The Thing- John Carpenter - Movie Review Example

Name Course Lecturer Date The Thing- John Carpenter Introduction - Essay Plan This paper will give an introduction of some of the issues and concerns in film making namely, themes/ genres and styles. The film in question was made in 1982 and has been praised over the years for its high production qualities which included unusual upshots done by Albert Whitlock, a matte artist. The film is also renowned for the high profile actors who acted it. The film was made using the same materials as the 1951 “the thing from another world” but John Carpenter’s “Thing” seems to deviate a lot form the Hollywood way of doing things, and is considered to be more of a horror movie than a science fiction movie. The 1950s particularly saw an introduction of various series of monster films that were closely linked to the contemporary American scientific world and this is the class of films where “The Thing” belongs. Afterwards there was a lot of disagreement as to whether they were horror or science fiction in genre because they always either involved alien forces invading from outer spaces or a multitude of aggressors brought about by experiments in human science. When it comes to “The Thing” though, this disagreement needed not apply because John Carpenter having made other horror films followed his style through and through to come up with “The Thing” which has been praised as the best horror film of its time. Films such as “The Thing from another World” done in 1951 for instance was about aliens invasion from outer space which in the first instance progressed through aggression and in the second part by an sinister substitution of human beings with alien reproductions on the one side, and on the other part. “The Thing” follows the same theme as “The Thing from another World”, but does not resemble it except in the natural setting in which the film was made. Other horror films such as “Them”, done in the year 1954 that concerned undisruptive animals growing to incredible dimensions due to nuclear radiation emanating from human experiments and threatening humanity with the danger of destruction (Kawin), have no semblance to John Carpenters “The Thing” and that is why this film was different. The horror film could arguably be said to have occupied the place that had been occupied by the “western” in terms of genre as the most written about genre. In most of the stories written about it, the horror genre is said to be interesting because it has a purportedly trivial and consequently dissident eminence as a popular culture that carries notorious sort of well-liked customs. The importance of horror goes beyond the current vogue which suggests that it is not as eminent as it was before, and like pornography, the horror genre has often been an entity regarded with lots of disapproval regarding aesthetics and has also been targeted due to panics related to ethics and calls for censorship control. The horror film can therefore be said to raise a lot of questions as far as culture studies and literary policies are concerned. According to Kawin (Pg. 7-9), horror is mainly about relationships between the identifiable and unidentifiable, an assertion that augers well with the extra-terrestrial invasion films such as “The Thing” which is the subject of this paper. This paper is an analysis of “The Thing” by John carpenter in the context of both its semantic and syntactic elements. It will try to establish whether “The Thing” by John Carpenter maintains the status quo in film and whether it has a signature style of its own. This paper in a quest to establish these facts will compare “The Thing” by John Carpenter with “The thing from another world” which is known for having a lot of Hollywood traditional film making characteristics and therefore, it will begin by giving some of the characteristic of “The Thing from another World before answering the questions at hand” Argument Does “The Thing” by John Carpenter Maintain the Status Quo? One of the all time classics of science fiction films is “The thing from another world” by Horward Hawks which is said to have initially been done in collaboration with Christian Nyby. It is however said that Howard worked on the film even more than Christian as a producer. “The Thing, done in the year 1951 is a conventional suspenseful story and horror film; which has lucid science fiction principles and is a good case of” Hawksian films”. The storyline of the film is looked at in a very descriptive manner via the main character, Captain Patrick Hendry which is acted in the film by actor Kenneth Tobey. Captain Patrick is presented as a hero who is strong-minded and not influenced by matters that are emotional. He is also depicted as a conventional male judging from the way he responds to problems. The movie starts with Captain Patrick playing a game of cards with another man who is his colleague and he sets the character of the film when he wins over the other man by uttering the words: “You should know better than to try to fool our captain, only dames can do that!” (Pridham. 1-2). Later in the movies, his real weakness which is women is exposed. The first few minutes of the film’s set up introduce a situation which involves Captain Patrick being called to oversee a discovery made by Dr. Arthur Carrington; of a spaceship that if found covered in ice which needs instant attention from the military. It is here that the depiction of Captain Patrick as a man who has a vision and, an ambition that is decipherable and the strange object at stake is witnessed and the question that seems to present itself at this moment is whether the object at hand is a curious one of whether it can change the destiny of men. Afterwards Captain Patrick goes to the polar station and that’s where he meets Nikky, whom he has a love interest in, in a humorous scene and having flirted with each other before, Captain Patrick suggests that they should start all over again. As the film unfolds, his character is revealed as one that is strong in purpose, with no flaws and one that is characteristic of the traditional Hollywood. The female presence in the movie is also characteristic of classical Hollywood films in the sense that their presence is quite restricted and they are not used to move the story ahead. Nikky’s sole function for instance is to give a female contradictory point to Captain Patrick’s character and to bring a love interest perspective to the Captain’s character. According to (Maltby. Pg. 16-42), about 85% of all Hollywood films have some content of heterosexual anecdote. John Carpenter’s “The Thing” Status Quo John Carpenter’s version of “The Thing” does to some extent carry on the status quo of Hollywood movies some of whose characteristics can be seen in Howards version. However, it does not maintain the status quo parse. For one, John Carpenter’s “The Thing” has no romance in it since it doesn’t even have women in it. John Carpenters film has two scenes that have some sort of flirtation and low down informal passionate music which gives the couples in those scenes a chance to seek for a pair and wish they were together, and in one of these two scenes, Nikky has Captain intoxicated and she binds as they