web counter
 

The Thing With The Thing

By Brian Prisco | Posted Under Trade News | Comments (31)

thething460.jpg

There’s no point in enjoying any horror movie anymore, because they’re just going to remake it. They’ll do it choppier, and flashier, and more MTVier. Rosemary’s Baby would fall out of Juno and turn into the date of the Seed of Chucky. Now, if John Lithgow or William Shatner thought they saw a gremlin on the wing of their plane, an air marshal would put two between their eyes and then get a commendation. It’s hideous, and unstoppable.

Stacey gave you the heads up about The Orphanage redux, a perfectly awesome horror flick from but two goddamn years ago that somehow needs to be Americanized for our appreciation. Ridley Scott’s decided to take another gander at the Alien franchise, because Sigourney Weaver’s reaching that point where she’ll do anything for a dollar. (Frankly, I’d like to see them bring back Lance Henriksen. Or even Paul Reiser.)

John Carpenter’s The Thing was pretty much a live target for remake from the second the odious practice came about. They had actually gotten Ronald Moore, the scribe responsible for the beloved “BSG” to fire out a prequel. I would have been behind this, as Moore would have kept the atmosphere while respecting the original. Shit, he probably would have worked in Kurt Russell and Wilford Brimley in new exciting roles. Plus, Moore’s got experience with the cylons, so he knows how to work that angle.

Now, they’ve brought in Eric Heisserer to rework the script. Heisserer wrote a webseries and also punched up the new Nightmare on Elm Street abortion, so they felt he’d be a prime dude to polish a script written by the latest guy to keep decent science fiction on television alive. That’s kind of like having Rachel Ray judge Top Chef.

Nothing is sacred anymore.

(Source: MTV Movie Blog)









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance

← Dune Remake Gets Pierre Morel | Brain Drain, Blended, and Missille Command in Development →









Comments

Ugh, I hate to hear it, this Thing is one of my favorite horror movies ever.

Posted by: Mebe at January 5, 2010 11:06 AM

Nooooooooooo!

I just watched The Thing at Christmas (I'm trying to create a new Christmas tradition)and was talking to my brother about how great it is.

They'll ruin it

Posted by: Park at January 5, 2010 11:11 AM

I can't in good conscience wait for the irony police to make an arrest. In the interest of public safety I have to point out that Carpenter's The Thing was itself a remake.

Posted by: Eep at January 5, 2010 11:13 AM

Hmmm....we watched this at Halloween. Maybe this time they will have enough in their budget to give the lead character an appropriately warm coat.

Posted by: Nimue at January 5, 2010 11:15 AM

So if it's a prequel, is it going to be in Norwegian? Or are they going to make some stupid crap up about how there were Americans at the Norwegian base? This whole thing is just stupid. I guess if it remains a prequel it's better than an actual remake, but not by much.

Posted by: Snath at January 5, 2010 11:15 AM

Eep, I thought Carpenter's The Thing was based more closely on the original book, not the old crappy movie about killer plants. Is it still a remake?

Posted by: Snath at January 5, 2010 11:18 AM

This is what the above should have said

Nooooooooooo!

I just watched The Thing at Christmas and was talking to my brother about how great it is.

They'll ruin it and destroy what was going to be a new Christmas tradition. Thanks a lot Hollywood. This could have been the new Festivus

Posted by: Park at January 5, 2010 11:18 AM

I'm flexing every muscle in my body waiting for the beating that's inevitably coming my way, but I don't really consider remakes sacrilige unless the original was, y'know, slightly better than meh.

Granted, it was cool seeing the alien reveal itself every so often, then have Kurt Russell torch its face(s) back to hell, or Neptune, or wherever, but I simply cannot grasp why *THIS* is considered to be the cream of the crop when it comes to sci-fi/horror. Re-make it, with my blessing, and I can almost guarantee to meet it with as much indifference as the John Carpenter version (props to Eep for the irony call).

Posted by: Death By Hippopotamus at January 5, 2010 11:22 AM

Although, for the record, I hope that Kurt Russell's hat stays.

Posted by: Death By Hippopotamus at January 5, 2010 11:23 AM

My response to this news can best be summed up by Helicopter Pilot RJ MacReady:

"Yeah? FUCK YOU, TOO!"

