Thread 213660643 - /tv/ [Archived: 47 hours ago]

Anonymous
8/14/2025, 6:01:44 AM No.213660643
2011thething
2011thething
md5: a12a33f3051345a6f639871bcaff9d5c🔍
What does /tv/ think of the 2011 The Thing film?
Replies: >>213660928 >>213661039 >>213661056 >>213661274 >>213662621 >>213664002 >>213664079 >>213664255 >>213665300 >>213665654
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 6:02:14 AM No.213660660
I don't
Replies: >>213662329 >>213665312
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 6:04:15 AM No.213660702
>The.Thing.1982.Collectors.Ed.1080p.BluRay.DTS.x264-NCmt
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 6:13:43 AM No.213660928
>>213660643 (OP)
If they released the pilot version and didn't cover up the practical effects it would've been a decent prequal.
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 6:15:19 AM No.213660971
it sucked. why make basically the same movie? they should have went with a different angle
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 6:17:18 AM No.213661023
completely unnecessary I never understood the “sequel prequel” to movies that were originally made in the 70s or 80s
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 6:18:13 AM No.213661039
Bend_thumb.jpg
Bend_thumb.jpg
md5: a76393d9fadf77e12c418f8ac9bd46b3🔍
>>213660643 (OP)
I kind of liked it, everyone else hated it.
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 6:18:46 AM No.213661052
I enjoyed it. MEW was in it as well so that was a nice bonus.
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 6:18:53 AM No.213661056
>>213660643 (OP)
>what if we redid the Thing but this time...
>we added women
>replaced practical effects with CGI
>made it a prequel so everyone knows how it ends and rob the finale of tension
Replies: >>213664580
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 6:22:39 AM No.213661139
cute MC
good as a prequel
bad as a movie
cgi is so atrocious it becomes ridiculous especially in the alien ship section
Replies: >>213664580
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 6:26:42 AM No.213661259
Next person to get dubs is The Thing
Replies: >>213661345
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 6:27:20 AM No.213661274
Body Count
Body Count
md5: 790b6ce19c6306c3f8c29c644c724e1e🔍
>>213660643 (OP)

I happen to like it. It's one of the big "fuck you I liked it" films here. A minority opinion.

I watched it in the theater near halloween and I actually got a bit scared when things were going south. Real shame about the practical effects, no one seriously disputes that, but I generally liked what I saw. Story makes sense relative to 1982 (the frequently leveled complaint about how the thing seems to be hyper-charged initially in 2011 is invalid), no silly love interest nonsense.
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 6:30:09 AM No.213661345
>>213661259
rolling
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 7:08:17 AM No.213662329
>>213660660
this
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 7:19:14 AM No.213662621
>>213660643 (OP)

There's a few good moments, but it's mostly just a worse version of the first movie. The Thing is just a lot dumber and just doesn't let the scenes breathe, it's all right in your face with cheap looking CGI (which was a last minute thing over the practical effects unfortunately), and no time for atmosphere. Just a cheap knockoff cashgrab that didn't pay off.
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 8:30:04 AM No.213664002
>>213660643 (OP)
its okay, not terrible, decent enough
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 8:34:35 AM No.213664079
>>213660643 (OP)
It's... fine? It's entertaining. Didn't need to be made, but was neat just the same. The worst part is how badly the SFX team got fucked over when the suits replaced all the godlike practical effects with okay-ish CG that looked nowhere near as good.
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 8:44:23 AM No.213664255
>>213660643 (OP)
The pilot animatronic was cool and would have expanded the lore of the thing. The tetris thing was somehow more accepted than the pilot, inconceivable! It was a neat effect but you could have had both.
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 8:45:11 AM No.213664267
Skip the first hour where nothing happens.
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 8:46:42 AM No.213664292
The thing short story through his poverty is something every fan should check out. It captures the holy mission of survival that it has and how it's absorption is a communion not an attack.
Replies: >>213665397
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 9:05:06 AM No.213664580
>>213661139
>>213661056
The CGI part is even more insulting due to the fact they DID have impressive practical effects for the movie but were cut out.
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 10:01:27 AM No.213665300
>>213660643 (OP)
Ting go skrrrrra
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 10:02:52 AM No.213665312
>>213660660
based
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 10:10:41 AM No.213665397
>>213664292

is it by this Watts author guy?
Replies: >>213665645
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 10:34:44 AM No.213665645
>>213665397
Yeah, that's the one.
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 10:35:25 AM No.213665654
>>213660643 (OP)
Goddamned awful.
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 10:38:59 AM No.213665692
I liked it but I had never seen or heard of the original before and my dad took me to see it in theaters.
Anonymous
8/14/2025, 10:40:15 AM No.213665702
Was alright but nothing special. I find it absurd that people are enraged at it. Sure the CGI-over-practicals shit was gay but the movie is pretty inoffensive, albeit obviously nowhere near as important as the first.