Actually it was a horrible script and the fact that it was a movie no one wanted or cared for was what ruined it. Could have had the best practicals of all time, and still would bomb
no sadly it was not. Things are very scripted, the blood test works very rarely (sometimes you'll try the test on a guy, he's fine then you walk a few feet and then boom he's a thing.). it does act a sequel to the thing though. The best way to describe it is Half-life meets Resident evil.
The game itself it IS VERY GOOD. It has some rough edges like the blood test, but the entire product is a brilliant survival horror. You can find it on google if you want, just install it and give it a try, you won't get disappointed.
I like how the dog-thing clearly realized how dumb his previous strategy was. "Going around screaming and barely changing my form? The hell was I thinking?! Next time I'll do it better."
As far as I know the original ending was much darker and more in line with the Carpenter flick. Kate torches Carter - but he screams like a human, allowing her to realize that she just killed a man due to paranoia. The other snow cat doesn't have the fuel to make it back to base, so she's also thrown away her chance of survival. Earlier in the script, Carter had warned Kate about being outside the base in the freezing cold. He told her that the very moisture in your eyes would freeze, blinding you and leaving you to wander sightlessly until the cold finally kills you. The last shot of the movie would be Kate, all alone with no hope of survival, and a tear rolling down her cheek. We would see the tear crystalise and the credits would roll. As for ruining the mystery of the original film... the idea was to replace the mystery of what happened at the Norwegian base with the mystery of what happened aboard the spaceship (ie, the body of the pilot being reminiscent of "Colin" in the original movie). So the movie would give us new information about the creature, but also raise more questions. Was The Thing a stowaway on the ship? Was it a prisoner of some kind that broke loose? Did it intend to crash the ship or was it actually the crew that downed it in an effort to kill The Thing? The director and writer understood the source material - the studio did not. As a result the movie is only okay, when it could have been something special.
Dang! That would have been a bleak but very fitting ending given the 1982 ending. This movie suffered so much from studio interference that it's painful learning all hat got scrapped for the story we end up with
Of course, it would be the creature is that of an advance alien civilization and is currently surrounded by primative bio mass like beings. It's first objective would be to over power them onlt to later realize its mistakes and rely on deception as no matter its size raw power doesn't work well enough
TheSouloftheDragon even funnier how the thing cleaned the bathroom. I just imagine it being there, scrubbing the blood while murmuring complaints like some Mexican grandma
The difference here is that the original film wrote rules for how the Thing would behave, and then wrote scenes around that behavior so that the sequence of events would force it to transform. The interesting part of The Thing is that the monster itself is actually just as much trying to survive as the people, and there's a good balance between times when it is on the attack and when it is on the defense. It's not just a malicious entity out to kill, it's an animal trying to feed and preserve itself. But this movie turns it into a slasher villain, it seems only interested in killing people, with no real goal to survive or escape. Unlike the first movie, this one writes scenes where the Thing transforms, without caring about rules to dictate how it behaves.
*FX Team:* Builds and designs puppets for the Thing and other aliens to cut costs for the production budget *Studio:* Demands a portion of the budget gets blown on obvious unconvincing CGI as to not confuse the audience *Audience:* Wondering why CGI was used if puppets for the Thing was already made?
I wish Lars had survived and became the last man standing along with her. How tense would that have been? One survivor, and you can't understand each other.
@@jmack8767 Yeah Lars lived, he's the one with the gun at the beginning of the original The Thing. Got shot through the eye by the one guy of course, but y'know
@@ajexomen3712 John Carpenter's DVD commentary identifies the Norwegian who speaks and is shot by Garry as being played by Norbert Weisser. Weisser played the pilot, not the passenger, so this means that Lars' fate is that he blows himself to bits. The confusion seems to stem from the fact the movie isn't terribly clear that the gun changes hands when the Norwegians land; everyone, including the makers of this movie, naturally assumes the one with the gun must be the passenger.
I think I can give a reason for why the Thing was acting...odd compared to the first movie. In the 2011 movie it underestimated humanity, it thought it could just assimilate and then use brute force to beat the humans, it wasn't concerned with hiding most of the time because it saw humans as weak and could easily be overpowered by itself, so in the next movie it chose to adopt a more stealthy approach because it learned that humans are tougher than it initially thought. You can even see in the 2011 movie ending that it tries to hide but a small detail gave it away.
It wasn't The Thing that underestimated humans, it was the production company who didn't know or care to keep a vital part of The Thing's appeal. The "cgi abomination' was more like The Thing From Another World (1951), just crashing through stuff and making a big spectacle of itself. The Thing (2011) needs to chill and learn the subtle art of tension from its predecessor
I am Norwegian, and the chances of finding a Norwegian who doesnt speak even a little english is 0%..if you go back to the 1930s and 1940s then maybe, as my grandfather and grandmother on my fathers side didnt speak english at all (but they were born back in 1924...) and my mothers parents both speak english...my mothers father even worked in London for a while in the 1950s...anyone born in the 1940s and later would speak english! I was born in the 70s and we had to learn a second (english) and even a third language (I could choose between German and French). Not sure which year the movie is supposed to be set in, but he should at least be able to understand some basic english! - ah almost forgot...love your videos !
Lars does appears to understand some basic English in the 2011 film, such as when Kate yells at him to burn The Thing with his flamethrower. But the reason he doesn’t speak any English is simply to fit the continuity of the 1982 film.
I'm norwegian, too. Stop being so fucking basic. It's fully likely that some north-norwegian didn't speak english in the 1980's. Could be born out in the middle of nowhere and barely learned basic english in school, but not well enough to speak or understand it. Just like us with Spanish today. If you are norwegian, you should love this movie, as I do, because it has great performances from lots of norwegian movie stars.
Ehh never say never. Even now I would bet there are people in norway who don't speak english in some remote village somewhere. Its not as uncommon as you might think. Hell in canada there are people in villages in quebec who literally only speak french despite virtually all media and education in the country being in english and virtually the entire country either being native english speakers or dual english-french speakers and StolenEyes makes a good point as well. Plenty of people can understand a language better than they can speak it. For example my spoken french is terrible and I haven't used it in 20+ years, but I can still understand someone speaking french quite well. Lars could have had something similar going on. That and with the whole flamethrower situation he could have just been using common sense to figure out what she was telling him to do given the context of the situation. she could have been screaming at him to burn it in japanese and he would have likely understood the inferred meaning if not literally what she was saying
@@JS-wp4gs Agreed, I would murder Spanish if I tried, but through all the media that has subtitles, ads, etc. I have a (rough) understanding. Oh and remember that English, well at least US english, has some hodge podge words added to the dictionary everynow and then, like camouflage for instance.
The prequel is supposedly set before the events of the 1982 film, but watching this movie I could never shake the feeling it was set in modern times. I think it's the colours and sharper images and crisp CG because I can't think of anything within this movie that wouldn't have been around in the eighties.
OMG to the parallels to Paul W. S. Anderson's AvP.. Evil company guy asks pretty female protagonist (who has something remotely to do with science and stuff) to do some "undisclosed" work for them. They hesitate at first but later agree and end up being the sole survivor of the whole endeavour. Bravo screenwriters.
no,remenber when they she falls down a shaft in the ship and they get separated?and then the movie cuts to her waking up?he probally was assimilated by then and decided to help kate kill the other thing to gain her trust and go to civilization,survival is most important to things they will go as far as kill other things as not to blow their cover
I agree, I actually heard that the FX team used the practicals in Harbinger Down from 2015, too bad some people didn't see the pilot alien or the director's cut.
I know right the Practical effects were awesome I can't believe they Fuckin CGId over them unreal what the fuck were they thinking?!! That's what made the original film so God Damn great
G filmer I know I've seen them on RUclips it's awesome in just a shame that they weren't used or that they were in glazed over by CGI that was terrible
Aye man, the original just had that secret sauce lacking in so many horror films nowadays, the two standouts for me was the acting in between the Thing's appearances which despite the surreal terror is totally believable and the absolutely eerie score by Ennio Morricone
I always figured since it was a prequel, you could say that the Thing perhaps learned to be more stealthy the 2nd time around, because it failed with the Noreweigan camp
The movie still has contradictions like when the alien got burn into flames and throwing itself outside, in the John Carpenter's The Thing there's evidence that they dumped gasoline on it then burn it because there were empty gasoline jugs next to the body in the movie.
Agreed. The biggest glaring one is that they didn't use thermite to blow up the UFO, which is very clearly shown and referenced in John Carpenter's movie. It makes you wonder how such things were missed when you're specifically creating a prequel. The discrepancies ruin the enjoyment at a lot of points.
Yep, I found that just as silly too, making the Thing become too much of a cliched horror villain. Whereas the genius of the original is that it isn't a slasher flick (which is oddly the route the prequel took), it's a horror suspense film.
