|
Films/DVD Asylum Movies from comedy to drama to your favorite Hollyweird Star. |
|
|
|
Films/DVD Asylum Movies from comedy to drama to your favorite Hollyweird Star. |
|
In Reply to: Re: "The Thing": 1951 Original vs 1982 Remake posted by BKing on October 4, 1999 at 18:02:57:
Hi BKing,
It has been said Nyby's directorial role was relegated to that of an
apprentice observing the master, in this case, Hawks; Hawks definitely ran
the show.
Carpenter's remake was closer to Campbell's story, which I suggest you
read as I think you'd find it entertaining and enlightening. The film's effects
certainly captured the amorphic duplicative ability created in the
story.
Roger Ebert criticized "The Thing" on superficial characterization,
story plausibility and the gruesome special effects; Pauline Kael and
Leonard Maltin criticized the character depth and overwhelming effects.
Reputedly characterization was never one of Carpenter's strong points; no
matter what one thinks about the film's other aspects, it is a strikingly
visual one. I don't think "The Thing" is for everyone, especially those
who are adversely affected by the type of effects created; I think many of
the older generation like things toned down a bit, whereas the younger
people prefer the standout effects. Luckily, we all have two different
versions to pick from; as I said , I like both of them for their respective
merits.
If you want to see some indepth text and photos on the 1982 film, check
out the website: www.powerup.com.au/~vampire
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: "The Thing": 1951 Original vs 1982 Remake - AudioHead 08:32:29 10/05/99 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
