Halloween & Halloween II - The Originals

After burning through the entire Texas Chainsaw Massacre franchise, I originally planned to take a break from horror films, especially long franchises. Then I realized Halloween Ends was coming out, and someone asked me what I thought about H20, a movie I had never seen. Rather than being sensible and planning on tackling the Halloween series next year, I decided to watch every one of these stupid fucking movies in one week. And I did it, but I’m not writing a full article on each film. Instead, I decided to break it down into segments:

• Halloween and Halloween II - The Originals

• Halloween III: Season of the Witch - The Outlier

• Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers, Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers, and Halloween 6: The Curse of Michael Myers - The Thorn Trilogy

• Halloween H20: 20 Years Later and Halloween: Resurrection - The Copycats

• Halloween and Halloween II - The Zombie Movies

• Halloween, Halloween Kills, and Halloween Ends - The New Trilogy

I learned from writing about the Massacre movies that there were going to be entries in this series that I just didn’t have much to say about, but thankfully the series is easily broken up, aside from the third movie. But before I get into the first two films, I wanted to comment on the series as a whole a bit.

This series isn’t sacred to me, so I’m not going to dwell on what a Michael Myers movie should be or anything like that. This is all going to be about my personal enjoyment of these movies, even if I might consider the vast majority of them to be technically “bad” movies. Even though I hadn’t seen a lot of this series before I started this, I still knew these were going to be easy watches (aside from the Zombie movies) because I find the slasher genre to be almost relaxing at this point. In other words, these articles are just my personal ramblings, and I’m going to be way too forgiving of some of these films, and I might be too harsh on others, but it’s all going to be my honest response based on what I want from these movies. Enough vague nonsense, here are my thoughts on the first two movies.

After watching all of these movies, I can safely consider myself a fan of the Halloween series, but before that, I truly did not care for these movies. And that goes for the sacred first film, as well. I kind of viewed it the same way I think about Citizen Kane, acknowledging that this was a groundbreaking film that changed future films for decades, but I personally wasn’t all that impressed with it. 

So this has always been a movie I knew I should love, but just didn’t. On top of that, I’ve become a huge John Carpenter fan over the years. How could I not love his most famous film? Because of this, I have watched the first film many times, and I’ve always just thought it was okay.

This time around, I appreciated how easy it was to rewatch this movie, and how creepy it is without being gory or going for cheap scares. I learned that I fucking love seeing Michael Myers in daylight. It’s so much creepier to see him standing behind some sheets or by a hedge than it is to see his face appear in the dark. It’s not that seeing his face in the dark is not scary, it’s just expected. Slashers are typically nighttime monsters. You might think seeing them during the day would lessen the effect or, worse, make them look downright goofy. But it works for Myers, and this is one of the main reasons why I’m not crazy about the second film, which takes place entirely at night. 

More than seeing a daytime monster, the original Halloween, and the series as a whole, is defined by its music. Carpenter’s score is iconic, at this point, and it still works. Usually, an effective score shouldn’t be noticed, but that’s not the case here as I find the score to be the star of the film. It does such an amazing job of taking what could be boring, long scenes and turning them into extremely tense moments.

Appreciating the atmosphere and pace of the film this time around also made me realize something that opened up my enjoyment of the entire series: I don’t give a fuck about Michael Myers. Don’t get me wrong, the outfit and ever-changing mask is synonymous with slasher films, but The Shape is really just a shell of a character. Later films, starting with the second, would attempt to expand on this character, and it’s been downhill ever since. 

I don’t care who’s under that mask. I’m fine with Loomis just telling me he’s pure evil at this point and must be stopped. Good enough for me. I need no motivation. There’s a killer out there, and he must be stopped. That’s the fucking movie. 

In defense of the films that followed, what else could they do? You can’t just have this dead-eyed fucker showing up for no fucking reason other than its Halloween and the local insane asylum has atrocious security and transport personnel. 

I’m not naive enough to say they should have stopped after the first film, but they truly had nowhere else to go with Myers as a character, which is why they added the Laurie-is-his-secret-sister element. Once I accepted that I would never like The Shape more than I did in the first film, it was easy to accept the increasingly goofy sequels. 