It also gets the two Norwegians in the original movie confused. They thought the Norwegian who speaks and gets shot by Garry was the gunman from the helicopter so they wrote the Lars character as not speaking English and had him get into the passenger seat at the end. One problem. The speaker was actually the pilot, identified as Jan Bolen in the novelization and a deleted scene (and called Mathias in this movie). So they screwed up by not paying attention to the original movie (the rifle changes hands when the chopper lands; the gunman hands it to the pilot).
the biggest issue I took with this film was this "where's Lars?" "we didn't kill him" why was the next sentence not "we should go back and get him, he was great" Or better yet, why did neither of them think to grab him when they left?
Grr, this movie. My issue with the cgi here really isn’t that it was bad - it was fine - but with the speed at which the transformations occurred. In Carpenter’s version, when transforming it was a slow, messy affair drawing the audience into the horror of it. Here, for the most part, it’s too quick, too cleanly done. There’s no juicy, squishy sense of revulsion that is body horror. Add to that to the near lack of paranoia, the set barely felt like it was 1979, and finally knowing from the outset who will survive.
Everytime I see poor cgi in a movie it ruins it for me. I can no longer enjoy or get into the movie. That's why the original is my favorite horror movie! The effects were amazing and hold up extremely well compared to the shit in the 2011 film. Wish the studios kept the practical in this film :/
"Otherwise its a mystery what happened to the other people...and who wants mystery in a Horror" pretty much sums this version up and everything wrong with it
I hate this movie, even if it had practical effects I'd still hate it for its writing and inconsistencies (the ship looks nothing how it did in the original, and also the Norwegians blew up the ice to uncover the ship, you know, like that VHS MacReady found showed. Why do they find it in an underground ice cave instead of being faithful to what the original established? Bullshit inconsistency). It has no interesting character (unlike the original film), it has annoying modern horror movie jumpscare stings instead of atmosphere and build up (unlike the original) and it has a dumb monster that doesn't make sense (so the Thing can turn the guy's hand into a centipede thing, but it can't do that to reach the girl when she hides in the ship) so... it's just a shitty movie on its own. The only argument the supporters make boil down to "Oh, but it's cool because you see how the axe got to the wall, I RECOGNIZE DAT! Oh, but it's cool because the ending looks like the opening, I RECOGNIZE DAT!" ...What about the writing? What about the characters? What about the fact it'a a shitty modern horror film on top of a shitty prequel? Doing a prequel is also pointless. The whole point of the destroyed Norwegian base was to simply foreshadow what was going to happen to MacReady's team: it would explode and be left as icy ruins. That's it. Unless you had a group of creative filmmakers that actually cared for details and had an idea to make a story worth telling, doing a prequel is just a bad idea in the long sad history of Hollywood's bad ideas.
Yeah it was kind of dumb how the prequel left the spaceship fully intact and operational. Why would the Thing choose to leave the ship and freeze itself then? Makes no sense. I always figured it escaped containment and killed some of the crew on board the ship. When the ship crashed, fires erupted inside the ship and the Thing went out into the cold to avoid being burnt to death. Here's some more inconsistencies: In John Carpenter's film, before heading to the Norwegian camp, Fuchs mentions that there were a total of 10 people stationed there (including the 2 in the helicopter) and they had only been there for 8 weeks. In the prequel there were way more than 10 people. The Thing corpse at the Norwegian camp was found with cans of kerosene next to it, implying that it was burned right there by some of the survivors, but in the prequel it just ran through the wall after being set on fire. The axe in the door in John Carpenter's film had blood on the handle as well as the head of the axe. I always assumed it was human blood, considering every piece of the Thing is alive and can reform itself into something else, which is why they burned the contaminated blood bags in John Carpenter's film. Which means that the blood on the axe in the prequel would be alive as it belonged to part of the Thing. I could also get into why the metal fillings and whatnot was a terrible idea, but that would take too much time. In the end, I didn't hate the film. It can't hold a candle to Carpenter's film however and it completely missed the point of the film (its supposed to build on paranoia, not knowing who's who, instead of being a generic monster film where the monster makes itself known at every turn. They completely dropped the ball there.)
@@TheWiseLJ I know this is very late, but why was metal fillings a bad Idea. It makes sense because how could something that copy's organic matrer be able to copy Inorganic matter?
@@jamesmonroe1538 Because even the movie points out how much of a bad idea it is XD Not everyone has fillings, so anyone who didn't have them is going to be looked at with scepticism. Had the script writer not been binging on macy D's coffee and actually TRYING to write a script he'd have realised that and done something with, I don't know...spit? or hair? If everything on the thing is its own part then pluck someones hair and put it on a bunson burner ....HOLY CRAP I came up with a better idea with less coffee than the writer :/
@@CrashHeadroom well it was a decent idea tbh it works for some survivors so you can get proven allies. Yes its not a great plan for 100% identifying the monster but so what? The characters even say this, just because chracters had an idea that wasn't the best doesn't mean it's stupid to include it.
I'd like him to review Harbinger Down. It's a film that alot of this crew went to work on because they were mad about their practical effects in this film (2011) being masked so heavily by CGI. From memory I didn't love it immensely but did enjoy it. I believe it's available on Netflix.
Actually, it sort of does make sense why the Thing behaves differently compared to the original. It sees itself as superior to humans and tries to use brute force to overpower its victims, but by the time of the original has learned that humans are tougher, smarter and more resourceful than it initially thought, so it learns to rely on stealth and deception to win.
The thing is: why did the American torch the thing inside the UFO, if he was also The Thing? She probably killed an innocent white bread. I don't like the way they're speeding up the transformation processes, which was also done in the last Aliens flick. It's asinine.
How long did it take for Norris or Palmer to transform? Norris got his chest-mouth open in mere seconds of being electrocuted. Palmer only needed about 10 seconds worth of footage before breaking loose and jumping to the ceiling. Yeah, the Kennel-Thing took a while to shapeshift, but slow mutations are not a concrete rule. The Thing in John Carpenter's film was not an ambassador of consistency.
@@1krani it's a creature that devours and assimilates itself eventually into a whole society and then passes on to other worlds. and only comes out to feed and assimilate again, unless threatened. Norris = Defib provocation. Palmer = it was his blood exposed to the red hot wire therefore the whole thing took it as a threat to itself. the kennel = ample time to be alone in the quiet without threat to feed and pass on.
@@theaegis5795 You and everyone else always focus on the Thing's intelligence before its reveal. What about AFTER it's revealed? Let's recap its decisions: *Kennel-Thing:* after being irritated by gunshots while eating the dogs, it hung in a corner and went "boogity boo" despite knowing that humans could harm it (as evidenced by its burned remains from the Norwegian camp), and only made token efforts to escape before changing its mind and attacking Childs. Rookie mistake, but forgivable since we don't know if it knew what a flamethrower looked like. *Bennings-Thing:* ran out into the snow where there was absolutely no place for it to hide, got caught, got torched. Again, forgivable rookie mistake, though if Bennings was assimilated by Kennel-Thing's remains instead of Split-Face's, wouldn't it already have the layout of the outpost and thus know where a good hiding spot would be to finish transforming? Pure speculation, though. *Norris-Thing:* bit Copper's hands off before exploding out of its first body and going "boogity boo" at MacReady despite witnessing him torching Bennings without hesitation or fear. This isn't a rookie mistake, this is poor writing. Both Palmer and Norris were there to see Mac torch Bennings, so unless Norris was somehow assimilated BEFORE the incident but NOT in the brain area, he would've known that it can't scare MacReady into hesitating. Possible to excuse, but implausible. *Palmer-Thing:* attacked Windows after putting on a horror show, but THEN instead of killing Windows and focusing on the primary remaining threat (MacReady), it instead spent all that time infecting Windows and gave its most ardent foe time to get his flamethrower working. There is no possible way The Thing wouldn't know what a hardass MacReady was, because Palmer was there when he torched Norris-Thing and SAW that scaring him into hesitating didn't work. UTTERLY impossible to excuse. *Blair-Thing:* sure it got Garry and probably Nauls, too, but once it exploded out of the ground, it literally just stood there and politely waited for MacReady to throw dynamite at it while showing off its half-formed dog imitation. What happened to the tentacles it used to grab the dynamite plunger and molotov cocktails? Who cares! Rob Bottin and John Carpenter sure didn't. My point about The Thing is that it's only smart when it's hidden. Once it transforms itself, it goes from superhuman master of stealth and psychology to an animalistic intelligence at best. Its rationality is not consistent, and those inconsistencies are the primary thing that gets it killed by the heroes.
Ikrani has a good point actually. The Thing always returns to a primal and mindless state when it transforms fsr. Maybe it’s only humans that are sentient out of the life forms it has absorbed? I don’t know. I’ll watch it again.
