After realizing you can watch the 1982 version streaming on Netflix, I went out and watched Matthiis Van Heiinigen, Jr.’s The Thing the other night. But first a quick history lesson:
First came The Thing from Another World, produced/directed by the legendary Howard Hawks and Christian Nyby in 1951, inspired by the novella, Who Goes There? by John W. Campbell Jr. Then in 1982 came the remake The Thing,directed by American horror director John Carpenter, with a storyline more faithful to the storyline of Campbell’s novella, and finally in 2011 Dutch Matthiis Van Heiinigen, Jr.’s The Thing, billed as a prequel to the 1982 version. I’ve now seen all three of these versions.
I can’t talk about the Heiinigen’s Thing without talking about, and comparing it to, Carpenter’s Thing. In the opening sequence of Carpenter’s Thing, a Norwegian helicopter chases a dog into an American Antarctic camp, shooting at it before crashing and killing those aboard. Later we find out that the dog isn’t a dog at all, but THE THINGGGG! Heiiningen’s Thing aims to tell the story of those Norwegians and how they got to that American camp.
Before I saw it, everyone was saying “It’s a remake. They’re calling it a prequel but it’s really a remake.” I’m not entirely sure. I can tell that Heiiningen was attempting to create a fresh, new story for the Thing, and brought in some divergent factors from Carpenter (tensions between Americans vs Norwegians, female lead, more sci-fi element) but when pretty much all of the main paramaters of the plot are the same:
1. You’re stuck in a camp in the Antarctic
2. You don’t know who is human and who is not
3. There’s an alien killing and imitating your friends
It’s pretty hard to not see the movie as a remake.
Anyhow, the new version devolved into a predictable Hollywood thriller CGI-fest, with mediocre writing and acting, relying on shocking the audience instead of plot and character development. A lot of the CGI effects were cheesy, and I couldn’t help guffawing randomly at it during the movie. As my companion pointed out, none of the characters were developed enough for us to care about them dying. “They were all just meat at that point,” he said. Compare this with the quiet, moody, almost noir-ish, well-paced horror of Carpenter’s version. The gross rubbery practical special effects of the 1982 version were more visceral and horrifying than the weird liquidy CGI, and I got to know the characters much better (even though a lot of them were 1980s stereotypes).
The plot tie-in into the 1982 version was weak and seemed thrown together last minute. They thought they were being clever by bringing back Carpenter’s score and font for that ending/credit sequence, but I wasn’t buying it. Overall, its OK for a popcorn munching mainstream throwaway date movie, but if you’re looking for something that compares to its predecessors (now deemed as horror classics), don’t waste your time guys.