Speaking of sequels, the first sequel, Halloween II, is…okay. I already mentioned that I don’t dig the constant night of the movie, and the sister reveal isn’t great, but the story had to go somewhere. Aside from that, there’s another pet peeve I have with the setting: the abandoned hospital. Maybe things were different in the late ‘70s, but in my experience, hospitals are constantly well-lit and populated by more than three people. But maybe the ‘70s were different. Anyway, I just don’t like the setting of the sequel.

Beside that, Michael gets some fun kills (the crazy hot sauna comes to mind) and Loomis gets to run around spouting off cryptic nonsense (“You don’t know what death is!”), so it has its moments. 

By having Michael survive and seem fine soon after the events of the first film, Halloween II also reveals Michael to be so evil that he’s supernatural and possibly cannot be killed. I’m actually fine with this. If you don’t make these slasher villains supernatural, then these movies get too dumb. Because, come on, what normal guy can walk through a hospital door like Michael does at the end?

This brings up one of the common problems with this franchise: is Michael supernatural or just a really strong, evil fucker? The first film made it seem like it was the latter. Yes, he survived some seeming unsurvivable shit, but for all we knew, he was crawling in some bushes, barely alive after he disappeared. Halloween II, however, presents Michael as completely fine. In fact, he’s stronger now. Even though they do try to make it clear that he dies at the end, his ability to bounce back from his injuries in the first film make it clear that he is supernatural. 

This isn’t a problem in general, but the series either went too goofy explaining that he was supernatural (hello, Thorn trilogy), or he’s simply supernaturally strong because slasher villains are supposed to be (H20, Halloween: Resurrection). It’s just uneven. And this applies to the new trilogy, as well, with Michael going from man to supernatural evil killing machine back to man (which I’m actually okay with, as I’ll explain when I get to those movies). This is why I’m a bigger fan of the Friday the 13th series, which finally said, “Fuck it, just Frankenstein Jason’s ass and make him unkillable. Hell, make his evil into a butt worm that travels from person to person, who cares? Just keep making these fucking things!” The Halloween franchise never had that definitive moment because of the messy timelines and multiple reboots, making Michael Myers the most inconsistent villain in slasherdom.

I still kind of love these movies, which is a testament to the first film. Perhaps that’s the problem; the first film was too good to live up to, and the harder filmmakers tried to one-up the original, the more it became apparent that that was impossible. This is why John Carpenter was right about this series all along. After reluctantly writing the script for the second film, he decided the series should move on from Michael Myers all together. Season of the Witch is coming up next.

"Captain Ron" - Is Ron actually Snake Plissken?

*I write these articles under the assumption that you’ve seen the movie, so...SPOILERS. But if you haven’t seen Captain Ron, then obviously you didn’t have TBS or the USA network in the ‘90s. 

Originally, I was going to write about Buffalo Soldiers, the Joaquin Phoenix movie that got delayed into oblivion because of 9/11. But the DVD was too scratched up to play, so I threw it away and randomly moved on to Captain Ron, a $5 bin classic that I would also watch every time it came on TV. Kurt Russell is amazing in this movie, and according to IMDb trivia, he pretty much created the character, down to the wardrobe that he provided himself (including the Speedo). The movie overall is pretty damn goofy; it’s like John Hughes got stoned and wrote a movie. But Russell makes it memorable. Watching it this time (and thanks to some of the trivia I read), something amazing occurred to me.

Captain Ron is the origin story of Snake Plissken.

First off, I know this is ridiculous, but there are enough similarities to consider this. Obviously, the eye patch is the main indicator here, along with Ron’s raspy voice. And while Ron doesn’t have a cobra tattooed on his stomach, it is still a tattoo he would conceivably get one day (and he knows good work, as evidenced by his “primo work” comment regarding Caroline’s tattoo). Also, Ron claims to have been in the Navy, and Snake was Special Forces in the Army. Could it be that Ron was actually a Navy SEAL? Or maybe Ron was in the Special Forces, but he’s so full of shit he forgets what branch of the military he was really in.

The timelines work out a little, too. Captain Ron came out in 1992, which leaves plenty of time for World War III to break out and Ron can become Snake. The events of Escape from New York don’t take place until 1997. Ron has experience in Communist Cuba, he’s dealt with pirates, and he associates freely with revolutionaries (much like Cuervo Jones in Escape from L.A.).

