ModdedCentipede
Moderator
Only hired to satisfy the diversity quota
Posts: 303
|
Post by ModdedCentipede on Oct 19, 2019 4:49:43 GMT
Still in the season of excessive use of the word "spooktacular" (amirite?), we go further south where we encounter... Chosen by: Balder and Pimpjira Year: 1982 Starring: Kurt russell, Wilford "I have diabeetus" Brimley, Keith David Directed by: John Carpenter Written by: Bill Lancaster, John W. Campbell Jr. Produced by: Wilbur Stark, Larry Franco
|
|
Cervantes
Off-Brand Transformable Robot
A former Incompetent Evil Commander (XP: 2423)
Posts: 2,865
|
Post by Cervantes on Oct 19, 2019 5:25:59 GMT
This film is just perfect. 6/5.
I can't get my head around the fact that it was heavily criticized on its release by what must've been the most stupid group of critics to ever exist. The horror is build up perfectly, fills everyone with paranoia and then unleashes what still are some of the best monster effects ever made. The characters are all very credible and act intelligently, the alien threat is very convincing and creative in its methods, the ending is a satisfying and still bittersweet conclusion. It even does the rare feat of being much better than the 1951 film (though this one is more a readaptation of the original book than a remake of the first film).
John Carpenter was the most underrated director in the 80s - every movie was excellent, and still all of them failed with public and critics for no good reason. Too bad he had a few bad movies in the 90s and then mostly retired - I think he could still be doing a great job in modern horror. The Thing is my favorite movie of his.
By the way, I watched the prequel The Thing (2011) this week and it doesn't live up to Carpenter's movie. It's good as a "this is what could've happened at the Norwegian base", but the characters are flat (just there to be killed), the "final girl" is unconvincing, it has a few plot holes and the CG effects aren't as good as the practical ones from 1982.
The 1951 one is good, though. Its only problem is that it somehow didn't use the original story's idea of the Thing turning people into it - so it's just about an humanoid monster (like Frankenstein's) killing people around the base. It's good because of the characters and dialogues (also the fire scene), but otherwise it is a more standard monster movie.
EDIT: Corrected the release year of the 50s movie.
|
|
Armored Core Raven
Vanguard Ranger
Radio: The test is over. From this moment on, you are a Raven!
Posts: 1,738
|
Post by Armored Core Raven on Oct 19, 2019 6:41:10 GMT
^what he said
|
|
scipioafricanus
Cartoon Pony Wrangler
Sega Does What Nintendon't... except the 32X
Posts: 3,614
|
Post by scipioafricanus on Oct 19, 2019 11:54:54 GMT
This film is just perfect. 6/5. I can't get my head around the fact that it was heavily criticized on its release by what must've been the most stupid group of critics to ever exist. The horror is build up perfectly, fills everyone with paranoia and then unleashes what still are some of the best monster effects ever made. The characters are all very credible and act intelligently, the alien threat is very convincing and creative in its methods, the ending is a satisfying and still bittersweet conclusion. It even does the rare feat of being much better than the 1958 film (though this one is more a readaptation of the original book than a remake of the first film). John Carpenter was the most underrated director in the 80s - every movie was excellent, and still all of them failed with public and critics for no good reason. Too bad he had a few bad movies in the 90s and then mostly retired - I think he could still be doing a great job in modern horror. The Thing is my favorite movie of his. By the way, I watched the prequel The Thing (2011) this week and it doesn't live up to Carpenter's movie. It's good as a "this is what could've happened at the Norwegian base", but the characters are flat (just there to be killed), the "final girl" is unconvincing, it has a few plot holes and the CG effects aren't as good as the practical ones from 1982. The 1958 one is good, though. Its only problem is that it somehow didn't use the original story's idea of the Thing turning people into it - so it's just about an humanoid monster (like Frankenstein's) killing people around the base. It's good because of the characters and dialogues (also the fire scene), but otherwise it is a more standard monster movie. And it has Kurt Russell
|
|
stratogustav
Supreme Overlord
Warrior with Bandana
Posts: 7,647
|
Post by stratogustav on Oct 21, 2019 8:16:43 GMT
Kurt Russell makes the movie 10 out of 10, dude is cool as fuck. He represents everything Jeff Bridges could never be.