The only good thing about remaking classics is the remake will blow ass and no one will remember it in a year. It's when they are doing it to excellent foreign movies like "Let The Right One In" and "The Orphanage" that I get annoyed. "The Departed" gets a lot of acclaim, but the original "Infernal Affairs" was better and most Americans don't even know "The Departed" was a remake and that is just wrong.

Posted by: TylerDFC at January 5, 2010 11:31 AM

I'm with eep here, how can you possibly complain that a remake of a remake is getting a remake?

Posted by: EricD at January 5, 2010 11:56 AM

please nOOOOOOOOOO!

Posted by: carrie at January 5, 2010 11:58 AM

True, Carpenter's The Thing was a remake but it was made with LOVE by an (at the time) master of the genre...not some douche-y hacks who are jumping on the remake bandwagon because the only way to make any money in hollywood these days is to capitalize on a pre-existing brand/name/franchise. Grump.

Posted by: JenVegas at January 5, 2010 12:04 PM

I choose to ignore this reality and continue on with my own. You know, the reality that only has one remake.

Posted by: admin at January 5, 2010 12:07 PM

but I simply cannot grasp why *THIS* is considered to be the cream of the crop when it comes to sci-fi/horror.

1. Fantastic casting, set design, and direction.
2. Spare, economic script that keeps you guessing until the end and still works on multiple viewings.
3. Rob Bottin's special effects were remarkable, and are still damn fine, standing up with the best of Rick Baker and company.
4. Kurt Russel was in full on quiet-warrior mode and no one did that shit better.
5. That score fucking rocks.
6. 3 words: Keith motherfucking David.

I hope this answered your query.

Posted by: TylerDFC at January 5, 2010 12:12 PM

The real travesty of a Thing remake will be the horrible CGI usage for the creature itself. Rob Bottin must be rolling in his grave.

Posted by: Some Guy at January 5, 2010 12:12 PM

Dub Tee Fer?! That pic is hideous

No more yearbook photos. -------- Blurp

Posted by: Ms MoMo at January 5, 2010 12:32 PM

Well said, TylerDFC.

Posted by: Death By Hippopotamus at January 5, 2010 1:06 PM

Yawn. Get back to me when they start remaking the remakes of remakes. Then I'll get my ire up, but only for the right films. We're one degree removed from me caring about another version of The Thing. I'm not a big Carpenter fan, so unless they've decided to remake Cigarette Burns or Pro-Life without him, I'm not getting upset.

Well, I am upset, actually. I kept convincing myself David Cronenberg directed The Thing, so I wrote an awesome rant on why no one would touch my favorite of his, Videodrome. Then, when I realized it really was John Carpeneter, I started ranting about The People Under the Stairs, only to remember that was Wes Craven. I guess I just don't like Carpenter in feature length doses.

Posted by: Robert at January 5, 2010 1:07 PM

WTF ever happened to Paul Reiser, anyway?

*shakes head back and forth a few times making "ai-uhai-uh" sounds*

I truly love Carpenter's The Thing. Yes, I know it was a remake, but the original movie was yawn. The Carpenter version is much more faithful to one of the most kick-ass science fiction stories of the early 20th Century.

I watched it again recently, and y'know, that old-style FX stuff ought to look ridiculous today, with the latex and Vaseline and egg white and little motors making things move; but it doesn't look ridiculous at all. It's still very frightening.

We don't need no fuckin' remake; but if you're gonna do it anyway, just put it on the pile with all the others.

Posted by: Jerce at January 5, 2010 1:09 PM

The Thing is still the best damn horror movie I've ever seen. It looks as good today as ever because it's NOT computer graphics. It's a sculptural nightmare masterpiece come to life!

Posted by: RhymesWithSilver at January 5, 2010 1:21 PM

Eric Heisserer? That's not a real name, is it? It's a made-up name, right? Like Dr. Michael Hfuhruhurr.

Also, hands off "The Thing" or I. Will. Choke. A. Bitch.

Posted by: , at January 5, 2010 1:35 PM

*shakes head back and forth a few times making "ai-uhai-uh" sounds*

Jerce, I love you so much. That was hilarious.

But I don't love you quite as much as I love Prisco, I'm afraid. His illustration of Eric Heisserer : sci-fi script :: Rachael Ray : Top Chef was dead-on.

