• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

    Vote now in wave 1 of the FEOTM Reboot!

"The Thing" from 1951

As promised, here is the final trailer; an extended and tweaked version of the my first vintage trailer, featuring alternate footage:


And here is a direct comparison with the original The Thing from Another World trailer on which it was based:



These have both been added to the OP, along with a sample of the dog scene. Many of you will have seen a longer demo of this from early on in the project. There have been changes since then, although nothing too drastic.
 
Here's a small clip transitioning back and forth between original and fanedit (also added to OP):

 
There's something really captivating about that dated, low-quality audio. Can't wait for this.
 
One final clip :)

For whatever reason, this is my favourite moment in the edit and I had a lot of fun scoring it. Peak drama! Bonus points if you can guess where the music is from...

 
@The Scribbling Man you've created a really fantastic gem here. The amount of work you put into this is inspiring and I'm loving your commentary track and learning a ton. Thanks for making this edit and providing such a rich learning experience for us all through your commentary track!
 
Thank you @DigModiFicaTion for your prompt, detailed and kind review! I'm so glad you enjoyed it :)

As for the stop motion towards the end, there is no additional processing/added damage. The footage is simply in terrible shape, to the point where some shots were just straight up unusable. I upscaled it and did some very limited repair with virtual dub, but ultimately it was beyond my skillset to do anything notable with it. The opening disclaimer mentions that "a handful of scenes still display some heavy damage [due to interdimensional travel]", which is meant to excuse it somewhat with the concept, but it was a controversial move to put it in and I appreciate that it was possibly jarring in light of how the bulk of the edit is presented.

If you remember specifics for where you found the audio to be abrupt and are able to give any timecodes, I'll take a look.
 
After having recieved positive reviews from everyone who has watched your edit, do you think you might do the same type of edit for "the day the earth stood still "1951+2008 in the future?
 
Gary2129 said:
After having recieved positive reviews from everyone who has watched your edit, do you think you might do the same type of edit for "the day the earth stood still "1951+2008 in the future?
Click to expand...

I've not seen the Day the Earth Stood Still remake, so I have no current plans for that (though I'm open to watching it and seeing if anything sparks). I do, however, have general plans for similar edits. The concept and nature of each edit would vary, but the main premise of vintage edits of modern films or edits from an alt history is definitely one I want to explore further. A big part of The Thing was rescoring, but for another project I currently have in mind I'd expect more of the changes to be visual and involve pulling footage in from multiple sources.
 
It might be difficult with TDTESS. The movie is very modern looking technology and fashionwise. Parts of the plot surrounding tech would also be difficult to replicate in a 50's approach.
 
Once the dust settles a bit with this edit I will probably open an ideas thread specifically for the parallel universe/"movies from another world" concept. I currently have 3 well developed ideas for other edits within this concept and they all will be slightly different in approach.


In other news, now that this is complete, I've decided I will be going forward with what I originally planned to do and work on "The Thing for Another Audience". This will be making use of a lot of the cuts and changes for The Thing from 1951, but will be a version that is updated to allow for a viewing in original widescreen and colour, essentially functioning as a version of the film for those that would just like it toned down. Because some of my changes have relied on the black and white and 4:3 framing, inevitably there will be differences and I will probably go more extreme with the cuts to ensure that it is suitable for those that find the body horror a bit too much.

For the fun of it, if it's not too much trouble, I may see if I can still include the 50s audio as an option as well.
 
Last edited:
So, another retro-vibe series of edits is coming? :)

50s, black & white and 4:3 are not necesarilly my... thing (pun intended) but still, fingers crossed. The more transformative edits, the better.
 
Thank you to everyone who has dropped a review so far. It really means a lot to see that people are enjoying it!

@futon88 you mentioned in your review how the damaged stop motion footage might have worked better if previous moments had been made to look similar. Were you referring to the whole edit or just saying it would work better to have it look that damaged more than once? There are two other instances of added damage in the edit, but I don't let them linger too long, and the footage isn't anywhere near as damaged as in the stop motion scene.

Also, you mentioned that it wasn't too campy (as a good thing). Given your awareness of that risk, did you watch the restrained or the dramatic audio? (just curious)
 
The Scribbling Man said:
Were you referring to the whole edit or just saying it would work better to have it look that damaged more than once? There are two other instances of added damage in the edit
Click to expand...
Just meant having more than one clip where the damage was obvious. But it sounds like they were there, but I didn't notice. Now I can't tell if that's a good thing or a bad thing!

Regarding the audio, it was whatever my TV picked as the default, but I'm pretty sure it was the dramatic audio. And to be fair, I had a smile on my face the entire time. If it was your intent to make it campy, I think you succeeded, and if it was your intent to make it not too campy, I think you succeeded. :)
 
futon88 said:
Just meant having more than one clip where the damage was obvious. But it sounds like they were there, but I didn't notice. Now I can't tell if that's a good thing or a bad thing!
Click to expand...

