The Thing Prequel Will Finally Start Shooting This March
by Alex Billington
January 4, 2010
It was March when we last heard anything about The Thing prequel that was supposedly being written by "Battlestar Galactica" creator Ronald D. Moore. Now Production Weekly (via Twitter) is reporting that shooting is due to start in March and continue until June in Toronto. Universal is developing the sequel and has set commercials director Matthijs van Heijningen Jr. to helm. It probably won't star Kurt Russell, so don't get your hopes up, but it still could be good considering the team involved. If they're shooting in three months, they better get a cast on-board soon, as I'm anxious to hear who this will star instead of Russell.
As for the plot of this prequel, as it was reported late last year, it will focus on the Norwegian camps in the Antarctic that were ravaged by the alien first before the Americans (in The Thing) discovered the decimated camps. We heard last year that van Heijningen was pushing to make the lead character of his prequel that of R.J. MacReady's brother; in the original, Kurt Russell played MacReady (seen above). We're not sure if that's still the case, but despite the unnecessary nature of this prequel, there's a slim chance it could be pretty cool. Let's hope for the best, because with original being such a classic, I want this to be great, too.
This would make a good sci-fi flick. It has to be good. The Thing is a good sci-fi flick, one of my favorites.
Madnezz344 on Jan 4, 2010
One question: why?
jim on Jan 4, 2010
Christ I'm all over this!
Sonnychiba1 on Jan 4, 2010
They should get Kurt Russell to Do a cameo for the The Thing II weather it is just flying is Brother in on the Helocopter or somthing it would give the film some kind of cred to the film. I will be intrested in fothcoming infomation on The Thing Project. 🙂
Cineprog on Jan 4, 2010
R.J. Macready's Brother!?! Stupid and unnecessary. What the Hell would He be doing in the Norwegian camp? Why wouldn't Mac be concerned about His brother in the first film? There would be plot holes out the ying yang and I think it would cheapen the whole movie adding this character. Now I can see Kurt Russel doing a cameo, even at his age put that big beard a heavy coat and that hat of his on and he would look the same. I hope that they at least make it it's own movie, And I sure hope that they don't fill the cast with Party of Five rejects or a bunch of female eye candy with stupid teen horror sex scenes. That is another point, even though I want the movie to stand on it's own two feet as it's own story. At least draw from the first film what made it great. the cast of 8 men in a harsh environment trapped with a morphing alien that essentially "eats" you cell by cell. the paranoia, claustrophobia. feeling of being cut off and trapped. I sure hope that they don't ruin a good Idea like they did with "The FOG" I am still trying to figure out what they were thinking when they made that "re-imagining".
LD on Jan 4, 2010
It was about the time.. Somebody should tell the story of what was in Antarctica before Predators 🙂
HQ Movies Online on Jan 4, 2010
I wish them luck as they got some big shoes to fill, The Thing is a classic.
TediusTed on Jan 4, 2010
mrjzn on Jan 4, 2010
Pointless and very stupid. This will flop terribly, because todays so-called talent have no idea of the craft behind the seminal classic known as The Thing. Cue a lot of CGI, bad cut and paste jobs from the original and OH! MacReady has a brother? Oh how fucking typical of hollywood when making sequels to SELF-CONTAINED FILMS. The story of The Thing was finished in the first movie. There are no loose ends. Talk about tugging and sucking on an empty nipple. But saying that, if they cast Robert Patrick as the shape-shifter I'll be happy....
Dr. Gonzo on Jan 4, 2010
Yo...The Thing is one of the best movies of the 80's. And considering it's a remake of a remake, I have no problem with a random-ass prequel. If it sucks, it will have no affect on my enjoyment of it's predecessors.
whomever on Jan 4, 2010
This could be good,the original scared the bejesus out of me.
tir na nog on Jan 4, 2010
I agree with #11, nothing can touch the original (remake) from the 80s. I trust Ronald D moore. The Thing is one of the best horror movies ever made, because of the clausterphobia, the characters, the environment and the ending. I don't know what he can do with the plot, but considering how much paranoia was in Battlestar Galactica I think he can come up with something great.
chariots of the gods, man on Jan 4, 2010
what made the original this good is because of the special effects ( non CGI crap ) ! i hope they dont make the mistake of going beserk with CGI special effects, but instead go back to the basics with large sets and live effects because this is what made this, and also Alien, the movies what they are now. Peace
uber thing fan on Jan 4, 2010
a brother? jeeeesus. NO NO NO NO NO!!!!! they should have skipped over a prequel and gone directly to sequel, turning the Dark Horse comics sequel into a film. at least then we'd have MacReady and Childs, but granted that should have been done 15 years ago or so. i'm interested in this, but not too hopeful
CLC on Jan 4, 2010
yeah about that...NO!
