The Thing (2011) - Film Review

Revisiting this one, I have to admit that I came into viewing this with some rose-tinted glasses. I saw this back when it first hit theaters and had no idea it was a prequel at the time. Even after my most recent viewing, I still felt it was fairly decent, but then a friend of mine recommended revisiting the original The Thing for comparison. It's intriguing to see how a prequel that came out thirty years after its predecessor seemingly fails at nearly everything it tries to emulate.

1

Where You Can Find It: I viewed this one on Amazon Video where it is available for rent/purchase.

General Information 
The Thing is a science fiction horror film that was released on 14 October 2011. It was directed by Matthijs van Heijningen Jr. and produced by Eric Newman and Marc Abraham with Universal Pictures distributing. It is a direct prequel to the 1982 film of the same name. Like the original, this one also had its own comic book spin-off, and was equally met with scorn upon its release. With a budget of $38 million, it only made $31.5 million in box office returns. Critically, it received a few nominations from a handful of small film groups, however it has a less-than-stellar 49 Metascore on Metacritic, while it holds an even more painful 34% Tomatometer rating on Rotten Tomatoes.

The Story

Out in the lifeless wastes of Antarctica, a team of Norwegian researchers, led by Edvard Wolner (played by Trond Espen Seim), follow a strange signal and discover a buried spacecraft along with what appears to be the remains of an alien lifeform frozen in a block of ice. Wolner invites his friend, Dr. Sander Halvorson (Ulrich Thomsen), who in-turn invites Paleontologist, Kate Lloyd (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), to analyze both the craft and the creature. Shortly upon excavating the creature's remains, the monster awakens and begins to rampage across the Norwegian research station.

One of the immediate flaws with this film is that it sheds its thriller-origins as a film about paranoia and instead replaces those elements with the generic type of schlock that might inhabit any other creature feature. Although the original The Thing's monster could be equally horrifying, it was cagey and subtle with a sense of self-preservation. In this film's version, it is a mindless monster that smashes through walls and devours people. There are many scenes that discuss its capabilities to mimic its prey, however it seems pointless when every time it drops its disguise it reverts back to being mindless. Near the beginning, we see a version of it actively kill itself as part of a cheap fake-out to the viewers. The action is entirely out-of-character and the ensuing chaos felt incredibly cliché.

2

Who needs subtle intrigue when you can just have a raging monster instead?

Another element where this film fails is with its weak characters. Despite the fact that this is a Norwegian research station, all but one of the crew speak perfect English. Lars (Jorgen Langhelle) is the only member that doesn't and that's likely only due to the requirement that his character appears in the original film and does not speak English. Beyond that, the Norwegians are all wholly uninteresting and nondistinctive from each other. Most of them lack any defining characteristics and they contribute very little to the overall plot, which seems wholly dedicated to Kate, Dr. Halvorson, and the pilot, Sam Carter (Joel Edgerton). It would've been far more interesting to see a story where most of the Norwegians don't speak English so that the Americans have to rely on other means of communication to discuss their options. As it stands, the Norwegians are forgettable cannon-fodder.

3

Don't worry about remembering any of their names, the Norwegians are just there to die

The Americans are no better in this as it's abundantly clear that Kate and Sam are the real heroes as the camera rarely follows anyone else while Kate seems to live so she can deliver exposition. More than once do we see situations where Kate knows things that her character could not possibly know, while Dr. Halvorson is used as the scapegoat to explain why no one outside the research station is notified about the alien as he's selfish to the point of suicidal.

Special Effects/Atmosphere

It's generally considered that practical effects are superior to CGI, however I'd argue that's not always the case. Unfortunately, this particular film's CGI does not meet that exception. There are certainly parts of the film where the CGI works and it looks fine, however the majority of its CGI is atrociously bad, and has not aged well either. The final form of the creature, near the end of the film, was so hilariously bad that it made others (including me) laugh out loud during the climactic stand-off.