@@1krani It's not necessarily poor writing. Inconsistency in the actions of an intelligent being, to an extent, is one of the most realistic things out there. How often can you claim the way one person acts in similar situations is completely consistent? John Carpenter's The Thing has anything but poor writing. As you said Gama most of those inconsistencies can be explained away very easily.
I like to think that the reason the alien was attacking randomly was because it had been frozen for so many years so it didn't know how to adapt and would shift at the wrong time
Lars fly off with discount Norwegian Adam Sandler, who boots a grenade, destroys the helicopter and is not there when Lars needs a translator. WTG discount Norwegian Adam Sandler.
"the thing" wasn't what was flying the craft, it was something that they were carrying, it escaped attacked the crew and the craft crashed here, only "the thing" survived.
So, in the prequel to the prequel we would see some funky aliens, maybe on an ice planet. They would find something and bring it onboard for an autopsy. Only, it comes alive!
Nathaniel Foga or, alternatively, The thing: origins The thing cometh The thing: the first assimilation The thing: the mystery begins The thing dines Norwegian
Mr Critical I was about to suggest maybe the original novella “who goes there?” that inspired the original adaptation but that would be really hard to work in a title. Unless you do “the thing: who goes there!?”
Hold up. I have a question - why did they followed the Thing in the end? If it's idea was to leave the planet JUST LET IT DO SO. In 1982 movie the creature also tried to make a flying saucer but realized that it's not possible due to the only parts avaliable being snowmobiles and a helicopter. So it decided to freeze itself and then infect the rescue team. Here in one scene it tries to leave in a chopper for the mainland and in the end it's going for the flying saucer to leave the planet instead of doing the same thing it did in 1982 movie by freezing itself to be found later by a rescue team or someone else. Either it was sure that the Split-face and a Dog were going to successfully infect other people or writers were just not giving a damn.
I think a lot of people hate on "The Thing"'s CGI because they said they WOULDN'T use CGI. They promised that they would use puppets and miniatures and practical effects. It was the one statement that won a lot of people over, myself included, and then it came out and....dear god.
That was the Sad part for me, it "mainly" opened a mouth in the TORSO of the Person it Mimicked or had an upright/insect Format it took on. The Centipede hands were a smart touch, but that was it. IF you look at the Original... Dear GOD I could NOT guess what it would MORPH INTO NEXT (when it was out of its mimic form) it was FUCKIN SCARY!
21:30. Yes. The monster scream was added in AFTER the theatrical release... This whole movie was like the creature, immitating a better film while pretending to be something else.
It's a good movie. These people have a stick up their asses. I worship Carpenter's The Thing, but to shit on this movie because it doesn't live up to the best movie ever made, is so pathetic. No one makes good prequels - literally no one. It never happens. What we got here is a pretty good prequel with a super cool cast, and as a Norwegian I absolutely loved seeing these all-star actors in a horror movie. It's so out of character for many of them. I see all the flaws, sure, but to say the movie is bad is absolutely ridiculous. By the standards of modern Hollywood movies, it's a fucking masterpiece.
I like to think that the reason the thing sucked at hiding in this movie because this was the first time it dealt with humans, by the second base it had learned a lot about us
Hey Decker! Been watching your show for a long time, so I wanted to make a fun little request. How do you feel about reviewing the Resident Evil movies?
The ending would have been better if Joel Edgerton's Thing/Human status was left ambiguous. I personally felt like his earring fell out and he put his hand to the wrong ear due to stress and exhaustion. As fast as the Thing could be in this film, it should have had major defensive reaction as soon as not-Ripley made it clear she suspected him. She roasted an innocent man because it was the only way to be sure.
BulletTooth504 How would one explain the eerie screech the Thing makes? Just sound effects? I do agree though, that would be interesting if it was left ambiguous.
I've tried to pretend the screeching was little flourish for the score, or that Katie "Not-Ripley" Lloyd was just imagining it. But I know that is not what the filmmakers intended. It's like they deliberately wanted to make a highly flawed premake and couldn't be bothered to save it with a decent ending.
This was the ONE video i was looking forward to. Sure, the prequel film has it's flaws, but it can compare with a nice good'ol beer, smooth and crisp. It may taste a bit weird, but give it a few seconds and it will be a dream your mouth will thank you for.
Hey Decker Shado Could You Please Review The Original 1990's Live Action Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Movies TMNT 1990 TMNT 2 The Secret Of The Ooze And TMNT 3
I felt that the creature when it woke up was disoriented & way more aggressive and realized it was almost wiped out. So it took another approach. But that's just me I guess.
Yep...trouble with CGI is you can have the most groundbreaking graphics made by supercomputers but as soon as you lift CGI out of a CGI environment you jar the viewer because you can always tell there's a disconnect between what actually exists on camera and what's been added... If they made a fully CGI movie about the thing with the best CGI i think that could be awesome but mixing the two things just doesn't cut it and there's no movie where you can point to a scene and say' wheres the CGI'' and not be able to guess correctly 100 percent of the time
You could always say, this being a prequel the Thing hadn't become smart enough to be deceptive until it had absorbed enough knowledge and experience to do so.
ssdko I understand where your coming from but the thing is implied to have assimalated aliens that traveled through space. It should have encountered creatured smarter than humans.
Jose Sosa. And those aliens may have been entirely different leading to a different adaptation. Also, who knows what kind of inteligence it could retain all those years.
Kei Kurono what? Did THIS thing specifically build the ship? Humans have knowledge of how to build a spaceshuttle, doesn't mean their collective intellect is reflected like that in any particular individual.
In Carpenters film, the alien tries to build an alien spaceship to get away when it's controlling Blair. The team find out and blow it up. It's not like the thing absorbed a humans knowledge of how to build an alien spaceship. It had that knowledge already. If it's that intelligent, the whole not knowing how to hide is just a stupid excuse to try to justify a crap film. Which is what The Thing 2011 is, a crap film. And it isn't canon nor will I ever consider it canon.
Not sure if anyone mentioned this but at the end of the film, Carter mentions a Russian base 50 Miles from the crash site and he and Kate plan on driving to it, now some could argue that Carter thing was lying to get Kate alone to kill her but if that was the case he'd have just killed her then and there. My theory is by this point in time the thing was smart enough to know not to reveal itself and was using Carter's knowledge of that base to get away where it start the infection cycle all all over again but Kate found out about it and killed it, after getting her bearings she made her way to the Russian base but since nobody would ever believe her she made up a story about the team going crazy from cabin fever.
Zambie Explained there’s a video on RUclips that shows all of the practical effects they used, the studio forced them to redo all of the monster stuff with cgi.
Riven is right the writing doesn't compare and even the tone shifts and the atmosphere was entirely lost here which was essential in the original if u take it out there is no tension and the move is boring
The dog was were the prequel lost me. The dog had been hiding. The humans weren't looking for it because it was believed to be dead. But rather than keep it's head down and see if they left, it decides to jump up and let them know it was there? Then again, I never understood why it started attacking the dogs when it did in the original. Again, everyone believed it was a dog - and would have until two face thawed out and started attacking. It volunteered to put everyone on alert that it was dangerous before it had to. Seemed like a note from the studio "Nobody's died yet!"
I have a theory. Maybe the thing is alot less subtle in this movie because it is its first experience with humans. It doesnt know the dangers e6c humans can pose to it yet which is why it is so rash, doesnt hide, etc. After figuring out thay humans know its weakness it hides and becomes a bit more subtle and when it finally reaches the american base as the dog. Think of it like a giant learning curve. Idk it makes sense to me butni could be totally wrong Edit:saw someone already made this comment two seconds after i posted this but i took time to make this so itll stay lol
"The Other Thing" is a good alternate title. I'm surprised you didn't mention that they shot all the monsters with practical effects, then the studio replaced them all with average CGI.
Couple of things that bothered me about this one, like for starters, they opening scenes had Norwegians speaking in their native tongue. Why couldn't they have just kept that for the whole movie? But, no, gotta cram in Americans for international audiences of course. And secondly, and more importantly, their attempt at explaining split-face's origin just tells you the producers lost grasp of the things concept. It would only reveal its form and attack when alone. "The chameleon strikes in the dark". Here it just transforms and attacks for no real reason other than to illicit a gasp from the audience and fans to be like "ahhh" . Instead of trying to escape like it actually would, it tries to morph into the other guy in front of everyone when there is no point, since everyone would know he was a thing. And then, to add insult to injury were treated with some tom and jerry bullshit, where it decides to hunt for Kate. Ever since the constant rumors and up to when it was finally released, i always knew it would be a longshot to expect much, given the time period. And i'm glad that as always Hollywood excels at destroying classics and revels in our disappointment.
I might be biased 'cause I'm Norwegian, but I agree. I understand that Hollywood isn't interested in making movies with non-English-speakers as the protagonist, but the fact that the entire base is Norwegian but all of the main characters happen to be American feels a bit... It kind of seems to imply that only Americans can be heroes or something like that, or that the story specifically needs an American main character in order for it to even be worth telling, it's a bit iffy.
