Okay, that title is a bit of
a misnomer.
But only a bit.
Following the comics in the 90s, there were a few attempts to try and bring The Thing back to the screens – one I had only recently learned about was an attempt at a Sci-Fi Channel miniseries that got up to scripting before going under – but for a time, couldn't quite make it land.
They finally changed that in 2011, with the release of The Thing – an attempt at a prequel to the 1982 movie designed to fill in the story of the doomed Norwegian team from the first movie.
But only a bit.
Following the comics in the 90s, there were a few attempts to try and bring The Thing back to the screens – one I had only recently learned about was an attempt at a Sci-Fi Channel miniseries that got up to scripting before going under – but for a time, couldn't quite make it land.
They finally changed that in 2011, with the release of The Thing – an attempt at a prequel to the 1982 movie designed to fill in the story of the doomed Norwegian team from the first movie.
There's a certain unintentional meta-brilliance to having
this use the exact same title as the original while being something of an incomplete copy.
this use the exact same title as the original while being something of an incomplete copy.
Like the idea of providing a clear answer to the fates of MacReady and Childs, I can't pretend I don't see why people would want to explore the first thaw, even if I can't say I agree with it. Yes, we know in broad strokes what happened, but doubtless there are some that would want to know how things like the split-face monster came to be.
The problem in a case like this is, unlike with MacReady and Childs, you already have a pretty clear idea what's going to happen. This is a dilemma of prequels in general – the question of why fill in when you know where it goes. But it's easier with something like, say, the fall of Anakin Skywalker, where a lot of the details were left vague originally (...let's not discuss the finished product now), vs the fate of the Norwegian outpost, where Carpenter's movie gives you enough details in what the Outpost 31 crew find to tell a pretty clear story. It's not air-tight, but you have enough points you're expected to hit that many filmmakers would find their hands tied by that.
I don't envy
Matthijs van Heijningen Jr. and Eric Heisserer for taking on this job. By the early 2010s, Carpenter's movie had come a long way from
its former status as a black sheep and now made for a very big set
of shoes for anyone to fill.
To us, the viewers, this says 'stay the Hell away'
To this team, it still says 'Let's see what's inside!'
To this team, it still says 'Let's see what's inside!'
I say this in part because I want to cut them some slack with what they had to work with, and also because it makes it much more frustrating that, rather than take the risk and try something completely off the beaten path, but still reach the same end point, much of this movie just feels like reheated leftovers of its predecessor. The first act of this makes for some of the better material the film has to offer for this reason. There's no other team to force the situation forward, meaning the movie has to find its own footing to start and move from there – instead of the downed alien ship being a key to a base full of dead people, it's an archaeological mystery. They're approaching with more wonder than apprehension and it gives the cast some material to work with than they get in much of what follows.
Once the original alien is out of the ice, the movie starts running into problems. With that escape, it turns into a fast-forwarded edition of the '82 version, going through many of the beats and twists the first did, often rushing to them and losing much of the impact they had the first time around. The first attack, for example, is played out mostly outdoors at night and with a CGI creature that only attacks once. It moves quickly and never seems to want to stop to take in the horror of what it's selling. Compare it with its equivalent moment in '82, when the Thing attacks a kennel full of dogs that get wind of what it really is. The suddenness of the prequel version feels incredibly unsatisfying by comparison to the grim, visceral build-up that it's taking its cue from.
I get that Rob Bottin is a high hurdle to get past, but making this your first
look isn't really helping.
look isn't really helping.
That difference between
those two scenes is the best example of what may be the
other major problem this movie has – for being built around a
creature whose very nature is built on infiltration and survival, the Things
in this movie really can't resist showing off early and often.
Granted, the earlier movie's iteration of the creature was not,
itself, a shrinking violet, but it was still a creature that
understood the value of stealth – save for being caught
mid-assimilation at one point, the '82 Thing is shown as a being that
keeps its tentacles under wraps until it has been identified and has absolutely has no other
choice – often preferring to stoke suspicions and keep everyone's
eyes off it while it works.
The fact the new version offers a CGI Thing
isn't helping matters either. I'll give the filmmakers some credit on
this – it's been well established they wanted practical
FX work and lobbied to try and get it before that was ultimately
vetoed. Further, to be totally up front, I commend them for making
the attempt at least. At the same time, watching the rest of
the movie with that in mind, I feel like even practical effects would
have only done so much to save these scenes. There's still an
impatience to get to the body horror in many moments that takes what
feels like it was supposed to be a shocking reveal and just drops it
on out there without much build up or suspense.
"Okay, so we're turning back. Play it cool, play it cool.
No need to let them suspect me ye--SCREW IT! TENTACLES!"
No need to let them suspect me ye--SCREW IT! TENTACLES!"
I wanted to be able to find
more to like in this movie in general. I know it didn't go entirely
the way the filmmakers wanted, and if I'm giving some credit, I do
like several members of the cast here – even if they've had better
days than this. Unfortunately, that only does so much to save the
finished product of this movie from what it becomes – a prequel to
a story of Lovecraftian paranoia that broadly doubles down on the former
while skimping quite a bit on the latter.
...Kind of an unimpressive
note to close out Thing Week with, admittedly. But, you work with
what you have.
Apocalypse October continues rolling, however, as we leave the frozen Hell of the Antarctic for a whole new Hell next Tuesday. We're heading off to the church basement as Carpenter flings the gates of Hell open and Prince of Darkness comes forth.
Apocalypse October continues rolling, however, as we leave the frozen Hell of the Antarctic for a whole new Hell next Tuesday. We're heading off to the church basement as Carpenter flings the gates of Hell open and Prince of Darkness comes forth.
Till then.
No comments:
Post a Comment