|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
#1
09-12-2007, 06:15 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The Thing...
There's supposed to be ANOTHER remake of The Thing. This time a remake of the John Carpenter movie (release date somewhere in 2009), dunno if this is a rumour, but if its real I hope they don't screw this up too much with "modern special effects". Therefore, a little piece of me is a "retro horror" addict (if I may classify it like that :p)
__________________
"If practice makes perfect, and nobody is perfect, then why practice?" 
|
|
#2
09-12-2007, 06:40 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
That'd be unfortunate. I think the effects in the '82 version hold up well still today, and pressing on too much more would end up killing the tone of the film with iffy CGI and whatnot.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Just how I felt with Halloween and Psycho.
__________________
|
|
#3
09-12-2007, 07:25 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
My top 10 (in no particular order) 1) Candyman 2) American Werewolf In London 3) Evil Dead 2 4) Hellraiser 5) Night Of The Living Dead 6) Jaws 7) Ginger Snaps 2 8) Dead Alive 9) Halloween 10) The Omen t-pot
|
|
#5
09-12-2007, 08:59 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Yeah, for 1982 those were decent special effects. Especially the Dog Kennel mutation and the Palmer mutation were pretty artistic for those days. The only thing I disliked was the Norris mutation (the little guy thing that explodes out of his chest against the ceiling, that was pretty crappy and ruined it for a sec for me)
__________________
"If practice makes perfect, and nobody is perfect, then why practice?"
|
|
#6
09-14-2007, 04:13 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
i'd say re-release both versions of the thing in a special double-feature. hawks' film is so funny and smart - carpenter's so dark and brooding. . . that would be fun
__________________
Winner HDC Battle Royale I & HDC Battle Royale IV 
|
|
#7
09-14-2007, 04:32 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I think the 1982 version holds up cause the special effects at the time are no where near as good as they are today. So you didn't really see much of the thing which added to the suspence. Which is probably why many say Jaws is such a good movie. Spielberg wanted to show more scenes with the shark but cause they couldn't get the shark working properly, they couldn't show it as much and it gave the movie much more suspence. I think why movies today aren't as good is that they rely way too much on cgi, and not enough on suspence.
|
 |
|
|
