Why Was the Thing Hated By Critics?

Saw this yesterday, and I thought it was amazing. Apparently it was panned on release by critics who labeled it "instant trash" and a "barf-bag movie." Why did this happen? The movie is easily 10/10

And was Childs a Thing?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/e5h9ZPBuBEs?t=3m18s
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cult_films
youtube.com/watch?v=3kk58TK0c6I
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

At the time it came out, audiences were looking for happy fun movies like E.T.

They were being bitches because this and blade runner weren't optimistic scifi movies like et

because a lot of great films are panned or not heralded as great when they're released

and I have no idea, my brain tells me mac was the thing for about half of the movie and childs wasn't infected but the thing got him by sharing the bottle

Critics and people hated Blade Runner as well.

Carpenter said childs was a thing yes.

Taxi Driver came out...

youtu.be/e5h9ZPBuBEs?t=3m18s

Films like E.T are the chains of cuckold chastity for the white race. They were the stepping stones to the complete infantilization of the white race that we're facing in today's capeshit climate.

Kek. Outlaw was alright, but HE MAD.

“John Carpenter and I worked on the ending of that movie together a long time. We were both bringing the audience right back to square one. At the end of the day, that was the position these people were in. They just didn’t know anything,” said Russell.

“They didn’t know if they knew who they were, but had you seen all the things in the movie, you’ve heard MacReady say, ‘I know I’m me,’ Well, you either believe him or you don’t. And Childs — you know, one of my favorite lines in the movie [is], ‘Where were you, Childs?’ And I think that basically says it all,” explained Russell. He continued, “I love that, over the years, that movie has gotten its due because people were able to get past the horrificness of the monster — because it was a horror movie — but to see what the movie was about, which was paranoia.”

Childs left his post
Said he saw Blair in the storm but Blair was in the basement at the time taking out he power.
Also his coat changed at the end of the movie.

I bought the film for 25p in CEX just for that commentary.

Amazing.

No. He only said one of them is the thing

If you notice, in the last scene the director made a big deal about russels characters breath being visible from talking and breathing. He went OTT with it even.

Childs was talking and breathing with no breath shown, which implies he was an alien.

>giving a shit about critics

Older critics were easily swayed by fucking anything and said everything was shit and modern critics give everything a pass and/or are paid.

>the director made a big deal about russels characters breath being visibl
No he didn't.

In the Mouth of Madness and Vampires got shitted on as well when they came out, but they've been gaining the respect now on later years.

Most of Carpenter's movies have been hated by the critics. Such is life when you're auteur as fuck but you mainly work in horror.

I really liked Carpenters' Vampires.
Probably my second favorite vamp movie ever. I loved how they were portrayed as mindless beasts instead of the usual aristocratic bullshit

I'll tell you a secret, OP. Critics are full of shit. They try and guide the public opinion based on who paid them the most. Which is why I think it's always hilarious when a critical failure is a massive commercial success.

If you really want to find out if a movie is good, you wait until years later when you can look at it objectively.

Critics also DESPISED Equilibrium when it came out. Now it's a cult classic.

>Now it's a cult classic.
Hardly.

Howdy hey, Sup Forums

That's a really bad reason

I've got proof.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cult_films

Where's yours?

If you look at it differently it's a logical reason.
Same reason why capeshit are all happy go lucky power of friendship films

in fact carpenter was made to do penance for the thing by making starman

>Same reason why capeshit are all happy go lucky power of friendship films
I see you never watched BvS.

he said nothing of the sort, you honkies

BvS is an attempt at a more dark and gritty cape movie and we all saw how horrible it was

>was Childs a Thing

Are we really going to do this again?

vampires doesn't have the scope of his other movies, the plot is predictable and contrived and the characters are anemic, but it's still pretty good

...

Translation: "I listened to the critics who told me it was horrible therefore it was horrible."

You missed the whole point of this thread, dumbass.

