30 years later, THE THING gets a prequel
30 years later, THE THING gets a prequel
Jan 04
I’m in two minds about the impending prequel to John Carpenter’s 1982 sci-fi horror classic The Thing. On the one hand, it was written by Ronald D. Moore, the executive producer behind the amazing Battlestar Galactica TV reboot: dark, gritty, and uncompromising seem to be common words in his playbook, and this is in keeping with the tradition of the original film. On the other hand, this is a completely unnecessary, unsolicited cash-in on a cult film nobody watched, let alone liked, cooked up decades after the original, which itself was a reimagining of a novella already adapted by Hollywood in the 50s (and you think Hollywood’s only recently become cannibalistic and unoriginal, huh?). There is potential for greatness in the seeds of the idea, but I’m not entirely sure I wouldn’t just rather re-watch the original on Blu-Ray.
Since when did Twitter become a legitimate news source? I feel like a dinosaur. Production Weekly via /Film.
So you know how in the original the Norwegian camp gets brutalised off-screen by the Thing first? And then when MacReady goes to check it out he finds a burnt-out building and an otherwise healthy man frozen dead to a chair with slit wrists? And the whole thing is intensely foreboding, and succeeds in planting terrible images in your mind, amplifying the agony of suspense? Well the idea in the prequel is to explain everything that happens at the Norwegian camp, thus dispelling much of the tension of the first act of the original. Great. I guess it ends with the last two survivors getting to the choppa to take out the dastardly dog we’re so confused and conflicted about at the start of the original Thing — again, spoiling much of the tension of the original. How can a film whose ending is dictated by an earlier film in the series be compelling? Look at the Star Wars prequels — aside from being badly written and poorly directed green-screen snooze-fests, there was very little dramatic tension because we knew exactly how everyone would end up — Padme dies, Obi-Wan goes into exile, Anakin puts on a helmet and whines about everything, etc.
One of the reasons the original was so successful was its special effects minimalism. The effects still look pretty good by today’s weightless CG standards, but the ideas behind the effects are still incredibly chilly. The dog grimacing as it is ripped to shreds by its own tentacles, the look of confusion and bewilderment on Fuchs’ face right before he gets burned alive, and the visceral lurch of hands getting ripped off at the elbow — it’s rare you see these kind of disturbing visuals carried out in intelligent films these days. I have no idea who Matthijs van Heijningen is, but I assume that as a first-time director he’ll be under a lot of studio pressure to jump through a few hoops. Big-name actors is probably one (Shia LeBeouf in a six-months-in-isolation beard?), shitty visual effects is another (does everyone remember when Paul W. S. Anderson promised mostly live-action aliens and predators for the first Alien Vs Predator film? That didn’t really come through, did it? Probably because Anderson is a hack, though), and some kind of uplifting conclusion might be another mandate (the original’s bleak ending is great, and it validates the rest of the film in a hollow, cold but satisfying way — I doubt Hollywood would let that kind of ending slip through again, except perhaps in The Mist).
No word on casting yet, but the film is due to roll from March to June this year, so a cast, crew, and script must all be well and truly locked down. Details are thin on the ground, maybe because the big trades don’t care enough about the original to carry this kind of news (they’d rather run another article about how much they love James Cameron), but probably because the production company is being tight-lipped for now. Like I said, I’m in two minds. The original is one of my favourite films, but I can completely understand why most people have absolutely zero compulsion to see it, and I don’t begrudge you that. But that just makes the idea of a prequel even sillier. The majority of the population won’t see the connections because they haven’t seen the original, and the fans of the original will just get offended by the very premise of a prequel sans John Carpenter and Kurt Russell. Who wins here?