No worries! That's good to know. I didn't want the whole edit to look damaged as that's not really my thing (pun unintended) and I really liked how the film looked in black and white, but a little bit here and there to help sell the added stop motion is just fine. I don't intend on diving back into the edit any time soon (unless I have to), but if enough feedback comes in to warrant an update then I will def bear this in mind and maybe see if I can ease the viewer in with some more damage. The drop in quality there seems to be the main point of feedback.

futon88 said:
Regarding the audio, it was whatever my TV picked as the default, but I'm pretty sure it was the dramatic audio. And to be fair, I had a smile on my face the entire time. If it was your intent to make it campy, I think you succeeded, and if it was your intent to make it not too campy, I think you succeeded. :)
Click to expand...

Ha! Thank you. I'm glad you enjoyed it regardless. Yes, the default would have been the dramatic score :)
 
I'm glad you didn't "damage" the entire thing. I actually find that kind of treatment exhausting to watch. You went to great pains to ensure the framing looked professional, so it's fair for the quality of the photography to match up, I think. Also, 4:3 needs a renaissance. Who do we call?
 
futon88 said:
I'm glad you didn't "damage" the entire thing. I actually find that kind of treatment exhausting to watch. You went to great pains to ensure the framing looked professional, so it's fair for the quality of the photography to match up, I think. Also, 4:3 needs a renaissance. Who do we call?
Click to expand...

I do think there is an unfortunate common mindset that 4:3 is "old" and superseded by widescreen, mainly because people want their screen filled and a wider image has become the standard. I recently watch an open matte version of Jurassic Park and there is actually MORE visual information because it is before it has been cropped to widescreen. Regardless, it has black bars at the sides and so the person I was watching it with said that even though they know there's more to see, psychologically they feel as though they are getting less, that it's a downgrade. Similarly with colour being seen as an "upgrade" from black and white, when both can bring entirely different moods that the other can't. That being said, I think there is a bit of a slow resurgence and you do see some experimentation in that area. Films Bait and The Lighthouse are both deliberately filmed to look old, and so are rendered in black and white with a more "archaic" aspect ratio, but you also have more experimental modern examples like The Electrical Life of Louis Wain (2021), which makes marvelous use of its 4:3 aspect ratio and it really does compliment the film in a unique way. Homecoming is a TV series that uses a square aspect ratio with a very boxed in look, but transitions back to widescreen for select scenes in order to convey different things. It's marvelously effective.
 
As for ARs - 4:3 may show different things, more (or even reveal too much) and sometimes I like to watch open matte versions of some movies like, for example - The Abyss, Predator, Running Man or Total Recall (and - of course - prefer to watch OAR 4:3 than chopped 16:9), but when I know that 4:3 is just chopped from the sides, then this is a different situation. I've reframed a couple of movies to 2.35:1 shot by shot (because I like the look of that AR), but altenate 4:3 framing just needs to offer something that is not there in wider framing, If I were to watch it (this is not about this particular edit - just general thought)
 
^^ That's understandable and obviously you like what you like. Personally, I do think 4:3 framing can offer something different in much the same way that a wider aspect ratio can. For me it just gives potential for a different atmosphere; with this edit I felt like I had freedom to bring focus on specific elements or create new subjects of shots; I also think there's power in what you choose to not show as much as what you show. I know you're speaking more generally, but just in case it wasn't apparent: this edit is a shot-by-shot reframing and not just chopped at the sides.

Your feelings on framing may be a little similar to me on film damage. I appreciate grindhouse edits but I'm not naturally drawn to them. I would rather see a crisp presentation than something that's made to look in worse condition, but obviously the degrading of the quality is necessary for creating the experience of a 1970s grindhouse film. Similarly, my 4:3 framing is a core part of creating the experience of a 1950s b-movie.
 
The main advantage of grindhouse treatment is that it allows to use worse quality source in the way it won't be too jarring/noticeable. I have an edit in line, that won't be really grindhoused, but deleted scenes look that way, so I'll just make the main movie footage looks "grindhouse" to have a consistent look.
 
Last edited:
The Scribbling Man said:
I will be going forward with what I originally planned to do and work on "The Thing for Another Audience". This will be making use of a lot of the cuts and changes for The Thing from 1951, but will be a version that is updated to allow for a viewing in original widescreen and colour, essentially functioning as a version of the film for those that would just like it toned down.
Click to expand...

This sounds awesome, and it reminds me of an edit idea I had a few years ago for some friends who I think would really like some scary movies... except the scary parts. Maybe I'll finally get around to it this summer! Love the films from parallel worlds concept because it's a frame that my friends and I already use to talk about hypothetical other versions of movies we'll (probably?) never get to see.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom