The Thing (1982) User Reviews

Today it's still one of the best horror films

[Stibbert · 9/10 · 11 July 2005]

Antarctica, winter 1982. The team on an American research base get surprised by a couple of mad Norwegians who is chasing a dog with a helicopter, trying to kill it. All the Norwegians are killed and the Americans are left with nothing, but a dog, a couple of bodies and questions. That's the beginning of the greatest horror/thriller film I've ever seen.

From the very beginning all to the end you feel the tense, paranoid mood. Helpless and alone out in no-mans land. Ennio Morricone was nominated for a Razzie Award for his score. Why I don't know 'cause as far as I can see his score is simple, creepy and very good. It really gets you in the right mood.

The acting is great! The best performance is probably given by the dog who's just amazing. As for Russell and the others on two legs I can say nothing less.

You may think 1982 and special effects are not the most impressive? Well, think again! You haven't seen it all until you've seen this. Bodyparts falling off and creatures changing forms... Rob Bottin has done a great job witch today stands as a milestone is special effects makeup.

The movie didn't get a big response when it first hit the big screen due to other alien films at the time and so it's not very well known. In fact you can almost consider it an unknown movie. Nobody I've asked have heard of it. However the movie has managed to survive for over twenty years as a cult film on video and DVD. Twenty years is a long time and except for the haircut the movie is still pretty much up to date. This movie is to be considered a classic.

The movie is without doubt one of my, if not my favorite. I've seen it several times, but it's just as good as the first time I saw it. As a Norwegian the only thing I don't like about this movie is that MacReady keeps calling the Norwegians swedes!

Who Goes There?...

[Xstal · 8/10 · 12 September 2022]

You're stationed at an isolated outpost in Antarctica when a helicopter arrives intent on shooting a dog it had been pursuing across the tundra. Things get out of hand and the occupants of the chopper have their ability to pursue curtailed, more permanently than they'd like. Not too long after this carnage it becomes apparent that the pursuing shooters had a pretty good reason for wanting to remove the dog from the land of the living as the dog turns out to have the same aspirations as its pursuers, albeit in various guises, transformations, metamorphoses and reconfigurations.

While this was made in 1981 it remains to this day one of the greatest and most engaging pieces of horror movie making that has ever been created.

Makes more sense now

[BandSAboutMovies · 8/10 · 19 December 2020]

This movie failed at the box office and nearly ruined the career of John Carpenter. Think of that as you watch it. But did it really fail? It made nearly $20 million on a $15 million budget, but audiences must have expected more. Studios certainly did.

Was it because E.T. came out at the same time, as well as so many other science fiction and fantasy films? Did the recession make people not want to watch something so nihilistic? Did the sheer level of gore turn people off? Were people upset that he remade a film some considered a classic*?

After one market research screening, Carpenter asked the audience what they thought. One answered, "Well what happened in the very end? Which one was the Thing...?" When Carpenter said that the answer was up to their imagination, the response was, "Oh, God. I hate that."

How could audiences respond to a movie that did not spoon feed them any of the story beats? That doesn't have a single character to root for or get behind? That is influenced by Lovecraft - as our the other Apocalypse Trilogy installments Prince of Darkness and In the Mouth of Madness - in that ordinary people face off with supernatural horror that they are doomed to be destroyed by, which isn't really what mainstream America wants from a popcorn film?

Yeah, it could be all of those things. Or perhaps, the world was not ready for it. But watching the end of this film, as everyone sits around wondering who has a disease that they can barely understand and know will eventually impact them, yeah. I think the world of 2020 is ready for it.

I wonder what it's like to watch this movie when it screens every year at the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station. I bet it feels pretty real there, too.

In an interview with the AV Club, Carpenter said, "If The Thing had been a hit, my career would have been different. I wouldn't have had to make the choices that I made. But I needed a job. I'm not saying I hate the movies I did. I loved making Christine and Starman and Big Trouble in Little China, all those films. But my career would have been different."

As it was, Carpenter was reluctant to make the film** and nearly quit before it ever started filming. A lifelong fan of Howard Hawks***, he felt that his version of the story - both are based on Who Goes There? by John W. Campbell Jr. - was unbeatable. But as he re-read the original story - spurred on by co-producer Stuart Cohen - he saw how he could make a movie with a vision for his time, just as Hawks had thirty years ago.

Beyond Carpenter, so many talents make this film work. Of course, there are the actors on screen, like Kurt Russell, Keith David, T.K. Carter, Wilfred Brimley, David Clennon and Richard Dysart. But there's also the astounding production design and storyboards from Man-Thing artist Mike Ploog and Mentor Huebner, which were so detailed that several of the shots from this look like carbon copies of their sketches. There's Dean Cundy working to make every shot look amazing - this is his first major studio movie with Carpenter. Want it to get even better? Sure, Carpenter could have done the score, but he got Ennio Morricone****. And finally, the Rob Bottin-lef effects team were pushed to the brink of exhaustion - Bottin was only 21 years old and ended up going to the hospital for exhaustion, double pneumonia and a bleeding ulcer after working for an entire year on the film, sleeping on set - but the work they created will never be duplicated and puts any CGI efforts to remake this film to shame. Carpenter thought that having someone in a suit - like Alien - cheapened the film. He wanted something more. Well, he got it. In the last battle with the Thing, fifty different artists are operating the monster.