engage in kissing The purpose of this scene is basically to give the film some sort of romantic interval which was almost a must for Hollywood films. The remake of Carpenter’s “The Thing” only contains a squad of men with no single female and this intensifies the nervousness in the film which is an interestin element of the film leading to a further development of the theme of confrontation even further (Pridham. Pg. 4-7). The men in the remake have no women whom they can defend and they are all by themselves in an environment that is aggressive and antagonistic. One is also capable of noticing that in the original film, its Nikky who comes up with the idea of how they can defeat the aliens in a brainstorming session. At this point, the men are asking themselves what it is that they can do with vegetables (referring to the alien whose cellular structure is vegetable and not animal) (Pridham. Pg. 1-4). Nikky overhears them as she enters the room and utters “Boil it, cook it, fry it” (Pridham. Pg. 1-2)This statement is what gives the men the idea to come up find out how they can kill the alien. Carpenter’s film has no women and therefore no reprieve or ideas from the likes of Nikky. Soon after the squad reaches the buried ship, they get organized and ready to face whatever may be lurking in the unknown. Its very interesting to note that they are all ready and resolute to carry out their duty and this can be seen in the Captain’s approach to the whole matter and the way the scientist detaches any manner that may bring emotions into the whole matter of exploration. This is another Hollywood characteristic that is seen in many movies that represents military men as men who are committed to whatever course they are undertaking. However, in Carpenter’s version of “The Thing”, the leader in the 1982 version McCready is a chronic drunk who is ever playing chess and taking whisky, and who appears to be really unhappy to be in the Antarctica. He is disdainful and comtemptuous of almost everything especially the weather and he wears a Mexican hat called “sombrero” all the time. Among the squad are two members", “Childs and Palmer”, who are bleak smokers of pot and who are completely bored with their job and who are there just for the cash. They are especially addicts of American television shows. The ending of the original version of “The Thing” is one characterized by a return to stability which is expected of classical Hollywood films as the alien is destroyed and the squad working with Captain Patrick is saved. This is a corroboration of what (Bodwell. Pg. 309-311) refers too as an ending which follows the achievement of the protagonist desires which is characteristic of the Classical Hollywood films. In this case, it refers to the destruction of the alien being and peace being restored at the arctic station. However, in an ironic twist of things, Carpenter opts for a sinister gloomy ending in his version and in his version all of the characters get killed by the monster except for two men who even after killing the creature are left to freeze up to death and even so, Carpenter’s version does not give an assurance to the audience that the creature is really dead. According to (Bazin and Gray. Pg. 1967-1971), a Classical film is basically a play in photographs that has a purposeful narrative which is simply observed by means of a camera with emphasis on the most relevant of its components. Hawks being very devoted to this philosophy of a classical film is famous for his uttering of the words; “a director is someone who doesn’t infuriate you” (Wood. Pg. 83-107). It is no wonder then that the direction that “The Thing from another World” is a leveled, cost-effective and obvious one whereby the audience is given ample opportunity to concentrate on the action in the film. The “Miseen-scene” is promoted by the location that is chosen for the story which is an Antarctic station. A claustrophobic constrained space setting gives enhancement to the relationship between the characters and the attacks from the alien creature, etc. The same is true of Carpenter’s version but in Carpenter’s version, the claustrophobia and loneliness is more obvious and patent. Bad weather causes a problem in communication in this latter version which helps to makes the latter version seem more real with the depiction of isolation so apparent, something that is not implied in the original version as the men are always there for one another and the mainland is always in vicinity and reachable. It is also good to note that the original version was made immediately after WWII and at that time the idea of combined efforts as the way to conquer the enemy was still fresh in the minds of people and therefore that is what appealed to the producer of the film at that time coupled with distinct Hollywood features. However, Carpenter’s version needed not maintain the status quo because in 1982, circumstances were totally different after the disappointment of McCarthism and the Vietnam war among other factors such as the cold war and therefore, during this period which is when Carpenter did his version, the reality of the worldwide situation was very harsh and men could no longer trust each other in Carpenter version. Does “The Thing” by Carpenter have a signature style? Carpenter’s “The Thing” does have a signature style – one of mistrust and outrage. It succeeds in combining a slow burn up of worry and doubt with brilliant sparks of imaginative aggression. Underneath all these, is a hidden and very troubling query on whether we truly know each other or in other words of whether we are capable of truly knowing each other as people and really knowing ourselves. This signature style used by Carpenter in his version of “The Thing” is an extraordinarily singular one which is very remarkable but at the same time terrifying. Among the cast are several faces which are familiar to the audience such as Keith David and Wilford Brimley guided by Kurt Russell who is their gloomy but very strong-minded pilot. Carpenter’s style is a very tense and sometimes very sinister and regretful in the sense that it gives the audience a disturbance unlike any other in the violence that its displays which the audience may never have envisioned. Though criticized by many due to this ruthless manner, Carpenter’s “The Thing” has come to be acknowledged as one of “the greatest horror film of the last fifty years and its popularity is likely to grow with every new generation” (Pridham. Pg. 1-2) List of References Bazin, A. and H. Gray. What is Cinema? Berkeley: University of California Press , 1967-1971. Boodwell, D. Staiger, J. et al. The Classical Hollywood Cinema: Film Style and Mode of Production to 1960. New York: Clumbia University Press, 1985, 309-311. Kawin, B. Horror and the Horror of Film. New York: Anthem Press, 2012, 3-9. Maltby, R. Hollywood Cinema. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2004, 16-42. Pridham, M. "Underneath the Skin: John Carpenter’s “The Thing” and You." 25 March 2012. Weird Fiction Review. 23 August 2012 http://weirdfictionreview.com/2012/03/underneath-the-skin-john-carpenters-the-thing-and-you/, 1-7. Wood, R. Howard Hawks. London: BFI Publishers, 1981, Pg. 83-107. Read More