The bit of trivia that really set me off on this was the claim that John Carpenter was “nearly called” to direct Captain Ron. (It also claims that he said he would have done it, but just to be in the Caribbean.) With Carpenter’s possible involvement, it adds a little credence to the origin story theory. Also, Carpenter originally saw Escape from L.A. as a comedy satirizing modern action movies (the studio was not a fan of this idea, which is why the film ended up edited to basically be a carbon copy of New York). And he directed Big Trouble in Little China, which is very much a comedy, also starring Russell.

Of course, Captain Ron isn’t really the origin story of Snake Plissken, but there are enough similarities to at least consider it. And while I am always down to watch Captain Ron, watching it while considering it as Snake’s origin story added a new element to it. Finally, I just like the idea that fun-loving Ron finally got beaten down by the world enough to turn into Snake Plissken.

Russell's next movie was Tombstone. What a transformation.

I don't have anything to say about that. I just wanted an excuse to post this comparison picture.

Random Thoughts

The beginning really reminds me of Planes, Trains, & Automobiles. In fact, the whole thing comes off as a wacky John Hughes film. Steve Martin and John Candy were both even considered for Short's role.

The camera really hangs on that clearly fake photo of a young Martin Short.

"Incentives are important. Learned that in rehab."

Seeing "dead" Captain Ron getting poked with a stick still makes me laugh.

Ron claims to have been on the USS Saratoga, a ship that was sunk in a nuclear bomb test in 1946. How old is he?

I love how Ron gets the party going again at St. Haag by doing a little dance and saying, "Hey hey!" And it works.

My brother says, "Get me a beer, swab," to this day because of this movie. 

"Now that you got a little coin in your jeans, let's make this game a little more interesting."

"You want a beer, you get your own."

The shower scene provides a bit more nudity than you'd expect for PG-13.

Martin Short lets out a great scream when the sander knocks him off the boat. 

Ron's plan for Swab to get the anchor was great, just taping bricks to feet and sending him underwater. 

I think Martin's family should ditch him for Ron. Martin sucks.

"He's gone storm crazy! I've seen this before!"

Getting kicked off the island is what Martin deserves for snitching on Captain Ron. 

"I've always been a fast healer. Of course, I believe in Jesus Christ. It helps."

..

Halloween Month: "They Live"

*As always, I write these articles under the assumption that you’ve seen the movie. So...SPOILERS.

As I was rewatching The Thing, I started thinking about other John Carpenter movies I love, and I knew I had to revisit They Live. Carpenter movies are like Pringles to me, I can’t stop after just one. The other thing about my favorite Carpenter movies (The Thing, They Live, Escape from New York) is that when I’m watching them, I start to think that particular movie might be my favorite of all time. And since I recently crowned The Thing as my favorite, my top pick was vulnerable. I got past it, though. I still consider The Thing Carpenter’s best work, but man, They Live is a very close second.

A movie starring Roddy Piper made me question the very essence of existence.

They Live is possibly the least subtle anti-capitalist film of all time. In the film, it turns out that we’re all being controlled by aliens through subliminal messaging that intends to keep us docile and, more importantly, shopping. Once Piper puts on the glasses, he sees that money has “This is your God” written on it. It doesn’t take much thought to figure out what this movie has to say about our obsession with greed in the 1980s (and ever since, really).

I don’t have a problem with anti-capitalist messages in film or anything else. Our obsession with money leads to suffering for the many while the few benefit. But I do get a little dubious when I see that message in a movie that I have purchased twice (and the second time it even had a sticker that said “BUY” on it. Isn’t it all a bit hypocritical? Yeah, but what are you going to do? I don’t think it takes away from the message of the film, but it does give me pause. I can’t help but think, Yes, I agree that all this greed is bad, and here’s my money to prove it!

Beyond the hypocrisy of a Hollywood movie preaching against greed, there’s a bigger question that looms behind any kind of story that contains this type of message: if the way we’re living is wrong, then what’s the right way? I ask this question all the time because so much of modern life is critiqued as a waste of life. We all work too much. We watch too much TV/movies/online videos. We play too many videogames. We spend too much time on our phones. We drink too much. We take too many drugs. We eat too much. We read the wrong news. We just have kids because society tells us to. We only have monogamous relationships because society tells us to. We support the wrong politicians.

