Name a flaw

Name a flaw
you can't

there's a nigger in it

...

John or James

I literally can't.

In fact with the Holy Trinity of Carpenter (The Thing, Big Trouble in Little China and Escape from NY), you can't find a single flaw. It's perfection.

No womyn.
except for the Thing

That's Keith David you fucking plebian faggot

LA>NY

Character drama is weak outside of a handful of scenes. With 'Night of the Living Dead' George Romero handled the premise of manly men disagreeing while fighting monsters tighter than anybody else has since.

I think that his 'Dead' trilogy is still the best thing to ever happen to horror. I love John Carpenter but also think Sup Forums has a bit too much affection for The Thing. Why can't we ever have a 'Prince of Darkness' thread?

The Thing is literally the Top 5 movie ever. But if I really wanted, I could bitch about the dog thing escaping through the roof and no one ever mentioning it ever again.

They Live > Escape from NY/LA

The Thing is probably the only movie Sup Forums agrees on.

Just stop

Prince of Darkness was trash.

If Norris wasn't the Thing, he's dead.
You don't make an incision from neck to belly, causing a massive hole where his chest should be, and put a defib unit literally on his organs and expect to save the guy.

>Character drama

What the fuck does this even mean, you pseudo-intellectual, cock-snivelling, buzzword-consuming faggot, you fucking sistershagger you?

I thought it was pretty awesome for a small low-budget production. I liked the unique approach to hell and the end of the world. The whole thing does a good job of feeling creepy and hopeless.

drama between characters, as opposed to drama because they're a giant fleshy man-eating alien screaming in everybody's faces. I thought it was a pretty straightforward term. Am I going to get shit for saying 'straightforward' now? With my stupid useless fancy college edication makin me think i'm lernd an such?

>drama between characters

The movie was literally loaded with your precious "drama between characters", you braindead you.

I loved when The Thing tried to put suspicion on others just to fuck with them (Palmer->Windows, Blair->Clark)

>literally loaded
Well you sure showed me.

Really though, I think a few fewer characters and more discussion between the ones we got would have helped to really get across exactly what everyone thinks of the situation and why they're acting the way they are. Night of the Living Dead clearly divides the main two characters over the issue of whether to fight or hide and that's where all the conflict stems from. In The Thing the protagonists don't really seem to have any motivation more specific than 'not dying' for most of the movie so the tension never gets much more thoughtful than everyone yelling at each other and panicking.

There are great scenes like the doctor freaking out and I like how Childs seems to dislike McCready appointing himself leader but I think the movie needed to do more with its characters.

>but I think

Your first mistake. You're obviously not put on this planet for such things.

Oh shit forgot about that.
So it's the holy quaternity?

What's the point of this thread if we're not going to discuss 'The Thing?' You probably think you love the movie more than me, but if that's right how can you have nothing to say about it? I don't dislike the movie at all, in fact I actually like it so much that I'd have seen it nearly ten times, but I've noticed things I think the movie didn't handle too well over the course of these viewings and I'd like to see what other fans really think about these issues.

Do you really like The Thing? If you do why are you stifling discussion in this thread?

did the monster represent feminism?

Excellent post. I've watched the movie a number of times, and can see what you're talking about. I wonder if a modern tendency to make longer movies affects your opinion. But then I would need to know your viewing habits, which I don't.

That said, I think there are some very clever bits that show what the characters are thinking through actions. You mentioned two; I would add the beginning scene with McCready playing chess. It's a great insight into how his mind works (lost the game? change the rules).

I do like how in ways that aren't blatant but are still clear the movie tells us what the characters are like, but I'd have liked it if it felt more like these traits and thoughts actually influenced what was going on. Aside from McCready, Childs and the doctor though I don't really think the cast's individual characteristics affect the events of the movie in any substantial way, if at all.

I'm sure each actor had in their head a little idea of how their character would be assessing the situation, but that never really comes into play at all, which seems like a shame with a premise like The Thing where the monster really works well with an ensemble cast. Childs seems to dislike being told what to do and gets abrasive, while McCready like you said responds to problems with ingenuity, and that's great. But unfortunately most of the encounters with the monster to me seem like they would have played out more or less the same if most if not all of the characters present were replaced with different people.

I sort of get what you're trying to say, but The Thing does a pretty good job with character interaction. It's mostly focused on the isolation and body horror aspect, but it still had some great dialogue even when it didn't: Childs and Macready at the end.

???, still a nigger is he not?

