‘The Thing’ Red Band Trailer Features Gruesome Creature Violence

Published 4 years ago by , Updated March 3rd, 2014 at 7:37 am,

the thing red band trailer The Thing Red Band Trailer Features Gruesome Creature Violence

Anyone who has seen John Carpenter’s 1982 cult classic sci-fi/horror flick, The Thing, has a pretty good idea about what to expect from next month’s prequel of the same name. There’s some flexibility, in terms of exactly which characters do (or don’t) survive – otherwise, their final destinations are basically set in stone.

Part of the appeal of next month’s prequel – which is (somewhat confusingly) also titled The Thing – is more the promise that modern-day special effects will be used to bring the film’s namesake to (horrific) life. Those who don’t want to wait until the flick hits theaters can now check out the disgusting monster in the newly-released red band trailer.

The Thing starlet Mary Elizabeth Winstead has spoken out before about the titular creature – which was briefly glimpsed in recent TV spots – and assures fans that it’s definitely something worth seeing on the big screen. Based on the newest footage, however… that doesn’t seem to be true.

First, here is the official synopsis for The Thing:

In the prelude to John Carpenter’s classic 1982 film of the same name, paleontologist Kate Lloyd (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) has traveled to Antarctica for the expedition of her lifetime. Joining a Norwegian scientific team that has stumbled across an extraterrestrial ship buried in the ice, she discovers an organism that seems to have died in the crash eons ago. But it is about to wake up. When a simple experiment frees the alien from its frozen prison, Kate must join the crew’s pilot, Carter (Joel Edgerton), to keep it from killing them off one at a time. And in this vast, intense land, a parasite that can mimic anything it touches will pit human against human as it tries to survive and flourish.

So, to reiterate: The Thing has virtually an identical premise – as that of Carpenter’s film – along with some familiar character archetypes and all-but-fixed outcome. What then does it have to offer, in terms of innovative creepy alien effects and disturbing horror material?

Find out by watching the NSFW red band trailer for The Thing (via IGN) below:


Winstead has said the Thing was brought to life via CGI and practical means, but the footage of the creature unveiled so far appears to have largely been digitally-rendered – and, unfortunately, not all that convincingly either. The effects in Carpenter’s film are relatively dated, no doubt, but there’s still something viscerally unnerving and genuinely grotesque about them, even today. The prequel’s version of the creature, on the other hand, already looks kind of cheesy.

However, what ultimately made Carpenter’s Thing so literally chilling (jokes about the bleak frozen setting aside) was not that its monster actually seemed real – rather, because it served to enhance the paranoia-inducing atmosphere of the film. The tension that lingered throughout the movie was due in no small part to the ever-present threat that a seemingly benign human could turn out to be a monster in disguise.

The Thing 2011 trailer The Thing Red Band Trailer Features Gruesome Creature Violence

Director Matthijs van Heijningen Jr.’s prequel, on the other hand, is already between a rock and a hard place: most moviegoers know in advance how things are ultimately going to go down, so watching the film will feel more like playing a guessing game about which character is going to be knocked off next. Thus, in order for The Thing to work, Heijningen has to create a truly menacing atmosphere. Sadly, based on early footage, it looks more like he’s simply resorted to a handful of scary movie clichés instead.

We’ll see if The Thing can still surprise when it arrives in U.S. theaters on October 14th, 2011.

Source: IGN

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


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. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. I would love to see John Carpenter remake John Carpenter’s The Thing since the new movie is a prequal. I’d love to see his movie redone with today’s special effects. Use the original cast. I think most or all are still around. That would be sweet!

    • The practical effects is what made the movie so real and creepy looking.

  2. The preview looks cool!

    • I can honestly say I have a renewed sense of enthusiasm for this. The delays still have me very skeptical (they historically do not bode well) but this will get me butt in a seat opening weekend. I mean, unless I happen to see that it opens to universal poor reviews first.

  3. We may also be so desensitized to movie violence (thanks in part to Carpenter, et al) that this is just another effects horror movie.

    I agree. What makes a good horror movie scary is the fear of the unknown as well as presenting something that is so abhorrently unheard of that the viewer has to rethink what they know or thought to have known. A perfect example of that was in Carpenter’s version where the head falls off the table and spouts legs. I saw that as a kid and had nightmares for days. To this day, that always stuck with me.

