Making a classic remake of the genre is a very risky venture, so we can welcome the decision of the producers of "The Thing" to mask their project as a precursor to John Carpenter's 1982 cult movie. Moreover, this turns out to be their only the strongest trump. After nearly 30 years of cutting-edge technology, things are totally different, and it is practically impossible to repeat the furor caused by the revolutionary effects of Rob Botin's time-of-life, and the great Stan Winston. I admit that my memories of the first "The Thing" are related to a blurry image coming from a pirated video cassette and the drowning voice of a person in the media who translates all the illegal production. Still, I do not remember another movie I was more shocked about. That is why my expectations for the new version were related to the extent to which the spoiled eye of a modern viewer would be made if not to be out of horror, at least delicately to close in some places.
Here is the time to say that from a technical point of view, the film by the Dutch director-debutant Matthijs van Heijningen does not disappoint, but certainly does not bring the innovative spirit of his predecessor. Seeing him calmly from start to finish can mean many things, but perhaps the most important of them is that he lacks "The Thing" to separate him from the mass production that floods us daily. I am far from thinking that every film should be a masterpiece, but I'm definitely disappointed with the work of screenwriter Eric Haysser, who has done nothing but gathering the best clichés in the genre. You can be sure that just when someone is breathing heavily in the near future, there will be some tin cans to fall nearby, or the alien nausea will appear just as the hero thinks the danger has passed. Of course, there is also the hint of a final twist (no surprise from the point of view of the story), which is very original this time from the inscriptions.
The main thing missing in this new version is the skillfully created by John Carpenter of tension that arises between the characters and paranoia becomes the main engine of the action. Magnificently captured polar landscapes just cry for a psychological drama of the "group of people who are locked in one place, guess who the killer is." Here the confusion is reduced to a few scenes that make your last meal go the way it is came, and some really good sound effects. There is no development of the characters, and the viewer has nothing to do but to find out where to direct his sympathies almost in appearance. What rescues the film from a heavier fate is the exceptionally well-chosen cast, which, although not composed of stars, demonstrates enviable professionalism. Despite the difficult conditions and the lean scenario, we are witnessing a surprisingly good group performance that can be hard to separate. The lead role is entrusted to Mary Elizabeth Winchester, who despite her participation in several blockbuster, has no peaks in her career. With a great deal of certainty, I can say that the 2011 "The Thing" will appeal to all those who have never heard of John Carpenter's movie. For the sworn fans of the genre remains purely research interest. For all the rest, it will be another title that can be watched and may not be viewed.
