The Thing (2011) (Blu-ray + Digital Copy) [Region Free]

Good quality and service

I bought both the original and this movie. Both films are brilliant. This newer film shows what happened when the alien was found in the ice so it is a sort of prequel to the original 80’s film. Both fab and worth watching.

*contains some spoilers*The Thing (2011) has received something of a critical drubbing in the press. Certainly, there's plenty of reasons to be cautious - marketed as a reboot (with the same title), yet tying in completely with the 1982 John Carpenter movie of the same name as a prequel. Then there was the strange gestation period where apparently, according to an interview with the writer on movie website Bloody Disgusting, various rewrites and reshoots were performed, and much of the original physical effects work was either removed or composited over in CGI.Anyway, for the laymen - The Thing is based on a classic short story, Who Goes There by John W. Campbell, Jr., written in 1938. It largely deals with the same plot - a group of Norwegian scientists literally fall onto the find of the century in the form of a giant, crash-landed alien craft in the middle of the Antarctic. Finding the crafts inhuman pilot frozen in the ice, they do what any good scientist would do and excavate it before taking the corpse back to base. Then the leader of the expedition, a doctor named Sanders, brings in an little-known paleontologist named Kate Lloyd, played by Mary Elizabeth Winstead (her character being a reference to 1951's The Thing From Another World).Naturally, things go awry on her arrival when they bore a sample of the creature from the ice-block, and it thaws out and escapes before assimilating the hapless base crew in a variety of somewhat disgusting ways. The Thing, you see, is an intelligent alien virus that can imitate any living creature.There are two ways to approach this movie - that of a fan of John Carpenters superior, and stone-cold-classic, 1982 "sequel", in which lies a path of possible disappointment, and that of someone looking for a good horror without any knowledge of it.As a horror, it works. It's actually quite a well made film, with a few problems exhibited through some over-zealous use of CGI and perhaps a little lack of imagination when it comes to the creature effects. But the point is there's very rarely a film released like this that goes quite as far out. The lead-in to the creature escaping has a great sense of dread, it's well directed visually and the actors, despite having little to play with (in this shortened Theatrical cut at least), really seem to be putting in their all. Joel Edgerton as chopper pilot Carter acquits himself well, and the various Norwegian characters are all, despite their sketched-over personalities, genuinely engaging in their performances.When The Thing does bust out, the film manages to maintain the doomy tone of the original, only at a somewhat more hyperactive paste. The Thing is a creature on the run and on the offense. Its motive seems purely to escape, attacking when cornered much like the original, only with an aggressiveness not seen in John Carpenters film. The movie gives way somewhat to a purely chase-the-monster framework towards the end, but MEW's Kate is a character you're happy to stick with and the film ends on a satisfyingly refreshing grim note.Now, I've mentioned the original a few times already - naturally, I'm a fan. Many fans of John Carpenters "sequel" are going to, maybe justifiably, loathe this film. It's pacing is too fast, I've already read unnecessary comments online about the female lead, plus it's very much a facscimile of a superior film. There are no suprises here. The motivation of the Thing might appear muddied in comparison to its need to hide in the original, but I'd argue that The Thing learns to hide after it's slaughtered again and again in this film.There are other issues, mainly of detail (how the ship is buried, how The Thing escapes its ice block etc), but a lot of complaints center on the use of CGI. Now, the effects in the original weren't perfect, but the amazing way John Carpenter turned the screw with his Kubrickian camera, long tracking shots and concentration on quiet moments of reflection and character added tension; so when it eventually bursts on screen in an explosion of rubber and vomit, you ARE genuinely shocked. And it holds up today. True, some of the effects are incredibly bad now, but they still work when the film is viewed as a whole and the surreal imagery really hasn't been beaten. Certainly it hasn't been here. Some scenes do manage to capture the feel of the beast, but overall the plastic CGI takes away some of the realism and the creature design has taken something of a dive. It's also lacking in green/yellow goo which made some of the original Thing scenes stomach-churningly horrid.I referenced earlier that there had been a lot of changes since principal photography by the studio, based on screening feedback. Now, I understand the importance of feedback in developing a movie, but Hollywood's filmmaking-by-committee has often been proved wrong, and on reading that interview I honestly feel the producers at Universal missed a trick. As a fan, I'd loved to have seen the original cut, sans CGI effects (they made them pracitcally to start) and with the extended scenes that allegedly contained far more character driven sections and gave the Norwegian cast members far more to do. For what its worth, it looks like these will be available on the Bluray disc, but it's an absolute shame that the longer, better paced and presumably more interesting to watch version will forever be under wraps. Here's hoping Universal sees fit to put out a Directors Cut.As it stands, The Thing 2011 is an above-average horror, and more than makes the grade compared to the recent glut of remakes and sequels. It might be a pale imitation of the film it segues into, but I can't say I didn't enjoy it. If you want an effective shocker with effects to make your loved ones gag, it's worth it. Just bear in mind if you're a fan of the original you might come away disappointed.