We're lucky that this movie exists. I saw it at the drive-in this year and it felt like it could have been made today. It was too imaginative, too nihilistic and too good for most people, even nearly forty years later.

*One of the reviews that upset Carpenter the most came from the co-director of the original, Christian Nyby, said, "If you want blood, go to the slaughterhouse. All in all, it's a terrific commercial for J&B Scotch."

**Originally, Universal was going with Tobe Hooper and Kim Henkel as the team for this movie, but were unhappy with their take. John Landis was also considered, but the film was really greenlit when Alien was such a big deal in 1979.

***How big of a fan is Carpenter? You can see scenes of The Thing from Another World during Halloween.

****Morricone's score for this film was nominated for a Razzie, while his score for The Hateful Eight - which has some unused music from this film in it - won him his only Best Original Score Oscar.

"The Thing" is John Carpenter's masterpiece and one of the best classic horror films!

[ivo-cobra8 · 10/10 · 31 October 2015]

A classic film. John Carpenter's "The Thing" is one of the most entertaining horror films ever made - fast, clever and purely exciting from start to finish. It is one of my personal favorite horror movies. This is how all movies of the genre should be made. Set on an isolated base in Antarctica, this version seems almost to pick up where the original version (The Thing From Another World) left off. The American scientists discover a decimated Norwegian base some miles distant. Everyone is dead, and only the half charred remains of some unidentifiable thing left to smolder outside the compound might offer any answers to what may have happened. The Thing is brought back to the American base and, too late, the scientists realize that it is alive and lethal. The Thing thaws out and is off, not only killing anyone and anything that crosses Its path, but also absorbing them, making Itself into whoever and whatever it wants. The film then turns into a brilliant paranoia piece. Everyone is suspect, anyone can be The Thing, and no one trusts anyone anymore. Gone is the strength and security found when human beings band together in spite of their differences to battle a monster. The group splinters and fear rules supreme. Who is the Thing?

Seriously I Love this movie I love it To Death. I love Escape From New York and I love Escape From L.A. but I also love The Thing so much better this is definitely the best Carpenter film a truly masterpiece classic I love R.J. MacReady - Kurt Russell I love everything about this film that is. Science Fiction, Horror and an Action Epic Film. A lot of the practical effects were left out but the it looked nice and the acting was good and it expanded upon the monsters background and showing you the inside of the ship. It must of been tough to bring across on screen the visual design.

In my opinion, nobody has topped this film in the 25-odd years since its release. I'll put any of "The Thing's" old-school effects up against any CGI-driven movie, or this cast against almost any other ensemble. If you haven't seen the film yet, I envy you because I WISH I could see "The Thing" again for the first time. WOW! Does more need to be said? How about this...there is no parallel. Who's your friend? Who's the Thing? Who do you trust? Who can you afford to trust? If you've never seen this movie...your in for a treat. The only other movie that had such an impact on me was The Matrix (the first movie)...where I left the theater touching the walls wondering if they were really real. This movie will leaving you wondering....is the guy/gal next to you really real?

"Trust is a tough thing to come by these days."

John Carpenter's The Thing is a seminal piece of horror that is not only a fine specimen of its era, but it also serves as a shining example of horror done absolutely right in any era. Combining gross-out special effects reminiscent of Hellraiser, the nail-bitingly intense, claustrophobic filmmaking of Alien, offering a story that is very well-paced, such as George A. Romero's Dawn of the Dead, and presenting the idea that true terror can be found at any time, in any place, and inside anyone, much like Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho, The Thing works on every level, and represents the peak of each and every aspect that may be utilized to make horror films effective. Granted, this amalgamation of styles is not the only formula for winning horror.

The basic plot about this movie is Horror-moister John Carpenter (Halloween, Escape from New York) teams Kurt Russell's outstanding performance with incredible visuals to build this chilling version of the classic The Thing. In the winter of 1982, a twelve-man research team at a remote Antarctic research station discovers an alien buried in the snow for over 100,000 years. Once unfrozen, the form-changing alien wreaks havoc, creates terror and becomes one of them.

It is one of the best favorite horror films of the 80's ever. I love this film to death. The Thing is the best classic horror film from master and genius John Carpenter! 'The Thing' is classic Carpenter and one of the few remakes that is better than the original. Kurt Russell's characters: Snake Plissken, R.J. MacReady and Jack Burton are Kurt's best favorite characters he ever played. I also love the music score from Ennio Morricone! Awesome!!! 10/10 Grade: Bad Ass Seal Of Approval

Good things come to those who wait

[Rainfox · 27 May 2000]

* * * * ½ (4½ out of 5)

The Thing

Directed by: John Carpenter, 1982

Looking back on John Carpenter's The Thing – today a highly treasured cult favourite – one has to wonder why it was dismissed by both the audience and critics when it first came out in 1982.

Steven Spielberg's extra terrestrial adventure about a sweet alien that phoned home (that stole the hearts of both children and adults world wide) had opened just two weeks before and was on its historic box office rampage. Bad scheduling may have had a greater impact than anything else on the fate of Carpenter's first big studio effort for Universal Pictures. Nobody was prepared – moreover wanted anything so dark, gory and scary as this genuine remake of the famous 1951 original. This was the time of E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial.

It then makes for great movie history trivia, that The Thing has gained such a remarkable afterlife on video, DVD and television. Both financially and critically. Carpenter's version is less a remake of the Howard Hawks' version than a more faithful adaptation of John W. Campbell's short story "Who Goes There?' (on which both were based), and critics today point out how well Carpenter plays his characters against each other. Kurt Russell will never top this one, and he gets a brilliant sparring from the entire cast.

