within the would-be safe confines of your encampment. And there with you is not only a murderous beast that is only vulnerable to fire, but can perfectly imitate everyone around you, making you the only person that you can trust; even the sled dogs could be a villainous alien waiting for you to be at your most vulnerable. The scene alone is petrifying, and the more they show us the object of our fear, the less we are going to be afraid of it.
One of the core principles of horror movies is to let the viewer become entrenched in the story to the point where they are not only sympathetic toward the characters, but themselves immersed as their imagination takes them away. If you show them the creature of terror, it will inevitably fail to live up to expectations. Think about Jaws, who wasn’t even seen until the last 35 minutes of the movie, yet the masses were terrified to go into the water for years to come.
With all of the trashy, bare-minimum remakes, sequels and prequels that have come down the pipe, this movie is definitely heads and shoulders above them. However, this is far from a great movie. There are some definitive nods to the source material, however it takes no bold new steps and there are more than a few continuity errors. It is a descent movie, one that any fan of John Carpenter’s “The Thing” should see, but don’t expect a lot.
Powered by AkoComment 2.0!
