🔔Alerts
Login to get notifications!
🗨ī¸Forum

🎞ī¸Movies & TV


🌐Junk

🔍
Search keywords
Join➕ Now!   or       đŸ”Ŋ Forgot Password?
avatar
🚸

The Thing (2011)

by Tommix

Jul 2022
Anybody have any strong feelings about this one? The 1982 movie will never be surpassed, of course, but in some ways the 2011 prequel takes respectable risks, I think.

I have seen most of it before, just channel surfing, but I watched the whole thing this weekend. I tried to pay attention, and not just zone out like I often/usually do.

One interesting element of the prequel: I am not absolutely certain of this, but I had the strong impression that at least some of the Thing-ified humans believed that they were still regular humans, right up until the end. If you look carefully at their facial expressions as their bodies are Thing-ing out, they appear to be as horrified and suprised as any normal human would be, if that suddenly happened to them.

My personal theory to explain that, is that maybe the Thing-ified humans had two separate consciousnesses in the same body, a Thing consciousness and a "human" consciousness. My interpretation is that maybe when the Thing makes a perfect duplication of whichever human it is duplicating, maybe the duplication just generates its own consciousness on its own, in its brain, without even knowing what it really is. If every single cell was perfectly imitated, maybe the imitation would end up with identical memories and personality to the original human. It wouldn't necessarily know what had happened to it. Of course, somewhere in the body there would be a second intelligence, which can control what the body does, and even the form of the body. Maybe that second intelligence would choose to lie dormant for long periods of time, just so the imitation human intelligence would fit in more perfectly with its old friends, and with the patterns of life that it was expected by other humans to follow.

In the original story, Who Goes There?, by John W. Campbell Jr., a character named Kinner actually asks that question, of whether he would even know if he had been Thing-ified. In the story, McReady immediately shuts down that line of thinking, he just says "you'd know," and that's the end of that conversation. But, maybe they decided to toy with the idea a little in the 2011 The Thing, and just... just sort of suggest, at least, that the humans who had been Thing-ified didn't even realize it. It makes for a more horrifying movie, if you think about it.

Anyway, I enjoyed that, about the 2011 The Thing. I also liked the little homages and nods to the 1982 movie, like the dog gnawing at the wire mesh of his caged off area. Also, the alien spaceship looked pretty cool, so, that's a plus.

Well, I mostly just wanted to share my theory about possible multiple consciousnesses inhabiting Thing-ified human bodies. If anybody has any thoughts on that, or on anything else about the movie, pls share!


🚸
avatar
Box_a_Hair says:
#1

Jul 2022
I don't mind it. I saw it in theaters and was pleasantly surprised by the little details. They kept it in 1982 and while the whole premise is inherently predictable, it was an interesting ride to see just how everything went down. When you have a story with some mystique to it, what do you do? You milk it for all its worth, of course. Leave no stone unturned!

Valid theory though. The assimilation is a weird process that probably puts its host in shock. When they awaken, they may assume it was a bad dream until the thing in them spots another creature to assimilate. That's when the alien takes over and goes into attack mode, so the host's surprise, although short-lived, may indeed be genuine.

Consider how some of the infected do carry on with duties after being "thingified". Are they nervous as if trying to blend into a crowd, hoping not to stick out like a sore thumb? Or are they shaken from that realistic nightmare of being merged with an alien creature? Perhaps they aren't acting under the thing mind at all. Maybe the thing has its human host on autopilot until its predatory instinct kicks in.


🚸
avatar
#2

Jul 2022
I saw it at the cinemas and remember leaving disappointed. Never gave it a 2nd chance and probably should. I remember liking Winstead but not many of the other characters. The whole fillings and dental angle was smart and liked how they fit it in with the original timeline. In fairness, they were given an impossible task to live up to the original imo.


🚸
avatar
Box_a_Hair says:
#3, Reply to #2

Jul 2022
You're not wrong. It's inevitable for any of these follow-ups to match the originals. I do appreciate the TCM'03 remake, though I did see it before the '74 original, so my view on those is distorted by sentimenal attachment, but everything else always falls short.

Thing '11 went heavy on the CGI, and that's where original fans take an immediate gripe. I think practical effects are too hard for this generation of filmmakers. It requires makeup and prosthetics, and drawing it on a computer is somehow easier? I'd imagine practical effects would be cheaper sometimes, but what do I know?

Also, the characters we're following are (almost) all Norwegian. That leaves little room to be star-studded. The '82 movie had a few big names in it. For some reason, I've never been very into Winstead. emoticon


🚸
avatar
#4, Reply to #3

Jul 2022
I completely understand your idea of sentimental attachment. Being a kid in the 80s I saw TCM 2 before I saw the original. Due to this I actually like Chop Top more than Leatherface?! I know the original is a far superior film but can anyone deny that Bill Mosely as Chop Top plus his work in RZ's House of 1000 Corpses and The Devil's Rejects is probably the most underappreciated actor in the history of Hollywood horror films?


🚸
avatar
Box_a_Hair says:
#5, Reply to #4

Jul 2022
And the most underrated in music history. Chop-Top and the Cornbugs are great. I was just thinking about how I don't listen to them enough.



Loading...


Loading...

@ am
You have reached the end of Trash Epics.