It opens in Antarctica with a sled husky running from a pair of crazed and armed Norwegian men in a helicopter. The scene is long, slow and uneasy. It feels like the Apocalypse. It oozes doomsday.

This scene comprises one of the greatest opening sequences in film history.

Ennio Morricone's moody synth score (heavy on naked thumping bass lines in classic Carpenter style), the windswept massive white of the desolate polar ice and the majestic husky running across the tundra chased by the chopper, compromises a completely mesmerizing piece of scenery.

A satisfying example of a movie that today – 18 years after – looks downright muscular in its simplicity.

The budget was big ($14 mill), yet it allowed Carpenter to visualize his ideas better than ever before. There's a brooding darkness to this film, making the whites and blues of the icy Antarctic claustrophobia seem poetic and almost angelic. Dean Cundey's extraordinary photography created a palpable chill to every shot. The careful preparation (the crew went into a record 11-month pre-production) paid off immensely.

Horror specialist Rob Bottin was handpicked for the many gory and grotesque special effects. Be warned – there's a lot of splatter and gore here. The Thing is actually notorious for its creature morphing scenes. Some find them disgusting, some mere cult.

An argument could be made against The Thing being an Alien rip-off; it has its origins in an old sci-fi story and it creates tension by popping a crowd of people (note: all-male) on an isolated outpost (an Antarctic research facility) terrorized by an alien life form.

Where Carpenter was clearly inspired by Ridley Scott's 1979 masterpiece, his own alien movie is original and intriguing in its own right. There's a rhythm and an environment that equals Scott's in every way.

The husky was in fact half-wolf and half-dog, and it was noted that it never barked or growled on or off the set (Horror Takes Shape, the making of - DVD version).

Watch in awe at the scene where it walks through the hallway and stares at a human shadow, slightly tilting its head forward in stalking position like a wild wolf. This is a fine piece of animal training, sure, but that's not the point. This is as spooky as anything ever made in a horror movie.

Carpenter had all the right tools here, and he utilized them to perfection, making The Thing his best movie alongside Halloween.

A classic that still holds up to this very day

[MovieAddict2016 · 10/10 · 26 July 2004]

"I know I'm human. And if you were all these things, then you'd just attack me right now, so some of you are still human. This thing doesn't want to show itself, it wants to hide inside an imitation. It'll fight if it has to, but it's vulnerable out in the open. If it takes us over, then it has no more enemies, nobody left to kill it. And then it's won."

John Carpenter's "The Thing" is one of the most entertaining horror films ever made – fast, clever and purely exciting from start to finish. This is how all movies of the genre should be made.

Taking place in the Antarctic in 1982, the movie focuses specifically on a group of American scientists. We are given no introduction to their mission, but are thrust into their existence when a pair of seemingly crazy Norwegians appears at their base camp, chasing an escaped dog. The Norwegians are killed, and the dog finds its way into the colony, which is when things really start to get crazy.

It is soon made quite clear that the "dog" is actually a shape-shifting alien organism, which manifests itself upon the physical form of its victims – in other words, it begins to eat the Americans, and imitate them so well that the remaining humans cannot discern the difference between their friends and enemies

The pack of scientists, led by MacReady (Kurt Russell), begin to fight for their own survival, using wits instead of brawn. If the Thing is indeed amongst them, then how are they to go about revealing it? How many Things are there? How can the Thing be killed? (Or can it be destroyed at all?)

The creature's origins in the film are explained easily: Thirty thousand years ago a spacecraft plummeted to Earth, and was frozen in the Antarctic ice. The Thing tried to escape, and was discovered in the ice by the Norwegians, who unknowingly released it from its natural prison.

"The Thing," the movie itself, is similar to Ridley Scott's iconic "Alien" (1979). Many comparisons have been made – the protagonists are stranded in a desolate area, stalked by a seldom seen foe that manages to kill them off one-by-one. However, "The Thing" – for all practical purposes – came first.

Based on the famous short story "Who Goes There?" by John W. Campbell, Jr. (writing under pseudonym as Don A. Stuart), the film was originally adapted as a feature production in 1951 by Howard Hawks and Christian Nyby. The result was "The Thing From Another World," an unarguable classic. But to be fair, it bore little resemblance to the short story, and Carpenter's remake does it more justice.

The idea of the Thing being able to adapt the physicality of anyone is what essentially makes this movie so great, and is the most vital link to the short story. In 1951 the special effects were simply too poor to reasonably portray the shape-shifting organism, but thirty-one years brought many advances in SFX.

Creature effects artist Rob Bottin does an excellent job of turning what could have easily become a cheesy gore-fest into a startlingly frightening (and realistic) mess of blood and fear. The Thing, although never actually taking one specific form, is constantly seen in a morphing stage, and the effects are simply superb. They still pack a punch twenty-two years later.

Ennio Morricone's score (nominated for a Razzie Award at the time) is a bit too electronic and tinny, but nevertheless haunting when used correctly.

From the fact that its cast consists entirely of males, to the fact that its ending is one of the most thought-provoking and untypical conclusions of all time, "The Thing" – by any standards – is unconventional Hollywood at its best. It comes as no surprise that, at the time of its release, "The Thing" performed poorly in theaters, and "E.T." – released the same year and featuring a much kinder alien – became the higher-grossing picture of the two (by far).

