Watch: Great Peek at the Practical Special Effects Behind 'The Thing'
by Ethan Anderton
December 15, 2011
Just as fast as Halloween came and went, so did The Thing, this year's horror film which went by the same name as John Carpenter's original, purported to be a sequel, but didn't feel like anything but a remake. It wasn't terrible, but it wasn't all that great either. However, what is great, is some of the practical special effects done for the film that ended up being a little too polished by CGI effects when the final cut of the film was put together. Thankfully, Amalgamated Dynamics, Inc. the company behind those practical effects, have released a video looking at the effects of the alien itself, which may or may not be its original form.
Here's a look at the practical effects from the remake/prequel of The Thing (via Shock Til You Drop):
You can also watch the above video in better quality from the company's YouTube page
The Thing is directed by Dutch filmmaker Matthijs van Heijningen Jr. It's set at another Antarctica research site that's invaded by an "alien life form" (the same one from John Carpenter's 1978 film, as this is a direct prequel). The discovery of an alien craft brings in graduate student Kate Lloyd (Winstead) who partners with Sam Carter (Edgerton), a helicopter pilot, to hunt down this alien. It hits DVD/Blu-Ray Jan. 31st.
I wonder if using gci for the final product was a studio decision or the directors decision. These practical effects are top notch!
Cinemamind on Dec 15, 2011
Joe on Dec 15, 2011
the practical effects is what made the first film so great. the reason i didnt see the remake was because CGI should not be used when it doesnt have to be. Effort put forth such as this is what makes horror movies scary in the first place. Also the reason why Paranormal activity 1 was so great. Barely any effects used and it was horrifying. The only part with evident CGI (the end) wasn't scary. Bring baaackk practical horror make up and creature designs!
Alex Williams on Dec 15, 2011
This wasn't a remake, it's a prequel
Armeetapus16 on Dec 16, 2011
Sweet, the music remided me of Signs mixed with Jeepers Creepers
Davidbryan949 on Dec 15, 2011
It was actually a prequel, not a sequel or a remake. Great video though, it's crazy how much work is put into this, they did an awesome job.
Mike P. on Dec 16, 2011
Gianni Persello on Dec 16, 2011
I agree with a comment above, in that the practical effects of the first movie are some of THE best effects ever done. Successful in technicality and scaring the absolute HELL out of me.
Voice of Reason on Dec 16, 2011
These practical guys are brilliant and that stuff is insane. But how much of it was actually used or recognisable in the film? I remember the guy exploding in the helicopter looked nothing like the awesome detail I see in this video. It was shot in a very ordinary fashion and glimpsed for seconds. Sadly the movie was still pretty forgettable and unsatisfying. I think, despite a heap of talent and great elements, the movie itself wasn't great. I think it came down to the script and, of course, partly the direction - the way the story unfolded and not enough really great set pieces like the original.For example, showing a brief glimpse of the Thing in the helicopter, then cutting away like that was the wrong call and deflated the tension. And despite the solid acting, the characters were a bit nothing. It wasn't terrible, there's lots to like... it's just not the kick ass film I wanted to follow Carpenter's masterpiece.
sv7 on Dec 16, 2011
I don't know what you guys have been smoking, but most of those great practical effects were in the movie and visible, along with some very good CGI enhancements. I liked the creature effects better in this prequel than the original.
rennmaxbeta on Dec 17, 2011
Sorry, new comments are no longer allowed.