The producers convinced Universal Studios to allow them to create a prequel to John Carpenter's The Thing (1982) instead of a remake, as they felt Carpenter's film was already perfect, so making a remake would be like "painting a mustache on the Mona Lisa".

Is The Thing 2011 a reboot?

Taking the form of a prequel, the 2011 revival — also titled The Thing, which isn't confusing at all — explains what occurred at the abandoned Norwegian camp explored by R.J. MacReady (Kurt Russell) and Doctor Copper (Richard Dysart) in the Carpenter film.

Does The Thing 2011 take place before The Thing 1982?

It is a direct prequel to the 1982 film of the same title by John Carpenter, which was an adaptation of the 1938 novella Who Goes There? by John W. Campbell.

What makes The Thing 2011 a prequel?

One of the main reasons that 2011's The Thing is a prequel is that sequels to John Carpenter's The Thing already existed before its release. A set of comic books, written by screenwriter Chuck Pfarrer, were published by Dark Horse Comics in 1991.

Is The Thing with Kurt Russell a remake?

The Thing (1982)

John Carpenter's 1982 film is a remake of 1951's The Thing from Another World and stars Kurt Russel as the hero RJ MacReady.

The Real Reason The Thing (1982) is Better than The Thing (2011)

Is The Thing remake better than the original?

John Carpenter's The Thing is considered one of the best horror remakes ever made, surpassing the original film in its adherence to the source material and its unforgettable practical effects.

Is The Thing a remake or prequel?

The producers convinced Universal Studios to allow them to create a prequel to John Carpenter's The Thing (1982) instead of a remake, as they felt Carpenter's film was already perfect, so making a remake would be like "painting a mustache on the Mona Lisa".

Why did The Thing flop?

The film was about the end of the world. Its bleakness was the reason it wasn't a success at the time, but I think also why it has endured. In fact the film was an enormous failure. I got fired because of it and was out of work for a while, but slowly its reputation changed.

Is the thing 2011 canon?

Fun fact, all three canon entries of The Thing series are titled The Thing. The Thing (2011) The Thing (1982) The Thing (2002, video game.)

Is there a part 2 of The Thing 2011?

Talk about serendipity: the developers behind The Thing video game also considered using an oil rig as a major location for their own scrapped sequel. In any case, van Heijningen Jr. never got to see the idea through to the end once his film underperformed — both critically and financially.

Which is better, The Thing 1982 or 2011?

As a revolutionary horror sci-fi film, John Carpenter's original The Thing is held in higher regard than the 2011 prequel for these five reasons. John Carpenter's The Thing released in 1982 to poor reception but has since been revered as a cult classic, ranking among some of the most well-known and best horror movies.

Did anyone survive the thing 2011?

The final scene of the 2011 version even leads directly into the opening shots of 1982's The Thing. As predicted, the vast majority of the prequel's characters are dead by the time credits roll, though Winstead's Kate has managed to (at least temporarily) stop the monster from escaping Antarctica in its spaceship.

Why did the Thing 2011 use CGI?

'The Thing's Practical Effects Were Replaced With CGI

Despite how proudly Heijningen Jr. and his team would boast about using practical over digital effects, Universal was concerned they would make the film look dated and demanded they be almost entirely replaced with CGI.

How many times has The Thing been remade?

Two remakes of this film occurred in 1982 and 2011, each with the truncated title of "The Thing". They both occurred in Antarctica as in the original "Who Goes There?" story. It's very interesting that the 2011 is a "prequel" to the 1982 version. The German version shortened some scenes, e.g., Dr.

Was child infected The Thing?

With no other choice, Childs sacrifices himself to destroy the creature by blowing himself up while MacReady escaped the sub in a capsule. However, it would be later revealed that Childs was assimilated by the creature, who would later reveal itself to MacReady in Argentina.

What does the Norwegian guy say in The Thing?

During the opening of John Carpenter's "The Thing" (1980), the "crazed" Norwegian that accidentally shoots one of the expedition members shouts "Get the hell away from that thing. That's not a dog, it's some sort of thing! It's imitating a dog, it isn't real! GET AWAY YOU IDIOTS!!"

Was Lars infected in The Thing?

The next day, Matias returns to the research station to discover the carnage from the previous day and is accosted by Lars, who insists he proves that he isn't infected by showing his teeth.

Who is The Thing, Childs or MacReady?

Even back in 2004, when Carpenter had an idea for a sequel, he planned on having both Childs AND MacReady return. The writers and producers agree that neither were The Thing, even the actors themselves were told to act as if they weren't The Thing.

Who is infected at the end of The Thing?

Cundey suggested that throughout the film a specific light gleam can be seen in the eyes of whichever body is currently inhabiting the alien. A light gleam can be seen in Childs' eyes in the final scene, which would mean he's infected with the Thing under Cundey's theory.

Is Among Us based on The Thing?

Among Us was inspired by the live party game Mafia, and the science fiction horror film The Thing. The idea for the concept was originally given by Marcus Bromander, co-founder of Innersloth, who had played Mafia since he was a kid.

Is the thing 2011 bad?

Overall, as a film on its own, The Thing isn't terrible, but it isn't very good either. It didn't amaze me and it didn't do any of the things that a good horror film should. But when you compare it to the 1982 version it is a very bad film. It simply gets everything wrong that Carpenter's version got oh so right.

Why was The Thing badly received?

Upon its 1982 release, The Thing was panned by many critics, who nicked the film for its supposedly shallow characterization and over-reliance on gory, gross-out sequences. In his interview with Carpenter, Colbert also posed that perhaps the release of Steven Spielberg's E.T.