In the long run, however, "The Thing" is superior in almost every conceivable way. Spielberg's tale is outdated and flopped during its 20th Anniversary Re-Release. "The Thing," on the other hand, has gradually climbed a ladder of cult classics – it is one of the most famous non-famous movies ever made.

Carpenter is notorious for having a very uneven career – from his amazing "Assault on Precinct 13" (1976) to the magnificent "Halloween" (1978) to the disappointing and silly "Escape from L.A." (1996), "The Thing" remains his very best motion picture. Although its reputation over the years has never been honorary enough to land it a spot on most "great movies" lists, "The Thing" is still one of my favorite horror films, and – upon close inspection – masterfully crafted. It is a daring and ingenious thrill-ride that is simultaneously unique and chilling – a genuine relief for film buffs who are tired of the same old horror knock-offs. This one, at the very least, is genuinely unpredictable.

One of the Most Re-Watchable Movies Ever Made

[fullbug · 10/10 · 29 May 2021]

Classic and timeless that is now almost 40 years old. Great cast and character interaction, and covers the whole gambit of genre's (sci-fi, action, horror, thriller, mystery). There are even a few comedy moments, and with it taking place in Antarctica, it could even be classified as an adventure. It is one of the most re-watchable movies ever made.

Finally getting recognition.

[mcseph · 10/10 · 29 September 2001]

I am ashamed to say it, but I have to admit, the first time I saw this film was only about a year ago. After seeing it, I immediately rushed out and bought the DVD collectors' edition and have watched it many times since.

The film is terrific on many levels. It works as your straight monster or action type film, as a horror/sci-fi and also as a very intriguing look into the human psyche. The incredible sense of paranoia, mistrust and fear, lent not only by Carpenter's direction (which is stunning) but also by the incredible acting of the cast in general. Kurt Russell (obviously) is spectacularly understated in the lead role of MacReady, and, as a direct result he "feels" like a real person, rather than a hollywood "all american hero". The other cast members all carry off their roles with style, and the net result is an intensely believable atmosphere, and a truly fantastic film.

Some things work, some things don't

[hall895 · 6/10 · 5 June 2014]

The Thing is a monster movie with a twist. The monster could be the guy standing next to you. Or maybe the monster could even be you. The story unfolds at an American research outpost in Antarctica. Some crazy Norwegians show up, shooting at a dog. Before the Americans can ascertain what is going on the Norwegians are dead. Soon everyone will realize this dog is no dog at all. It's, for lack of a better term, a thing. This thing can take the appearance of other creatures it absorbs. It can become a perfect imitation of any living creature. So now how much do you trust that guy standing next to you? Paranoia overwhelms the group very quickly. This thing is, quite literally it appears, eating the group alive.

Kurt Russell plays MacReady, the helicopter pilot who becomes the leader of the group as they try to stop the thing before it destroys them all. If they don't stop this thing in its tracks and it manages to make its way to civilized areas it will be the end of humankind. So some pressure on our little group then. MacReady is a take-charge kind of guy. But who's to say he's not a thing now? Certainly other members of the group have their doubts. Trust is a commodity in very short supply. Where the film fails a bit is in failing to really establish any characters beyond MacReady. A couple of them stand out because they're portrayed by actors we recognize, Wilford Brimley for example. But it's a largely faceless bunch, not a whole lot of personality in the group. And for a bunch of supposed scientists they're not the smartest group either.

The movie has some decent twists and turns, leaving you guessing along with the characters as they try to determine who's still human. It's an intriguing story but it certainly would have grabbed you more if you really identified with all of the characters. As it is there are too many guys whom you really wouldn't care about should the thing make a meal of them. Characters, and the story as a whole really, too often take a backseat to the gore which director John Carpenter piles on liberally. If you're looking for a gross-out movie you'll find few better. The creature effects are very well done but maybe a little too repulsive for some people's tastes. A little more story, a little less blood and guts, probably would have served the film well. It is a very compelling story. You just wish the filmmakers trusted that story enough to allow it to carry the film. The paranoia, the mistrust, there's so much great tension there potentially. But tension loses out in the quest for gory, scary moments. In a movie such as this you want to have some good frights. But you want the scares to enhance the story, not overwhelm it. The balance in this movie is just a little bit off. It's an interesting movie but there is definitely the sense more could have been done with such a fascinating concept.

Intelligent Splatter

[Gafke · 10/10 · 28 December 2003]

This is another one of those films that I remember staying up late to watch on TV, scaring the crap out of myself at the impressionable age of 12 or so and dooming myself thereafter to a life of horror movie obsession. This is a GREAT movie, and stands as living proof that there were indeed realistic effects before CGI.

Set on an isolated base in Antarctica, this version seems almost to pick up where the original version (The Thing From Another World) left off. The American scientists discover a decimated Norwegian base some miles distant. Everyone is dead, and only the half charred remains of some unidentifiable thing left to smolder outside the compound might offer any answers to what may have happened. The Thing is brought back to the American base and, too late, the scientists realize that it is alive and lethal. The Thing thaws out and is off, not only killing anyone and anything that crosses Its path, but also absorbing them, making Itself into whoever and whatever it wants. The film then turns into a brilliant paranoia piece. Everyone is suspect, anyone can be The Thing, and no one trusts anyone anymore. Gone is the strength and security found when human beings band together in spite of their differences to battle a monster. The group splinters and fear rules supreme. Who is the Thing?