this film does the original proud and was very enjoyable

I had to look it up, but I think that this is supposed to be a prequel to John Carpenters classic "The Thing", which was itself a reimagining of the very old black and white film "The Thing From Another World"..But none of that really matters, as this is so similar to John Carpenters version that it's pretty much just an updated and more polished version with newer stars. So much so that they didn't change the name or poster. Which makes it all the more confusing when the end of one clearly links up with the start of the other..And much as I love Mary Elizabeth Winstead, the vague gender flipping of the main character from Kurt Russells one feels both unnecessary and gratuitous, not to mention a little insulting. I have a very high opinion of Winstead, but Russell is the stuff of legend!.And while this (sort of) gender flipping of characters is supposed to be modern, the more it's done just for the sake of it I think that it's going to get old fast, and very quickly date the film's it happens in. Sometimes it's great, but here it just feels a little forced..IF you have never seen the previous film, then maybe this is a good horror film. But if you love the previous one like I do, then this is largely disappointing, but maybe still worth checking out just the once..

Excellent

I stayed away from watching this as I'd heard it was a modern remake of John Carpenter's 'The Thing' and not a very good one. And this is the problem when you listen to reviews from morons with a chip on their shoulder (and there's quite a few!) or those who haven't actually watched the movie. Firstly, it's not a remake or reboot, it's a PREQUEL. Secondly, it's a bloody good movie. Why some people have difficulty understanding the concept that this movie is set prior to Carpenter's film, yet understand perfectly that Rouge One (with no Bothan spies in sight) is an immediate prequel to Star Wars A New Hope, sure beats the heck outta me. Okay, maybe it's the title that has confused these dribbling dullards, which admittedly was a very lazy and poor choice on the part of the film-makers to call it 'The Thing' when they could have better (and just as easily) called it 'The Thing: Norwegian Camp' or 'The Thing: Beginning' to tip people off that it's NOT a remake, re-envisioning or reboot of Carpenter's classic. So, now I'll repeat myself to be clear (I hope), the story here is set immediately BEFORE Carpenter's The Thing. The Thing is a precursor to The Thing. Let that sink in for a minute, or ten....Take your time, no rush. Alright, hope you get it now? OK. This dvd has some bonus features like deleted scenes, cast interviews, director's commentary and behind-the-scenes featurettes which are great. The only downside is the heavy reliance on cgi to augment the practical effects and the choice of not keeping fully with the aesthetic of the early 1980's (complete with ugly sweaters and equally ugly hairstyles) established by Carpenter's film, which is when this prequel was set.

Bought as gift for son. He liked very much.

très bon préquel du remake qu'a réaliser carpenter.

Me encanta esta película, vino como siempre viene todo en perfectas condiciones, el audio e imagen perfectas. El audio español castellano. Siempre he querido tenerla esta genial esta película.

Ma 1ère pensée en lisant le titre : un remake du cultissime film de John Carpenter 30 ans après l'original. Encore un et pourquoi faire?Heureusement les craintes se sont vite dissipées en découvrant non pas une nouvelle version truffée d'effets numériques, mais un bel hommage à l'original constituant en réalité un fabuleux prélude. Car ici tout est expliqué pour coller parfaitement aux découvertes des scientifiques américains conduits par Kurt Russell dans la base norvégienne désertée. Pourtant le pari était double car le défi consistait d'abord à situer l'histoire avant celle des scientifiques américains de 1982 et ensuite à se raccorder à l'univers visuel de Carpenter. Une reconstitution rétro était donc nécessaire. Eh bien, le défi est relevé haut la main !!! L' univers visuel et l'ambiance concordent parfaitement, avec un mélange de terreur, paranoïa et méfiance créé par l'isolement et le huis-clos comme dans le "The Thing " de 1982. Quant aux effets numériques, discrets mais utiles, ils contribuent à donner plus d'ampleur à la créature extraterrestre et à moderniser les effets spéciaux, tout en conservant cet aspect si particulier et saisissant dans le film de John Carpenter. Où comment la technique moderne s'aligne sur des effets spéciaux classiques d'animation mécanique.Mary Elizabeth Winstead n'est peut-être pas Kurt Russell, mais au rayon action et suspense, elle ne démérite pas et assure dans son rôle de scientifique paléontologue prenant conscience du danger qui décime peu à peu tous les membres de la base norvégienne. Bien sûr des questions demeurent : que devient-elle? Comme un écho à ce qu'il advient à Mc Ready à la fin du film de 1982. Belle ellipse!!!!La version de 2011 est donc un bel hommage au classique de 1982 et assure une très belle continuité avec ce dernier, que vous pourrez vérifier jusque dans les dernières scènes du générique.L'image est parfaite de jour comme de nuit, avec des couleurs vives, des constrastes équilibrés et des détails qui crèvent l'écran. Film vu en VOST : son puissant, remplissant tout l'espace sonore et parfaitement découpé sur tous les canaux. Irréprochable.Quant aux bonus, j'ai beaucoup apprécié le documentaire expliquant comment l'équipe technique a réinventé "The Thing" tout en collant parfaitement au film de John Carpenter, bel hommage rendu au maître du fantastique.Un excellent film fantastique qui ne trahit pas du tout l'oeuvre de John Carpenter. Laissez-vous tenter!

