pics

29320 readers

171 users here now

Rules:

1.. Please mark original photos with [OC] in the title if you're the photographer

2..Pictures containing a politician from any country or planet are prohibited, this is a community voted on rule.

3.. Image must be a photograph, no AI or digital art.

4.. No NSFW/Cosplay/Spam/Trolling images.

5.. Be civil. No racism or bigotry.

Photo of the Week Rule(s):

1.. On Fridays, the most upvoted original, marked [OC], photo posted between Friday and Thursday will be the next week's banner and featured photo.

2.. The weekly photos will be saved for an end of the year run off.

Weeks 2023

Instance-wide rules always apply. https://mastodon.world/about

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

Alchemy@lemmy.world

netburnr@lemmy.world

Theprogressivist@lemmy.world

pwalker@discuss.tchncs.de

397

I think I just came. (lemmy.world)

submitted 4 days ago by SwissArmyKazoo@lemmy.world to c/pics@lemmy.world

52 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Salamanderwizard@lemmy.world 38 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I would love a "The thing" movie by Peele. I feel he'd do justice to it.

[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 20 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (3 children)

I love the way it's always assumed that a remake of The Thing would do some kind of service/disservice to John Carpenter.

He made a fucking remake. If someone else does a remake, it's fucking whatever. Carpenter did a fantastic fucking remake, but it's still a remake.

Like if someone remade The Fly. Cronenberg did a fantastic job. Is it his fucking film? No. It was a remake.

[–] Hubi@feddit.org 27 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

The original The Thing is not a remake. I just recently watched the 1951 movie and it is very different from Carpenter's version. Both films are loosely based on "Who Goes There?" by John Campbell but they are independent interpretations of the source material.

[–] Salamanderwizard@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Friend. I am not going that deep. I like both him and Jordan as directors. I know there is like a "the thing" movie before the one I am talking about with sexy Kurt Russel and Devilishly handsome Keith David, who also voiced the awesome Arbiter in Halo.

I just know that one and love it a lot and would love for a talented artist to do one or continue the story with little cgi. I like that type of horror, which is all my dude.

[–] SSETranquility@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I was wondering why sexy Kurt Russel didn't wear a winter hat, but I heard he was contractually obligated to show his flowing mullet

[–] Salamanderwizard@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

His sexy hair is what probably saved him. No way any alien crearure could ever copy that licious flow of human hair. It'd have driven it crazy.

[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Are you claiming the original was a remake or the 2012 one he produced was a remake? You’re wrong on both accounts, but I need to know the answer to my question so I can tell you why you’re wrong.

[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 7 points 4 days ago

Are you claiming the original was a remake or the 2012 one he produced was a remake?

Development of the film began in the mid-1970s when David Foster and fellow producer Lawrence Turman suggested to Universal Pictures an adaptation of the 1938 John W. Campbell novella Who Goes There? It had been loosely adapted once before in Howard Hawks' and Christian Nyby's 1951 film The Thing from Another World, but Foster and Turman wanted to develop a project that stuck more closely to the source material.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_(1982_film)#Production

I'm saying the 82 film was a re-whatever of the 51 film/book.