Posted by: Jelinas at January 5, 2010 1:59 PM

The love for this movie, in this thread, warmed my heart. For some reason I thought this needed saying.

Posted by: Samwise at January 5, 2010 2:22 PM

no travesty they make can ever touch the perfection that was "The Thing". that carpenter watched the original as a child, saw a man shout "it's like a giant carrot" and could get inspired about bringing his vision of claustrophobia and paranoia (and downright mindfucking monstrosities) is a testament in itself.

This movie ruined my sleep forever when i was a child, and i still watch it fairly frequently, and it always holds me rapt. nothing in it has aged.

directors could learn a lot taking a page from this movie, from suspense, to special effects. no cgi ever brings you to the horror of having a chest cavity collapse, grow teeth and then bite your hands off, right before dripping the head off and having it grow spider legs, howl and skitter away.

Posted by: idleprimate at January 5, 2010 3:36 PM

I'm loving all the love for The Thing in this thread. Yes, the John Carpenter version, yes, it's a remake - FROM THE EIGHTIES, before remakes were "cool". Get over it.

I just rewatched it recently and it totally holds up. Although I will agree that none of them had coats that would allow you to survive in Antarctica for more than about five minutes. But Kurt Russell needed that hat. You know, to look cool.

In conclusional non-sequitur, Keith David is awesome.

Exhibit 1: The Thing
Exhibit 2: They Live
Exhibit 3: Pitch Black

Posted by: MM at January 5, 2010 4:14 PM

Yeah, I'm gonna reject this reality and substitute it with my own.

I'm not opposed to remakes in theory, but in practice, many of them suck ass. Just makes the original (or the good previous remakel) look that much better and maybe even brings it some renewed attention. So... whatever.

RE "Videodrome": I saw that for the first time a couple months ago. Meh. I can see why it's considered ahead of its time and visionary and whatnot, but it was ultimately kinda boring. Sorry. After a lot of the other shit I've seen in movies (like "The Thing"), "Videodrome" ain't that shocking.

Posted by: Slash at January 5, 2010 4:37 PM

Slash just quoted a Mythbuster.

Posted by: Samwise at January 5, 2010 4:53 PM

Lance Henriksen is busy making Brazilian soap operas now.

Posted by: zito at January 5, 2010 6:12 PM

As Eep points out The Thing is a remake. But Prisco ups the irony ante by using the classic Twilight Zone episode and its movie remake in the same sentence decrying remakes!

Bravo sir!

Posted by: ed newman at January 5, 2010 8:59 PM

NOW IT'S MY TURN!!! The 1982 version of The Thing belongs to me, it's mine, not yours, none of you, fuck off all of you! Well, except for Park who I'd like to start spending Christmas with from now on. Such a tradition could well replace Christmas Story marathons! And Snath and TylerDFC can stay, too. And anyone else who, from their postings here, clearly (and properly) has a small shrine to John Carpenter in their bedroom in the proper Irish Catholic tradition.

But to Eep and EricD and all the other motherless fucks who call The Thing a remake, the irony you point to is utter horseshit, because the 1952 The Thing From Another World--itself a shit-tastic venture--was, as Snath correctly points out, simply an earlier interpretation of John W. Campbell's novella Who Goes There?, to which minor deity John Carpenter's adaptation was infinitely more faithful. Can Lord Carpenter be blamed for being born later than some guy named Christian Nyby (that's the actual name of the director of the 1952 farce.)

And Snath, it's sad, because the prequel Mr. Prisco mentions is not happening, though it would indeed be a good idea. I always used to think the '82 flick would be good fodder for a sequel in the right hands, but I fear some fuckwad director with too much ego and too little imagination's gonna render unto the world some fucked-up, abbreviated, 90-minute dose of pure crap.

To Death by Hippopotamus, let me elaborate on the schooling you just received from TylerDFC, how many horror flicks have been scored by master composer Ennio Fucking Morricone?!? The answer is just one! The hell kind of horror flick fan are you?!?!

Get out all of you non-Carpenter-appreciating dumbshits. You know nothing.

RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR ... Hulk smash!

Posted by: Johnnyboy at January 5, 2010 9:00 PM