THE THING
US, 1982, 103 minutes, Colour.
Kurt Russell, Wilford Brimley, T.K.Carter, Richard Masur.
Directed by John Carpenter.
The Thing is John Carpenter's remake of Howard Hawks', Christian Nyby's early '50s classic. The screenplay was written by Burt Lancaster's son, Bill Lancaster.
This film remains closer to the original story, Who Goes There, by John W. Campbell Jr. (pseudonym Don A. Stuart) of 1938. The film emphasises the isolation of an Antarctic team, the growing paranoia and suspicion as men begin to mistrust one another. The film also visualises the monstrous thing described in the story - this was rather avoided in the Hawks - Nyby film. The visual effects are impressive. In fact, they are almost too horrible. They are the work of Rob Bottin, who worked on The Howling, transforming humans into werewolves in one sequence. While this adds to a certain amount of fantastic realism, it seems at times so horrible that it can distract the audience from the drama.
John Carpenter is an expert at various film genres ranging from science fiction in Dark Star to police sieges in Assault on Precinct 13 to his horror in the fog, Halloween. He also made the futuristic fantasy Escape from New York. His star is Kurt Russell, who appeared in his telemovie of Elvis and in Escape from New York. This is a very clever film - but in many ways it overwhelms its audience.
1. The impact of horror films? Scaring audiences? Visualising nightmares? What if .... ? The quality of this horror film - style, content? Entertainment value? The seriousness of this film - or exploitation horror? The classic status of the original story, the original film? The work of John Carpenter and his skill in film genres?
2. Comparisons with the Howard Hawks - Christian Nyby classic? The original B-material and B-treatment with its atmosphere of horror? This film's big budget and location photography and special effects? Its closeness to the original novel? The visualising of the Thing? The discussion as to whether explicitness is more horrifying than implicit suggestion?
3. The visuals of the Thing, horror, reality and unreality, the monstrous imagery? The contrast of the monster with the landscapes and snow scapes of the Antarctic? With the interiors of the American base with the electronic games, the ordinary mess atmosphere etc.?
4. The importance of the opening for creating atmosphere: the Antarctic landscapes, snow and mountains, the helicopter flight, the dog being pursued through the snow? Audiences' sympathy with the dog? The suggestions of paranoia, the Norwegian going berserk? The build-up of suspicions? The transformation from the opening sequence to the interiors with the men wary of one another? Experiencing horror? The visualising of the Thing, the exploding animals and humans? The mounting terror and the mutual hatred? The journey from day to night?
5. The title and its vagueness? The Thing as buried in the Antarctic ice, a thing of the past, the discovery by the Norwegians, the response to the warmth, the possession of the dog, the transformations and the ingesting of people, the Thing and its self-preservation, its being destroyed in its mutant forms? Was it ultimately destroyed?
6. Antarctica and American missions, the isolation, landscapes, the cold and freezing, the pressure on nerves? The facilities of the base? For work and research? For recreaction? The reactions of the men cooped in isolation, antagonisms, suspicions? Friendliness and antipathy? Boredom? Professionalism? The encounter with the Norwegians - and the visit to their base and its destruction?
7. The dog chase and the suspicions? The death of the Norwegian? The dog in the case and its explosion? Pervading terror and explicit horror?
8. Mac Readie as the tough hero? His isolation in his hut? Appearance, drinking, chess-playing and anger, helicopter skills? His flights and his searching the Norwegian base? His control of the men? Suspicions? Practical action? His being isolated but let into the huts? The blood tests? His destruction of the mutants? Survival? He and the negro survivor facing the dark night? An American hero?
9. The range of men: Blair and his age, capacity for investigation, rears, destroying the communications, realising the repercussion of the Thing's taking over humanity, his computer calculations, his being isolated, his escape and death? Garry and his control, antagonism, suspicions, his being tied up? The surgeon and his search of the Norwegian headquarters, his examination of the suspects, his arms being bitten off, his death? The negroes - the cook and his jollity, lack of consideration for others, his fears, death? The angry negro and his antagonism, survival? The researchers and the working men - suspicions, their being tied up, the blood tests, the monstrous mutations and their deaths? The black man and the white man surviving at the end of the world in the night of Antarctica?
10. The visual experiences of explosions, ingestions, mutations? Monstrosity with tentacles, bones, distorted and screaming faces? Gore and blood? The ability of an audience to respond to the visual horror?
11. The underlying fear, suspicion, paranoia? The echoes of so many films like The Old Dark House? (The links with Alien, etc.)
12. For what audience was the film made? Young or old? Science fiction fans? The status of the original film? How does this film match it as a classic?
