The Thing (2011) Dir: Matthijs van Heijningen Jr.
- Ridley Coote
- 1 hour ago
- 2 min read
Instagram post:
I adore John Carpenter's 1982 horror classic; 'The Thing', so when the opportunity came to watch the prequel, released in 2011 and directed by Matthijs van Heijningen Jr., I approached it with just a little apprehension. It goes without saying that it had a lot to live up to - after all, the original is considered to be one of the best horror films ever made. The critics have not been terribly kind to this legacy film, but there seems to be a fair portion of its audience that find it underrated and far too maligned.
The heavy reliance on CGI was very disappointing, particularly when comparing it to the wonderdully goopy and inventive practical effects of the 1982 film, but it did mean that the creature could be utilised in a more fluid way, at least. By 2011 standards, the CGI looked good, but the huge strides taken in that industry have left it looking a little dated for the present day, unfortunately.
The story had its pros and cons. I think it did fairly well to tell the story of the Nordic team's fate, albeit the dialogue was very sloppy, and the characters were pretty much all very shallow. The explicit horror of the narrative was well executed, but the mystery aspect was not. It was very predictable as it pertained to who would survive the longest - there were two actors who were a lot more famous than anyone else in the film.
Mary Elizabeth Winstead was the only actor who really gave me anything positive to think about, in terms of their acting, and even that was fairly subdued compared to what she usually provides. She at least showed some level of personality, whereas the other actors in the film lacked even that, for the most part. I don't think Winstead was helped by the shoddy dialogue, but she did at least make for a relatively easy face to root for.
Joel Edgerton gave a typically Joel Edgerton performance, in that he was decidedly average the entire film. I have never been his biggest fan, and part of that is because of how much of a charisma vacuum he seems to be in just about every role of his. In regards to the rest of the supporting cast, it was the pair of Ulrich Thomsen and Eric Christian Olsen who stood out the most, albeit both of their performances were still very average. I do still think I should mention Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, Paul Braunstein, Trond Espen Seim, and Kim Bubbs, even if they weren't all that impressive - they had fairly sizable roles, after all.
Overall, there was almost no way that this was ever going to live up to its predecessor, but I was still a little underwhelmed regardless. The film had some positive elements to it, and it was certainly watchable, but it fell well short of the level achieved by John Carpenter and his crew. This was fine to watch as a modern horror, but I think it made a lot of its name off of the success provided by the film it was set before.
Comments