What an utter garbage, especially compared to the far superior and faithful 1982 version. Can't believe some of you even praised this. It's just another forgettable straight to tv movie that essentially just reused the frankenstein costume to a pathetic effect. Disgraceful.
shareThe 1982 version is the most overrated film of all time, in any genre. So what if the 1951 film is not exactly like the book, as long as the writing, acting and direction are all first-rate, as they are here? One thing I find hilarious is that the same idiot fanboys who condemn this film while drooling all over Carpenter's for being allegedly "faithful" to Campbell's novella will also praise Paul Verhoeven's desecration of Heinlein's Starship Troopers for being UNfaithful to its source material.
shareIf anything, the 82 version was criminally underrated. It bellyflopped hard on its theatrical release and over the years has gained the status it rightfully deserves through word of mouth. So much so that when there were rumblings of a remake a few years back, the guys that were taken on to write it convinced Universal that the only way to do it would be to make a prequel because the Carpenter version was simply untouchable in terms of suspense, drama, horror and above all, effects.
How many movies get a prequel thirty years later? Not bad ones that for sure.
Families is where our nation finds hope. Where wings take dream
Criminally underrated? That's a laugh. It has the most annoying and irritatingly obsessive cult this side of Star Trek, and is a thoroughly mediocre film, without scares or suspense, whose popularity says more about the contemporary tendency to put special effects over substance.
shareA mediocre film? You are obviously arguing for the sake of it. No suspense? No scares? Are you kidding?
The direction, writing and acting are absolutely top notch. No amount of trolling will change that.
I'm out.
Who's the troll here? The brainless adherents of the Cult of Carpenter-like the original poster- just love to come here to the message board of the 1951 film, and bash the film for the hell of it as a form of pathetic infantile geek therapy. They still hold a grudge over the fact that their favorite film didn't make the billions they thought it deserved, and was properly recognized as a pile of *beep* in its original run, especially when compared to the film it was remade from, a science fiction classic that was justifiably regarded as a masterpiece for over four decades until a brainless contingent of cinematic illiterates started trashing it sight unseen. Neither I, nor anyone else capable of thinking for themselves, will be scared by a film just because you and thousands of others tell us we should be, nor a loud and obnoxious fan base make a movie good. I speak for thousands of fans of the Hawks-Nyby original when I say: BITE ME, JOHN CARPENTER!
shareI find no reason to disparage one or the other. Both versions are fantastic. Both were ground breaking for different reasons. I grew up loving the '51 version. So, when i first watched the '82 version, i thought it WAY to over the top with the gore. I found it disgusting! So much so that it really took away from my appreciation of the film. Probably the most disgusting film i've ever seen until the recent run of slasher films that nothing more than gore fests.
But over time, perhaps because i've become desensitized, the gore doesn't take center stage like it did. I love the atmosphere of the film. The pacing of it, the neurotic distrust. The terror. It's Carpenter's best. Carpenter did a very wise thing in going back to the actual story for material. This way Hawkes version and his version can stand side by side instead of competing with each other.
But yet, people find a way to knock each version anyway
I think they are both masterpieces of their generation.
.
@SimplySteve
How do the angels get to sleep when the Devil leaves his porch light on?
Actually being as it was made in 1951 it's very unlikely it went straight to TV right away for the simple reason that a lot of people didn't have TV sets as yet back in 1951. Remember this was just a few yrs after WWII and winning a TV set on a game show was considered a great prize as they were so expensive. I remember hearing that when my paternal grandfather bought their 1st TV back in the 50's my grandmother wanted to know why he'd bought that thing for. Between the expense of a set and some people not thinking much of it (the idiot box as some call it even today) it wouldn't have paid the studio to have it on TV right away. Granted that some movies did go to TV early on they weren't necessarily brand new ones.
shareYes, The Thing made use of the Frankenstein monster as a model for Arness' character. Karloff's 1931 portrayal of The Monster became an instant cinematic archetype for horror and has been used by directors producing all genres of film. Your criticism of The Thing based on this particular detail begs the question: So what?
It is clear from your tone that you did not like this film. Why not simply say so instead of taking this cheap shot?
By the way, as another poster has already explained the reasons why, there were no "straight to TV" films being made in 1951.
In my opinion, the contrast between The Thing and Plan 9, other than the obvious differences, is sharp.
Howard Hawks' The Thing, made in early 1951, is a dramatic Hollywood production that established the look and feel of scifi/horror films for the decade to come, while Ed Wood's Plan 9, made in 1959, is a cheap satire that looks backwards on scifi/horror films, and in its cynicism renders the genre as absurd and valueless. In short, the former builds, while the latter destroys.
Mike, you're just tossing out some bait, ain'tcha.
Short Cut, Draw Blood
[deleted]
Wether you're saying this because you believe it or you're just trolling doesn't make any difference because either way you're still an idiot.
shareWhat a moron
shareWho says Plan 9 from Outer Space is supposed to be a bad movie anyway? Oh, right...
Still, it'd be more respectful to call this film overrated (not that I think it is) than to compare it to Plan 9.
Hey there, Johnny Boy, I hope you fry!
Everyone fell for this mike's bullcrap statement.....he was just trolling....what a retard....
share