why is THE THING (2011) a worthy prequel?

Sky, ah, yes, Planet of the Apes, didn't like that film at all. But yes keep-itreal, The Thing 2011 was a) a good old-fashioned monster-morphin' film, if you like that sorta thing, which I do/did and b) it did EXACTLY what a PREQUEL should have done i.e. it got you to the original and made you wanna rewatch that. It has all the relevance IN THE WORLD to what happened with Prometheus, the prequel that never was*. *Yet was marketed as a prequel RIGHT UP UNTIL THE END, when they had to come out and admit they HADN'T SUCCEEDED in keeping their 'promise'. Maybe next one isn't called PARADISE but is called PROMISED LAND for the debt it owes its own narrative questions. When they finally GET TO ALIEN in some prequel-like fashion.

Scott NEVER marketed the film as a prequel! To my recollection all he and everyone involved did was try to get it across toi people that it was NOT a prequel. They took the word ALIEN out of the title for that reason. Yet there are still to this day people who go see the film and bitch about how it's not a prequel and how it never showed how the SJ arrived on LV-426. Personally, I'm thrilled it wasn't a prequel. This way they can let the mysteries that made Alien so great in the first place remain mysteries as well as showing us more about the Engineer race and telling a completely new story. For the record, I like the prequel of The Thing. However, I do understand why a prequel of that nature is a bit pointless. We know how it's going to turn out. But like I said, I like it. Prequels like that have their place, I suppose but how many of them actually turn out decent? Most are shit. Ridley knows that. If you're a fan of Ridley's work then I would think that you would know that he's the LAST director that would want to tell a story that you know the ending of. Also, he might not go as far as, say, David Lynch but it's obvious he's not a director that feels or wants to have to EXPLAIN everything. In all, Prometheus was EXACTLY what they marketed the film as. A film with ties to Alien but DEFINITELY not a prequel. Ridley put the ending on to try and satisfy certain people but it seems all it did was irritate them even more. Most of the people who thing the prequel to The Thing is good are die hards. It feeds on our fondness of the original and gives us a similar but far inferior ride. Nostalgia does not make a great film. But it can make a bad or mediocre film seem great. This is also something Ridley would NEVER rely on as was the case with The Thing. Furthermore, the way she killed the thing at the end was about as horrible as it could get. I know the original was made in the 80's but did you have to rip off throwing an explosive into the mouth of the beast to kill it. Talk about something that's been done to death. That really was one of the biggest let downs in cinema history.

Engineering, Prometheus was MARKETED (by 20th Century Fox) as The Prequel to Alien. It was GOING to explain the Space Jockey (the real one) and 'scare the shit out of us', in Ridley's own words. Not 'some other back-engineering of the spacejockey tech, but the real snorkelguy, fossilised to his seat. Instead, Lindelof cranked up his LOST-like Mystery Making Machine and we still don't know a) where the REAL Ganesha Space Jockey came from or what it REALLY was, and b) we're still all not scared, not one of us. Funnily enough, as I was watching a REAL prequel, The Thing (2011), as soon as they started roaming around the Scandinavian base under torchlight, I instantly thought about one of my favourite TV shows, MOST HAUNTED. I know it's all fake or set up or scripted, but I just can't get enough of that trash. Ya know?

[url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-18298709]NOT A PREQUEL#1[/url] [url=http://www.hollywood.com/news/Prometheus_Alien_Prequel_Trailer/11677412]NOT A PREQUEL #2[/url] [url=http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2011/12/01/prometheus-isnt-an-alien-prequel-swears-fox-studio-chief/]NOT A PREQUEL #3[/url] [url=http://www.alienprequelnews.com/2011/11/fassbender-prometheus-is-not-prequel-to.html]NOT A PREQUEL #4[/url] [url=http://screenrant.com/prometheus-alien-prequel-noomi-rapace-rob-96519/]NOT A PREQUEL #5[/url] [url=http://popwatch.ew.com/2011/01/14/alien-prequel-prometheus-ridley-scott/]NOT A PREQUEL #6[/url] Seriously, there are pages and pages of search results for these articles and interviews. Do I need to keep posting them? BTW, some date back to over a year ago so it's not like they waited until the last minute to let people know.

it doesn't really matter if its prequel or not.

How does it not matter if it's aprequel or not? I think it has quite a bit of importance to fans. I would say most fans wanted a straight prequel and were very dissapointed that it wasn't one. Like I said, I'm of the opinion that the way they went was the best way to go. Too many prequels and remakes as it is. Funny how people bitch and complain about prequels and remakes then get mad that a director tries to do something original that really is the best of both worlds. Please let me know how it doesn't matter.

Quote=FreePlanet...[i]"*Yet was marketed as a prequel RIGHT UP UNTIL THE END"[/i] The below quote was taken from an MTV interview with Fox Filmed Entertainment CEO Tom Rothman. The interview was done on December 1, 2011. [i]"It is not [an 'Alien' prequel]. It's not," Rothman passionately defended when MTV News pressed him on the question at the Gotham Awards this week. "Hand on heart."[/i] Below was taken from an article posted on January 14th, 2011... [i]"Fox announced today that the project once known as “The Alien Prequel” has morphed into something else entirely — a film called Prometheus, slated for release March 9, 2012. The script, written by Scott and Damon Lindelof, will tell a completely different science fiction tale. “While Alien was indeed the jumping off point for this project, out of the creative process evolved a new, grand mythology and universe in which this original story takes place,” Scott explains in the press release. “The keen fan will recognize strands of Alien’s DNA, so to speak, but the ideas tackled in this film are unique, large and provocative.” Swedish actress Noomi Rapace (The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo) is already attached to star in one of the film’s five major roles, a “scientist” named Elizabeth Shaw."[/i] I do see what you're saying though. When they first started on the project it was an Alien prequel. But they gave plenty of warning that it wasnt. I see why and how some may be upset. I understand. I do.

[b][i]Once known as[/i][/b], prequel hard to refute then? Actually, being charitable to Scott and his Team, it seems that (as the Space Jockey tech was back-engineered to Engineer purpose) the Alien-origin narrative ideal was back-engineered to Neo-Franchise purpose. Remember, also, that the Alien-prequel project went through [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prometheus_(film)#Development]many stages over many years[/url] I refer the honourable gentleman to a phrase 'which was soon afterwards expressed as a then untitled prequel to Alien'. But, anyway, I've said this before, "We don't always get First Base truths out of art-directors like Scott," for example he reported that he was working on the Blade Runner Prequel until he admitted he'd be approaching a Sequel. Who can ever tell what goes on in a commercial artist's Corporate-Controlled i.e. [b]profit[/b]-driven mind.

@ Freeplanet... As Engineering pointed to many times and explained more than once - Prometheus is not a prequel to Alien. Yes, at one point in its pre-production it was a prequel to Alien, but it stopped being one the moment Damon Lindelof was brought on board to re-write the script. And from that point onward Ridley stated many, many times that Prometheus was not a prequel to Alien but a film "that explores its own mythology, but with strands of Alien DNA in the story".

Its amazing how people tend to change true facts around. Prometheous was never billed as a prequel when it day viewed on screen. Mr. Scott time after time said that the film would stand on its own. The problem with this franchise is that fans are in love with the Xenomorphs. They would love to watch the Xenos on film for two hours straight.

Ok I know it's a prequel to the John Carpenter film, but some things are similar to the 1952 classic "The Thing from Another World" by Howard Hawks. For example, the alien pilot is inside an ice cube as in the original; then this movie looks like a remake of the original and also a prequel to "The Thing" 1982.

Of course it has to do it since its a prequel...so leave that out, and you got nothing to praise about the piece of crap movie. No suspense, no thrill, nothing worthy to discuss about. Garbage ass movie, I can't believe you even mentioned this movie next to Prometheus as if it has any connection.

