New Character Details of ‘The Thing’ Prequel

Published 4 years ago by

The Thing title header New Character Details of The Thing Prequel

Last week we reported on the news that The Thing prequel is set to go into production this March, shooting through June. As far as we knew, the prequel was set to focus on the events of the decimated Norwegian camp we saw in John Carpenter’s original film. However we get news from Bloody-Disgusting telling us that might (MIGHT) not be the case.

A script for The Thing prequel was originally written by Battlestar Galactica‘s Ronald D. Moore, but Nightmare on Elm Street remake writer, Eric Heisserer, was brought in to do a rewrite. According to Bloody-Disgusting, the studio is going ahead with Heisserer’s version of the script, which reportedly starts with the discovery of an alien spaceship far beneath the ice surface near a remote Antarctica outpost. Supposedly a team of scientists decide to thaw out the creature that’s discovered, which inevitably leads to the mayhem at the camp.

There were previous rumors that the setting of the prequel would be the Norwegian camp seen in Carpenter’s version of The Thing. I personally thought that was a great way to tie this prequel into the Carpenter version (and so did many of you). After all, this is supposed to be a prequel, not a totally new story. If it doesn’t link up to Carpenter’s film in some way then it’s just another pointless remake in my eyes.

Lending strong evidence to those early rumors, Spoiler TV and/or Bloody-Disgusting (not sure who got there first) have obtained information on the characters that are set to appear in The Thing prequel. It appears that Heisserer’s version does indeed incorporate the Norwegian team, as the casting info calls for some people who speak Norwegian. We’ll just include a few of the descriptions below, and you can head over to Bloody-Disgusting for the rest:

[KATE LLOYD] In her late 20s to early 30s, pretty, bright-eyed, intelligent, she’s a graduate of Columbia and a Ph.D. candidate in paleontology (the study of prehistoric life). On the recommendation of her friend Adam Goodman, Kate is tapped for a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity by Dr. Sander Halvorson to join his research team in Antarctica, where an extraordinary discovery has been made. Upon arrival, Kate soon finds herself at odds with Halvorson about how best to proceed with the discovery — an alien spaceship with a mysterious and sinister frozen THING found nearby — specifically whether to transfer the specimen undisturbed to a more appropriate facility for analysis, or, per Halvorson’s wishes, to drill into the specimen’s ice encasement for a definitive tissue sample. Kate’s misgivings about her involvement grow when Halvorson ignores her advice and collects his tissue sample — a critical error in judgment that ultimately frees the trapped organism and triggers a series of horrific incidents and attacks. Furthering her sense of isolation, most of the scientists at the site speak Norwegian, a language she doesn’t understand. Kate looks to her friend, Adam, for help stopping Sander’s obsession from getting them all killed, but eventually must take matters of life and death into her own hands. In the end, her only hope of survival is to join forces with Sam Carter, the chopper pilot who flew her team to the remote Norwegian base…LEAD (2)

[DR. SANDER HALVORSON] In his late 30s to early 50s, austere, scholarly and imperious, he’s a microbiologist from NYU who leads a science research team to Antarctica to help his old friend Edvard interpret and analyze an extraordinary discovery made beneath the ice. Sander, a brilliant scientist and a master of self-promotion, knows that his involvement in such an historic discovery will bring him fame and fortune. Blinded by ambition, he refuses to abandon the “project” even as the bodies pile up around him. He is annoyed when Kate, whom he considers more of an apprentice than an equal, disagrees with him and openly questions his decisions in front of the others…LEAD. Actor must be able to speak some Norwegian. (2)

[SAM CARTER] In his early 30s, rugged, handsome, blue-collar, he’s a helicopter pilot with a private charter service that transports personnel and supplies from McMurdo Station to remote research sites across Antarctica. Carter is a mercenary. He flies when he wants, where he wants, and he flies for one reason: money. But his resourcefulness, experience and get-it-done mentality make him indispensable. Arriving at Thule Station, he is the first to suspect something strange and dangerous is going on. Trapped there by faulty equipment, he becomes an unlikely ally of Kate’s — he reminds her (in temperament) of her father, now deceased, also a pilot. He and his co-pilot Jameson are nearly killed in a helicopter crash as they attempt to leave under less than ideal conditions. Carter must ultimately join forces with Kate to stop the THING’s rampage…LEAD (3)

