It is difficult to know where to begin when comparing two Things. No, really. That capitalization is not an accident. For all intents and purposes, it is this reviewer’s goal to effectively compare and contrast two films that, while sharing similar titles and premises, are very different films inhabiting two separate genres. First, there is the “classic” original film, the 1951 RKO Picture, The Thing From Another World, directed by Christian Nyby and starring James Arness as the Thing. Following this is director John Carpenter’s 1982 “remake,” titled simply, The Thing, starring Kurt Russell and Keith David. The word remake is put in quotes because, as mentioned before, they are very different versions of the same story. Although they share a common source, they are two very different films.
Before moving forward, it is important to first understand where both of these films drew their inspiration. The first film claims to be an adaptation of the John W. Campbell novella, “Who Goes There?” first published in 1948. It is difficult to see how this could be, because the RKO picture shares little with the story outside of a snowy setting and an otherworldly creature. There are no shared character names or places. Even the description of the creature in the story is not at all like that of the thing played by James Arness. John Carpenter’s version, however, remains faithful to the source material, keeping names and the tense atmosphere from the novella.
 |
| The Thing From Another World (1951) |
A majority of the differences between the two films can be attributed to the fact that they were made in very disparate eras of film. Just over thirty years apart from each other, these films are able to demonstrate just how much changed after the MPAA abandoned trying to enforce the Production Code in the late 1960s. This is most evident in looking back on the 1951 adaptation, which struggles to work as a film at all under so many content restrictions.
Therefore, it makes sense that so many changes would have to made to the story to keep in line with the then strictly-enforced Production Code. There is hardly any violence to speak of, save for some scenes of animal cruelty and cheesy effects that bring about the monster’s demise. Not a single human member of the cast meets their end, and good wins out over evil in the end. There is also a distinct lack of urgency to the proceedings, which makes the film feel like it drags on much longer than it needs to. The Thing itself isn’t even fully revealed until an hour into the film, and even then, there are a scant three scenes that fully show Arness in all his made-up glory.
Besides the lack of terror and violence, there are other ways in which the RKO picture is a reflection of the time it was made in. There is a strong military presence, and an overwhelming sense of cold-war paranoia. A UFO falls out of the sky, and the general immediately orders our hero, Captain Hendry, to meet up with the scientists in the arctic and go check it out. There are hyperbolic references to the bible, such as reporter Ned Scott’s statement, “This is the biggest historical event since the parting of the Red Sea,” and the ever-present cheesy theremin music in an attempt to arouse feelings of discomfort and fear. There are two women present in the film. One of them is a non-speaking role, only on screen for barely a minute, while the other is the Captain’s love interest, and only shows up on screen when it seems appropriate to remind the audience that, yes, our hero is indeed human, and he is making sure that our women our safe from harm. Not that there was really ever that much of a threat to begin with, but still. They barely share one slightly hidden kiss beyond their playful flirtations. All the same, there are moments in the movie where everyone seems to forget that there’s an alien monster on the loose.
The biggest offender, though, is the film’s anti-climax, in which the Thing is easily defeated, and then everyone sits down to relax over a pot of coffee. Add to that the final words of the film, “Keep watching the skies. Look everywhere. Always be watching,” and you have a real gem indicative of its time period. One would suppose it is classic in that sense, but the movie fails to bring about any real sense of dread or urgency to the proceedings. Finally, the film is laughably dismissive of science and reason. The one scientist who goes out of his way to inform our heroes (and the audience) that, “knowledge is more important than life,” and, “there are no enemies in science,” is dismissed by the whole crew, and later wounded by the Thing with a smack to the face. It is essentially saying that it is not worth trying to understand or reason with others, and that violence is the only way to effectively defend ourselves. It is strange to see such things play out on the screen.
 |
| John Carpenter's The Thing (1982) |
Now, onward to John Carpenter’s superior interpretation of Campbell’s novella. This film is literally polar opposite from it’s predecessor, being set in Antarctica, rather than north of Anchorage, Alaska. Staying true to the source material, there are no military present, only the scientists and researchers. There are no women present in the film, either, which I suppose could go either way when trying to determine believability. I’m sure there are plenty of women scientists in the Antarctic. It would make sense to assume that Carpenter opted to leave women out of this picture to get away from the distracting love interest present in the older film.
The theme of paranoia remains, though it is not of the cold-war brand. Sure, the war was still on at this time in 1982, but it wasn’t as clearly defined as it was 30 years prior. Carpenter’s film takes on a much more existentialist, even nihilistic view on this, making any of the characters fair game to being mistrusted or killed by the extraterrestrial menace. The effects are also much more engaging, though that can be attributed to technological progress in make-up and animatronic effects.
The hero of the novella, MacReady, returns as the hero of this film, as do Blair and the others. And just like the original story, the Thing itself is only revealed to the audience in bits and pieces, never shown full-on, in order to keep the tension and interests high. Not to mention that the Thing is a near constant presence throughout the film, keeping everyone on their toes at all times. Adding to that is the theme that nobody in the facility can be trusted on their own, and the acting among the characters is electrifying, unlike the wooden and unenthusiastic heroes of the older film.
Finally, there is film’s conclusion. Whereas everyone survived the ordeal in the 1951 film, all but two of the men at the research facility are left. They have blown up the whole base in an effort to destroy the monster, and there’s nothing left to do but share a bottle of booze and watch it burn. The film fades out and the credits roll, leaving the audience with a sense of hopelessness, unsure if MacReady and Childs will make it, though it is implied that they meet their doom at the hands of the freezing Antarctic weather.
The souls of these two films are very different when held up next to each other, and this can be attributed to the Production Code, as well as the cynicism which developed over the course of the cold war. Carpenter’s film does a lot more to engage the audience, whereas the RKO “classic” picture turns out not unlike how Ned Scott describes the Thing in one scene, which that it is "an intellectual carrot." However, it is trumped in the intellectual department as well, as Carpenter’s film takes a much smarter approach to the idea of a monster movie.
No comments:
Post a Comment