the answer is no, whichever one you meant by the original.
Ahem, one can only assume that the original poster is referring to John Carpenter's "original" film, as he has the 2011 The Thing as the topic of discussion -- and Howard Hawks' film is a different animal.
the answer is no, whichever one you meant by the original.
Ahem, one can only assume that the original poster is referring to John Carpenter's "original" film, as he has the 2011 The Thing as the topic of discussion -- and Howard Hawks' film is a different animal.
Sadly, there was a LOT of studio interference. This video explains some things HERE. There was to be A LOT of practical FX. The 2011 movie SHOULD'VE been better! Damn shame!
Can't find a movie or TV show? Login to create it.
Respondo de tmdb53400018
je Junio 24 2017 je 5:43 PM
Absolutely not. It's too derivative of Carpenter's take, and the special effects can't hold a candle to his film's.
Respondo de BarkingBaphomet
je Junio 24 2017 je 8:33 PM
the answer is no, whichever one you meant by the original.
Respondo de tmdb53400018
je Junio 24 2017 je 8:52 PM
Ahem, one can only assume that the original poster is referring to John Carpenter's "original" film, as he has the 2011 The Thing as the topic of discussion -- and Howard Hawks' film is a different animal.
Respondo de tmdb43737777
je Junio 24 2017 je 9:24 PM
Nope. The original is a classic
Respondo de BarkingBaphomet
je Junio 24 2017 je 9:38 PM
i thought he was referring to this.
Respondo de tmdb53400018
je Junio 24 2017 je 10:26 PM
Of course! How could I forget ?
Respondo de Irina
je Novembro 7 2017 je 1:14 PM
Both "The Thing From Another World" (1951) and its brilliant REMAKE "The Thing" (1982) are 100x better than this one
Respondo de jorgito2001
je Aprilo 18 2019 je 9:45 AM
Sadly, there was a LOT of studio interference. This video explains some things HERE. There was to be A LOT of practical FX. The 2011 movie SHOULD'VE been better! Damn shame!