Forums Horror Movie Reviews
THE THING Prequel (2011) - "The Midichlorian Edition"

For those of you Bidites that aren't uber nerds I will explain the definition of Midichlorian. In the Star Wars universe, Midichlorian's are chemical compounds found within every living cell that forms the bas between the connection life and the Force. Without midichlorians, life would be imposble. According to Star Wars lore, the amount of midichlorians in a life from represents it's ability to understand, comprehend, and manipulate the Force. What does Midichlorian have to do with the 2011 prequel to John Carpenter's 1982 masterpiece THE THING? It added an unnecessary element to the Star Wars universe that mply wasn't needed.



I won't go into this movie ung the term "review", this is much more of a rant. Was the prequel to JC's THE THING a bad movie? Absolutely 100% not in my humble opinion. I thought the characters were believable, the acting was on par (maybe even above average) and I didn't mind the splicing of CGI with practical effects. Did I want an entire film with nothing but practical effects? Sure I did, but I knew I wouldn't get that film and I thought the use of CGI was well done. They pulled it off without really taking me out of the film. So why then do I mply despise this film? Is it nostalgia for my beloved 1982 masterpiece that I can't get enough of? Was it the lack of Kurt Russel? Was the muc not as good? Was the film awful? I've already stated that it wasn't, so where is the hatred from?

It is mple really, they brought absolutely zero to the table in the 2011 veron. It was almost short of being a remake however we did get a prequel re-telling of the Alien ship that crashed (albeit it brief). Down to the same old tried and true things (pardon the pun) this film took the story that John Carpenter weaved and tried to do it again. It's as if someone tried to reshoot the 1978 Halloween with Michael Myers wearing a different mask. It just wasn't needed. Which brings me back to the "Midichlorian" reference. Look, chances are I wasn't going to love this film in the first place. I understood that fully going in but I was hopeful that we would get a chance to something new, something fresh, maybe even a new mytho that wasn't explored in the 1982 veron. Unfortunately, short of the last 15 minutes of the film, we were treated to the same film only not nearly as well executed.

If you went into this film blind and hadn't seen John Carnpeter's veron I don't think that you'd hate it. It wasn't a terrible film and I would even be so bold as to say it was enjoyable for the most part. I hated it with every fiber of my being because I knew what the film should have been. That is the problem with blurring the lines like they did here. If you're going to blur the lines, then blur them. Don't give us a rehash that is nearly frame for frame, or at the very least so milar to the source material that you keep comparing scenes over and over again.

If you haven't seen the film I would recommend it mply for the fact that it isn't terrible. It's much the same, which is why I personally had a problem with it. The ending of the film when the credits were rolling where by far my favorite part. Partly because it setup the film I so dearly love. Kudos on the effort but the Mona Lisa doesn't need repeating nor does John Carpenter's THE THING.

I thought the film had its flaws but as a huge fan of Carpenter's original I thought this movie did a good job of staying on the same path.

True, the suspense wasn't executed as well and some of the scenes near the end with the ship kind of made me groan.

This didn't stop me from enjoying the movie.

You say it didn't need to be made.

I actually flirted with the idea of writing a script for this part of the story.

Carpenter's original gave us an intriguing glimpse at a group of Norwegians who, probably celebrating a terrific find, found themselves in a battle against an extra-terrestrial like nothing we've ever seen.

I found the Thing in this prequel to be much more aggresve than the slick and cunning Thing of the original and I believe it to be correct.

We're talking about a being that has just thawed out of a 100,000+ year slumber.

Its the first time it has had contact with our species.

Its probably disorientated, to say the least.

So its aggresveness was warranted.

By the time it reaches the American base its had a lot of time and experience to adapt and play a more stealthy game of hide and seek.I agree 100% with the end of the film and that tingle I got watching the helicopter whir into action to pursue the dog.

I did enjoy the practical effects that were used along with the CGI that was inevitable.

Some people were irritated that they brought in a female lead.

She's no Kurt Russel but she had the spirit of the level headed heroine that the movie needed.

Some of the detail to the sets made me feel like we were back in 1982 Antarctica, which I really enjoyed.

The chief example is the room that the block of ice reded in.

The dimenons and the stairs leading down to the exhibit was just like Carpenter's setup back in the day.

It was this kind of attention to detail that made me believe that the film makers were fans of the original and not just another remake, cash hungry production team.i would suggest watching This prequel back to back with Carpenter's original would make for a fantastic duology and I'm glad they went ahead with the project.

I really, really liked this film.

No veron ever made would equal the claustrophobic fear that John Carpenter had in his veron.

Movie studios these days don't seem to be in the mood for films that build suspense they just want the director to get to the monster and the gore.

That is way too bad.

I liked how this prequel tied everything together with John's film.

Especially Eric Christianson who's "death" was a big piece in John Carpenter's film.

I loved how they had the Norweigen firing the gun at the dog unable to understand English which is what eventually leads to his death.

He was hunting that dog from the word go in this film.

I am also happy that we were finally taken inde the alien space craft.

If there are anymore things to be made I think they should team Kurt Russell and Mary Elizabeth Winestead together for one last movie to turn this into a trilogy.

Even though not as good as John Carpenter's this is still a good film.