Basically, we’re all zombies doing exactly what the powerful want us to do so they can take advantage of us. So what should we be doing? Armed rebellion? Against who, precisely? So we should live more simply, then? Just hang out in the woods until we die? No one ever really gives an answer. Or worse, one person’s answer is another person’s example of a wasted life. For example, many would say that focusing on raising children and having a family is most important, but others would argue that our idea of family is a form of control. Or maybe someone says we’re just supposed to enjoy life instead of worry so much about money and possessions. Okay, but what if my idea of enjoying life enjoys eating and partying as much as I want? Doesn’t that put me right back where I started: under the control of society? Or maybe I’m supposed to devote my life to cause for the betterment of a specific group of people. But what’s the right cause? And by picking one, am I saying that another cause isn’t worthy? And let’s go one step further in this existential clusterfuck I’ve created: if we’re all going to end up dead anyway and the sun is eventually going to blow up and destroy the earth, then why do anything ever? In the long run, nothing matters, right? This is why I don’t like thinking too deeply about stuff like this, because my answer always ends up in this dark place where all life has ended and nothing ever mattered anyway. I think we all know this deep down, and we allow life’s distractions to take hold, and we just try our best to have our own version of a full life. For my part, my family is the most important goal of my life. Now that I have a child, I have a pretty clear purpose from here on out. On top of that, I want to read, watch, and play as much stuff as I can, and I want to leave behind as many articles about it as possible. Will all of this disappear someday? Probably. But who cares?

I’m probably overthinking it. Buy maybe not. Perhaps not having an answer is an answer in itself. There’s nothing that can be truly done about it, so fuck it. Just do whatever you think is best. In that way, They Live is more about the fantasy of a having a very specific villain to fight. It’s kind of saying, “Wouldn’t it be nice if we had some alien overlords to fight and kill?” Of course, the allegorical nature of the film suggests that we do have some overlords in the real world: the rich. And the fight is to expose their control over us. I feel like we do that now, and we do fight the good fight. But there are still plenty of people either unaware of the truth or unwilling to believe it. And now we’re embroiled in this constant battle over what the “truth” is. I don’t see this ending anytime soon, either. So I guess what I’m saying is, “Bring on the mind-controlling alien overlords so we have a common enemy!” You know, the Watchmen (comic, not movie) plan.

Back to the actual movie, though. Isn’t it great that such a campy, entertaining movie can lead me down this existential rabbit hole? To be honest, I usually enjoy They Live for it’s surface qualities: the crazy fight scene, Piper’s performance, the funny dialogue, etc. But much like The Thing, it’s nice that there’s the option to take a deep dive when you watch this movie. If you love this movie as much as I do and want to take a deep dive, I recommend this book.

The late, great Roddy Piper

I was always more of an Ultimate Warrior fan growing up, but “Rowdy” Roddy Piper was one of my favorites, as well. Pro wrestling has always been just as much about acting as it has physicality, and Piper was perfectly suited for it. You might not expect much of him as only an actor, though (which is why I poke fun at the idea of a Piper movie making me think about existence in the topic header above). With They Live, he proved he is more than just a wrestler who also acts. Sure, he never became a star along the lines of Dwayne Johnson or anything, but his performance in They Live is special.

It might just be that the character is perfect for Piper. He’s meant to be a hardworking everyman (hence his character name of Nada, which we only learn from the end credits) who is shown what’s really going on and takes action. It also helps that Nada transforms into an action hero after he sees what’s going on, because Piper is a natural for one-liners and shit-talking, in general: the famous bubblegum line (which was written by Piper himself), telling Keith David (who’s great in this, too) to put on the glasses or start eating that trash can, telling an old lady she looks like her face fell in the cheese dip back in 1957, etc. Some of the lines aren’t necessarily that great, but his delivery sells them.

I like Piper in this for the same reason he was so popular as a wrestler: he’s fun to watch. They Live could be a very dark, depressing movie, but with the humor added to the script and Piper’s performance, it ends up being a surprisingly fun look at how our obsession with capitalism is destroying humanity.

The fight.