The gore effects here are absolutely amazing and messily realistic. I could have done without the dogs head splitting open like a banana peel, but that's just the animal lover in me being picky: kill all the humans you want, but leave the kitties and puppies alone. Sanity and reason disintegrate rapidly as, one by one, the humans are taken over by the shapeshifting alien. The power of this film lies in its paranoia, and although I liked the original version, I prefer this one; the real threat lies within, and is scarier for the fact that it cannot be seen or easily detected. When it is forced out of hiding, it's wrath is huge and the results are horrific.

This is one of Carpenters best films, right up there with The Fog and Halloween. All of the actors give strong, realistic performances and the special effects are so powerful that they stand as their own main character. This film has something for any lover of the horror genre. Don't miss it.

More of a gross out film than a well-crafted horror.

[bscrivener-50810 · 6/10 · 17 January 2016]

The Thing is a 1982 sci-fi horror film directed by John Carpenter and stars Kurt Russell as Mack MacReady, a researcher based in Antarctica and our protagonist in the film. Upon its release, The Thing was met with a lot of mixed reviews and overall a negative reception, however over the years has gone on to gain a cult following and a legendary status in the history of sci-fi, horror and cinema as a whole. While The Thing does have its moments, as in the grand special effects of the horrific, repulsive monster itself which still don't look particularly dated by todays standards and the great sense of vulnerability in our characters. It is in these characters that lies the problem. Not one of them is particularly likable or relatable, even Kurt Russell himself. You never get a great sense of caring or hoping for a certain character to make it out alive, rooting for a character just doesn't happen in The Thing. We are also left hanging in the balance by the end of the film with no real climactic epic fight or showdown. The Thing can be tense and generally scary at times, but in reality is a pure gross-out film rather than a well crafted horror. The music however is another strong point which does add to the suspense and the very clever idea of blood samples in the latter part of the film really has us guessing and wondering who is human and who is the monster. While I don't agree the statement that The Thing is one of the greatest horror movies of all time, it does have its tense, pseudo horror moments and shrieking horror soundtrack to build on this. Overall it does feel more of a gross-out, gore-fest with unfortunately unlikeable characters, some rushed scenes and disappointing third act which leaves it feeling incomplete, but with brilliant special effects. 6/10

Flips the scenario round from the original to great effect.

[hitchcockthelegend · 10/10 · 4 March 2008]

John Carpenter shows how much he loves the 1951 original by giving it the utmost respect that he possibly could, the only difference here is that Carpenter chooses to stick to the paranoiac core of John W Campbell Jr's short story.

The secret to this version's success is the unbearable tension that builds up as the group of men become suspicious of each other, the strain of literally waiting to be taken over takes a fearful hold. Carpenter then manages to deliver the shocks as well as the mystery that's needed to keep the film heading in the right direction.

Be it an horrific scene or a "what is in the shadow" sequence, the film is the perfect fusion of horror and sci-fi. The dialogue is laced with potency and viability for a group of men trying to keep it together under such duress, while Ennio Morricone's score is a wonderful eerie pulse beat that further racks up the sense of doom and paranoia seaming throughout the film.

The cast are superb, a solid assembly line of actors led by Carpenter favourite Kurt Russell, whilst the effects used around the characters get the right amount of impact needed. But most of all it's the ending that is the crowning glory, an ending that doesn't pander to the norm and is incredibly fitting for what has gone on before it. Lets wait and see what happens indeed. 10/10

Why do modern audiences so badly overrate this film?

[ugothereur-548-496417 · 6/10 · 4 October 2021]

Maybe they're sick of CGI and fine the film's first rate practical effects refreshing? Could be, but the truth is all the criticism The Thing received in1982 is still valid. Messy, muddled scripting. Unfocused direction, lethargic editing and scoring, and unsympathetic characters make it impossible to create any real suspense. The effects are the star, and that never nade a Transformers movie worth watching. The best scene in The thing is the blood test sequence, and that's because the cutting of the fingers was simple and identifiable. It was human unlike the characters and certainly unlike the film.

Dean Cundey's photography and Rob Bottins practical effects are brilliant, to bad they were surrounded by mediocrity in the other departments.

Stick with the 1951 original. It's superior film. One in which you'll care about the characters and real suspense ( not repulsion) is on display.

A mess and a travesty of the 1951 classic

[mnpollio · 3/10 · 21 April 2011]

There is a good reason why the 1951 The Thing is a classic. Howard Hawks influence is obvious and it packs the excitement, bravado and camaraderie that he brought to his westerns. It introduces us to a variety of characters that are amiable and sympathetic, and balances that with the conflict that erupts between the scientists and military in dealing with the alien threat that confronts them.

Looking for anything of similar depth or entertainment value in John Carpenter's woebegone remake is pointless because it simply does not exist. This film adheres a bit more closely to the source novella by John W. Campbell Jr. Carpenter's version adopts an Invasion of the Body Snatchers mentality, wherein a creature "infects" others and takes on their appearances to move about at will. It is an interesting concept, but it becomes apparent that the sole interest Carpenter has is in crafting progressively gorier and grotesque effects to gross-out the viewer.