    So, unless the new version can bring something completely new to this story, it’s just going to be another prequel/remake/rehash/reboot/etc…

    I’ll still see it on DVD unless Rotten Tomatoes and SR just completely poopoo it.

    • I agree with Sandy*

  4. I liked the trailer and it does look to be a solid recreation of the original Carpenter movie, it appears to have the same feel as well in regards to the creature in its self, the article it self comes off as more of a downer, with terminal review of the subject matter. Im a big fan of the original and the creature in the original does come of as mighty cheesy at points, but the best part of the movie is the suspense and not the creature work from Baker. This movie will be good if it can mimic the suspense more then anything its just to bad that this movie not only has to fight off the trailer that does show abit to much and a poorly written article that only hopes to put negativity where it doesnt belong

    • Not dismissing what you are saying, but the original was done in 1951.

      I don’t think Sandy was unduly putting negativity on it. We live in a time where most everything coming out of Hollywood is a remake (or a remake of a remake). I think he’s spot on in his assessment that this is just another rehash, by all accounts of it thus far.

      But who knows, it could be the next big thing.

      • I beg to differ. The “original” was done in 1982. Some other film with a similar title was done in 1951. The 1951 film has just about no connection whatsoever to the novella upon which “The Thing” (1982) is based.

        • @Mike, It is I who “beg to differ”. Nautius is right, The original, The Thing From Another World (1951) and The Thing (1982) are both base on John W. Campbell Jr’s book, Who Goes There?

          I just finished reading it on Kindle and was amazed how well it has stood the test of time. John Carpenter’s version was closer to the book except for having fewer men stationed at the research outpost.

    • LocoLobo,

      Oh, I see… “poorly written article” is code for “article I disagree with.”


  5. When we speak of the original, it’s in relationship to THIS movie, meaning Carpenter’s film.

    Anyway, this one looks like a updated remake with just a change of characters. Will wait for the DVD.

  6. Looks brilliant!

  7. Hey didn’t I already see this movie? Oh yeah, it was in the first twenty minutes of the 1982 version of the film.

    I can smell the rotten tomatoes in the air.

    All in all, this movie was a COMPLETELY unnesscary remake, whether it turns out to be good or not.

    • Remake?

      • Not a remake. Prequel.

        • A premake?
          A requel?

          Maybe we really DO need a new word for this type of film?

          • It is so similar to the original film. It’s sorta kinda like a pre-sequel without it being an original of the prequel. If that makes sense?

            It doesn’t.

  8. if this isnt leading up to a dead space movie then i dont know what will! :-D

  9. Im liking it. I get bored watching Carpenters version, so im anxious to see another chapter.

  10. Does anybody remember the Video Game lol just throwing it out there

    • There was a video game?

      • A video game sequel that actually got good reviews.

        • It was scary as HELL! I played it. The closest thing I can compare it to is the Dead Space series, but with better music.

  11. As someone who saw Carpenter’s version when he was 5 and was severly traumatazed by everything on screen, The Thing here looks silly. In the ’82 version it still looks awesome.

    • I was in my early 20′s and saw it in the theater not knowing what was coming. Blew my doors off!

      I still have the original movie poster I got from the theater owner on my wall.

  12. It looks so bland and stock.

  13. maybe it’s just cause the effects remind me of a video game is why this didn’t really rouse anything in me while carpenters grotesque puppet creatures still makes me shudder in fear today, they’re so creepy. that’s my 2 cents about it, will probably end up seeing it at some point though, out of curiosity

  14. Am I inured to violence?
    Normally these “red band” trailers contain considerably more violence and gore than the regular trailers. This trailer barely seemed to go beyond what is in the previous teaser trailer.

  15. You know, the original ‘The Thing’ is streaming right now on the Netfix and it still scares the crap out of me. I’m sorry, but there isn’t anything too scary about this trailer. I will just wait until the movie is out on DVD. Scratch that, Netfilx streaming.

  16. For me the Carpenter remake was much better than the 1951 original, which I saw when originally released back in my youth, and the suspense was greatly enhanced by the music by Ennio Morricone, especially the closing scenes.

  17. Silly sequel that is unnecessary and not good at all! The trouble with movie making today is that if someone doesn’t like the way a movie was produced they can recreate it and call it a reboot/retelling of the story the way THEY thought it should have been Look at the remake of The Day The Earth Stood Still,it was appalling in every sense of the word!!! There are some movies that just should not be remade,period!!