I’ve seen They Live at least a dozen times, but I’ve watched the fight scene from They Live at least thirty times. It is so ridiculous and awesome that it would make They Live a movie worth watching even if the rest of it was garbage. Thankfully, the fight is just the icing on the cake of awesomeness that is They Live. Let me break down all the reasons why I love this fight.

The fighters - I never knew I wanted to see Roddy Piper fight Keith David until I saw this movie. Not only are they both convincing fighters, they are also hilarious throughout: Keith David saying, “You dirty motherfucker!” after Piper tries to hit him in the balls, only to end up kneeing Piper in the balls multiple times later in the fight; Piper breaking David’s back window and immediately dropping the board, like it was okay if he had connected with David’s skull with the board, but breaking a car window is crossing a line (you don’t fuck with a man’s car, I guess), David then trying to break a bottle into a makeshift knife but breaking it too much, Piper constantly telling David to put on the glasses, etc. It all still makes me laugh after all this time.

The sheer length of it (that’s what she said) - I know this is why the fight is so famous, but it’s so fucking crazy. This is not a movie about fighting. But Carpenter is the type of director to just go with something. So when Piper and David and stunt coordinator Jeff Imada came up with this lengthy fight sequence, he just kept it in rather than doing the normal thing and cutting it down to two minutes or so. What’s crazier is that there are multiple times where this fight could have ended, but it just keeps going. Those are my favorite moments. You keep thinking, “Okay, wow, that was a long-ass fight sc-oh, wait, they’re still fighting!” It’s so perfectly over-the-top.

The way it’s shot - I think I like Carpenter’s movies partly because the guy uses plenty of long takes. He isn’t flashy about it or anything, but in his movies, the lack of cuts makes it easier to follow the action. If this scene had twenty more cuts in it, it wouldn’t be as impressive. By letting it all happen in long takes, we can see how much work the actors and stunt coordinators put into this awesome fight.

There is no real aftermath to it - Yes, David puts on the glasses and teams up with Piper, but aside from a little limping and whatnot, they both seem fine pretty soon after the fight. These guys would be laid up for days after this fight in real life. Instead, we get a nearly six minute, brutal fight, then these guys run off and start killing aliens. I love it.

The sound effects - I love horribly fake punching sound effects, and the sound used here is akin to the crazy loud punches Indiana Jones throws.

The yelling - Both of these guys yelling at each other throughout is pretty funny, but my favorite moment is near the end of the fight. David is resting against a wall, thinking the fight is over for the tenth time, and Piper comes lumbering over. Before he even gets hit, David just starts yelling. These dudes are screaming cavemen at this point.

The reason - This is a fight that happens primarily because Keith David won’t put on a pair of sunglasses. He is truly a principled man. He’ll get into the most epic fight every committed to film instead of simply putting on some sunglasses. I respect that.

Okay, that’s enough about the fight scene. I’m going to watch it on YouTube a couple more times then call it a day.

Do I regret buying this?

My only regret from buying this film twice is that it contributes to the control our hideous alien overlords hold over us. And by watching this film multiple times every year, I am staying asleep instead of taking action. Oh well.

Random Thoughts

The “cripple fight” scene from South Park that recreates this fight is great, but think about it: it was pretty ridiculous for that fight to be in a cartoon; these guys did it live action!

Easily the most political, satirical of Carpenter’s films. But I like it just as much for its surface qualities.

The messages of this movie:

TV turns us into zombies.

The rich and powerful are our alien overlords.

This is all still true.

“I believe in America.”

I love all the real messages: obey, conform, stay asleep, no ideas, no independent thought, marry and reproduce, etc.

My favorite is on money: this is your god.

I couldn't make out what was on the cigarette packs, but I'm sure it was good.

“It figures it would be something like this.”

The film gets so quiet when he gets to Holly's house, and then, seemingly out of nowhere, Piper gets thrown through the window. It's so abrupt it makes me laugh every time.

Keith David tosses that money in the box pretty easily. I wonder how many takes that took.

“Put the glasses on!”

Siskel and Ebert are aliens. That's why they don't like Carpenter’s movies! Seriously, though, it's a bold move to refer to yourself in your own movie.

Halloween Month: "The Thing"

*As always, I write these articles under the assumption that you’ve seen the movie, so...SPOILERS.