The film keeps the same setting in Antarctica and opens with some Norwegians attempting to kill a sled dog. The chase intersects with a group of Americans at a neighboring research facility, who think the Norwegians are crazy. When the dog is sheltered in the American facility, it is revealed to be The Thing of the title. The remainder of the film is basically a guessing game as to who is really human and who has become an assimilation of The Thing.

The storyline sounds infinitely more exciting than it plays out. Carpenter has little to no interest in the characters populating his thriller. There are no women at the base and the men have little to no discernible personalities. There is not a role that is not filled by a capable actor, but no one manages to make much of an impression. Even lead Kurt Russell - doing another one of his lamentable John Wayne imitations - just blends into the bland background of bottled testosterone. Unlike Invasion of the Body Snatchers, where it seemed a distinct tragedy that the central characters were being turned into cold, unfeeling beings, the characters in this film are already relatively emotionless and so we feel no tragedy over their assimilation.

It is easy to understand why Carpenter has no interest in plot, character development, or even building genuine suspense, his attention is too focused on the next special effects/make-up freak show extravaganza. All of the imagination seems to have been funneled into the next gore scene. The initial scene where The Thing departs its guise of the sled dog and launches an attack on the other dogs in the kennel is revolting on more levels than one can care to count. The dog's head splits open and the tentacled creature goes on a bloody rampage assimilating animals all around into a giant writhing wall of quivering flesh and fur that splits open in various spots to reveal writhing bloody innards. Animal lovers be forewarned. Full disclosure, when I initially attempted to watch this film (and being a fan of the 1951 original) I actually walked out of the theater shortly after this sequence. Several years later, I decided to give the film another chance and made it all the way through to the end.

Later sequences are just as repellent. Body parts fly to and fro, chests are crushed, arms are bitten off, limbs take on lives of their own and try to skitter away. Again, lots of imagination, but it would have been far more impressive if Carpenter had channeled this initiative into more substantial areas of his epic. At the time, this depiction was a bit of a surprise coming from Carpenter, whose thrillers had heretofore largely eschewed graphic violence. Here, he makes up for it a hundred fold.

Gradually the men are wittled away. Unfortunately, no one cares. There is no sense of urgency or concern for any of these people. They are all unknowable ciphers and easily interchangeable. We truly cannot tell who The Thing has infected less because of its diabolical nature than because the men are all written and played as colorless cookie-cutter tough guys from the average grade-C action film. Carpenter seems to have no idea how people would genuinely act in such a tense situation and there is no camaraderie amongst the men at all. None of them seem to be friends or work well together - they are a gaggle of lone wolf Marlboro Men braving the great unknown. Despite being isolated together and living in close quarters for months, none of them seem to know even the most minor of things about each other.

The vague, ambiguous ending with two of the characters resting amongst the carnage, sharing a drink and trying to ascertain if the other one is human or The Thing is exceptionally vacuous. For one thing, knowing that The Thing propagates itself through body fluids, why in the world would the two men chance sharing a drink from the same bottle? Then again, do we really care about either of these guys? The answer would be a resounding no.

Interestingly, the film has developed a cult following and fanatics talk about it like it is some sort of a classic. Unfortunately, nothing could have been further from the truth. At the time of release the film was a major box office disappointment and the majority of critical reviews were scathing. In fact, the only people who really seem to consider this some lost classic are gore hounds who think bloodletting should trump storytelling.

A Timeless Look in Paranoia, a Horror Classic

[ChadKuhns · 5 August 2002]

Just to put things in perspective for you before I get into my thoughts on this film, I am only 20 years old and have grown up in the era of CGI, blue screen effects...and this movie was made around the same time i was born.

With that said, WOW, I only recently saw John Carpenter's version of 'The Thing', and what a masterpiece it truly is. I have long since been a fan of John Carpenter, in particular his works from the late 70's and 80's. In 'The Thing' John Carpenter has truly crafted a paranoia inducing, perhaps gut wrenching classic.

The movie is an update of the classic 'The Thing From Outer Space', but only like it's predecessor, this film is in full color, and the characters of this film have much more to worry about than an alien veggie

The film centers around a group of Arctic Researchers you encounter an alien lifeform capable of taking the form of anything it comes into contact with, and out of for that matter. Kurt Russell stars as R.J. MacReady, an alcoholic Vietnam Vet, thrust into the role of leader of a group of relatively cold and callous men all of whom are readily plunging into manic paranoia and somewhat madness once they realize that they are up against a creature that can take any form, be any one of them.

John Carpenter, more than in any other of his films, manages to create a truly believable and incredible atmosphere. When watching this film you truly get the sense of the dark,sinister, desolate surroundings, you feel and realize that these characters have no where to go...never for one second do you not believe they are stuck on a polar ice cap. Also, this film has perhaps one of the greatest endings to any film of it's genre, or any genre for that matter. I'm not going to give it away here, but to say that it will leave you wondering would be an understatement.

Kurt Russell is superb as MacReady....truly conveying the emotions of a man thrust into a situation of unimaginable horror, forced to lead a group of men who cannot trust that the man next to them is not the creature that has driven them to the brink of paranoia and emotional meltdown.

I don't care if this movie is 20 years old by now, the special effects in this movie are gut wrenching, mind blowing, and absolutely awesome. They blow away any CGI pixel based crap out there today. The 'Thing' itself is a truly horrifying and disturbing creation...unlike any alien you have ever seen in a movie before. Those who have a low tolerance for gore and blood had best prepare themselves for watching this movie.