@ Shambalasaur- 'The Thing From Another World' was produced by Howard Hawks, the director was Christian Nyby! Just sayin' :-)

thanks for the correction Lone ;)

Minisuit, as I said, "I disagree with your review," this was a lovely film with a great cast of Scandinavian superstars. AND IT DID THE JOB.

Snorkel and the others, 1) explain the Space Jockey - didn't (so many reasons/issues) 2) get to the point where the distress beacon is picked up - didn't. I'll admit that P R O M E T H E U S wasn't a prequel, even though "that was it's purpose". Don't blinker yourselves, "You all wanted to know WHY Alien was." You were all let down. My REAL point here is, "Sure, things change, but they don't (necessarily) evolve." Q: is this 'prequelness' question even more contentious than that 'canon' questions?

ZZplural, on the 'patience' issue, I do hope you're right, I do hope the 'prequel' will finally arrive (and not be just some throw-away TV Series). Seriously.

A bit of a repeat of a post I made long ago, but- I wasn't impressed with 2011's The Thing, although (IMHO) it was a much better prequel than Prometheus was to Alien. My take on "The Thing (2011)" falls short of what I enjoy in a sequel, because; except for a few interesting novelties, IT WAS THE EXACT SAME STORY as John Carpenter's! No new ideas or enlightenment with regard to the events that would be portrayed just hours (in movie time) later. The Thing simply devoured/assimilated/destroyed the Norwegians and then a variation of it just escapes and does the same to the Americans and their camp. It did answer most of the questions asked 28 years earlier (in real time), but would have been a much better prequel if it had shown, for example: The Norwegians having gotten really, really close (because of smarts- as they were scientists, there for that specific reason- not randomly encountered lay people as many of the Americans were) to conquering this nemesis- but run out of time or resources or something. Then; by movie's end, the clever (or just lucky?) Thing could have (again- for example) outwitted the Norwegian's last survivors well thought out, absolutely foolproof & guaranteed to work plan- perhaps by some accident or other such reverse deus ex machina in that film. Then The Thing as a dog could escape one last time- leaving the viewer with exasperation, knowing that the Norwegians came THAT CLOSE to victory- and wishing that the Americans hadn't ignorantly killed; instead of wounding, the very last Norwegian who knew the secret to destroying "The Thing"- despite his language gap. THIS (the above) would have satisfied my requirement for creativity to the prequel of 1983's The Thing. Compared to this, Prometheus dropped the ball completely- due to Mr. Lindelof's worship of ambiguity, and his statement made in an interview that "inevitability is not interesting" and later, "What happened to the Space Jockey isn't important". He isn't creative at all IMHO, but perhaps would make a much better game show researcher- as he seems to excel at asking questions that defy continuity, and lack corroborative and conclusive answers.

Ah, no, hate to have to burst your bubble, but that dog didn't look at all like the one from the original. It didn't have the bandit-like face markings, it had black down one side of it's face where as the dog seen in the original had markings that caused it to look like it had a black mask over it's eyes. Sloppy, considering the amount of time and effort they put into fitting the rest of it in with the original.................. When I saw the dog they were using I groaned, shook my head and nearly walked out, but I'd paid good money to see it............... I mean, seriously? That hard to find a dog with similar, if not near identical markings? I think not.............. I also remember the Norwegians blowing the ship outta the ice........... Remember that bit, where the Americans find the video tapes? And you see a big 'splosion where they're digging the ship out of the ice? But, no, lets instead make that the ships engines starting up and throw the whole continuity thing out, shall we? Those 2 thing ruined the movie for me. That, and the CGI over good practical effects........................

[i]"Compared to this, Prometheus dropped the ball completely- due to Mr. Lindelof's worship of ambiguity, and his statement made in an interview that "inevitability is not interesting" and later, "What happened to the Space Jockey isn't important"." [/i] well put aircraftfixer, hence this thread. :)