After rewatching Slither, which is partly an homage to The Thing, I decided to watch that film next. I’ve always been a little afraid to write about The Thing because it’s so good I feel like I wouldn’t do it any kind of justice. I still feel that way, but I don’t care anymore. I’m not trying to write anything definitive about any of the movies I revisit for this site. I’m just writing what occurs to me as I rewatch them. Still, I find it easier to write about movies like Dracula 2000 than The Thing. I don’t hold Dracula 2000 in very high regard. The Thing, however, I consider one of my favorite movies of all time (perhaps the favorite, but more on that later). John Carpenter is one of my favorite directors, so it’s high time I write about one of his masterpieces.

By the way, I know: "Halloween Month" and I'm not writing about Halloween. I get it, but I don't own that Carpenter movie. I like it, but I prefer his sci-fi work over his straight up horror films.

The Thing is a moody masterpiece

The amazing, gross, shocking, still impressive to this day, practical special effects of The Thing usually take center stage when the movie is brought up. I completely agree with that, but there’s not much I can add to that subject. Instead, I wanted to focus on what keeps bringing me back to this movie: the mood.

Mood, or atmosphere, in film is very important to me. I want the world of the film to feel real. I don’t think I’m alone in that since people tend to prefer practical sets and effects in movies these days. If you some CG creation, it takes you out of it. Since movies are meant for escapism, we don’t want to be reminded that they’re movies while we’re watching. I cannot think of a movie that keeps you in its world better than The Thing. The special effects play a big part in that. The defibrillator sequence comes to mind. I’ve seen that scene (and the movie in general) at least a dozen times, and I still get drawn in every time I see it. When the Norris-thing’s head separates itself and sprouts legs and crawls off, I watch in awe. I don’t think, “How did they do that?” I just think, “What the fuck is that thing?” I feel like I’m in that room with the characters.

Effects alone don’t accomplish that feeling, though. The setting is a big part of it for me. For whatever reason, I’m a sucker for sci-fi films that take place in secluded settings. Antarctica, a space ship, an island, whatever. As long as it’s a place apart from the rest of society I’m in. It’s not because I hate society or anything (I’m not a big fan, but I take part in it), it’s that secluded settings allow for a no rules scenario. Anything can happen. There’s no calling 911 or anything like that.

The separation from the rest of the world is key for this film. Getting help from the outside world is never seriously considered. Sure, they keep trying to get someone on the radio, but it’s never presented as a real possibility. And when the power gets cut off, the situation becomes even more dire. But instead of worrying about surviving, the characters pretty quickly decide they need to stop the Thing, even though they know they will die no matter what. That bleak scenario always appeals to me: in the face of certain death, the characters put their own survival to the side to accomplish their goal.

Simply being separate from humanity isn’t enough on its own to create a truly memorable setting, though. The bleakness of Antarctica is a character in itself in The Thing. Much like movies that take place in deep space, like Alien, the setting says something about the characters. What were their lives like that led them to choose this area for a job? The Thing is fairly light in traditional character development. We know very little about these men, and we only get slight hints at their relationships to one another. But I still don’t consider them underwritten characters, partly because of the setting. To take a job at a research station in Antarctica says something about all of them, especially the non-scientific characters. Who takes a job as a pilot, a mechanic, a radio operator, a doctor, a cook(!) in Antarctica? I don’t need a backstory in that scenario; their very presence there says plenty about them.

The final piece to establishing mood in The Thing is the score. The Thing is unique in that the score was not done by Carpenter himself, though if you didn’t see the credits you might think he was the composer. Ennio Morricone did the score, but it is very Carpenter-like. More importantly, it’s eerily perfect for the film without drawing attention to itself. Morricone’s score (which he re-used a bit and used unused portions of for Tarantino’s version of The Thing: The Hateful Eight) is the icing (no pun intended) on the cake of this film. It completes the overall feel of the film that brings me back to it multiple times a year.

It’s time to rethink my favorite movie of all time.