This movie does what any good horror/sci fi movie should do, it really thrusts you into it's character's world. It leaves you wondering, what would you do, who could you trust if anyone you knew could be the creature waiting to feed on you, and take you over as well. The images, and ideals of this movie stayed with me long after i first saw it, and today as i write this review send a chill up my spine.

It is a true shame this movie is only now getting the proper recognition it deserves. A box office flop when released, now more then ever when movies are paper thin with plot, and one dimensional in effects, this film can be appreciated as a true masterpiece of sci/fi and horror.

If possible, get the Collector's Edition DVD, and enjoy it in anamorphic widescreen..the way it is truly meant to be seen. Marvel at the incredible scenery, the taught direction, the excellent atmosphere, the sweat inducing, gag reflex activating, and everything else that makes this movie great.

Watch it with the lights out, with a group of close friends...maybe even with a dog around...if you don't what i'm talking about...you will afterwards.

Don't let a classic pass you bye

Still my all time favorite sci-fi/horror!!!

[PeachHamBeach · 10/10 · 22 May 2008]

The silly saying, "You can't touch this" surely applies here. With all the clone horror and sci-fi films coming out, along with all the inferior remakes, it's hard to find anything worthy of 2 hours of your time. That's why I always rely on the classics that scared the weewee out of me when I was a pre-teen.

THE THING is, without an ounce of doubt in my mind, the goriest, ickiest, screechiest sci-fi horror classic that John Carpenter, or any other director (sorry, even you Mr. Spielberg) ever made. What really gives it power, though, is not the gore (it OOOOOZES of slime and blood and God knows what other fluids), but rather the sense of dread, isolation, and distrust it fosters in the characters and the viewer.

You can't get more remote than Antarctica, and in this howling, freezing white setting is where the story takes place. Several Americans, researchers and military men, are stationed there. One day, they witness a Siberian Husky dog running for dear life from gun-wielding Norwegians. Before they know it, the American outpost is battling a mysterious creature that can imitate any creature it wants. It may morph into disgusting slimy bloody shapes before it's finished, but once it's finished, if you didn't see it in progress, you can't tell it among humans or other normal Earth animals.

Kurt Russell, Keith David, Wilford Brimley, Richard Masur, Donald Moffatt, TK Carter, Thomas Waites and Charles Hallahan are just a few of the fine cast. This film is the reason why horror CAN be a great genre. It actually STILL scares me. The alien blood "jumping" out of the petri dish when the hot wire touches it still makes ME jump!!!

Still the scariest of them all.

I worship this film. 10/10

[The_Wood · 10/10 · 20 April 2002]

John Carpenter's The Thing is hands down the best horror film ever made. Not only that, but it is also on of my personal favorite films of all time. What makes the movie so great? It's hard to put my finger on it. Everything just seems to work in The Thing, it's one of the rare occasions where everything just seems to fall in place. The film is even superior to Alien in creating a type of moody atmospheric hell. The fact that it's not only about the gore (which is wonderful btw), but it is able to create a paranoia that is unmatched in films. A truly wonderful film that is worshiped by all horror buffs, and anyone who has good taste in films.

Right up there with "Halloween"--one of Carpenter's best!

[preppy-3 · 10/10 · 6 December 2003]

Remake of the classic 1951 "The Thing From Another World". 12 men are in a completely isolated station in Antartica. They are invaded by a thing from outer space--it devours and completely duplicates anything it chooses to. It starts off as a dog but gets loose--and has a chance to duplicate any of the men. Soon, nobody trusts anyone else--they're isolated--the radio is destroyed--their helicopter likewise. What are they going to do?

The 1951 film had the thing just be a big, super human monster. That movie was scary. This one is too--but the story is different (and based more closely on the source material--the novelette "Who Goes There?") and it's scary in a different way. The movie starts right off with Ennio Morricone's extremely eerie score setting just the right tone and--when the Thing gets attacked--the amount of gore is astounding. There's blood and body parts flying all over--arms are bitten off, heads detach and--in the strongest one--one man is devoured face first by the Thing. The gore effects are STRONG and real nightmare material. I don't scare easy but I had to sleep with the lights on when I saw this originally back in 1982. Rob Bottin's effects are just incredible--how this picture got by with an R rating is beyond me!

It also has a very creepy feel--gore aside, it is very suspenseful. You're not sure who is what and Carpenter's direction and the score really build up the tension. One complaint--no one is given any distinctive personality traits. They actors just remain straight-faced and say their lines. That's annoying...but the movie still works.

This was a critical and commercial disaster in 1982--it competed with "E.T." and MANY critics complained about the amount of gore and there being no female characters in the movie. It's now considered one of John Carpenter's best. A must-see...for strong stomaches. NOT a date film!

An amusing note: When this was released Universal sent a note along with all prints of the film. They suggested to theatre owners that they play the film in an auditorium near the rest rooms. They were afraid that people would be so sickened by the violence that they'd have to be close to a facility to throw up!

The tagline is no mere jest

[I_Ailurophile · 10/10 · 19 December 2020]

"The ultimate in alien terror," it says. It's not wrong. This is it. This is the greatest horror film ever made. John Carpenter's A-#1.

Cinema is full of great creature designs, yet The Thing bests them all. Every incarnation we see of the creature, and all the practical effects and set pieces that bring it to life, are the best that the industry has to offer. The most realistic CGI will never compete.

