He doesn't say they're better. "More technical expertise" seems to imply that the effects took more effort to do, because CGI requires dozens of artists.
Roger Ebert seemed to not understand how The Thing worked as an alien. In his original review he outright lied and said that "people will disappear for a bit, and then round the corner with a wicked smile on their faces..." which never happens a single time in the Carpenter film.
He seemed mostly upset that Carpenter dare remake the 1951 film, which Ebert found to be nearly untouchable. It's the main reason why most boomers disliked the 82 film; the 51 film was such a timeless classic, and leave it to Hollywood to splatter it with gore and special effects. A huge reason as to why the 82 film developed a cult following and a serious reevaluation was that it was introduced to unbiased people who didn't grow up with a blind devotion to the 51 film. People today don't even know the 51 film exists, which does stink because it's a great film, but it means people today are going into the 82 film with fresh minds.
reply
share