case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2016-09-19 07:53 pm

[ SECRET POST #3547 ]


⌈ Secret Post #3547 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.














Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 32 secrets from Secret Submission Post #507.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

(Anonymous) 2016-09-20 12:45 am (UTC)(link)
Yay! Another The Thing secret. :) The original is one of my absolute favorite movies, too. (Was the secret from 2 days ago with Fuchs also yours?) While I didn't absolutely hate it, I was seriously disappointed in the prequel. They could've done it so much better. But I agree with you that at least it didn't ruin the original.

There were occasional aspects that I liked, especially the detail they put into recreating the Nordic outpost, and the nods to the original, but I wanted so much more from it.

I especially wish they'd stuck with doing the effects practically. iirc, they intended them to be practical and filmed them that way, but they got overlaid by digital in post-production.

And I completely agree about the dog (mentioned in a previous comment). Why couldn't they have at least gotten a dog that looked right?!

OP

(Anonymous) 2016-09-20 12:51 am (UTC)(link)
Yes, the Fuchs secret was me. :)

That is my understanding about the effects - while IMO there still would have been a lot of problems with the film story and character-wise, the practical effects I saw looked great, definitely better than the CGI effects they did went with.

Re: OP

(Anonymous) 2016-09-20 12:56 am (UTC)(link)
Awesome! :D

Yes, exactly. I agree with this 100%. I might have even forgiven some of the plot and character issues (some... not a lot) if they'd gone with practical effects. It would've felt so much more 'true' to the franchise.