The creature is dumber because at this point within the time frame, it hadn't learned to be subtle. By the time of carpenter's film, it has learned to be subtle and it got more results.
Not trying to be a jerk, but I think it was just bad screenwriting. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed The Thing prequel and no one should hate on you for enjoying the film as well, but it had many flaws. When The Thing imitates its host, it makes a perfect copy, down to how the humans act, speak, think, etc. Obviously this means that after assimilating the first human host, it would know how intelligent the human race is and would have adapted from that first kill. Therefore the only time it should act dumb in the film is when it first escapes from that block of ice. It shouldn't be dumb throughout the entirety of the film.
@@TheWiseLJ It could also be debated that yes, it sees how smart people are, let it also sees how incredibly stupid people can be from its 1st assimilated host. For something as seemingly invincible as it is common it might still see human as less then a real threat.
@@raptoid2518 Aye, humans are pretty stupid. I always get a laugh at the end of the film when that dude from the Star Wars prequels puts the earring in the wrong ear. Considering that the Thing creates a perfect imitation, this means that whats his face completely doesnt know which ear he had an earring in ha ha. I'm also typing pretty well considring the amount of rum I drank. Do you trhink the Thing likes rum?
I just realized that you didn't understand that without the distress signal the equipment wouldn't have been there to make the ice cave in. The ice skating wouldn't have happened without the distress signal. So no the ice caving in wouldn't have been enough reason to investigate because it wouldn't have caved in without the distress signal. Cause and effect. Cause distress signal affect equipment on the iced to cause it to cave in.
It's actually kind of sensible that it would behave more aggressively at the first outpost since it has no reason to believe that there's another outpost for it to go to and try to consume there.
I know Decker doesn't watch TV, but he's missing out on some of Adewale's (he did the one-name thing early in his career) best work. He was great as Mister Eko on Lost, and Sevvy Johnson (fictionalized OJ Simpson) in Marcia Clarke's FanFic limited series, The Fix. If Decker wants to do a porn review with Creepy, Adewale also had a one-off role in a Red Shoe Diaries story (framed with narration by David Duchovny).
Hey man I’d love to see you review Jaws. I’d love to hear your opinion on it. It’s one of my all time favorite movies and I think it be a great addition to your channel. Thanks man! Nice hair!
@@quinnzykir actually they used mostly practical effects, they only used a small amount of cgi to polish it and remove wires and other out of place tech
_"... examining a frozen bear..."_ Wait, what? They are in the Antarctic, where did they get a bear? Or did they go all the way to the arctic in order to fly someone to the Antarctic? All the random/crazy in this movie, and that is the thing that's gonna mess with my head the most.
I hate these prequels/sequels/remakes that completely mess up the established canon. For this movie, we all know, from John Carpenter's version, that the Norwegians attempted to unearth the saucer with thermite (in a nod to Howard Hawks' 1951 original). Yet, the prequel fails to show this. Also, having Kate, a paleontologist who doesn't even have rudimentary knowledge of American sports, written to be another Ellen Ripley, a science officer with enough grit and experience to be an executive officer, was a slap in the face to Ripley. Kate did not have the mental or physical wherewithal to be be Ripley. Today's filmmakers must be reading the Cliff Notes when they make their "modern" versions.
I just saw Cooties for the first time recently after hearing so much about it. It's ok, pretty average in my opinion. Not nearly as good as what I heard but also not nearly as bad as I was expecting. I really want Decker to review the Halloween series and the Texas Chainsaw Massacre series.
hey decker u should review these movies Crocodile (2000) Spiders (2000) Arachnid (2001) Spiders 2 Breeding Grounds (2001) Reptilian (2001) Crocodile 2 Death Swamp (2002) Ultraman THE NEXT (2004) Dinocroc (2004) Abominable (2006) Supergator (2007) Pterodactyl (2007) Transformers (2007) Evangelion You are NOT Alone (2009) Loch Ness terror (2009) Evangelion You Can NOT Advance (2009) Transformers Revenge of the Fallen (2009) Transformers Dark of the Moon (2011) Evangelion You can NOT Redo (2012) Willow Creek (2013) Pacific Rim (2013) Transformers Age of Extinction (2014) Attack on titan (2015) Attack on titan: End of the World (AKA part 2)(2015) Kong Skull Island (2017) Power Rangers (2017) Transformers the Last Knight (2017) Pacific Rim Uprising (2018)
important note: the studio replaced the practical effects with cgi. really ruined it.
The CGI really wasn't that bad.
Yeah, it was that bad.
Actually it was a horrible script and the fact that it was a movie no one wanted or cared for was what ruined it. Could have had the best practicals of all time, and still would bomb
@@DAIadvisor bold claim
Did not have Rob Bottin
"In horror movies, characters are incredible stupid. And in prequels the monsters are even dumber"
That is an excellent quote.
I really want a "The Thing" video game in the nature/style of Until Dawn. Your choices determine who gets assimilated, etc. etc.
Terra Novei that's pretty interesting, was it any good?
no sadly it was not. Things are very scripted, the blood test works very rarely (sometimes you'll try the test on a guy, he's fine then you walk a few feet and then boom he's a thing.). it does act a sequel to the thing though. The best way to describe it is Half-life meets Resident evil.
DeviousPredator That game is just like The Thing 2011. Could have been great but it really just ends up sucking ass...
The game itself it IS VERY GOOD. It has some rough edges like the blood test, but the entire product is a brilliant survival horror. You can find it on google if you want, just install it and give it a try, you won't get disappointed.
From what I hear it has its faults but it's still playable, though I haven't personally gotten around to picking up a copy yet
I like how the dog-thing clearly realized how dumb his previous strategy was.
"Going around screaming and barely changing my form? The hell was I thinking?! Next time I'll do it better."
Yea it makes sense for the thing to be way smarter the second time it tries to assimilate people
@@thegamewin100 not really it's intelligence seems to flip flop based on scenes it only once tried to actually trick it's prey
As far as I know the original ending was much darker and more in line with the Carpenter flick. Kate torches Carter - but he screams like a human, allowing her to realize that she just killed a man due to paranoia. The other snow cat doesn't have the fuel to make it back to base, so she's also thrown away her chance of survival. Earlier in the script, Carter had warned Kate about being outside the base in the freezing cold. He told her that the very moisture in your eyes would freeze, blinding you and leaving you to wander sightlessly until the cold finally kills you. The last shot of the movie would be Kate, all alone with no hope of survival, and a tear rolling down her cheek. We would see the tear crystalise and the credits would roll.
As for ruining the mystery of the original film... the idea was to replace the mystery of what happened at the Norwegian base with the mystery of what happened aboard the spaceship (ie, the body of the pilot being reminiscent of "Colin" in the original movie). So the movie would give us new information about the creature, but also raise more questions. Was The Thing a stowaway on the ship? Was it a prisoner of some kind that broke loose? Did it intend to crash the ship or was it actually the crew that downed it in an effort to kill The Thing? The director and writer understood the source material - the studio did not. As a result the movie is only okay, when it could have been something special.
That sounds like a much better, more horror filled ending.
Why do they never go with the better ideas?!!!!!!!
Dang! That would have been a bleak but very fitting ending given the 1982 ending. This movie suffered so much from studio interference that it's painful learning all hat got scrapped for the story we end up with
Gotta love how The Thing immediately reveals itself even when it's not in danger of exposure.
TheSouloftheDragon it's actually a smart move having it do so as in the second movie the creature's previous experience with humans made it adapt
Of course, it would be the creature is that of an advance alien civilization and is currently surrounded by primative bio mass like beings. It's first objective would be to over power them onlt to later realize its mistakes and rely on deception as no matter its size raw power doesn't work well enough
TheSouloftheDragon even funnier how the thing cleaned the bathroom. I just imagine it being there, scrubbing the blood while murmuring complaints like some Mexican grandma
The Carpenter version didnt need a prequel. It didnt need a sequel. It doesnt need a reboot.It is perfect.
But, doesn't it after assimililating someone BECOME that person? Memories and all? So... it should already have that experience at that point.
The difference here is that the original film wrote rules for how the Thing would behave, and then wrote scenes around that behavior so that the sequence of events would force it to transform. The interesting part of The Thing is that the monster itself is actually just as much trying to survive as the people, and there's a good balance between times when it is on the attack and when it is on the defense. It's not just a malicious entity out to kill, it's an animal trying to feed and preserve itself. But this movie turns it into a slasher villain, it seems only interested in killing people, with no real goal to survive or escape. Unlike the first movie, this one writes scenes where the Thing transforms, without caring about rules to dictate how it behaves.
