 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
67.166.204.16
In Reply to: Re: Starman isn't a bad SF film, in spite of its somewhat predictable melodramatic elements, ... posted by patrickU on March 18, 2005 at 09:03:29:
Yes, I really AM serious: John Carpenter's The Thing IS a good film; in fact, it's an EXCELLENT film, and thankfully not a remake of the earlier film!Granted, you don't like the Carpenter film; that's fine, you'll get no argument from me regarding your tastes in cinema or, arguably, the lack thereof. However, just calling the '82 version a bad film because YOU didn't like it is more of a reflection on your viewpoint than on the film, IMHO. Please note that I didn't say Howard Hawk's production was "bad" even though it was directed by Christian Nyby who, as demonstrated by the link below, was a journeyman director more known for helming Bonanza & Kojak TV episodes than well received films.
The 1950's treatment of this classic suspense story, The Thing from Another World, served it's purpose as a reflection of the U.S. paranoia during the Cold War, nuclear escalation and McCarthyism, BUT it wasn't John W. Campbell's SF novelette "Who Goes There?" Director Carpenter's achievement was in shooting a screenplay that respected the original vision in Campbell's best known tale. That is why, regardless of your SUBJECTIVE dislike of this movie, John Carpenter's The Thing, from Bill Lancaster's fine screenplay, is the better of the two films.
That is MY objective, albeit none-too-humble opinion, but here is another from Absolute Astronomy:
"Who Goes There? has been twice adapted as a motion picture: rather loosely in 1951 as The Thing From Another World and more faithfully in 1982 by director John Carpenter as the film The Thing, from the Bill Lancaster screenplay."
Source:
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/W/Wh/Who_Goes_There.htmCheers,
AuPh
Follow Ups:
Influate his poor ego.
The Thing was " Instant junk ".
Nobody could say it better.
- http://movies2.nytimes.com/mem/movies/review.html?title1=&title2=THING, THE (MOVIE)&reviewer=Vincent Canby&v_id=49462&oref=login (Open in New Window)
You want reviews? I got'cha reviews right here:http://homepage.powerup.com.au/~vampire/thing/t-review.htm -("Carpenter's 1982 remake complicates Howard Hawks' original by dissolving the camaraderie and mini-democracy of the arctic outpost besieged by an alien life form. While Hawks' film was a reiteration in the horror genre, of the tenets of the true-blue American war film, with a unit composed of distinct, idiosyncratic individuals joining in a common cause, Carpenter's film is infected with the cynicism and self-preservation instinct of an age far from the solidarity of the post-War, Cold War years. Distrustful and wary of one another from the start, when a parasitic alien is introduced into the compound by a group of Norwegian scientists, the men's suspicions expand tenfold. As the monster replicates and hides itself inside their bodies, each man becomes a potential enemy -- the dissolution of their own ranks is even more profound and destructive from within than anything the monster can do from without.")
http://www.scifimoviepage.com/thing.html -("John Carpenter's re-make of the 1951 classic The Thing From Another World (also based on John W. Campbell's short story Who Goes There?). Readers who have seen both movies and read the story on which it is based maintains that Carpenter's version is more true to its source.")
http://www.moviesonline.ca/film311.htm
http://www.dvdfile.com/software/review/dvd-video/thing_1982.htm
http://www.horrorwatch.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=95 -("I have to say The Thing is the best of John Carpenter's work.")
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1021244-thing/ -(82% posiitive)
http://www.nixflix.com/reviews/thething.htm -("The Thing is a man's movie ..." - Is this why you're having a problem with The Thing, Mssr. patrick?)
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/10/26/143819.php -("This is one of those slightly strange films; I'd guess that many, many more people have heard of it than have actually seen it, which is a damn shame because it's proof that John Carpenter at least used to be able to do great things, even if he's slipped a bit more recently...")
http://www.revolutionsf.com/article.html?id=163 -("After just one viewing, The Thing easily makes my top ten list...")
http://www.hollywoodbitchslap.com/review.php?movie=2453 -("It doesn't get much better than this. Tight story, built-in tension, and a cast that's simply a joy to watch. "The Thing" is one of those movies where you get to see a bunch of guys confined in a small space implode under extreme pressure, but it has a few defining ingredients that place it a cut above the standard fare. Way, way above.")
...and so on! Care to try again? :o)
Cheers,
AuPh
But it fits to you to confuse quality for noise and sensibility for quantity.
It will not go further in this matter as it is boring.
;^)
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