4

The CGI in this is on par with The Mummy Returns

I want to praise Heijningen for using nothing more than stills and old set photos from The Thing to recreate the Norwegian research outpost. The attention to detail is certainly there, and I genuinely felt like this was the same place as what appears in the 1982 original. The final scene, included in the credits, was my favorite part of the film. Unfortunately, I found the attention-to-detail lacking in costume design as everyone looks like they're from the 21st century despite it being set in 1982. Winstead looks identical to modern characters she's played, and I actually had to remind some of my fellow viewers that this was set in 1982 on more than one occasion as there were very few indicators of the time period throughout the film.

The Acting

I wasn't particularly blown away with anyone's acting in this film, although I suppose I didn't actively hate anyone either. Eric Christian Olsen, who plays Dr. Halvorson's research assistant, Adam Finch, probably does the worst job as he genuinely doesn't look like he belongs in this kind of movie. With the exception of when his character exposits what his role is on the expedition, Olsen's character never comes off as remotely educated or involved. He's simply there to scream at stuff and run from the monster.

5

The greatest mystery of this film is how Olsen was cast for it

Winstead and Joel Edgerton get the most screen-time in this, but neither do anything particularly interesting. Winstead does her usual scared-but-defiant schtick and Edgerton attempts to roleplay as Kurt Russell's MacReady. Considering Heijningen decided to keep most of the plot focused on these two actors' characters, the lack of range affected my interest in the overall story as I just didn't care about either of them.

The Best of the Best: The ending's direct lead into the original film, accompanied by Ennio Morricone's initial score.

The Worst of the Worst: That CGI has not aged well at all.

Calhooey Score: 4/10 - Below Average

Would I Recommend?

6

My thoughts exactly, Lars...

On its own, The Thing is a generic monster movie with boring characters that are shunted into a predictable plot. As a prequel to the original The Thing, this is a cheap imitation that essentially makes all the mistakes that the original managed to avoid. Fans of the original film may get a little enjoyment out of this, but I wouldn't recommend this unless it was available for free on a streaming service you already happen to own. Also, if you decide to watch this, I highly recommend not viewing it until after having seen the original.

-------------------------------------------------Spoiler Comments-----------------------------------------------------

• Why does Lars have a crate of grenades, flame throwers, and an assault rifle? What does he do at that research outpost? I had a similar criticism of the original film when it came to weaponry, but when Lars showed Kate the box of grenades, it was hilariously baffling to me.
• Why did Dr. Halvorson bring Kate along if he's going to ignore all of her advice?
• Why did Dr. Halvorson invite Adam Finch along either?
• The hand-centipede monster was terrifying.
• Lars has terrible aim.
• Halvorson as the monster was so funny.
• I get that we wanted this big reveal of Kate torching Sam, but if Sam was the monster, why didn't he jump her on the way back from the ship? She had no weapons and Sam would've been aware of that.
• Also, doesn't coming into any type of physical contact with the creature cause a person to become infected by their cells? Wouldn't this mean that Kate is doomed? If that's the case, the entire plot of the original is pointless as the creature likely survived.
• Kate is the biggest example of wanting to have your cake and eat it in a horror movie that I've seen in a long time. As a prequel, most viewers know the monster survives to the end and the Norwegian camp is destroyed. Kate surviving makes little sense.

----------------------------------------------------References--------------------------------------------------

(1) Amazon. (n.d.). The Thing film image. Retrieved from: https://www.amazon.com/The-Thing-DVD/dp/B005NYMXIU.

(2) Buarque, H. (n.d.). The Thing rampaging gif. Pinterest. Retrieved from: https://www.pinterest.ca/pin/178173728986321323/.

(3) Action Movie Freak. (2011). The Norwegians image. Retrieved from: https://www.actionmoviefreak.com/index-2011.php.

(4) Rotten Tomatoes. (n.d.). The Thing Sander-Thing image. Retrieved from: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_thing_2011.

(5) The Reel Story. (2011). Eric Christian Olsen. WordPress. Retrieved from: https://lexdarling7389.wordpress.com/2011/10/11/the-thing-eric-christian-olsen/.

(6) vork---m. (2020). Lars burning stuff gif. Tumgir. Retrieved from: https://www.tumgir.com/tag/The%20Thing%202011.