Sorry bro but The Thing had great character interactions and didn't need them going beep boop I am scared here is an essay on why every 5 minutes.

It's tight and you can grasp all this from either the dialogue, the way the characters act, or body language. up to you to figure it out, and it's not very hidden

no, he's the rare black man

I too liked PoD. The end with the mirror had me sweating and is imo almost better end confrontation than the things. That said The Thing is still way better.

The mouth of madness had potential to best The Thing but it somehow fell short. Tmom's kind of horror really fucks my shit up.

>in fact I actually like it so much that I'd have seen it nearly ten times
Is this bait? I'd put a low estimate of how many times I've seen this movie at 100x, and that doesn't even seem like that much considering how old it is. Even if you were born in 90, that's like less than 3x a year.

When I first saw this movie, I must've been 7 or 8. Since then I've watched the shit out of it every so often, and more recently (maybe a year or two ago) spent a weekend binge watching it over and over trying to find flaws and see for myself who is really what.

I understand you saying you actually like it, but 10 watches is in no way proof of this or anything to brag about.

>muh autism

I don't need people telegraphing how they feel constantly to feel involved in what's happening or anything, what I'm saying is I find it more interesting if I know what their specific interests are and can see that their actions are tying into that.

In Night of the Living Dead Ben is a hothead who wants to break through the zombies while the more conservative Harry wants to hunker down. Everything they do throughout the entire movie ties into these conflicting ideas and it makes all of their actions and conflicts feel natural and nuanced. I'd like that kind of stuff in more horror movies.

The mirror stuff and a couple of other scenes in Prince of Darkness I think are the scariest work Carpenter ever produced.

Fair enough I suppose. I think I've seen Phantom of the Paradise at least 5 times in the past year. There's liking a movie then there's real commitment. I'm not a massive fan of The Thing but I do like the movie.

>I'm sure each actor had in their head a little idea of how their character would be assessing the situation, but that never really comes into play at all
Were we watching the same movie?

Some just chill out like just whatever, while others are totally on edge and yet others are freaking the fuck out. If you're not thick as fuck you can easily tell when paranoia sets in with each character and how they handle it, it might as well be beating you over the head with a hammer.

>every black man ever was a nigger
>every white man ever was white trash
(you)

We can tell how they're feeling sure, but how often is that really a substantial factor in how things play out? Everything in Night of the Living Dead comes back to the nature of the two protagonists, while in The Thing a lot of the cast feel like cardboard cutouts to shout and fill screen-space for all the weight they have in individually swaying the events of the movie.

your autism

Okay now I do see what you're trying to communicate, I think. If I had to say, it was a product of the time. A lot of Carpenter's work was ahead of it's time (overall plot, effects, atmosphere), but was still affected by the time period (some characters are a bit over the top to add tension without subtlety). If you watch other movies at the time, this was a pretty big trend. Carpenter went really easy on it compared to other movies around it at the time.

Oh yeah, of course. By the standards of the time and place The Thing stands above pretty much all contenders by far, but do you remember what OP said? 'Find a flaw.' I like The Thing, and I don't really even consider the characterization to be a real weakness, but if there's one thing I'd call a flaw in the movie it'd probably be that.

Dog-Thing never escapes through the roof, its appendages break through the ceiling and grab onto the rafters and pull itself up, which is why you see it hanging from the ceiling before it gets torched.

Ah, it's early and I'm tired and have been drinking and have forgotten the actual subject of the thread... it just blended in my head with every other Thing thread, my bad.

The Thing is definitely in my top 5, but not flawless. If you really spend time trying to pick it apart you can and I wouldn't disagree that one of those flaws could easily be a few cardboard cutout characters that don't really serve any purpose other than creating drama and redshirt sacrifice.

Escape from NY is lame dude

triggered nigger

I'm as white as they come, negro, but I still understand the difference between a nigger and a black dude/chick.

Black dude/chick would be called an uncle tom or whatever by niggers, and niggers are basically chimps or in the case of Leslie Jones gorilla's.

You're lame.

I fucking love this movie, but I just rewatched it and remembered the scene where Blaire is using the computer... Outdated as fuck. It might have made sense back then, but really? A shitty animation to simulate the assimilation? Then the computer magically knows how to map disease vectors world wide? Maybe they cut out the month he spent coding?

That giant thing in the end doesn't look very good or interesting compared to the others

On the making of it was going to be done very different but Carpenter changed it and the effects guy was sad