THE THING (2011) REVIEW - uninspired prequel, but could anything succeed the original?

1.5/5

Let's have a run down of some of the things that made the original so great:

1) Tension
2) Acting and charismatic lead
3) Ground breaking visual effects

Are these here in the prequel? No. no and no. Let's start with number 1: Tension. This is the fundamental problem I had with this. The original was built around tension and atmosphere. Such a slow burn, building slowly, who is human and who isn't? But instead here we see the "Thing" right away, it's blasting out of the ice (which is shocking because it goes against all the rules set up in the first one, but more on that later), it's running around, mutating at will. Where are the scenes of distrust? Besides one scene, basically lifted out of the original, explored the distrust and it worked, it was the most compelling part. I believe that conflict was replaced with cheap jump scares. This is down to the screenplay.

The screenplay further comes in for stick with the second point. Even with the best acting in the world (Joel Edgerton is criminally underused, ever scene he is in is instantly improved) there is a core issue here: We don't know or care about any of the characters. Without any attachment, do we care who dies and how? It is suggested there is something between Mary Elizabeth Winstead's Kate and Adam but nothing is explained. Ulrich Thomsen's Dr. Sander Halvorson is angry and authoritarian but why? He has a go at Kate at times but we don't ever know what his plan is or what his goals are. He isn't even angry, he's just mildly annoyed, but we never know why.

That is another thing, there seems to be a distinct lack of emotion. Mainly from main character Kate. She has little to do besides churn out theories (which prove to be true every time), but she doesn't grow throughout the film, she doesn't have any flaws to overcome, she is just there.

Much has been made with the decision to go with CG after initial use of practical effects so I will just say that the film is worse for it.

One last issue, the lack of consistency. The "Thing" seems to have different abilities depending on when it suits the plot. One stage limbs can call off and become sentient creatures but then *SPOILER AHEAD* during the worst 10 mins at the end of the film, Kate escapes down a vent in the "Thing's" ship. Why not detach an arm and send it down? Nope, instead send some tentacles, then bust through the wall (trashing your own ship in the process). The film just loses credibility at times like these

I will say this, I do not know what film could have competed with the original. It is widely loved. It makes use of a young Kurt Russel on top form, it's idea is fresh. I like the premise of this film, finding out what happened at the Norwegian base but maybe it was doomed to start with. Matthijs van Heijningen Jr is obviously a fan of the original, he exhibited amazing attention to detail with set design and tie ins to the original and what else could he have done? A rehash of the first one that plays out exactly the same? It would have never had lived up and it didn't. If this film existed on it's own and not burdened by the original would it be better recieved? Probably.

All in all this film is a serviceable watch, you can tune your brain out and just watch for some mild shocks. But if you are after plot, character development, or suspense look elsewhere. Better still WATCH THE ORIGINAL.