MovieChat Forums > The Thing (2011) Discussion > They of course HAD to have a female in t...

They of course HAD to have a female in this terrible film


Because otherwise it would be SEXIST! Femmo's really have taken over the world, I bet you feminists actually prefer this terrible mess over the original masterpiece just because of the inclusion of a female who can't act. And then we have the "romance" and all the silly jokes that make men look like horny idiots, is this meant to be a horror or a romantic hormone comedy!? And then we have the over feminine conversations between the lead female and the other one, and the message is of course "oh we have to protect and worship you special beings because you have a vag", my god! In the 1982 film there was never a female in the Norwegian video tapes, but let's just be the feminists that we are because that will sell more and we won't get in trouble. This film was set in 1982! Women didn't go to Antarctica, they stayed at home and took care of the kids and let the men do what men had to do. Also, it's set in 1982 but it doesn't in any way feels like it does, the woman talks like a typical 21st century feminist. Maybe you should be more involved in making a great film! I'm not even going to start about all the other atrocious mainstreaming for the dumb calves that this horse can is littered with.

After 40min I skipped through the horror that this movie is, the CGI was also terrible and what is with all the "action" scenes? Makes it look like a video game. Ugh. 1/10

reply

"In the 1982 film there was never a female in the Norwegian video tapes"
------------
There was in the photo that Blair was looking at that showed the Norwegians and the Ice Block.

reply

I will need to watch again and freeze frame that scene, thanks!

Last year I analyzed the movie and freezed scenes to account for who is present and to identify everyone based on their jackets and clothing. It was a lot of fun to find that several people are missing in different scenes where "things" are popping off (pun intended xD). So it allows you to analzye who could be the thing and even when they turned. I was able to decipher some questons I held for the longest time!

But the picture and a woman in it? Thats really neat and I never thought to look for that.

reply

Thanks for the laugh. Feminimism will surely be the death of us all!

...give me a break, and watch Emma Watson's recent speech to the U.N. about the subject, you chauvinistic ass.

reply

[deleted]

Any respectable man would.

reply

Any ignorant chauvinist would, actually.

reply

LOL!

reply

[deleted]

1982 is not that long time ago, man. I see your point, the hero was made a woman for a reason, an ideological reason, but I don't think it ruined the film and again, 1982 is not 1952. She went there because of her expertise, not to fight off monsters, so there isn't anything weird about a woman in Antarctica in 1982. She was one of only two women in a group of twelve or something.

reply

You're absolutely serious? If a woman is a heroine it's only for ideological reasons? There wasn't an ounce of gender politics in this whole movie, it's only what some idiots are projecting onto it, some very sad lonely idiots(not you btw, OP).

So I guess Ripley was just a feminist statement, too, then. As was Sarah Connor? Every woman that ever picks up a gun, huh?

reply

Ripley and Sarah Conner are the only good major sci-fi female heroines, that's just it.

"*beep* the law, i want meat"-Nightbreed.

reply


You're absolutely serious? If a woman is a heroine it's only for ideological reasons? There wasn't an ounce of gender politics in this whole movie, it's only what some idiots are projecting onto it, some very sad lonely idiots(not you btw, OP).

So I guess Ripley was just a feminist statement, too, then. As was Sarah Connor? Every woman that ever picks up a gun, huh?


yes probably. I mean yea there can be woman heroine's but its just not the norm yet this is the complete opposite you see in films.

Case and point the film "sicario" is being criticised because the female lead has a problem dominating the men around her.

I wonder how long until gay people start getting the same treatment in films.

reply

Here's the problem with posting on Internet message boards - my response to you is going to come across as sarcastic, but it really isn't.

I wonder how long until gay people start getting the same treatment in films.


This is unrealistic in both reality and in film, because if there's any group in society with more power, it's people who are gay. Hollywood just can't wait to cast them as leads in major action/horror pictures. This will happen right after they stop being cast as window dressing or the cute girl's bestie. There were exactly zero major Hollywood releases in 2015 that featured a gay action lead. So, I'm not sure if you're trying to make a valid point here and used the wrong group, or if you're simply just using a subtle form of gay bashing.


Case and point the film "sicario" is being criticised because the female lead has a problem dominating the men around her.


Maybe - but you know what? Movies feature a host of scenes and scenarios that men can't do either. I mean things that are physically impossible, regardless of gender. It's what happens in things called movies. I'm unsure as to why everyone is so caught up on the gender of the lead. It's not as if she was treated as superior to the men. She was simply a member of a group of people stuck in an unrealistic situation. Just as the poster you originally responded to pointed out, you'd have to dig hard to find any sort of ideological agenda. Women are a big part of society. It's not unrealistic for them to show up - sometimes as the lead - in outrageous movies doing outrageous things. Just like men do in most action movies.

yes probably. I mean yea there can be woman heroine's but its just not the norm yet this is the complete opposite you see in films.


There were 347 studio films released in 2015. If you can give me just 10 examples - not even 4 percent - where there's an unrealistic portrayal of a female heroine, as opposed to an unrealistic portrayal of heroic men, I'll concede your point.

Now, if you'd like to talk about sexism and the unrealistic dynamic that exists between the final girl and every male around her in slasher movies, that's something I can actually get behind.

reply

"She was one of only two women in a group of twelve or something."
----------
I think it was actually a group of 15 people (plus the NORGE Chopper Pilot at the end) at the Norwegian Base.

reply


1982 is not that long time ago, man. I see your point, the hero was made a woman for a reason, an ideological reason, but I don't think it ruined the film and again, 1982 is not 1952. She went there because of her expertise, not to fight off monsters, so there isn't anything weird about a woman in Antarctica in 1982. She was one of only two women in a group of twelve or something.


I wouldn't have minded if they went with an older more rugged woman, But hollywood wanted a young 20 something babe. In the 1982 version. I don't have a problem with Winstead's performance though.

reply

So a movie having a female lead equals feminism now?

No... Wait, there are people who LIKED the sausage fest that was the 82 movie?

reply

Is it unrealistic for a woman to be part of an Antarctic Research Team in the 80s? I think not, the original script of The Thing (1982) featured a female researcher. But I agree with the OP that it was a calculated decision to make the lead character a female. Also that Winstead got the part is obvious, because of Scott Pilgrim vs. the World she was/is every nerd's wet dream, and nerds were the target group of this prequel.

So a movie having a female lead equals feminism now?

No, but today having a male lead with a big gun with no female matching in strength equals sexism to some delirious people who think of themselves as feminists. Action oriented films and videogames are in shambles because of them.




FURIOUS 7 - 4.3.15 That's right... Diesel-time, b!tches

reply

"Is it unrealistic for a woman to be part of an Antarctic Research Team in the 80s?"
-------------------
How BIG and small do Research Teams in Antarctica usually get in this day and age ?

reply

Two dudes and a blowup-doll, a female one of course.



FURIOUS 7 - 4.3.15 That's right... Diesel-time, b!tches

reply

millefeul@ gotta not like and think very low of a girl that uses the words "sausage fest." Kinda skanky.
Do you drink beer and burp and grab your crotch too to keep up with the boys that you're trying to impress?

reply

to the OP: Exactly!

reply

Sounds like someone has some issues with women.

Lol.

reply

I liked that they went with a female lead in this, it made the men flabbergasted she was taking charge.

reply

You do realize that in Carpenter's film he originally cast a female crew member but she got pregnant and was replaced last minute by a male actor, right?

reply