Ehhh no, Equilibrium is a style-over-substance Matrix rip-off.

user I watched the movie, BvS is horrible and as oyu might have realized what the post i replied to is talking about you dumbfuck

>y-your mom's name is Martha?
>wait, shit
>guess we're friends now
>let's quip around for 15 minutes while fighting a CGI gorilla
What a tonal masterpiece.

>Batman kills 50 people to grab someshit
>is unable to do so and loses the thing
>later grabs it off-screen
Masterpiece

>Lex Luthor was molested by his dad
>so now he's an evil asshole obsessed with proving that everyone is an asshole too
Wow, that's so dark and mature.

Real answer: a "The Thing" movie had already been made in 1951, which critics compared to Carpenter's adaptation (plus what said).

The original isn't very good, by the way.

>Superman is all about how Earth is his home, not Krypton
>An old fashioned farm boy that adores his adopted parents so much that he respected Papa Kent's dying wish not to be saved
>Calls his mom "Martha" instead of mom for some reason
>Girlfriend runs in and explains the situation

Lol

>Superman gets hit with a kryptonite gas grenade
>gets weakened, gets his shit stomped
>recovers
>his first action isn't to take away the gas grenade launcher and smash it or throw it on the orbit
>sure enough, a couple of minutes afterwards he gets hit by another gas grenade
???

>Real answer: a "The Thing" movie had already been made in 1951
It baffles me how many plebs around here don't know that.

>I loved how they were portrayed as mindless beasts

Have you seen The Strain? Overall the show is not great but the vampires are awesome.

>Why did this happen?

Because Carpenter didn't cast his wife in any of the roles - her two talents were always a highlight of his films.

Mcreadys breath was blowing like a fire extinguisher, every breath was billowing smoke.

Child however was almost none, they obviously heated the area as best they could to try push the idea he wasn't breathing

It's lighting. Things are perfect imitation anyway, Childs-thing would need breathing as much as a Childs-human. In the Bennings-thing scene (best scene in the movie) you can see his breath well enough.

Felt like more of an action-thriller than a horror-thriller desu

> breathing
> le kerozine
> earring
> muh video game canon
> le Carpenter said it!
> le molotov cocktail

They're all reddit memes with no basis anywhere. The R E A L question is why did Childs do such an out-of-character shit and leave his guarding place to supposedly chase someone into the storm?

But yeah, keep wasting your time discussing the breathing, you brainless cretins.

Because it was too post horror for them.

>people keep talking about the Childs Thing memey

Stop.

He's not a Thing. You can see his breath. It's so thoroughly-debunked that if you take it seriously you're admitting to trolling.

MacReady was the thing, he didn't attack Childs because he had a flamethrower but he left his alien cells in the bottle and when Childs took a sip, he got infected. See how MacReady starts laughing when Childs drinks and the ominous music starts playing at the same time.

>He's not a Thing. You can see his breath
The breath is not necessarily canon. Find a reference to visible breath for that scene in the script and then you might have a point.

Carpenter has also indicated, or better suggested, that both characters were still human. It depends on what year Carpenter's being interviewed.

The truth of the matter, what is really going on, is that Carpenter is intentionally vague, self-contradictory at times, and /mysterious/ about teh question, because he's an actual artist and he understands that in order for his work to stand the test of time, it is necessary to preserve what is so wonderful about it: its /mystery/. Whether you like his movies or not, David Lynch is also a true artist because he understands the value and importance of preserving mystery in his art as well, for roughly the same reasons. Explaining a movie in full is the same thing as dissecting a frog, or explaining why a joke is funny. Sure, you may actually understand everything that there is to know about the thing when you're done, but the process results in killing the thing, or killing what was interesting about the thing to begin with.

>He's not a Thing.
Actually, he might've been. I think the fact that he changes his coat is might be a giveaway.

Yes, you are correct. However, it's still fun to guess, just as long we don't run into some stupid memes like fucking kerosene.

Wasn't the video game confirmed canon and answer which of the two was the Thing?