Xerxex on Jan 4, 2010
this will be a good flick but i agree it has to STAND ALONE and be about the norwegian camp and how they first came in contact with the thing. mccready's brother angle is lame and pointless unless it was actually a SEQUEL and had his brother searching for him in the ice and coming across the thing and taking it "home" and then the mayhem begins all over again!! awesome IMO!
thejugfather on Jan 4, 2010
I can't wait!
GIGERBRICK on Jan 4, 2010
"the thing" is a CLASSIC. i don't see the need for a prequel. if it is made, i just hope they don't try to turn it into a "pg-13 cash-cow".......there are enough worthless, teeny-bopper movies being made already.
beavis on Jan 4, 2010
Agree with LD. What would Mac's brother be doing at the Norwegian camp? Sounds like a feeble attempt to connect to JC's The Thing. If they want to do a prequel, it shouldn't reference Mac, Childs, or any of the others.
EJP on Jan 4, 2010
What "original"? the 80's or the 50's.? If it's the 50's, a prequel would have to take place in another planet. If it's the 80's just re-do or update the 50's version. Any way I feel it is going to be a sci-fi blunder. Up next why not try The Thing vs Alien, or The Thing vs Predator. Do not forget "The day the earth stood still" Hollywood had great material to work from, yet we know the disaster they created. I say if it can not be improved it stay away.
B VELAZQUEZ on Jan 4, 2010
It's already been said, but I'll say it again: they may get the best CGI in the universe, but it will never come close to the "realness" of Rob Bottin's special make-up creatures. Those, uh, things had real weight and presence, and though some other good monsters have shown up since, nothing else has been quite like the Thing. Also, as someone said, they'll probably hire gen-y or z party of 90210 or whatever types instead of the grizzled middle-aged researchers who added to the grungy reality of a remote research camp. None of the guys in JC's film could be called a "pretty face." Pretty people don't end up working at the south pole. Leave a classic alone.
z on Jan 4, 2010
I hate all this prequel junk. Everyone started doing it after Star Wars did it, but the Star Wars prequels were TERRIBLE! Very few movies need a prequel. The Godfather: Part II is the only prequel I can think of that actually works, and it wasn't even a true prequel, just a bunch of flashbacks in a sequel. There's no point to make a prequel for this movie. The start of the movie made it clear where it came from. The only "thing" maybe missing is what the original monster they took out of the ice looked like (I always figured it looked a bit like James Arness), but I'm not that concerned over that. Sometimes less is more. Leave something to the audience's imagination. Jaws did that for the most part of the movie and that's what made it work. The "thing" that does interest me is what happened after the end of the movie. It kind of cuts to credits at an odd spot and leaves you wondering what happened after that and if The Thing, MacReady, and Childs, survived. For the sake of storytelling, a sequel is a lot more needed than a prequel in this case. As for the brother thing...that would be DUMB! Also, I assume that everyone in this Norwegian base is going to be speaking English for this movie.
Brad on Jan 4, 2010
I really wanted Russell to join the movie.This movie will be nothing compared to the old movie.
Fisherr on Jan 5, 2010
WHY INDEED...a part of why I liked The Thing is thinking what went on at the Norwegian camp, they wont even cast Norwegian's either. What a waste of time.
d1rEct on Jan 5, 2010
Ok, Love the idea but not looking forward to it with an unproven director and unproven movie writer for a movie whose plot is nothing new. It was the cinematography, direction, acting, great special effects, and music that all were top notch and added up to a good movie. Had this been given to a David Fincher and some proven writers then yes I would be more psyched. I am willing to be proven wrong. Who knows sometimes its the people without the proven experience that have that more to prove and pour their guts into making a great film.
Jeff C. on Jan 5, 2010
This might be cool if we can see a limited re-release of The Thing in theaters prior to the release of this prequel. I never did get to see it on the big screen. I am also hoping one day to see Aliens or Alien on the big screen, that was one I was too young to catch as well. Having both Bladerunner and Wiz of Oz in the theaters in the last few years was cool. Hackers was re-released as a promotion too but I missed that. Curious - What other movies have been re-released to the big screen in the last 10-15 years?
Jeff C. on Jan 5, 2010
New comments are no longer allowed on this post.