Although an entirely redundant remake masquerading as a prequel, The Thing, when taken at face value is competent enough. For those few who have yet to experience the delights of Carpenter’s film they may well enjoy this superfluous retread. But for those who remember the ‘82 original then this film may be harder to swallow.

John Carpenter’s film is one of my all time favourite horror films (as this list attests). It is brilliant for many reasons but the three main areas for me are in its characterisation, paranoia and groundbreaking special effects. Coincidentally these are the key areas where the prequel most struggles. I defy anybody to remember more than two of the character’s names this time around. Where…

Part of the 31 Days of Horror

It was a mistake to watch this immediately after the original. Whenever I watch a remake, sequel, prequel, or film adaptation of a book or other medium, I try (and usually fail) to judge it solely on its own merits, rather than comparing it to the original/source material. But having watched the original immediately before this one, I don't know how well I'll be able to keep from comparing the two films. The original The Thing is so fantastic, and, in my opinion, that is largely due to the suspense that Carpenter uses throughout his film. There is no suspense whatsoever in this prequel. Because of that, this film is so boring that…

I really enjoy monster movies. I loved the original. When I heard of the prequel I was filled with equal parts dread and excitement. Plus I think Joel edgerton is a great actor so his addition was welcomed.

What was clear from this prequel is that it was made by people who blatantly loved the original. So when you look at the set design and story arc it is clear that they wanted to do the John carpenter film justice. What i liked was the fact that the writers had reverse engineered the plot. So they took what evidence hey had of the Norwegian station from the first one and attempted to answer all the questions raised. And I felt…

God, I wanted to like this movie.

Who could blame me? I've seen The Thing '82 dozens of times. Confirmation bias from all that invested time and evaluation certainly made me amenable to enjoying any successor in the same universe. I'm entirely in support of creative new approaches to older material. And a clever treatment could have invigorated the cult of the original and started a new franchise.

But as beautifully acted and attractive as this was (and it's a gorgeous film, visually faithful to the original), it's a tonally confused and underwritten muddle. Somewhere between a prequel and a remake (let's use "premake" for misadventures like this in the future), it feels tentative at the same time that it…

In a way, I genuinely wanted to like this, even with it being a typical modern remake (or 'prequel' in this case). However, it just offered very little flair, both on its own and in comparison to its predecessor, like that of a delinquent son to a successful father. It makes an effort, but drops the ball; said ball deflates a little, too.

One of the first things taken into account is that it almost entirely avoids the atmosphere and fear of the 'universe' it takes place in; the scenario is practically entirely laid out within the first act, which allows little character development or room for tension/paranoia to seep in. Far too often is the Thing shown and far…