Yeah, and isn't the generator room next to where Childs was standing? (And where Blair was hiding?) Why would he go out in the snowstorm? Plus, earlier Childs said that nothing human could survive that storm without a guide line, then he runs out in the dark?

Its funny to me that critics panned it for the over use of special effects when in comparison to its 80s contemporaries and any film made these days it was incredibly restrained.

If you were to just take all the special effects sequences and combine them you'd actually have less than 15 minutes of gooey creature action. Which is nothing really.

A film that actually was the dumb gorefest they claimed it was would have used every character assimilation as another excuse to show off gory effects. (Palmer would have been seen getting done in by Clarke who would have been shown being got by the doggo ect)

But instead Carpenter opted to keep those events off screen and build tension and mystery instead splatter happy gore sequences every 10 minutes.

Moreover, Bennings-thing, /mostly post-transformation/amost-completely-done/, very clearly exhales a visible breath just before its immolation. Gee, it's almost as if a perfect imitation has, at the surface level, the exact same morphology as its victim, and would certainly of course produce the exact same basic physical phenomena, its special thing-status being used to take new victims in extraordinary ways notwithstanding.

The point being that humans and Things both exhale breath, not only because we see this at every stage in the films, but also because that makes perfectly logical sense, given what we are meant to understand about how the creature works and infiltrates animal populations.

It's almost as if the whole "breath" discussion is and always has been pointlesss, stupid and wholly inconclusive, because people have been suckered by memes promulgated by others anons who have not actually watched the film(s) closely. If you want to argue that Childs is a thing, you would do much better to theorize about Blair's movements, for example - the possibility of a tunnel into the generator room from the shack (and from there up the basement stairs to creep up on Childs, for example). Talk about that, or something else. Don't talk about the stupid breath thing again.

This was a really bad movie to watch with my soccer mom

What?

Kryptonite chunk. Batman fails to get it during the chase in the port because Superman stops him (it's also funny how Supes doesn't even bother to ask Batman why was he chasing these guys, or doesn't investigate that himself). Then later we get a scene with trashed LexCorp and there's a batarang stuck where the chunk used to be.

cannot understand this opinion which i have seen multiple times. i understand that some people don't think it's that scary but that doesn't mean it's not a horror movie. the most action-packed moments of this movie are whenever the torch dudes with flamethrowers (happens like 2 or 3 times) and the giant explosion at the end. it's more about suspense and paranoia than it is about shooting bad guys and driving cool vehicles and shit.

this movie is scarier than Halloween imo

E.T didn't help. The Thing legacy has been tarnished by a shit game and a crap prequel.

youtube.com/watch?v=3kk58TK0c6I

The game was okay, and even if it didn't, it didn't tarnish shit. No one will remember it, but Carpenter's The Thing is a cult classic.

Do you think Robocop is tarnished by the shitty remake? Give it 5 years and people won't even remember remake exists.

that actually happened in the movie. BvS is so bad that it's mind boggling

This x1000
He acts incredibly suspicious as well

>Decide you're gonna make The Thing.
>Fly out on location with your actors.
>Basically freeze the entire way through.
>Spend so much time out doors and in the intense sun and snow.
>You get skin cancer.
>Keep going anyways, make amazing SFX Horror film.
>Everyone hates it and calls you shit.

I saw it with my gf last week and she had a real hard time watching it, cause she found it so disgusting. But wanted to finish watching it cause its so good. And she is the kind that usually falls asleep when i pic movies.

It's one of those movies women will never understand

In basically any aspect you can care to name humans are fucking awful at 'seeing the forest for the trees' kind of stuff, almost all truly great artists are only ever recognised retrospectively.

Bad acting
Bad sound
Bad pacing
Bad adaptation of the original
Bad effects inb4 "CGI!!!" no just use less shit practicals

Bad Bait

>Bad sound
Now I'm mad

I hope you are talking about the 2011 movie.

It was mixed terribly
Both are shit the effects pre-CGI where so much better in 2011 though

Your opinion fucking sucks