The horror film can therefore be said to raise a lot of questions as far as culture studies and literary policies are concerned. According to Kawin (Pg. 7-9), horror is mainly about relationships between the identifiable and unidentifiable, an assertion that augers well with the extra-terrestrial invasion films such as “The Thing” which is the subject of this paper. This paper is an analysis of “The Thing” by John carpenter in the context of both its semantic and syntactic elements. It will try to establish whether “The Thing” by John Carpenter maintains the status quo in film and whether it has a signature style of its own.

This paper in a quest to establish these facts will compare “The Thing” by John Carpenter with “The thing from another world” which is known for having a lot of Hollywood traditional film making characteristics and therefore, it will begin by giving some of the characteristic of “The Thing from another World before answering the questions at hand” Argument Does “The Thing” by John Carpenter Maintain the Status Quo? One of the all time classics of science fiction films is “The thing from another world” by Horward Hawks which is said to have initially been done in collaboration with Christian Nyby.

It is however said that Howard worked on the film even more than Christian as a producer. “The Thing, done in the year 1951 is a conventional suspenseful story and horror film; which has lucid science fiction principles and is a good case of” Hawksian films”. The storyline of the film is looked at in a very descriptive manner via the main character, Captain Patrick Hendry which is acted in the film by actor Kenneth Tobey. Captain Patrick is presented as a hero who is strong-minded and not influenced by matters that are emotional.

He is also depicted as a conventional male judging from the way he responds to problems. The movie starts with Captain Patrick playing a game of cards with another man who is his colleague and he sets the character of the film when he wins over the other man by uttering the words: “You should know better than to try to fool our captain, only dames can do that!” (Pridham. 1-2). Later in the movies, his real weakness which is women is exposed. The first few minutes of the film’s set up introduce a situation which involves Captain Patrick being called to oversee a discovery made by Dr.

Arthur Carrington; of a spaceship that if found covered in ice which needs instant attention from the military. It is here that the depiction of Captain Patrick as a man who has a vision and, an ambition that is decipherable and the strange object at stake is witnessed and the question that seems to present itself at this moment is whether the object at hand is a curious one of whether it can change the destiny of men. Afterwards Captain Patrick goes to the polar station and that’s where he meets Nikky, whom he has a love interest in, in a humorous scene and having flirted with each other before, Captain Patrick suggests that they should start all over again.

As the film unfolds, his character is revealed as one that is strong in purpose, with no flaws and one that is characteristic of the traditional Hollywood. The female presence in the movie is also characteristic of classical Hollywood films in the sense that their presence is quite restricted and they are not used to move the story ahead. Nikky’s sole function for instance is to give a female contradictory point to Captain Patrick’s character and to bring a love interest perspective to the Captain’s character.

According to (Maltby. Pg. 16-42), about 85% of all Hollywood films have some content of heterosexual anecdote. John Carpenter’s “The Thing” Status Quo John Carpenter’s version of “The Thing” does to some extent carry on the status quo of Hollywood movies some of whose characteristics can be seen in Howards version. However, it does not maintain the status quo parse. For one, John Carpenter’s “The Thing” has no romance in it since it doesn’t even have women in it.

Read More