Achtung: Kann Spuren von Spoilern enthalten.Ich bewerte nicht die Qualität der DVD oder BluRay, sondern lediglich den Inhalt des Films.Ich habe die DVD soeben bestellt und habe den Film damals im Kino gesehen (und 1 Tag danach direkt wieder den alten Film auf DVD). Ich bin ein großer Fan von Carpenters "Ding", dieser hat mich mein halbes Leben lang begleitet und ich habe ihn sehr oft gesehen - für mich ein absoluter Meilenstein des SciFi-Horrorfilms und ich wage zu behaupten dass ich ihn beinahe auswendig kenne.Ich muss mich an dieser Stelle ganz klar zum Prequel bekennen. Ganz abgesehen davon dass wir hier grundsätzlich von einem absolut soliden Creature-Horrorfilm sprechen: Ich kann ehrlich gesagt nicht nachvollziehen wie manche Fans des Originals diesen Film enttäuschend finden können (vor Allem solche die nicht mal wissen wie der alte Film beginnt...). Ganz klar nutzt dieser Film CGI - aber das ergibt sich im Produktionsjahr 2011 eigentlich von selbst. Wäre heutzutage jemand mit Effekten wie zum Zeitpunkt von Carpenters "Ding" angerückt wäre der Film zwar eine Homage an den alten Film geworden, wäre aber an der Kinokasse und eben bei neuem Publikum komplett durchgefallen. Die Kreatureffekte sind allerdings ähnlich bizarr und das "Ding" kann von Liebhabern des alten Films sofort wiedererkannt werden. Was dieses Prequel meines Erachtens ganz klar heraushebt ist die unglaubliche Treue zum alten Film, hierbei wird mit keinem Aspekt aus dem alten Film gebrochen. Die Handlungsverläufe sind schlüssig, Szenen stimmen mit dem erwarteten Szenario im Großen und Ganzen überein, zudem werden verschiedene Fragen aus dem alten Film hier aufgeklärt. Eine solch respektvolle Handhabung gegenüber dem Original habe ich bisher bei keinem Prequel, Sequel, Reboot oder Remake (oder was auch immer) gesehen. Hierfür war ich damals im Kino zutiefst dankbar - betrachtet man im Gegensatz dazu doch ein paar Negativbeispiele aus anderen Filmen, wie zum Beispiel AvP (wo die Aliens viel zu schnell schlüpfen und wachsen, oder sich der Predator mit einem Menschen verbündet... Grrr, wie hab ich damals im Kino geflucht) oder SW - Epsiode 1 (Die Macht wird durch unglaublich unspektakuläre Bestandteile im Blut erklärt... Das war so als ob David Copperfield seinen Trick mit der chinesischen Mauer verraten würde).Auch empfinde ich persönlich die etwas andere Behandlung von Spannungsmomenten dieses Prequels als gelungen und auch schlüssig. Das "Ding" wird aus dem Eis geholt, ist übel gelaunt, hat keine Zeit zu verlieren und kann auch nicht wirklich strategisch vorgehen - da die Situation eben grundsätzlich von Anfang an für jede Person im Camp klar ist. Im Film von Carpenter kommt das "Ding" sozusagen unbemerkt in die Gruppe und kann anders, viel überlegter, vorgehen - erst nach und nach wird den Beteiligten klar dass sie es mit einem Alien zu tun haben und da ist die Situation schon nicht mehr überschaubar. Ich finde es sehr gut dass hier eben nicht mit den selben Mitteln wie im alten Film gearbeitet wurde. Der neue Film ist auf andere Weise brachial, funktioniert insgesamt weniger auf der psychischen Ebene - und wie gesagt: Ich finde das sehr gut und auch konsequent.Mit den gleichen Effekten und der gleichen Spannungsebene wäre dieser neue Film lediglich eine Kopie von Carpenters Film, stattdessen funktioniert dieser Film auch eigenständig sehr gut und fühlt sich eben nicht wie eine einfache Kopie des Originals an.Das grandiose, in den alten Film übergehende Finale setzt dem Ganzen die Krone auf. Am besten diesen Film anschauen und direkt danach den alten Film, dann erst wird wohl die tatsächliche Genialität dieses Prequels greifbar...