*FX Team:* Builds and designs puppets for the Thing and other aliens to cut costs for the production budget
*Studio:* Demands a portion of the budget gets blown on obvious unconvincing CGI as to not confuse the audience
*Audience:* Wondering why CGI was used if puppets for the Thing was already made?
I wish Lars had survived and became the last man standing along with her. How tense would that have been? One survivor, and you can't understand each other.
@@jmack8767 Yeah Lars lived, he's the one with the gun at the beginning of the original The Thing. Got shot through the eye by the one guy of course, but y'know
@@ajexomen3712 John Carpenter's DVD commentary identifies the Norwegian who speaks and is shot by Garry as being played by Norbert Weisser. Weisser played the pilot, not the passenger, so this means that Lars' fate is that he blows himself to bits. The confusion seems to stem from the fact the movie isn't terribly clear that the gun changes hands when the Norwegians land; everyone, including the makers of this movie, naturally assumes the one with the gun must be the passenger.
@@williamhiers1280 Thank you for explaining
No- Lars could clearly understand spoken English.
@@williamhiers1280 Ooof. Pretty lame of lars to die by dropping a grenade.
I think I can give a reason for why the Thing was acting...odd compared to the first movie.
In the 2011 movie it underestimated humanity, it thought it could just assimilate and then use brute force to beat the humans, it wasn't concerned with hiding most of the time because it saw humans as weak and could easily be overpowered by itself, so in the next movie it chose to adopt a more stealthy approach because it learned that humans are tougher than it initially thought.
You can even see in the 2011 movie ending that it tries to hide but a small detail gave it away.
Jericho Strayker neat
I mean, it *does* make sense for the nigh invulnerable alien plague to fear death a little bit less than us more traditionally alive humans.
Jericho Strayker I was just thinking the same thing haha
It wasn't The Thing that underestimated humans, it was the production company who didn't know or care to keep a vital part of The Thing's appeal. The "cgi abomination' was more like The Thing From Another World (1951), just crashing through stuff and making a big spectacle of itself. The Thing (2011) needs to chill and learn the subtle art of tension from its predecessor
Dude, spot on what I thought . You saved me the trouble of typing it all out lol.
I am Norwegian, and the chances of finding a Norwegian who doesnt speak even a little english is 0%..if you go back to the 1930s and 1940s then maybe, as my grandfather and grandmother on my fathers side didnt speak english at all (but they were born back in 1924...) and my mothers parents both speak english...my mothers father even worked in London for a while in the 1950s...anyone born in the 1940s and later would speak english! I was born in the 70s and we had to learn a second (english) and even a third language (I could choose between German and French). Not sure which year the movie is supposed to be set in, but he should at least be able to understand some basic english! - ah almost forgot...love your videos !
It takes place in 1982.
Lars does appears to understand some basic English in the 2011 film, such as when Kate yells at him to burn The Thing with his flamethrower. But the reason he doesn’t speak any English is simply to fit the continuity of the 1982 film.
I'm norwegian, too. Stop being so fucking basic. It's fully likely that some north-norwegian didn't speak english in the 1980's. Could be born out in the middle of nowhere and barely learned basic english in school, but not well enough to speak or understand it. Just like us with Spanish today. If you are norwegian, you should love this movie, as I do, because it has great performances from lots of norwegian movie stars.
Ehh never say never. Even now I would bet there are people in norway who don't speak english in some remote village somewhere. Its not as uncommon as you might think. Hell in canada there are people in villages in quebec who literally only speak french despite virtually all media and education in the country being in english and virtually the entire country either being native english speakers or dual english-french speakers
and StolenEyes makes a good point as well. Plenty of people can understand a language better than they can speak it. For example my spoken french is terrible and I haven't used it in 20+ years, but I can still understand someone speaking french quite well. Lars could have had something similar going on. That and with the whole flamethrower situation he could have just been using common sense to figure out what she was telling him to do given the context of the situation. she could have been screaming at him to burn it in japanese and he would have likely understood the inferred meaning if not literally what she was saying
@@JS-wp4gs Agreed, I would murder Spanish if I tried, but through all the media that has subtitles, ads, etc. I have a (rough) understanding. Oh and remember that English, well at least US english, has some hodge podge words added to the dictionary everynow and then, like camouflage for instance.
The prequel is supposedly set before the events of the 1982 film, but watching this movie I could never shake the feeling it was set in modern times. I think it's the colours and sharper images and crisp CG because I can't think of anything within this movie that wouldn't have been around in the eighties.
OMG to the parallels to Paul W. S. Anderson's AvP.. Evil company guy asks pretty female protagonist (who has something remotely to do with science and stuff) to do some "undisclosed" work for them. They hesitate at first but later agree and end up being the sole survivor of the whole endeavour. Bravo screenwriters.
The last scene with her killing Edgerton was poorly done. There were far too many inconsistencies for his assimilation.
I agree.
This entire movie was poorly done.
no,remenber when they she falls down a shaft in the ship and they get separated?and then the movie cuts to her waking up?he probally was assimilated by then and decided to help kate kill the other thing to gain her trust and go to civilization,survival is most important to things they will go as far as kill other things as not to blow their cover
If only the studio let the FX team keep the practical effects in the film.
wstine79 indeed damn studio's
I agree, I actually heard that the FX team used the practicals in Harbinger Down from 2015, too bad some people didn't see the pilot alien or the director's cut.
I know right the Practical effects were awesome I can't believe they Fuckin CGId over them unreal what the fuck were they thinking?!! That's what made the original film so God Damn great
If you want to see some of those practicals, the FX team still has footage on their website or watch Harbinger Down.
G filmer I know I've seen them on RUclips it's awesome in just a shame that they weren't used or that they were in glazed over by CGI that was terrible
Thanks Decker. imo, the worst part of the prequel was that they didn't achieve the eeriness and spookiness of the original.
exactly. The original built up its horror through paranoia. The 2011 version just feels like Resident Evil in the snow
Aye man, the original just had that secret sauce lacking in so many horror films nowadays, the two standouts for me was the acting in between the Thing's appearances which despite the surreal terror is totally believable and the absolutely eerie score by Ennio Morricone
It kinda makes sense for the thing to be like this it could be it’s first time with humans so the second time around it planned everything out
@@RJ_Productions316lol the original resident evil trilogy was actually pretty subtle. When they were actually survival horror games.
I always figured since it was a prequel, you could say that the Thing perhaps learned to be more stealthy the 2nd time around, because it failed with the Noreweigan camp
The movie still has contradictions like when the alien got burn into flames and throwing itself outside, in the John Carpenter's The Thing there's evidence that they dumped gasoline on it then burn it because there were empty gasoline jugs next to the body in the movie.
Agreed. The biggest glaring one is that they didn't use thermite to blow up the UFO, which is very clearly shown and referenced in John Carpenter's movie. It makes you wonder how such things were missed when you're specifically creating a prequel. The discrepancies ruin the enjoyment at a lot of points.
Lux Bellator also The Thing was not hiding it kept coming out. In John Carpenter's The Thing it never revealed itself unless it was a last resort.
Yep, I found that just as silly too, making the Thing become too much of a cliched horror villain. Whereas the genius of the original is that it isn't a slasher flick (which is oddly the route the prequel took), it's a horror suspense film.
'KAROSINE'
It also gets the two Norwegians in the original movie confused. They thought the Norwegian who speaks and gets shot by Garry was the gunman from the helicopter so they wrote the Lars character as not speaking English and had him get into the passenger seat at the end.
One problem. The speaker was actually the pilot, identified as Jan Bolen in the novelization and a deleted scene (and called Mathias in this movie). So they screwed up by not paying attention to the original movie (the rifle changes hands when the chopper lands; the gunman hands it to the pilot).
I don’t get why the prequel Thing doesn’t bleed profusely when it transforms like the Carpenter Thing
That was probably planned for the practial effects, but the studio fired the practial effects team and hired people to go in with crappy CGI.
I still want a poster with "The Thing - It's a lot more specific than it sounds.". Cracks me up every time I think of it.
16:16 Parasyte reference? Nice
TheBlackKnight1o1
Shinichi
TheBlackKnight1o1 migi was the right arm. It was the left arm that came off.
Black Fire Dragon the 13th both did one attached to the burned guy. Other was hatcheted.
Migi?
Are you alright?
Kyros Droztamyr In my opinion it is really great.
One of my fav.
the biggest issue I took with this film was this
"where's Lars?"
"we didn't kill him"
why was the next sentence not "we should go back and get him, he was great"
Or better yet, why did neither of them think to grab him when they left?
They thought the base was cleaned out and wanted someone to get the word out?
Grr, this movie. My issue with the cgi here really isn’t that it was bad - it was fine - but with the speed at which the transformations occurred. In Carpenter’s version, when transforming it was a slow, messy affair drawing the audience into the horror of it. Here, for the most part, it’s too quick, too cleanly done. There’s no juicy, squishy sense of revulsion that is body horror. Add to that to the near lack of paranoia, the set barely felt like it was 1979, and finally knowing from the outset who will survive.
I didn't like how people who had no lines that you don't even remember seeing were the thing, they gave no clues or hints who could be the thing.
Body horror; love the way you put that. Immediately I thought of David Cronenberg when I read the words "body horror"
CGI was not "fine" It was one of the worst I ever saw in a mainstream movie. It looked like it was made in late 90s.
Everytime I see poor cgi in a movie it ruins it for me. I can no longer enjoy or get into the movie. That's why the original is my favorite horror movie! The effects were amazing and hold up extremely well compared to the shit in the 2011 film. Wish the studios kept the practical in this film :/
Practical effects are much better at weathering the test of time. ALIEN still looks amazing today!
@@planexshifter yessss agreed
Even the director wanted to keep the practical effects... But the studio had final word on the subject.
"Otherwise its a mystery what happened to the other people...and who wants mystery in a Horror" pretty much sums this version up and everything wrong with it
I hate this movie, even if it had practical effects I'd still hate it for its writing and inconsistencies (the ship looks nothing how it did in the original, and also the Norwegians blew up the ice to uncover the ship, you know, like that VHS MacReady found showed. Why do they find it in an underground ice cave instead of being faithful to what the original established? Bullshit inconsistency).
It has no interesting character (unlike the original film), it has annoying modern horror movie jumpscare stings instead of atmosphere and build up (unlike the original) and it has a dumb monster that doesn't make sense (so the Thing can turn the guy's hand into a centipede thing, but it can't do that to reach the girl when she hides in the ship) so... it's just a shitty movie on its own.
The only argument the supporters make boil down to "Oh, but it's cool because you see how the axe got to the wall, I RECOGNIZE DAT! Oh, but it's cool because the ending looks like the opening, I RECOGNIZE DAT!" ...What about the writing? What about the characters? What about the fact it'a a shitty modern horror film on top of a shitty prequel?
Doing a prequel is also pointless.
The whole point of the destroyed Norwegian base was to simply foreshadow what was going to happen to MacReady's team: it would explode and be left as icy ruins. That's it. Unless you had a group of creative filmmakers that actually cared for details and had an idea to make a story worth telling, doing a prequel is just a bad idea in the long sad history of Hollywood's bad ideas.
Yeah it was kind of dumb how the prequel left the spaceship fully intact and operational. Why would the Thing choose to leave the ship and freeze itself then? Makes no sense. I always figured it escaped containment and killed some of the crew on board the ship. When the ship crashed, fires erupted inside the ship and the Thing went out into the cold to avoid being burnt to death.
Here's some more inconsistencies: In John Carpenter's film, before heading to the Norwegian camp, Fuchs mentions that there were a total of 10 people stationed there (including the 2 in the helicopter) and they had only been there for 8 weeks. In the prequel there were way more than 10 people.
The Thing corpse at the Norwegian camp was found with cans of kerosene next to it, implying that it was burned right there by some of the survivors, but in the prequel it just ran through the wall after being set on fire.
The axe in the door in John Carpenter's film had blood on the handle as well as the head of the axe. I always assumed it was human blood, considering every piece of the Thing is alive and can reform itself into something else, which is why they burned the contaminated blood bags in John Carpenter's film. Which means that the blood on the axe in the prequel would be alive as it belonged to part of the Thing.
I could also get into why the metal fillings and whatnot was a terrible idea, but that would take too much time. In the end, I didn't hate the film. It can't hold a candle to Carpenter's film however and it completely missed the point of the film (its supposed to build on paranoia, not knowing who's who, instead of being a generic monster film where the monster makes itself known at every turn. They completely dropped the ball there.)
It becomes rather obvious that this was intended to be a remake which got turned into a prequel part way through.
@@TheWiseLJ I know this is very late, but why was metal fillings a bad Idea. It makes sense because how could something that copy's organic matrer be able to copy Inorganic matter?
@@jamesmonroe1538 Because even the movie points out how much of a bad idea it is XD Not everyone has fillings, so anyone who didn't have them is going to be looked at with scepticism. Had the script writer not been binging on macy D's coffee and actually TRYING to write a script he'd have realised that and done something with, I don't know...spit? or hair? If everything on the thing is its own part then pluck someones hair and put it on a bunson burner ....HOLY CRAP I came up with a better idea with less coffee than the writer :/
@@CrashHeadroom well it was a decent idea tbh it works for some survivors so you can get proven allies. Yes its not a great plan for 100% identifying the monster but so what? The characters even say this, just because chracters had an idea that wasn't the best doesn't mean it's stupid to include it.
I hope Decker reviews the original 1950s Thing.
How easy would it be to find that version of the film
Eddie Brock Very, It's on RUclips.
I'd like him to review Harbinger Down. It's a film that alot of this crew went to work on because they were mad about their practical effects in this film (2011) being masked so heavily by CGI. From memory I didn't love it immensely but did enjoy it. I believe it's available on Netflix.
Its a great flick. Actually watched it late night horrorthon before I saw the Carpenter version. Yet I find Carpenter's version to be perfection.
Actually, it sort of does make sense why the Thing behaves differently compared to the original. It sees itself as superior to humans and tries to use brute force to overpower its victims, but by the time of the original has learned that humans are tougher, smarter and more resourceful than it initially thought, so it learns to rely on stealth and deception to win.
The thing is: why did the American torch the thing inside the UFO, if he was also The Thing? She probably killed an innocent white bread.
I don't like the way they're speeding up the transformation processes, which was also done in the last Aliens flick. It's asinine.
How long did it take for Norris or Palmer to transform? Norris got his chest-mouth open in mere seconds of being electrocuted. Palmer only needed about 10 seconds worth of footage before breaking loose and jumping to the ceiling.
Yeah, the Kennel-Thing took a while to shapeshift, but slow mutations are not a concrete rule. The Thing in John Carpenter's film was not an ambassador of consistency.
@@1krani it's a creature that devours and assimilates itself eventually into a whole society and then passes on to other worlds. and only comes out to feed and assimilate again, unless threatened. Norris = Defib provocation. Palmer = it was his blood exposed to the red hot wire therefore the whole thing took it as a threat to itself. the kennel = ample time to be alone in the quiet without threat to feed and pass on.
@@theaegis5795
You and everyone else always focus on the Thing's intelligence before its reveal. What about AFTER it's revealed? Let's recap its decisions:
*Kennel-Thing:* after being irritated by gunshots while eating the dogs, it hung in a corner and went "boogity boo" despite knowing that humans could harm it (as evidenced by its burned remains from the Norwegian camp), and only made token efforts to escape before changing its mind and attacking Childs. Rookie mistake, but forgivable since we don't know if it knew what a flamethrower looked like.
*Bennings-Thing:* ran out into the snow where there was absolutely no place for it to hide, got caught, got torched. Again, forgivable rookie mistake, though if Bennings was assimilated by Kennel-Thing's remains instead of Split-Face's, wouldn't it already have the layout of the outpost and thus know where a good hiding spot would be to finish transforming? Pure speculation, though.
*Norris-Thing:* bit Copper's hands off before exploding out of its first body and going "boogity boo" at MacReady despite witnessing him torching Bennings without hesitation or fear. This isn't a rookie mistake, this is poor writing. Both Palmer and Norris were there to see Mac torch Bennings, so unless Norris was somehow assimilated BEFORE the incident but NOT in the brain area, he would've known that it can't scare MacReady into hesitating. Possible to excuse, but implausible.
*Palmer-Thing:* attacked Windows after putting on a horror show, but THEN instead of killing Windows and focusing on the primary remaining threat (MacReady), it instead spent all that time infecting Windows and gave its most ardent foe time to get his flamethrower working. There is no possible way The Thing wouldn't know what a hardass MacReady was, because Palmer was there when he torched Norris-Thing and SAW that scaring him into hesitating didn't work. UTTERLY impossible to excuse.
*Blair-Thing:* sure it got Garry and probably Nauls, too, but once it exploded out of the ground, it literally just stood there and politely waited for MacReady to throw dynamite at it while showing off its half-formed dog imitation. What happened to the tentacles it used to grab the dynamite plunger and molotov cocktails? Who cares! Rob Bottin and John Carpenter sure didn't.
My point about The Thing is that it's only smart when it's hidden. Once it transforms itself, it goes from superhuman master of stealth and psychology to an animalistic intelligence at best. Its rationality is not consistent, and those inconsistencies are the primary thing that gets it killed by the heroes.
Ikrani has a good point actually. The Thing always returns to a primal and mindless state when it transforms fsr. Maybe it’s only humans that are sentient out of the life forms it has absorbed?
I don’t know. I’ll watch it again.