As a movie guy, a common question I get is, “What’s your favorite movie of all time?” As any movie buff will tell you, it’s very hard to narrow it down to a single film. Hell, I don’t think I could make a top 100 list without feeling like I’m forgetting something I love. Rather than say something annoying like that, I decided years ago that I would go with Apocalypse Now. I do love that film, and I watch it at least once a year. But I’ve never felt entirely comfortable giving it the number one spot. As I started to watch The Thing again, it just hit me: I love everything about this movie. I never get tired of revisiting the world of The Thing. With Apocalypse Now, I need to be in a certain mood to watch it. I think I could watch The Thing no matter what mood I’m in. So I think I’m going to start telling people that The Thing is my favorite movie of all time. But it’s more than just the mood of the film that led me to this.

As I stated above, I’m not trying to write a definitive article about this movie, but I feel like I need to at least nerd out about why I love it so much if I’m going to call it my favorite movie of all time. I’ll start with Carpenter. John Carpenter is one of my favorite directors of all time. His films are unpretentious, and they are just genuinely entertaining. With a Carpenter film, you know you’re going to get a unique world, and something dark and interesting is probably going to happen. He’s had his misfires, but when a Carpenter film is really working (The Thing, Halloween, The Fog, They Live, Escape from New York, Assault on Precinct 13), it’s simply awesome.

The Thing is also helped by its great cast. Kurt Russell is particularly great here, mainly because he’s not a typical hero. Sure, he takes charge in this film, but he’s not like Snake Plissken; he’s not a professional badass or anything, which actually makes him more interesting. And Keith David is always great. Wilford Brimley nearly steals the film, especially when you consider his freak out scene. There’s not a weak link in the cast.

The story is endlessly interesting because of the classic gimmick of trust. Who is the Thing? Or, who isn’t the Thing? Stories about paranoia in which the characters can’t trust each other are great for rewatching. The Thing can be studied intensely, or you can just casually enjoy it. I prefer to casually enjoy it, but if I wanted to I could really dissect it and try to figure out who was the Thing at what point and why did the Thing do this or that. I’d rather just enjoy the overall film, but it’s nice to have the option to give a deep dive into the story, too.

It all comes down to the look and sound of the film, though. This movie looks so fucking good, even by today’s standards. Actually, it looks better than most of today’s movies, and that amazes me. I get absorbed into this movie every time, and it’s because of the look and sound of it. It’s rare that I watch a movie at home and truly pay attention to it. But The Thing demands your attention because it’s so good. How can you look away from this movie, even at its most gruesome moments? Yeah, this is my favorite movie of all time.

Pretty sure The Thing is the inspiration for Dana Gould’s “Grady’s Oats” sketches for The Ben Stiller Show

Okay, there’s a lot in the topic header. Let’s start with the “Grady’s Oats” sketches. I’m a big fan of Ben Stiller’s short-lived sketch show from the early ‘90s. One of the funnier recurring sketches in one episode involved comedian Dana Gould (in heavy makeup and prosthetics) portraying Wilford Brimley as the unhinged spokesman for Grady’s Oats in a sendup of Brimley’s actual sponsorship of Quaker Oats. Over the course of three ads, Gould’s Brimley reveals dark family secrets, yells at oats, and eventually brandishes a gun and shoots at neighborhood children, likely hitting at least one.

It’s that final meltdown that reminded me of The Thing. The gun Gould uses is similar to the gun Brimley uses in The Thing when he loses his shit. I love that Brimley freak out scene, and it might be the scene that puts this film over the top to become my favorite of all time. But is that scene truly the inspiration for the sketches? I don’t see how it couldn’t be.

I tweeted at Dana Gould and asked him, but he didn’t respond, either because my question was so damn random or because he was too busy tweeting his outrage with our present political situation or both. I’ll need to check out the show again on DVD and see if there is a behind the scenes thing about it, but I don’t recall anyone mentioning The Thing in regards to the sketch when I watched it before. But look at the evidence.

Do I regret buying this?

Take a guess. Fuck no. That said, I do wish I had held out for the collector’s edition that came out a while back. I’ll probably go ahead and get it, which means I will have bought this movie four times. My only regret is that I’m a sucker for special editions.

Random Thoughts

Russell has never been cooler

They are way too quick putting out the dog thing fire. I would've given it at least another minute. So the fire spreads. So what? Did you see what was happening in that kennel? Let ‘em burn.

Man, I love Wilford Brimley’s freak out scene. “I'll keel YOU!”

Brimley just hanging out, eating Dinty Moore beef stew...next to a noose he made.