‘The Thing’ (New Version From Universal and Blumhouse)

[jayman3]

Morbidly curious about this.

Love Carpenters classic and was so-so on the 2011 film.

[panasonicst60]

Practical effects then I'm in. CGI then I'm out.

[Jay H.]

If the 2011 version had used Gillis and Woodruff's practical effects, the movie still would have stunk. But at least it would have stunk with practical effects.

[MechaGodzilla]

There have already been two adaptations, I'm open to a third. The original and first remake aren't going to cease to exist because of this one.

I really do hope it tries to be its own thing and doesn't take too much inspiration from Carpenter's film, though.

[Monterey Jack]

Never talk pre-release smack about the idea of remaking a classic film...that was a remake itself.

There are three great/very good films titled The Thing (the 1951 original, Carpenter's remake, and the underrated 2011 prequel), so I have room for another version in my collection, provided it turns out good.

[CelluloidPal]

Good grief. Talk about an uphill battle that Blumhouse can not and will not win.
The first two versions were great films. The so-called "prequel"...not so much.
I cannot see how well this one will turn out.

[Zoland2020]

This is going to fail hard.
Blumhouse should just stick to their own IPs instead of making pointless remakes and reboots that nobody asked for.

[Darkstream]

I just think Blumhouse hasn't really proven themselves as a studio to make this sort of special effects heavy film. Ghost stories, psychological thrillers, even slashers... okay... but to just jump into something like a science fiction/body horror movie that's based on a classic work that has already been done several times over, with one version in particular being iconic, is just opening itself up as a target for criticism.

[CelluloidPal]

Originally Posted by Darkstream

I just think Blumhouse hasn't really proven themselves as a studio to make this sort of special effects heavy film. Ghost stories, psychological thrillers, even slashers... okay... but to just jump into something like a science fiction/body horror movie that's based on a classic work that has already been done several times over, with one version in particular being iconic, is just opening itself up as a target for criticism.

Perhaps, this won't have ANY effects.

[DR Herbert West]

Just give me a UHD of the 1982 film.

[Darkstream]

Originally Posted by CelluloidPal

Perhaps, this won't have ANY effects.

Interesting, but then, why bother?

The Thing is not Invasion of the Body Snatchers. If it was, you might be able to get away with not having effects, but it's a totally different animal, so avoiding the morphing creature would be like throwing the baby out with the bath water.

[Himmel]

Originally Posted by Mikezilla3k

I think he's talking about the '82 movie, not the 2011 prequel.

Oh, thought he was talking about 2011 film. Sorry Damon buddy.

[darkness2918]

I mean if they’re gonna use parts of the full book that were never published it would be interesting to see the new stuff on screen. I love the Carpenter version & really like the 2011 prequel so I’m up for checking this out.

[RalphoR]

Originally Posted by DR Herbert West

Just give me a UHD of the 1982 film.

Absolutely. I'd even take the 2011 prequel which should look terrific in 4k (wish they could redo the f/x for the two headed abomination and the endgame Dr. Sander Halvorson embarrassment).

We have enough great Thing movies. Unless they do a miniseries or some multipart series don't touch the franchise.

[Rogue Deputy]

A good remake should expand upon the original, but also stay true in spirit. This is exact what Carpenter did with his remake so hopefully they can do it it again with this one, and not give us something we've already got. Has anyone read the expanded novel, and is it any good?

[Gizz]

Now come on it might actually be a good film. Probably not be still I will keep a open mind. I have enjoyed all three Thing films.

[Britbuffguy]

The Carpenter version is considered so good by so many people, this is never gonna surpass that version. Why try?

Why not just make an original idea?

[MJD64]

Throw in cameos for Kurt Russell and Mary Elizabeth Winstead and I'll consider giving this one a look...

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by Cremildo

I dread and, at the same tie, kind of anticipate the day we'll see a similar thread about Alien.

Couldn’t agree more. IMO, both The Thing and Alien gate OFF limits to the remakers. Go away. Stay outta here with that crap.

[KOQ24]

Because the previous Blumhouse remakes have worked so well.....................


Stick to original stuff Blum, at least those turn out good sometimes !