@@1krani It's not necessarily poor writing. Inconsistency in the actions of an intelligent being, to an extent, is one of the most realistic things out there. How often can you claim the way one person acts in similar situations is completely consistent? John Carpenter's The Thing has anything but poor writing. As you said Gama most of those inconsistencies can be explained away very easily.
I lost it when he said " it's Migi and he's pissed"
I like to think that the reason the alien was attacking randomly was because it had been frozen for so many years so it didn't know how to adapt and would shift at the wrong time
Lars fly off with discount Norwegian Adam Sandler, who boots a grenade, destroys the helicopter and is not there when Lars needs a translator. WTG discount Norwegian Adam Sandler.
8:05 get over here!
Will you review lake placid Decker?
Hamm with2ms Seconded
Matthew Knight Thirded
Hamm with2ms fourthed
Sixthed
"the thing" wasn't what was flying the craft, it was something that they were carrying, it escaped attacked the crew and the craft crashed here, only "the thing" survived.
So, in the prequel to the prequel we would see some funky aliens, maybe on an ice planet. They would find something and bring it onboard for an autopsy. Only, it comes alive!
Brilliant, Decker. You pointed out exactly what I felt was missing from this prequel.
Using the ax will just result in more pieces of the Thing--so, it's worse than useless!
just like using a nuke on the Andromeda Strain
They really couldn't come up with a better name then just the thing , why couldn't come up with a better name like The thing : the beginthing
Nathaniel Foga or, alternatively,
The thing: origins
The thing cometh
The thing: the first assimilation
The thing: the mystery begins
The thing dines Norwegian
The Thing: It's thingier this time
Or tie it back into the book and call it The Thing From Another World
Notimus Crime Yeah , those would've all been better name .
Mr Critical I was about to suggest maybe the original novella “who goes there?” that inspired the original adaptation but that would be really hard to work in a title. Unless you do “the thing: who goes there!?”
All these Norwegian guys could have just gone with their real names XD
Hold up. I have a question - why did they followed the Thing in the end? If it's idea was to leave the planet JUST LET IT DO SO. In 1982 movie the creature also tried to make a flying saucer but realized that it's not possible due to the only parts avaliable being snowmobiles and a helicopter. So it decided to freeze itself and then infect the rescue team.
Here in one scene it tries to leave in a chopper for the mainland and in the end it's going for the flying saucer to leave the planet instead of doing the same thing it did in 1982 movie by freezing itself to be found later by a rescue team or someone else. Either it was sure that the Split-face and a Dog were going to successfully infect other people or writers were just not giving a damn.
Them.. it... that.. thing?!
"Oh shit its migi, and it looks pissed"
I understood that reference.
There are not enough Parasyte References in "The Thing" reviews.
I think a lot of people hate on "The Thing"'s CGI because they said they WOULDN'T use CGI. They promised that they would use puppets and miniatures and practical effects. It was the one statement that won a lot of people over, myself included, and then it came out and....dear god.
This thing reminds me a lot more of a necromorph than the first one.
That was the Sad part for me, it "mainly" opened a mouth in the TORSO of the Person it Mimicked or had an upright/insect Format it took on. The Centipede hands were a smart touch, but that was it. IF you look at the Original... Dear GOD I could NOT guess what it would MORPH INTO NEXT (when it was out of its mimic form) it was FUCKIN SCARY!
21:30. Yes. The monster scream was added in AFTER the theatrical release... This whole movie was like the creature, immitating a better film while pretending to be something else.
not as good as the original but worth watching
It's a good movie. These people have a stick up their asses. I worship Carpenter's The Thing, but to shit on this movie because it doesn't live up to the best movie ever made, is so pathetic. No one makes good prequels - literally no one. It never happens. What we got here is a pretty good prequel with a super cool cast, and as a Norwegian I absolutely loved seeing these all-star actors in a horror movie. It's so out of character for many of them. I see all the flaws, sure, but to say the movie is bad is absolutely ridiculous. By the standards of modern Hollywood movies, it's a fucking masterpiece.
I like to think that the reason the thing sucked at hiding in this movie because this was the first time it dealt with humans, by the second base it had learned a lot about us
"all right guys, shrivel up, shows over"
That's what she said?
dude i found your channel a few days ago and am loving every minute.
Hey Decker! Been watching your show for a long time, so I wanted to make a fun little request. How do you feel about reviewing the Resident Evil movies?
*THE SUMMER OF RESIDENT EVIL!!!!*
The ending would have been better if Joel Edgerton's Thing/Human status was left ambiguous. I personally felt like his earring fell out and he put his hand to the wrong ear due to stress and exhaustion. As fast as the Thing could be in this film, it should have had major defensive reaction as soon as not-Ripley made it clear she suspected him. She roasted an innocent man because it was the only way to be sure.
BulletTooth504 How would one explain the eerie screech the Thing makes? Just sound effects? I do agree though, that would be interesting if it was left ambiguous.
I've tried to pretend the screeching was little flourish for the score, or that Katie "Not-Ripley" Lloyd was just imagining it. But I know that is not what the filmmakers intended. It's like they deliberately wanted to make a highly flawed premake and couldn't be bothered to save it with a decent ending.
Could You Also Please Review The Sam Raimi Spider-Man Movies Spider-Man 2002 Spider-Man 2 And Spider-Man 3
I just figured the critter would be hungry as hell after such a long ass nap. So dinner is up
This was the ONE video i was looking forward to.
Sure, the prequel film has it's flaws, but it can compare with a nice good'ol beer, smooth and crisp. It may taste a bit weird, but give it a few seconds and it will be a dream your mouth will thank you for.
I just stumbled across your channel and I'm already loving your content. I can't wait to go through your backlog!
Best hair, awesome shirt and good movie= Damn great review!
Ps: 28 Days Later?
I wouldn't call it a "good" movie, but the review is pretty neat. Decker is a comforting pass-time for me.
The alien thing impersonating scorpion when shooting the tendril through him: “get over here !!!!”
Hey Decker Shado Could You Please Review The Original 1990's Live Action Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Movies TMNT 1990 TMNT 2 The Secret Of The Ooze And TMNT 3
Dylan Cohran yaaaaaas
Unlikely, as I believe his buddy Creepy already did those films on his channel.
I felt that the creature when it woke up was disoriented & way more aggressive and realized it was almost wiped out. So it took another approach. But that's just me I guess.
"The effects really aren't that bad"
Yes.
YES they ARE.
Cartoonish, 2D and FAKE CGI loses to practical effects done in 1982...nuff said.
Yep...trouble with CGI is you can have the most groundbreaking graphics made by supercomputers but as soon as you lift CGI out of a CGI environment you jar the viewer because you can always tell there's a disconnect between what actually exists on camera and what's been added... If they made a fully CGI movie about the thing with the best CGI i think that could be awesome but mixing the two things just doesn't cut it and there's no movie where you can point to a scene and say' wheres the CGI'' and not be able to guess correctly 100 percent of the time
I have to admit. Usually movie reviewers are not too enthusiastic, but you are. Your comments and reactions are funny.
You could always say, this being a prequel the Thing hadn't become smart enough to be deceptive until it had absorbed enough knowledge and experience to do so.
ssdko I understand where your coming from but the thing is implied to have assimalated aliens that traveled through space. It should have encountered creatured smarter than humans.
Jose Sosa. And those aliens may have been entirely different leading to a different adaptation. Also, who knows what kind of inteligence it could retain all those years.
Except that the alien is smart enough to build spaceships so that excuse is bullshit.
Kei Kurono what? Did THIS thing specifically build the ship? Humans have knowledge of how to build a spaceshuttle, doesn't mean their collective intellect is reflected like that in any particular individual.
In Carpenters film, the alien tries to build an alien spaceship to get away when it's controlling Blair. The team find out and blow it up. It's not like the thing absorbed a humans knowledge of how to build an alien spaceship. It had that knowledge already. If it's that intelligent, the whole not knowing how to hide is just a stupid excuse to try to justify a crap film. Which is what The Thing 2011 is, a crap film. And it isn't canon nor will I ever consider it canon.
Tough day, time to blaze and watch some Decker
You're right, you do have the best hair
Not sure if anyone mentioned this but at the end of the film, Carter mentions a Russian base 50 Miles from the crash site and he and Kate plan on driving to it, now some could argue that Carter thing was lying to get Kate alone to kill her but if that was the case he'd have just killed her then and there.
My theory is by this point in time the thing was smart enough to know not to reveal itself and was using Carter's knowledge of that base to get away where it start the infection cycle all all over again but Kate found out about it and killed it, after getting her bearings she made her way to the Russian base but since nobody would ever believe her she made up a story about the team going crazy from cabin fever.
All the YES!
Ive never stepped away from a chance to talk to friends so fast
I wish the alien pilot was added...
Zambie Explained there’s a video on RUclips that shows all of the practical effects they used, the studio forced them to redo all of the monster stuff with cgi.
