Timeline for Has John Carpenter commented on The Thing (2011)?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
31 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 26, 2016 at 3:01 | comment | added | Fiksdal | @WadCheber Wow. :) | |
| Apr 25, 2016 at 23:58 | comment | added | Wad Cheber | @DavidStarkey - At the risk of tooting my own horn, I doubt there's anyone on M&TV (or here, for that matter) who is as obsessed with The Thing as I am. I would put my Thing-expert-credentials to the test with anyone on Stack Exchange. That doesn't mean that a similar question about a different franchise would be better suited for SF&F, but I can knock any Thing-related questions out of the park because I've spent years reading/watching everything I can find about it. | |
| Apr 25, 2016 at 23:51 | comment | added | Wad Cheber | @Broklynite - It fits perfectly on both sites, so it is simply a matter of the OP's preference. See also: scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/101948/… | |
| Apr 25, 2016 at 3:46 | vote | accept | Fiksdal | ||
| Apr 25, 2016 at 3:31 | comment | added | Wad Cheber | @Fiksdal - Thanks! I finally got around to answering it, even later. :) | |
| Apr 24, 2016 at 23:48 | answer | added | Wad Cheber | timeline score: 10 | |
| Apr 22, 2016 at 16:51 | comment | added | Fiksdal | @WadCheber Here's your reminder... A bit late. | |
| Apr 18, 2016 at 4:29 | comment | added | Fiksdal | @WadCheber Hehe, I'll try, but I have to admit that I'm somewhat forgetful myself. | |
| Apr 18, 2016 at 4:27 | comment | added | Wad Cheber | Sure, if you want. | |
| Apr 18, 2016 at 4:03 | comment | added | Fiksdal | @WadCheber you want me to remind you? | |
| Apr 18, 2016 at 3:21 | comment | added | Wad Cheber | Remind me to get to this tomorrow. | |
| Apr 14, 2016 at 16:01 | comment | added | Fiksdal | @CBredlow Then open a vote to move it there. Btw, Carpenter's comments on the '11 movie are relevant to in-universe subjects, as it determines whether the '11 movie is canon or not. (The accepted answer indicates that it is not canon for fans of the '82 movie.) | |
| Apr 14, 2016 at 0:35 | review | Close votes | |||
| Apr 14, 2016 at 1:13 | |||||
| Apr 14, 2016 at 0:19 | comment | added | CBredlow | Belongs on the movie stack exchange site. | |
| Apr 13, 2016 at 14:58 | comment | added | Fiksdal | @DavidStarkey Alright, thanks. | |
| Apr 13, 2016 at 14:57 | comment | added | David Starkey | @Fiksdal This might be a case where there is overlap. Generally you ask on the site you believe the experts for your question would be. I think of this site being more in-universe questions while Movies.SE would be more "behind the scenes". However, if there was an out-of-universe question about something like Star Trek, I'd imagine the experts to answer it would be here. This Meta seems to suggest leaving it here, though. | |
| Apr 13, 2016 at 14:55 | comment | added | Fiksdal | @Broklynite Yeah, yeah, all my comments and my question were also in the spirit of curiosity/discussion. Thanks for you input. Again, I think any comment/endorsement/involvement from JC would be very relevant and interesting to know about. Also, when you make an official prequel to someones creative work, incorporating many similar graphical appearances, and aiming for continuity between the stories, their opinion is ethically, if not legally, relevant. | |
| Apr 13, 2016 at 14:48 | comment | added | Broklynite | @Fiksdal calm down please, my question was meant in curiosity and not in snark. As for your question: Assuming another company had acquired the legal rights to the story (a not unreasonable possibility) and decided to do a prequel (remembering that it was originally a short story), then no, I don't see Universal having a leg to stand on. So you're comparing the director (who has no legal rights to the film, the studios do) of one movie with a separate movie; he has no legal authority to state anything aside from perhaps "this is not my movie" or "I like/hate it." | |
| Apr 13, 2016 at 14:40 | comment | added | Fiksdal | @DavidStarkey OK. I'm not familiar with either of these sites, and this is my first question to either. You can open a vote to move the question there. | |
| Apr 13, 2016 at 14:34 | comment | added | David Starkey | @Fiksdal I was referring to the OP, not the comments. | |
| Apr 13, 2016 at 14:09 | comment | added | Fiksdal | @DavidStarkey Are you talking about the questions in OP or the question I posed to Broklynite? If the latter: Yeah, but it was kinda rhetorical anyway, so won't post it there. | |
| Apr 13, 2016 at 13:39 | comment | added | David Starkey | This seems like a question better suited for Movies.SE | |
| Apr 13, 2016 at 11:51 | comment | added | Fiksdal | @Brolynite An interesting question for you: If another studio than Universal had made this prequel exactly the same way that it is, without any deal with Universal, do you think Universal's legal department would have been silent? Just an interesting thought. | |
| Apr 13, 2016 at 11:37 | comment | added | Fiksdal | @Broklynite So I actually think his view on the '11 movie is more relevant to how I think of the '82 movie than the '11 movie itself. See what I mean? Btw, I just watched half of the '11 movie, and I think it's entertaining so far. So I'm enjoying it, and Mr. Carpenters view on it (whatever it is) couldn't really affect that. But it means something for how I see the '82 movie. By the way, while I agree that Mr. Carpenter doesn't have a monopoly on The Thing movies, the '11 movie is not only based on the short story. It takes many graphical things and stuff like that from the '82 movie. | |
| Apr 13, 2016 at 11:22 | comment | added | Fiksdal | @Broklynite I never said he needed to. But clearly his relationship to the 2011 movie is not irrelevant either. I'm just interested in knowing what his feelings towards it is. There are many reasons for that. One of them is that the 82 movie (probably intentionally) left many things unanswered or ambigous for the audience for wonder about. The prequel gives many clues about many things, and therefore it would be interesting to know Mr. Carpenters view on it. In a way, his view on the 2011 movie is more interesting in terms of how we think of the 82 one than the '11 one. See what I mean? | |
| Apr 13, 2016 at 10:56 | comment | added | Broklynite | Why should he need to? His movie was a remake of a movie based on a short story. I love his movie, but I fail to see why he would have any sort of blessing to give. | |
| Apr 13, 2016 at 10:19 | vote | accept | Fiksdal | ||
| Apr 25, 2016 at 3:46 | |||||
| Apr 13, 2016 at 10:12 | answer | added | G.James | timeline score: 22 | |
| Apr 13, 2016 at 9:41 | history | edited | Ixrec |
tags
|
|
| Apr 13, 2016 at 9:29 | review | First posts | |||
| Apr 13, 2016 at 9:42 | |||||
| Apr 13, 2016 at 9:28 | history | asked | Fiksdal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |