AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › The Thing (2011)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Thing (2011)

post #1 of 80
12/4/11 at 2:09am
Thread Starter 



Quote:


Commentary with Matthijs Van Heijningen and producer Eric Newman
Two behind-the-scenes featurettes:
- The Thing Evolves
- Fire & Ice
Deleted/extended scenes
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #2 of 80
12/4/11 at 3:38am
I take it there is no (better) re-release of the 1982 version planned?
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 80
12/4/11 at 3:53am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenUK View Post

I take it there is no (better) re-release of the 1982 version planned?

























nope
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 80
12/4/11 at 9:42am
I actually became depressed after watching this. I felt as if all the goodness in people had faded away and all there was was ugliness and despair.

*Also shouldn't the Norwegian who shoots at the husky from the chopper have frosted sunglasses? How did they miss that?
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 80
12/4/11 at 11:01am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fanboyz View Post

I actually became depressed after watching this. I felt as if all the goodness in people had faded away and all there was was ugliness and despair.

*Also shouldn't the Norwegian who shoots at the husky from the chopper have frosted sunglasses? How did they miss that?

I noticed that too. Sitting in the theater at the end of this when the music begins I thought to myself, now the good part starts!!! Then the credit rolled!!! It just made me want to see the real deal again. There was no need to make this movie, just Hollywood cashing in. I wish someone would remake Hollywood.

No need for me to pick this one up. I own the HD-DVD and blu of the masterpiece.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 80
12/4/11 at 7:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenUK View Post

I take it there is no (better) re-release of the 1982 version planned?

What was wrong with it. For a 1982 film the BR looks pretty damn good and while the sound wasn't the best there's only so much you can do with a 30 yead old film.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 80
12/4/11 at 7:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite Dan View Post

there's only so much you can do with a 30 yead old film.

well, you can start by doing what you can do
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 80
12/4/11 at 11:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by neveser View Post

I noticed that too. Sitting in the theater at the end of this when the music begins I thought to myself, now the good part starts!!! Then the credit rolled!!! It just made me want to see the real deal again. There was no need to make this movie, just Hollywood cashing in. I wish someone would remake Hollywood.

No need for me to pick this one up. I own the HD-DVD and blu of the masterpiece.

So I take it...it wasn't all that great. I'm pissed I missed it at the Drive-in when it played there. Then I heard it wasn't all that good. My thoughts were, how can you mess up a classic...even a remake of a classic?

I still want to see it though.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 80
12/5/11 at 1:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite Dan View Post

What was wrong with it. For a 1982 film the BR looks pretty damn good and while the sound wasn't the best there's only so much you can do with a 30 yead old film.

A 4K remaster would be nice.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 80
12/5/11 at 7:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thebarnman View Post

So I take it...it wasn't all that great. I'm pissed I missed it at the Drive-in when it played there. Then I heard it wasn't all that good. My thoughts were, how can you mess up a classic...even a remake of a classic?

I still want to see it though.

The Thing and Alien are my top 2 sci/horror flicks. So I was excited to see this, but I knew the potential for it to suck was there. And suck, it did. I won't go into spoilers, but there's just no chemistry between the actors. There's a lot of repetition from the first, yet somehow it's just not pulled off well. It seems like someone got an idea while sitting at home watching the original while high and thought "dude, how about this!" There is something small there that the movie seems to revolve around for a bit. It's was not enough though. I don't want to go into it because I don't wanna spoil it for people who haven't seen it. Just rent it. It's probably worth it just to see it and make you realize just how good JC's version is. I was ticked that I paid full price to see it in the theater. I should have went to the matinee or rush hour show!!!
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 80
12/5/11 at 9:31am
I enjoyed it. I'd give it a B/B+ and the original an A+.
I'm curious about the extra scenes.
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 80
12/5/11 at 11:07am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenUK View Post

A 4K remaster would be nice.

The Digital Cinema version has the DNR so I think its never going to happen at this point.
Plus it sold and they just repackaged it in the UK.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 80
12/5/11 at 11:45am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

The Digital Cinema version has the DNR so I think its never going to happen at this point.
Plus it sold and they just repackaged it in the UK.

Its also a Universal title, which is depressing, and understandable as to why a better version is (even more) unlikely.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 80
12/5/11 at 11:48am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenUK View Post


Its also a Universal title, which is depressing, and understandable as to why a better version is (even more) unlikely.

The HDDVD was just fine however
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 80
12/5/11 at 11:52am
I was really hoping for a Director's Cut with the practical effects and the story, character moments and dialog reinserted into the film. I think I'll pass on this release.
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 80
12/5/11 at 11:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

The HDDVD was just fine however

Someone should mux the video encode from the HDDVD and the DTS-MA from the BD to make a proper BD then. Yeah.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 80
12/5/11 at 12:09pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Simonian View Post


Someone should mux the video encode from the HDDVD and the DTS-MA from the BD to make a proper BD then. Yeah.

It's been done....
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 80
12/5/11 at 12:29pm
Just watched it. It wasn't bad and I enjoyed it but the original was the best. Also at the end how did they screw up the guys googles!
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 80
12/5/11 at 2:11pm
I saw this in Oct and enjoyed it. I'm a big fan of the original, it is one of my all time favorite horror films. There is no way this was going to compete with that even if our minds hadn't already been made up about it.

The character development was shallow and CG was a bit overdone but apart from the glasses they did a good job of connecting it to the original I thought. I've certainly seen much worse prequels.
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 80
12/5/11 at 2:32pm
For all of the decent little ways how the movie catches up to Carpenter's original, y'all are hung up on a pair of sunglasses? I watched Thing '82 right after Thing '11 and I can't say I noticed anything about matey's goggles. I'm not saying that there isn't a difference, but it certainly didn't leap out at me.

As for the movie, I liked it. It's not a patch on the original classic but it's not horrendously bad - it avoids the usual prequel pitfall of completely undermining the film that is supposed to follow it - and I'll definitely be getting this on Blu.
Reply
Reply
post #21 of 80
12/5/11 at 2:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

It's been done....

Well....

You holdin' out on me, bro? Give it here!
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 80
12/5/11 at 3:31pm
Let's be honest, you could have an 8K scan and there would still be multiple complaints on this site. People were bitching about the Thin Red Line and that transfer is gorgeous if you just sit down and watch it instead of reaching for the scalpel. Most people here don't watch the movies. They hover over the screen with a magnifying glass looking for every little flaw that appears for 3 seconds and declare the transfer utter garbage. It's thier hobby.

My hobby is enjoying films and BR is a big improvement over the DVD (which The Thing definately is). Especially when it's unrealistic to expect a movie like this (a famous movie but not considered iconic by the average joe) to get a 4K transfer. The studios aren't gonna foot the bill, whether that's right or wrong is inconsequential. But I'm happy the BR is quite good. I do agree that blockbuster movies like Star Wars should get a 4K transfer considering how many sales it will make.
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 80
12/5/11 at 3:37pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite Dan View Post

Let's be honest, you could have an 8K scan and there would still be multiple complaints on this site. People were bitching about the Thin Red Line and that transfer is gorgeous if you just sit down and watch it instead of reaching for the scalpel. Most people here don't watch the movies. They hover over the screen with a magnifying glass looking for every little flaw that appears for 3 seconds and declare the transfer utter garbage. It's thier hobby.

My hobby is enjoying films and BR is a big improvement over the DVD (which The Thing definately is). Especially when it's unrealistic to expect a movie like this (a famous movie but not considered iconic by the average joe) to get a 4K transfer. The studios aren't gonna foot the bill, whether that's right or wrong is inconsequential. But I'm happy the BR is quite good. I do agree that blockbuster movies like Star Wars should get a 4K transfer considering how many sales it will make.

The non Criterion Thin Red Line is a fine disc indeed.
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 80
12/5/11 at 4:01pm
Evil Dead 1 has a modern 2k transfer and looks perfect. The resolution is not the problem, it's the denoise filtration getting done at encode time that effectively lowers the resolution to 720p. Universal is the worst, they are clueless.
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 80
12/5/11 at 4:09pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FitzRoy View Post

Evil Dead 1 has a modern 2k transfer and looks perfect. The resolution is not the problem, it's the denoise filtration getting done at encode time that effectively lowers the resolution to 720p. Universal is the worst, they are clueless.

Perfect? not by a long shot, better definitely but in no way perfect
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 80
12/5/11 at 6:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite Dan View Post

Let's be honest, you could have an 8K scan and there would still be multiple complaints on this site. People were bitching about the Thin Red Line and that transfer is gorgeous if you just sit down and watch it instead of reaching for the scalpel. Most people here don't watch the movies. They hover over the screen with a magnifying glass looking for every little flaw that appears for 3 seconds and declare the transfer utter garbage. It's thier hobby.
.

Isn't running a magnifying glass over transfers, and pointing out flaws, no matter how small, why we're here and not on a forum dedicated to the enjoyment of movies, no matter if they're faithful or not?
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 80
12/5/11 at 6:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite Dan View Post

Let's be honest, you could have an 8K scan and there would still be multiple complaints on this site. People were bitching about the Thin Red Line and that transfer is gorgeous if you just sit down and watch it instead of reaching for the scalpel. Most people here don't watch the movies. They hover over the screen with a magnifying glass looking for every little flaw that appears for 3 seconds and declare the transfer utter garbage. It's thier hobby.

right... because the only possible positions one may take on a release are gushing fanboy and vitriolic hater What's wrong with complaints? Can an otherwise very good disc not have shortcomings (never mind that The Thing isn't in the same league/ballpark/sport as TTRL)? Can you not handle adult discussions about them without resorting to petty ad-hominem attacks?
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 80
12/6/11 at 5:49am
Back to the topic at hand...
I had high hopes for this remake.
I have no problem with remakes, it's always nice to see what a new generation of film makers can do with a great sci-fi story.

Sadly, the main problem besides the uneven effects, is the monster.

It was more concerned with jump scaring the cast instead of acting rationally.

In the first film, "thing" was smart and there was a real sense of dread.
It would not leave its host unless it had to.
The new movie, it busts out at the drop of a dime.
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 80
12/6/11 at 8:19am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Schiller View Post

Back to the topic at hand...
I had high hopes for this remake.
I have no problem with remakes, it's always nice to see what a new generation of film makers can do with a great sci-fi story.

Sadly, the main problem besides the uneven effects, is the monster.

It was more concerned with jump scaring the cast instead of acting rationally.

In the first film, "thing" was smart and there was a real sense of dread.
It would not leave its host unless it had to.
The new movie, it busts out at the drop of a dime.

It's a prequel not a remake, although the title would lead one to assume otherwise. Yes, I agree and it was a fear I had going into this that CG scares would replace atmospheric tension as they do in so many horror films these days. I enjoyed the movie more that I thought I would and again appreciated the continuity to the first but would have liked more subtlety and suggestions than creatures running after victims.
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 80
12/6/11 at 9:17am
I liked the movie. Didn't love it, but will get it on Blu Ray. Yeah, I actually posted that.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › The Thing (2011)