[EDVARD WOLNER] In his mid 40s, gentle, erudite, loyal to a fault, this Norwegian geoscientist and his crew discovered an alien spaceship and a mysterious frozen THING buried in a deep crevasse in Antarctica. Edvard requested the assistance of his colleague Dr. Sander Halvorson and he’s pleased to see his old friend arrive at the site. Both men have stars in their eyes, knowing that their combined findings will bring them fame in the scientific community, but after Edvard loses two of his men to the terrifying THING, he’s ready to call it quits rather than risk more lives…SUPPORTING. Actor must speak Norwegian. (16)

As stated, for the rest of the casting/character info you can head over to Bloody-Disgusting.

The Thing still New Character Details of The Thing Prequel

We now have this casting info to clear up a lot of these rumors we’ve heard about The Thing prequel – especially the one about the brother of Kurt Russell’s character being a main character. Thankfully, that character does NOT appear on the roster (that would’ve been an epic fail). We know now the Norwegian team is definitely a part of the story, and that they appear to be mixed in with an American team for at least some of the movie. This allows the filmmakers to both keep the movie tied into Carpenter’s film but also bring in new (English-speaking) characters as fodder for the shape-shifting alien.

What are your thoughts on the latest info we have on The Thing prequel/remake (or whatever it is…)?

The Thing is set to go into production this March in Toronto, but there’s no release date set as of yet.

Source: Spoiler TVBloody-Disgusting

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:
TAGS: the thing

24 Comments

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

  1. “This allows the filmmakers to both keep the movie tied into Carpenter’s film but also bring in new (English-speaking) characters as fodder for the shape-shifting alien.”

    More fodder is good. I can only hope one of the characters has a bird, lizard or some other type of weird pet… the dog was done. Lets have something with a giant parrot head sticking out of its waist… :D

  2. Funny how the plot boils down to exactly the same plot as the first movie, a bunch of ppl trapped with a creature.

    I can't help but to be dismissive of this movie. The Thing is one of my favorites and a true horror classic. I just don't see how they will get anywhere near the first if they follow the popular cinema trends (CGI, explosions, etc.)

    I hope I'm wrong

  3. Well the creature was already “evolved” by the time we pick up on the first movie. Also some parts I hope will cover them breaching the ship, dealing maybe with a few nasties inside, etc.

    Id rather not spend the rest of this night tied to this <bleep> chair!!

  4. What if the “Thing” is a by-product of them killing the aliens and releasing something they had sealed up. Still not new but at least it's a little different than the original.

  5. Sam Carter? Is Amanda Tapping gonna be in this movie? ;)

  6. Really difficult to get a handle on how this movie is necessary… Are we all really that interested in the events that lead to the Carpenter film? Seems to me that the aura of mystery introduced during the brief visit to the norwegian encampment helped to flesh out the premise just fine. I don't see how revisiting it in minutia will create much in the way of curiosity or suspense. I think that it may have been a beter idea just to move the story along…maybe have one of the two remaining characters at the movie's end being recovered (frozen) by a belated rescue attempt and having the creature revived in a different setting with possible global consequences. It worked pretty well in the second Predator film, no?

  7. Worked pretty well in “28 weeks later” as well.

  8. Is it me or does the helicopter pilots have an hard life on cinema ?

  9. I'm totally game.
    And breathing a sigh of relief that no Russell brothers are in this film. That would have been the kiss of death, right there.

  10. The real story is the story that gets you to a third act. With a low profile writer and director this risky reanimation screams low budget, it could easily be a bomb. Then again, maybe they've found the right combination for a sleeper hit. March seems like a bad time to film a movie in Canada that's suppose to look like Antarctica. I guess the next clue I'm looking for is the rating being shot for.

  11. The thing about a prequel is that we already know that everyone dies. But on the other hand, I guess it might not matter that much as long as there's great alien action going on. I hope the alien is done as well as it was in the original.