Appreciate the parasyte ref. One of my fav manga reads in Highschool
Teh Thang
I can’t wait until you hit 100k, you deserve it
The CGI completely ruined the film, if the movie stuck to practical effects, it might have just rivaled the 1982 film.
The writing wouldn't allow it to catch up to the 1982 film's quality.
Riven is right the writing doesn't compare and even the tone shifts and the atmosphere was entirely lost here which was essential in the original if u take it out there is no tension and the move is boring
The dog was were the prequel lost me.
The dog had been hiding. The humans weren't looking for it because it was believed to be dead. But rather than keep it's head down and see if they left, it decides to jump up and let them know it was there?
Then again, I never understood why it started attacking the dogs when it did in the original.
Again, everyone believed it was a dog - and would have until two face thawed out and started attacking. It volunteered to put everyone on alert that it was dangerous before it had to.
Seemed like a note from the studio "Nobody's died yet!"
Can you look at RoboCop??
I have a theory. Maybe the thing is alot less subtle in this movie because it is its first experience with humans. It doesnt know the dangers e6c humans can pose to it yet which is why it is so rash, doesnt hide, etc. After figuring out thay humans know its weakness it hides and becomes a bit more subtle and when it finally reaches the american base as the dog. Think of it like a giant learning curve. Idk it makes sense to me butni could be totally wrong
Edit:saw someone already made this comment two seconds after i posted this but i took time to make this so itll stay lol
"The Other Thing" is a good alternate title.
I'm surprised you didn't mention that they shot all the monsters with practical effects, then the studio replaced them all with average CGI.
Couple of things that bothered me about this one, like for starters, they opening scenes had Norwegians speaking in their native tongue. Why couldn't they have just kept that for the whole movie?
But, no, gotta cram in Americans for international audiences of course.
And secondly, and more importantly, their attempt at explaining split-face's origin just tells you the producers lost grasp of the things concept. It would only reveal its form and attack when alone. "The chameleon strikes in the dark". Here it just transforms and attacks for no real reason other than to illicit a gasp from the audience and fans to be like "ahhh" .
Instead of trying to escape like it actually would, it tries to morph into the other guy in front of everyone when there is no point, since everyone would know he was a thing. And then, to add insult to injury were treated with some tom and jerry bullshit, where it decides to hunt for Kate. Ever since the constant rumors and up to when it was finally released, i always knew it would be a longshot to expect much, given the time period. And i'm glad that as always Hollywood excels at destroying classics and revels in our disappointment.
I might be biased 'cause I'm Norwegian, but I agree. I understand that Hollywood isn't interested in making movies with non-English-speakers as the protagonist, but the fact that the entire base is Norwegian but all of the main characters happen to be American feels a bit... It kind of seems to imply that only Americans can be heroes or something like that, or that the story specifically needs an American main character in order for it to even be worth telling, it's a bit iffy.
on par with BlockBuster Buster's review
I like to think that The Thing learned from this to be sneakier with its next victims.
The creature is dumber because at this point within the time frame, it hadn't learned to be subtle. By the time of carpenter's film, it has learned to be subtle and it got more results.
Not trying to be a jerk, but I think it was just bad screenwriting. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed The Thing prequel and no one should hate on you for enjoying the film as well, but it had many flaws. When The Thing imitates its host, it makes a perfect copy, down to how the humans act, speak, think, etc. Obviously this means that after assimilating the first human host, it would know how intelligent the human race is and would have adapted from that first kill. Therefore the only time it should act dumb in the film is when it first escapes from that block of ice. It shouldn't be dumb throughout the entirety of the film.
@@TheWiseLJ It could also be debated that yes, it sees how smart people are, let it also sees how incredibly stupid people can be from its 1st assimilated host. For something as seemingly invincible as it is common it might still see human as less then a real threat.
@@raptoid2518 Aye, humans are pretty stupid. I always get a laugh at the end of the film when that dude from the Star Wars prequels puts the earring in the wrong ear. Considering that the Thing creates a perfect imitation, this means that whats his face completely doesnt know which ear he had an earring in ha ha. I'm also typing pretty well considring the amount of rum I drank. Do you trhink the Thing likes rum?
I just realized that you didn't understand that without the distress signal the equipment wouldn't have been there to make the ice cave in. The ice skating wouldn't have happened without the distress signal. So no the ice caving in wouldn't have been enough reason to investigate because it wouldn't have caved in without the distress signal. Cause and effect. Cause distress signal affect equipment on the iced to cause it to cave in.
Do the Halloween series already!
Xavier Boggs think he already did that.
The guy at the end didn't know how to drive the snowcat.
It's a shame that this film flopped. The concept sounded great.
WeegeeSlayer some fans came up with great ideas that I feel sound better. Look at a youtuber named collative thinking.
Edit: I mean coallitve learning.
Jose Sosa I know that guy. I've watched one of his videos analyzing The Shining.
Concept was good. Execution very bad.
The concept of we can cash in on a title from a beloved cult classic?
I’d imagine this is what it would be like if they made a movie about Jim Hopper’s encounter with the Predator.
I don't hate the prequel but I think it's a disappointment.
It's actually kind of sensible that it would behave more aggressively at the first outpost since it has no reason to believe that there's another outpost for it to go to and try to consume there.
I just found this channel and I love it. It's like Nostalgia Critic before he got bought out by Disney :)
I know Decker doesn't watch TV, but he's missing out on some of Adewale's (he did the one-name thing early in his career) best work. He was great as Mister Eko on Lost, and Sevvy Johnson (fictionalized OJ Simpson) in Marcia Clarke's FanFic limited series, The Fix. If Decker wants to do a porn review with Creepy, Adewale also had a one-off role in a Red Shoe Diaries story (framed with narration by David Duchovny).
I Am the first one on here
Can you look at Godzilla Planet of the Monsters???
Hey man I’d love to see you review Jaws. I’d love to hear your opinion on it. It’s one of my all time favorite movies and I think it be a great addition to your channel. Thanks man! Nice hair!
You know. The cgi isn’t that bad
Terra Novei the special effects team also did Harbinger down. Which is the thing on a boat. They also ended up using digital effects.
And it looks much much worse. I know it’s a small budget, but there’s a reason “cut to black is not a bad cost saving measure”
@@quinnzykir actually they used mostly practical effects, they only used a small amount of cgi to polish it and remove wires and other out of place tech
_"... examining a frozen bear..."_
Wait, what? They are in the Antarctic, where did they get a bear? Or did they go all the way to the arctic in order to fly someone to the Antarctic? All the random/crazy in this movie, and that is the thing that's gonna mess with my head the most.
hey decker shadow its summer time, so do the summer of WWE super star The Rock.
I hate these prequels/sequels/remakes that completely mess up the established canon. For this movie, we all know, from John Carpenter's version, that the Norwegians attempted to unearth the saucer with thermite (in a nod to Howard Hawks' 1951 original). Yet, the prequel fails to show this. Also, having Kate, a paleontologist who doesn't even have rudimentary knowledge of American sports, written to be another Ellen Ripley, a science officer with enough grit and experience to be an executive officer, was a slap in the face to Ripley. Kate did not have the mental or physical wherewithal to be be Ripley. Today's filmmakers must be reading the Cliff Notes when they make their "modern" versions.
Can you review A zombie movie called Cooties. It's funny and bloody. Pls. It's good. Please
I just saw Cooties for the first time recently after hearing so much about it. It's ok, pretty average in my opinion. Not nearly as good as what I heard but also not nearly as bad as I was expecting. I really want Decker to review the Halloween series and the Texas Chainsaw Massacre series.
Sal Nal Halloween series would be cool to see
That sounds like a good name for a flamethrower manufacturing company. The Handy Dandy Flamethrower Company. Our motto is. You Kill em we Grill em.🔥🔥🔥
hey decker u should review these movies
Crocodile (2000)
Spiders (2000)
Arachnid (2001)
Spiders 2 Breeding Grounds (2001)
Reptilian (2001)
Crocodile 2 Death Swamp (2002)
Ultraman THE NEXT (2004)
Dinocroc (2004)
Abominable (2006)
Supergator (2007)
Pterodactyl (2007)
Transformers (2007)
Evangelion You are NOT Alone (2009)
Loch Ness terror (2009)
Evangelion You Can NOT Advance (2009)
Transformers Revenge of the Fallen (2009)
Transformers Dark of the Moon (2011)
Evangelion You can NOT Redo (2012)
Willow Creek (2013) Pacific Rim (2013)
Transformers Age of Extinction (2014)
Attack on titan (2015) Attack on titan: End of the World (AKA part 2)(2015)
Kong Skull Island (2017)
Power Rangers (2017)
Transformers the Last Knight (2017)
Pacific Rim Uprising (2018)
Scott Duncan I'd be down with him doing Ultraman the Next.
maybe that can be THE NEXT video
I blame the studio wanting CGI and the in-depth backstory taken out