1. Sign-up to become a member, and most of the ads you see will disappear. It only takes 30 seconds to sign up, so join the discussion today!
    Dismiss Notice

Universal Sci-Fi

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by bob kaplan, Mar 10, 2002.

  1. bob kaplan

    bob kaplan Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 1999
    Messages:
    665
    Likes Received:
    101
    Trophy Points:
    610
    Real Name:
    bob kaplan
    Univeral is releasing IT CAME FROM OUTERSPACE. This title was once part of two fun LaserDisc "Golden Age of Science Fiction Thrillers" box sets. Has anyone any idea if other titles in these sets will soon make their way to dvd? I would like to see all of them!!
     
  2. Marty Lockstead

    Marty Lockstead Second Unit

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2002
    Messages:
    275
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hi Bob,

    I wish I had an answer for you regarding your question, but if I may, I have a question for you, is that the originol film that John Carpenter based his 1982 re-make of THE THING on? I'm curious to see it.
     
  3. bob kaplan

    bob kaplan Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 1999
    Messages:
    665
    Likes Received:
    101
    Trophy Points:
    610
    Real Name:
    bob kaplan
    Marty,

    The Carpenter Film was based on a 50's film called THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD which was based....(i think)on a short story called WHO GOES THERE....or something like that. i have not read the short story, but i understand that the Carpenter version follows some of the ideas of the short story more closely than the 50's version. i, myself am more particial to the 50's version.
     
  4. Rex Bachmann

    Rex Bachmann Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2001
    Messages:
    1,975
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Real Name:
    Rex Bachmann
     
  5. Jan Strnad

    Jan Strnad Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 1999
    Messages:
    1,004
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah, the only reason I can see to compare the 1951 version with Carpenter's is the title. The 1951 version indeed lost the shapeshifter element, but it's still a much better film, IMHO.
    I get out Carpenter's film every few years, usually wondering, "Now, what didn't I like about this movie?" Then I watch it and remember, "Oh, yeah...the characters."
    A lot is made in the commentary about the rapport among the actors during the filming, but absolutely none of that rapport exists on the screen. It's just a bunch of squabbling guys engaged in an extended pissing contest.
    I disliked Kurt Russell's character instantly. He's playing a computer game, loses, and empties his drink into the computer, frying it. What infantile behavior, selfish, petty and horribly inconsiderate of the other Arctic scientists similarly trapped there who might enjoy the game themselves. Okay, I get it that it's pretty much each-for-himself with this lot, but that's why the film never really engages me. I don't give a crap who comes out alive and who gets killed.
    Really, it's as emotionless a film as any I can think of, very cold (no pun intended), and it leaves me feeling that way...cold.
    On the plus side, the opening sequence with the dog is absolutely brilliant! I think it's no coincidence that it's also the first and last time I cared about any of the characters.
    The 1951 film was black and white, the effects are primitive by today's standards, the whole style is 1950s instead of 1980s. But it's excellently crafted, there's great interplay among the characters, and it provides thrills and chills to those who can get into the 1950s way of doing things. I can see that it would seem dated to younger viewers, but that's only because...it is dated! It's firmly rooted in its time period, but it's a period I enjoy, personally, and I find the original Thing From Another World enormously satisfying.
    No insult intended toward those who love Carpenter's film, BTW. To each his own. This is just my take on a couple of movies, nothing more.
    Jan
     
  6. Bryan Tuck

    Bryan Tuck Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2002
    Messages:
    1,729
    Likes Received:
    251
    Trophy Points:
    1,610
    Real Name:
    Bryan Tuck
    What's kind of funny is that Carpenter's film is almost a sequel to Hawks'. In an interesting homage, in the 1982 film, the team unearths some footage from the last encounter with the thing, and it is scenes from the original movie.

    I'm not a big Carpenter fan, but I respect him, because he knows his fans and makes his films for them.
     
  7. Chas_Michael

    Chas_Michael Second Unit

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2000
    Messages:
    441
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    John Carpenter usually cast's the right ppl for the main characters...I really enjoy his work.
     
  8. Julie K

    Julie K Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Messages:
    1,962
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have not seen the 1951 version, but Carpenter's version is very close to the original story. I enjoy it a great deal. I like the tension and hostility amoung the characters. It lends to the cramped and claustrophobic atmosphere I believe.
    Of course, anyone who enjoys the Carpenter film, or the original "Who Goes There" should check out the incomparable At the Mountains of Madness [​IMG]
     
  9. Jack Briggs

    Jack Briggs Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 1999
    Messages:
    16,738
    Likes Received:
    129
    Trophy Points:
    0
    But the 1951 flick has its own charming, almost innocent 1950s-ish appeal, which Carpenter forsook in the name of contemporary hipness. "Keep watching the skies!"
     

Share This Page