The Thing

In a fitting tribute to the mashup monster at its chewy narrative centre, this latest version of famous horror property The Thing is a bit of a cinematic hybrid itself. Set up as a prequel to John Carpenter's stunning 1982 adaptation of John Campbell's story "Who Goes There?" (the basis for the also excellent 1951 movie The Thing from Another World), this Thing also operates as an occasional remake of Carpenter's movie. So it's both. Call it a premake. Or requel. Either way, this movie is soaked with Carpenter's influence, even as it tells a slightly different (or at least earlier) story. Director Matthijs van Heijningen Jr. clearly loves and respects Carpenter's Thing, but his adoration provides limited support for a familiar fright flick that is light on imagination and originality, both of which happen to be pretty important things.

Fleshing out events only hinted at in Carpenter's version, this new Thing takes place at the Norwegian research facility referenced in the previous Thing as the place where the mysterious alien creature of the title originally wreaked havoc. Like Carpenter's version before it, the story is set in Antarctica and focuses on an isolated group of researchers finding out that some Things are nasty shape-shifting bastards that want nothing more than to eat you and then impersonate you in order to better their chances of eating everyone else. Not a bad plan and it works pretty well in both movies and both stations.

Based on Carpenter's movie, we don't know much about the Norwegian facility other than that the extraterrestrial monster completely trashed the place. This allows Heijningen and screenwriter Eric Heisserer to come up with their own story and simply tie it back to the start of the Carpenter picture. So what do they come up with? Pretty much exactly the same stuff that happens in Carpenter's movie, which takes place at an American research facility that has a lot in common with what we see here in Heijningen's version.

Apparently the alien Thing thrives on familiarity. In this particular case, so does its movie. The sets all look eerily similar, which isn't so farfetched given the basic necessities of such a facility and the challenges of setting it up in such a barren, remote land. But when specific situations start popping up and making Carpenter's group look like a bunch of copycats who are actually being copied themselves, well, it's all a bit too clumsily transparent. Heijningen and Heisserer cannot resist the urge to hew close to Carpenter's movie and walk a very similar path. It's an understandable urge, but not acceptable to the point that it should excuse the filmmakers from coming up with something fresh and fun.

There are a few novel attempts here and there, including an ending that takes the narrative to a place neither previous Thing movie bothered to explore. But even when this Thing tries something slightly new, it still manages to be quite dull. And that's where this dedicated Thing fan gets frustrated. The last thing a Thing movie (man, I'm writing "thing" a lot) should be is dull. But by insisting on playing it safe and sticking to a recycled template, Heijningen and Heisserer lend the movie an almost generic flavour that is rarely exciting. The movie does pack a few good jump scares and tension is built rather well at times, so it's not like this Thing is a completely hopeless bore. It's just fitfully watchable and nothing more.

The premise still intrigues and the creature itself is still a welcome villain, but The Thing keeps falling victim to a flat pace and one very woeful decision. Whereas Carpenter's Thing was brought to life by brilliantly executed practical effects courtesy of mad genius Rob Bottin, Heijningen's Thing is a disappointing mess of CGI. Bottin's tangible monster remains the product of an incredibly unique series of creature designs that defy classification and appear so original that it is plausible to infer that such a being could only come from another planet. This new Thing certainly features glimpses of Bottin's influence, but the digital effects are routinely underwhelming and the alien is afraid to try anything new at first. Eventually, it does commit a horrifying face-meld that is somewhat inspired, but it still seems like the monster became a whole lot more creative when it left the Norwegian facility and went on to terrorize Carpenter's characters.

The disappointment of the constantly shoddy CGI is too difficult to overcome, especially in the midst of such arbitrary mediocrity. But added to the list of the few things Heijningen gets right (at least the ending is entertaining and a nice nod to fans of Carpenter's remake) is the casting of Mary Elizabeth Winstead in the lead role of paleontologist Kate, who is invited to the facility to help analyze the then-frozen alien specimen. Winstead doesn't have a great role to play (clichéd gender roles still rear their ugly heads in the form of a pointless statement about women's lack of sports knowledge), but she is capable of unveiling a youthful innocence that is suddenly met with an impressive amount of strength and take-charge attitude.

Winstead is surrounded by a cast that pretty much toes the line between acceptable and forgettable. No one's really awful, but no one stands out and only Winstead made me care enough to remain invested in her fate. The rest of the cast falls into the same lame category as nearly everything else in this Thing. Not horrible or dreadful or anything as potentially funny as that, but rather just a big whatever that doesn't count for much on either side of the good or bad argument.

So what happened to you, Thing? You used to be so fun, so creepy, so gross, and most importantly, so original. This premake idea has certainly got you down, because you've never looked so tired and uninspired. I still feel you have life left in you, but perhaps it's time to try something new. Maybe get out of Antarctica or at least find a fresher facility to attack. That might do the trick. And while you're at it, try to come up with some new tricks, even though I do applaud you for the face-meld, which really was wonderfully disgusting. I'll always find some enjoyment in your gruesome, gory manner of messy murder, you crazy, wild Thing, but this is easily your weakest hour (and a half). Hopefully a lesson learned. Quit the premake business and try to remember that despite the digital tools currently at your disposal, CGI does not look good on you.