why is THE THING (2011) a worthy prequel?

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. :)

That prequel was horrible. The reason that the thing original was so great was because there was no cheesy digital effects. They used real puppets that captured your imagination. The prequel was a bunch of virtual crap. a last ditch attempt to make a buck off a already existing fan base. I’m so sick of remakes and prequels. that’s how you know the end of the world is coming. Everything has already been invented. Anyway this fact speaks to the overwhelming awesomeness of Prometheus because it fought the odds in my onion.

So if a prequel answers ALL the questions (Star Wars, The Thing) it's bad. If a prequel asks new questions (Prometheus) it's bad. I am glad Ridley didn't answer the questions. Go Ridley!!!