web counter
 

The Thing Red Band Trailer: No, Not That Thing, The Other Thing. No, The Other Thing, Damn It!

By TK | Posted Under Trailers | Comments (19)

Mary-Elizabeth-Winstead-The-Thing-prequel-movie-picture-Joel-Edgerton.jpg

True story that just happened. I watched the below trailer for Matthijs van Heijningen Jr’s The Thing, and then had to explain the strange timeline of the three movies. How John Carpenter’s 1982 classic film The Thing is something of a sequel to the 1951 film The Thing From Another World (she then had to listen to my extended raving about how awesome Carpenter’s film is). Then, I had to explain that the 2011 film called The Thing was actually not a remake of the 1982 film, but more of a remake of the 1951 film. Which means that, chronologically speaking in terms of the universe of The Thing, there will be two films that take place one after another, with the same title.

Mrs. TK: That’s stupid.
Me: I know.
Mrs. TK: That’d be like remaking A New Hope and calling it The Empire Strikes Back.

She’s not wrong.

Anyway, here’s the shiny new red-band trailer. It’s not even remotely NSFW - it’s basically red banded for some goo. No dirty words, very little blood.









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

← We Are the Sinners: J. Edgar Trailer | The Typical (Read: Dumb) Audience Members' 23 Favorite Movies of 2011 →









Comments

I will be going in with very low expectations, and hopefully be pleasantly surprised.

Posted by: Morosey at September 20, 2011 10:37 AM

This is going to be a steaming pile, isn't it?

*whimpers softly*

Posted by: , at September 20, 2011 10:40 AM

Fuck you world! Fuck you right in your greedy fucking face!

Posted by: MurderBot at September 20, 2011 10:41 AM

B-but...SPECIAL EFFECTS ARE SPECIAL!

Posted by: superasente at September 20, 2011 10:45 AM

This seems ridiculously dumb. Mrs TK, on the other hand, seems ridiculously smart.
Don't get me wrong, I'm happy for you. But I do kinda wish it were the other way round, benefitting the many rather than the few. Or just you for that matter.

Posted by: cinekat at September 20, 2011 10:46 AM

Full of shiny, new, expensive CGI, that will not have 1/10 the impact of the good ol' practical effects.
Meh.

Posted by: The Kilted Yaksman at September 20, 2011 10:51 AM

John Carpenter's The Thing is one of the all-time great horror movies, far surpassing the original Thing from Another World and a much better adaptation of the original short story by John Campbell. Given Hollywood's track record when it comes to remakes (and even though I loved Conan, I'm well aware that Jason Momoa's ass was my primary reason for satisfaction with the film), and now that I've seen the trailer, I'm thinking this movie will, in a word, blow. Dammit.

Posted by: PDamian at September 20, 2011 10:54 AM

What is going on with the habitual rape of the films I loved as a child that left the perfect balance of fear and curiosity of what the hell was that??

Posted by: daria at September 20, 2011 10:57 AM

Kill it. Kill it with fire.

Posted by: , at September 20, 2011 11:10 AM

@daria They will continue to greenlight remakes/sequels etc because it's more a financial risk to make a film based on an original idea. So basically it's the recession's fault! I for one will put the shorely on Bank of America's greedy evil shoulders.

But seriously, studios have been conducting business like this for years and probably for more years to come sadly.

Posted by: Teresa at September 20, 2011 11:19 AM

Impressive.
This film looks worse with each consecutive trailer.

Posted by: Scott at September 20, 2011 12:15 PM

So it's a prequel to the Carpenter version? Interesting.

Posted by: kevin_m at September 20, 2011 1:35 PM

I'll say this....that shot of a face splitting is a direct reference to one of the bodies from the original...

But it still looks totally fucking awfulterriblehorribleshitewankgash. It's gash. It is SO gash. For the non brits, Gash is just fucking bad. It's bad. Jersey Shore is Gash. Teen Moms or 16 and Pregnant or however fuckin' many there are, gash. Nickleback? Gash. This crap? Gash/

Posted by: Nadine at September 20, 2011 2:20 PM

Why does Mary Elizabeth Winstead end up in so much crap? She's not a bad actress, and she makes an appealing heroine. It's sad that the high points on her resume are Sky High and Death Proof. She's like this generation's Jill Schoelen.

Posted by: Craig at September 20, 2011 3:25 PM

Uhm, that doesn't look anything like the original Thing from Another World. On the other hand, it looks VERY like Carpenters The Thing. So I don't know about this sequel to the first thing. In fact, I wager I can tell you during that seizure inducing set of quick shots exactly where some of those shots are occurring, plot and timeline wise.

It kind of goes without saying that regardless this is going to be a monumental fucking disaster. I showed Mrs. Frob The Thing just last year (she hadn't seen it - I know, I know, she's a work in progress on iconic movies) and it scared the beejeebus out of her. It doesn't need a CGI update, it just works.

-Frob

Posted by: frobme at September 20, 2011 4:29 PM

Well, since it hasn't been said yet, and because Carpenter's The Thing is just as much mine as it is any of yours ...

I want to see this, and I think it will be enjoyable.

I won't spew any hate. I'll just leave it at that.

Posted by: Johnnyboy at September 20, 2011 9:11 PM

This movie looks awesome. Loved Carpenters' version, doesn't mean that this CANNOT be good. Sometimes remakes are fun. Hipster freaks.

Posted by: mad at September 21, 2011 3:19 AM

I remain cautiously optimistic, though the surprising dearth of studio hype unnerves me. If they don't screen it for critics, brace yourselves.

Posted by: palaeologos at September 22, 2011 7:49 PM

"The Thing is something of a sequel to the 1951 film The Thing From Another World"

Um... nope.

Posted by: fatpie42 at September 25, 2011 6:17 PM