|
|
Balder
Supreme Overlord
Trying to cut down the amount of movies I watch
Posts: 6,838
|
Post by Balder on Oct 23, 2019 16:30:03 GMT
I watched this again for the 4th or 5th time. My roommate hadn't watched it before, and he loved it as well. It truly is one of the absolute best horror movies ever made. Here's my review from yesterday:
"This is a masterpiece on so many levels. It keeps you on edge from the first second as the creepy theme from Ennio Morricome hits. The whole film feels so unsettling and uneasy for me. It perfectly keeps the paranoia levels high all throughout, and I love it. The story telling is incredible, and as my roommate promptly put it; it is clever writing that never once feels dragged out or forced. The narrative moves on without ever sitting on a problem for too long. There are twists and turns around every corner. The Thing is one of the best monsters in movie history. It is both terrifying and interesting. I love all the possibilities it has and how it insists upon a great history without ever really giving us one. The special effects are a landmark in film history. It looks amazing, and I am mesmerized by it every time I watch it. They are so unique and creative, it is an incredible feat. The ending is also one of the best endings in all of horror cinema. It fills me with dread. The perfect horror movie." 5/5
|
|
Bogard
Night Raider
Posts: 584
|
Post by Bogard on Oct 23, 2019 17:44:28 GMT
Kurt Russell makes the movie 10 out of 10, dude is cool as fuck. He represents everything Jeff Bridges could never be. Jeff bridges > Kurt Russel
|
|
Balder
Supreme Overlord
Trying to cut down the amount of movies I watch
Posts: 6,838
|
Post by Balder on Oct 23, 2019 18:29:34 GMT
Kurt Russell makes the movie 10 out of 10, dude is cool as fuck. He represents everything Jeff Bridges could never be. Jeff bridges > Kurt RusselĀ Sigh... here we fucking go again with the Jeff Bridges discussion. Bogard I'm not sure you know what beast you have awakened now with that comment.
|
|
stratogustav
Supreme Overlord
Warrior with Bandana
Posts: 7,647
|
Post by stratogustav on Oct 23, 2019 18:44:13 GMT
Sigh... here we fucking go again with the Jeff Bridges discussion. @bogart I'm not sure you know what beast you have awakened now with that comment. My guess is Bogard is only joking, no one would say such a thing.
|
|
Balder
Supreme Overlord
Trying to cut down the amount of movies I watch
Posts: 6,838
|
Post by Balder on Oct 23, 2019 21:22:01 GMT
Sigh... here we fucking go again with the Jeff Bridges discussion. @bogart I'm not sure you know what beast you have awakened now with that comment. My guess is Bogard is only joking, no one would say such a thing. I think Kurt Russell on average is better than Jeff Bridges as every movie he is in he's solid. While I have to say Jeff Bridges' best performance beats out Kurt Russell's best performance.
|
|
scipioafricanus
Cartoon Pony Wrangler
Sega Does What Nintendon't... except the 32X
Posts: 3,614
|
Post by scipioafricanus on Oct 23, 2019 22:02:34 GMT
Kurt Russell makes the movie 10 out of 10, dude is cool as fuck. He represents everything Jeff Bridges could never be. Jeff bridges > Kurt Russel
|
|
Bogard
Night Raider
Posts: 584
|
Post by Bogard on Oct 23, 2019 22:35:10 GMT
Sorry guys, although i like big trouble in little china and tango and cash, Jeff Bridges is one of my favourite actors.
|
|
stratogustav
Supreme Overlord
Warrior with Bandana
Posts: 7,647
|
Post by stratogustav on Oct 24, 2019 10:37:06 GMT
I think Kurt Russell on average is better than Jeff Bridges as every movie he is in he's solid. While I have to say Jeff Bridges' best performance beats out Kurt Russell's best performance. His worse performance was The Big Lebowski because I don't think he can do worse. I need to see his other movies to see his best performance.
|
|
Balder
Supreme Overlord
Trying to cut down the amount of movies I watch
Posts: 6,838
|
Post by Balder on Oct 24, 2019 13:11:28 GMT
I think Kurt Russell on average is better than Jeff Bridges as every movie he is in he's solid. While I have to say Jeff Bridges' best performance beats out Kurt Russell's best performance. His worse performance was The Big Lebowski because I don't think he can do worse. I need to see his other movies to see his best performance. I think his best role is The Dude, but he is also great in the True Grit remake.
|
|
stratogustav
Supreme Overlord
Warrior with Bandana
Posts: 7,647
|
Post by stratogustav on Oct 24, 2019 20:46:24 GMT
I think his best role is The Dude... Oh please, that's a really bad joke even for you man. Low.
|
|