Plot: A prequel to the John Carpenter classic of the same name, The Thing follows a group of Norweigan scientists who discover an alien spacecraft and specimen in the middle of Antarctica. When Dr. Sander Halvorson (Ulrich Thomsen) asks paleontologist Kate Lloyd (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) to the frozen continent with the promise of the discovery of a lifetime, she can't resist. But when the alien specimen escapes and begins taking over various members of the scientific team, a fight for survival begins that nobody may walk away from.
Review: Let me preface this review by stating that director John Carpenter's 1982 classic The Thing (a remake of the 1951 film The Thing from Another World which is based on the short story "Who Goes There?" by John W. Campbell) is my all time favorite horror movie and in my mind Carpenter's best work. Therefore I made it my duty to go into the 2011 edition with as little expectations as possible, hoping I'd be pleasantly surprised.
Much to my relief I was.
One of the things that attracted me about the 2011 version was the decision by director Matthijs van Heijningen Jr to make a prequel rather than a straight remake. For those of you who haven't seen the 1982 film I won't ruin the movie for you. I'll only say that the Norwegian aspect of Carpenter's version was the impetus for the entire movie. I've always wondered about the discovery of the alien, which is only referenced in the 1982 film. Thankfully, Heijningen focuses heavily on attention to detail, going so far as to set the movie in 1982 and even using a similar score. Although this time Marco Beltrami waives the conductor's baton rather than the great Ennio Morricone. Heijningen also gives various nods to things depicted but not explained in the earlier film version.
Granted, the plot concept is still the same--a group of explorers trapped out in the wilderness and facing an enemy that can assume any shape. The Thing (both versions) have the trademarks of any good horror film which are isolation, paranoia, and the idea that something could take you over. What made the 1982 version so fantastic is that there was a real slow burn to the film punctuated by truly terrifying scenes. While the 2011 movie doesn't reach that level of success, I was amazed that Heijningen and screenwriters Eric Heisserer were able to recreate some of that feeling of tension throughout the film. They even added a nice twist at the end. It made certain scenes, such as the alien assimilation of Adam (Eric Christian Olsen) that much more macabre.
The Thing falters a little bit in the acting department. Olsen's character of Adam is extremely bland and Thomsen's Dr. Halvorson comes across as chauvinistic and irritating rather than malevolent and imposing. While Joel Edgerton is very good as American helicopter pilot Sam Carter, his character is severely underused. For the life of me I can't understand why Heisserer and Heijningen didn't make him a more central character. They basically wasted the abilities of one of the better actors working today. On a bright note Mary Elizabeth Winstead was excellent as heroine Kate Lloyd. Winstead brought a streak of vulnerability, courage, and toughness to the role, ala Ellen Ripley from the Alien franchise. (She even came up with an ingenious way to do an "alien test.")
The 1982 version of The Thing relied heavily on makeup, gore, and animatronics to facilitate the horror scenes. I only wish the producers of the 2011 edition would have done the same. While an autopsy scene does involve some sophisticated and gross makeup work, the majority of the film relies heavily on CGI. This was a mistake as many of the CGI scenes are of low quality. Perhaps filmgoers have been spoiled by movies like Avatar and The Lord of the Rings but that's no excuse for poor work. Fifteen years ago it might have been cutting edge but in 2011 it just looks shoddy.
The Thing was already in a bad position because it had to contend with Carpenter's beloved classic. It's like the Miami Dolphins trying to find a replacement for Dan Marino at quarterback. It's difficult if not impossible to replace a legend. However, I think this version while flawed is still a good movie and definitely worth a view. At the least I hope it inspires people who have never seen the original to check it out. (FYI--fans of the original be sure to stick around for the credits; I promise you won't be disappointed.)
My rating: 2011 version--7.5/10
1982 version--10/10
No comments:
Post a Comment