PDA

View Full Version : The Thing



NJCardFan
09-26-2011, 10:20 PM
A remake of a remake? Really?

Rockntractor
09-26-2011, 10:25 PM
A remake of a remake? Really?

Well, there was Dracula.:confused:

patriot45
09-26-2011, 11:00 PM
I didn't see this one , but the Thing with Kurt Russel can't be beat!

Articulate_Ape
09-27-2011, 01:11 AM
All they make are remakes! They are even remaking The Killer Elite.

WTF? The imagination bank is empty I guess.

NJCardFan
09-27-2011, 03:35 AM
I didn't see this one , but the Thing with Kurt Russel can't be beat!

Well, this one is a remake of the Kurt Russell one.

Zathras
09-27-2011, 09:06 AM
The new "the Thing" is not a remake of the Kurt Russell version. It's actually a prequel dealing with the Norwegians that actually found the creature and were seen at the begining of the 1982 "The Thing" chasing a dog across the ice in a helicopter that crashes, killing them.

I thought it was a remake as well until I did a little research and found otherwise.

ironhorsedriver
09-27-2011, 09:19 AM
James Arness of Gunsmoke played the Thing in the original. I thought it was a pretty good movie, but I liked the Kurt Russell version better.

NJCardFan
09-27-2011, 09:22 AM
James Arness of Gunsmoke played the Thing in the original. I thought it was a pretty good movie, but I liked the Kurt Russell version better.
What other really famous actor was in the original?

NJCardFan
09-27-2011, 09:25 AM
The new "the Thing" is not a remake of the Kurt Russell version. It's actually a prequel dealing with the Norwegians that actually found the creature and were seen at the begining of the 1982 "The Thing" chasing a dog across the ice in a helicopter that crashes, killing them.

I thought it was a remake as well until I did a little research and found otherwise.

I digress then. However, a different title would have been nice. You know, like The Thing: Arrival or something like that.

obx
09-27-2011, 09:26 AM
What other really famous actor was in the original?

John Holmes in the title role?

Zathras
09-27-2011, 09:38 AM
I digress then. However, a different title would have been nice. You know, like The Thing: Arrival or something like that.

From IMDB the reason why they didn't....


The reason the movie has the same title as the first film is because the filmmakers felt that adding a subtitle such as "The Thing: Begins", "The Thing: Origins" and so forth, did not sound as reverential as just simply naming it "The Thing". If you look up any of the proposed and existing "Thing" projects they all have "The Thing" as their title. Unfortunately, this confuses a lot of the public audience, but that's the title Universal wants. One could also see it tying into the idea of the Thing, which is indistinguishable from whatever it directly pertains to. An identical title, which confuses viewers, much as the creature itself does.

LINK (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0905372/faq#.2.1.2)

I agree with you that they should have made the title of the new movie different from the previous one. It could actually hurt it's take at the box office because of people thinking it's a remake instead of a prequel.

linda22003
09-27-2011, 09:49 AM
I love both versions, so I'll definitely be there for this one.

Zathras
09-27-2011, 09:52 AM
All they make are remakes! They are even remaking The Killer Elite.

WTF? The imagination bank is empty I guess.

I saw that one this last weekend. It was ok.

FlaGator
09-28-2011, 12:07 PM
The title of the 1950's version was "The Thing from Another World".

namvet
09-28-2011, 12:47 PM
Ill stick with the original.

Zafod
09-28-2011, 01:47 PM
A remake of a remake? Really?

looks dumb as shit....and its supposed to be a prequel

john carpenter can not be topped. its just that simple