  12. If one takes into consideration what the story any “sequel/prequel” to The Thing could consist of, then in essence, any 2nd film, be it set prior or post the events in Carpenter's film, ends up being nothing more than a remake. There is not much that can be done in a prequel, as the consequences of that story are already established in the original film.

    A true sequel, to be more than simply a remake (in other words, the same story over again, just with different actors) would require some form of expansion of the events in the first film.

    If it all happens in an Antarctic station, with the characters dying off, one by one, then it's just a remake. Absolutely nothing “new” has been brought to the table. It doesn't deserve to be called a “sequel”.

    I'd LOVE to have a real sequel to this film. I really think there is potential for a continuation of the story.

    Then again, there is also massive potential for an absolute crap-fest of mediocrity as a bunch of brain-dead Hollywood hacks try to “improve” on the story, rather than write something logical that really emanates from the original story (let's remember there's a brilliant and absolutely terrifying novella at the roots of this film).

  13. “This allows the filmmakers to both keep the movie tied into Carpenter’s film but also bring in new (English-speaking) characters as fodder for the shape-shifting alien.”

    More fodder is good. I can only hope one of the characters has a bird, lizard or some other type of weird pet… the dog was done. Lets have something with a giant parrot head sticking out of its waist… :D

  14. Funny how the plot boils down to exactly the same plot as the first movie, a bunch of ppl trapped with a creature.

    I can't help but to be dismissive of this movie. The Thing is one of my favorites and a true horror classic. I just don't see how they will get anywhere near the first if they follow the popular cinema trends (CGI, explosions, etc.)

    I hope I'm wrong

  15. Well the creature was already “evolved” by the time we pick up on the first movie. Also some parts I hope will cover them breaching the ship, dealing maybe with a few nasties inside, etc.

    Id rather not spend the rest of this night tied to this <bleep> chair!!

  16. What if the “Thing” is a by-product of them killing the aliens and releasing something they had sealed up. Still not new but at least it's a little different than the original.

  17. Sam Carter? Is Amanda Tapping gonna be in this movie? ;)

  18. Really difficult to get a handle on how this movie is necessary… Are we all really that interested in the events that lead to the Carpenter film? Seems to me that the aura of mystery introduced during the brief visit to the norwegian encampment helped to flesh out the premise just fine. I don't see how revisiting it in minutia will create much in the way of curiosity or suspense. I think that it may have been a beter idea just to move the story along…maybe have one of the two remaining characters at the movie's end being recovered (frozen) by a belated rescue attempt and having the creature revived in a different setting with possible global consequences. It worked pretty well in the second Predator film, no?

  19. Worked pretty well in “28 weeks later” as well.

  20. Is it me or does the helicopter pilots have an hard life on cinema ?

  21. I'm totally game.
    And breathing a sigh of relief that no Russell brothers are in this film. That would have been the kiss of death, right there.

  22. The thing about a prequel is that we already know that everyone dies. But on the other hand, I guess it might not matter that much as long as there's great alien action going on. I hope the alien is done as well as it was in the original.

  23. If one takes into consideration what the story any “sequel/prequel” to The Thing could consist of, then in essence, any 2nd film, be it set prior or post the events in Carpenter's film, ends up being nothing more than a remake. There is not much that can be done in a prequel, as the consequences of that story are already established in the original film.

    A true sequel, to be more than simply a remake (in other words, the same story over again, just with different actors) would require some form of expansion of the events in the first film.

    If it all happens in an Antarctic station, with the characters dying off, one by one, then it's just a remake. Absolutely nothing “new” has been brought to the table. It doesn't deserve to be called a “sequel”.

    I'd LOVE to have a real sequel to this film. I really think there is potential for a continuation of the story.

    Then again, there is also massive potential for an absolute crap-fest of mediocrity as a bunch of brain-dead Hollywood hacks try to “improve” on the story, rather than write something logical that really emanates from the original story (let's remember there's a brilliant and absolutely terrifying novella at the roots of this film).

  24. My big complaint if it IS the Norwegian camp: if there’s an American scientist on site why do they find no notes in English when they go to the camp in “The Thing”?

Be Social, Follow Us!!