The paranoia and distrust in the outpost is palpable. Carpenter crafts a tangible atmosphere of desperation and suspicion, from the unassuming beginning to the classic, ambiguous end--one of my very favorite endings from any movie, ever.

Composer extraordinaire Ennio Morricone lends his great skills with a minimalist, synth-driven score that adds immensely to the building unease. It very well complements the performances of the excellent ensemble cast that bring every feeling of terror and wariness to life. Kurt Russell once again shines as Carpenter's lead, MacReady, and Keith David is superb as the antagonistic Childs. It's easy to overlook other cast members with smaller roles and less time on screen--even the unmistakable Wilford Brimley--but have no doubt, they're all just as good, just as essential to the picture.

Once again: not only is John Carpenter a master storyteller, a fantastic director generally, but his greatest skill is in slowly building the tension and suspense in his pictures until the explosive finale. He does it so well that it's impossible for the viewer not to experience the same misgivings, the same sense of horror, as the characters on-screen--not because you're watching it, but because you FEEL it just as deeply.

It's violent, it's gory, and broadly it may not be for everyone. But this needs to be seen by anyone with the slightest interest in horror, or creature features, or with a keen interest in cinema history as a whole. Similar stories may be told, but there are no and will never be any imitators.

Interesting...but not brilliant

[Rammstein-2 · 6/10 · 7 November 2000]

This is an interesting film, mainly because it is one filled with some of the most disgusting special effects I have ever seen - though I admit that I am fairly new to horror flicks of this kind.

What's good about it? For one thing, it is a very clever touch not to reveal who has been infected and who hasn't until it is absolutely necessary. It is completely impossible to tell who is who, and the suspense raises sky-high because of that.

Also, the performances are actually pretty good, considering the cramped confinement of the set and the sparse and somewhat lame dialogue. These are ordinary men talking, though most of them seem to be more or less criminal in some way.

The beginning is very clever, and it takes quite a while before one gets the hang of why these crazy Norwegian are so eager to hunt the dog with machine guns and hand grenades (!) that they injure one of the Americans in the process. Of course, the first time I saw it, I knew what was coming, but it makes it better nonetheless.

I have a favorite scene in this movie, it is one I will remember forever: when the doctor is trying to resuscitate one of the team members, who has been infected, he gets his hands caught in some weird mouth that opens right in the guy's chest. That is awful. It doesn't matter much that the doc's hands seem to break off by themselves...

What else? Well...it's a cult classic, and deserves it. Like many of those, it's very far from brilliant, but are nonetheless very good and entertaining to watch.

Why The Thing?

[allst · 10/10 · 27 September 2003]

Many people has got a film they think of as their favourite movie. My movie will always be John Carpenter's The Thing! The main reason why this movie is a cult-film is perhaps the splatter-effects created mainly by genius Rob Bottin and that this is the movie that made Kurt Russell what he is today (along with Escape from N.Y.) In my opinion, this is not a great film because of the effects, it has to do with the story, the atmosphere, and of course, the acting. I have watched thousands and thousands of movies (3-6 every day the last 10 years), but none has had the impact on me as this one, not even the great "Das Boot".

Here's my suggestion to you who likes sci-fi and horror movies: Place yourself in the good chair of your home. Be sure you're not interupted by anyone. If you aint got a projector, sit close to your TV and watch this miracle of a film. Let it absorbe you, and you'll see it my way!

Best View Time: Late February between 5 and 9 in the evening.

Ridley Scott's 'Alien' at a Research Facility

[ThomasDrufke · 6/10 · 23 April 2017]

The Thing being the second John Carpenter film I've watched this week, I'm starting to notice why he's such a "big deal" in the film business, but I'm also realizing that his style may not be best suited for my tastes in film.

The Thing is a remake of a 1951 Howard Hawks film, which in itself is based on a novella, and the film was once again remade in 2011. Ultimately, this story is widely popular. But the funny thing is, the story doesn't feel all that special or unique. The film adapts the "whodunit" or rather "who is it" movie trope that has been used for as long as films have been made. I don't have a problem with that, but I do have a problem with this film feeling like a rip-off to Ridley Scott's 1979 Alien film. Right down to the chest bursting scene.

Some people may say that the original novella probably influenced Scott in making Alien, which may be true. But then why not change up a few plot points and shot selections instead of feeling overtly derivative from a film that is only a few years old. It also doesn't help that for all the blood, guts, jumps, and scares, we don't really get a look inside the minds of any of these characters. None of them are memorable, even Kurt Russell's flame throwing bearded helicopter pilot. Heck, we never even see the guy fly a helicopter.

I hate to keep bringing up Alien, so I'll compare the recent movie, Life. That film doesn't have anything new to add to the genre of "trapped-in-horror-thriller", but it consistently entertains you because you get to know each character and you care about them. The Thing's cast consists of a dozen or so men ranging from 30-65, and I don't remember any of their names or backstories. Why? Because the movie didn't take the time to establish either.

The Thing does do quite a few things well, though. The practical special effects are mind-blowing for a film from the early-80's. I would love to see some of the behind the scenes featurettes and how they were able to pull off some of the shots. If only the film didn't make me cringe every few minutes with its gratuitous blood spatters and gut bursting shots. The Thing also did a nice job at pacing out the deaths and jump scares where it didn't feel too overpowering at any one point but it also never got to the point of boredom either. Not to mention Ennio Morricone's haunting main theme that plays throughout the film. That will surely send chills down anyone's spine. So overall, The Thing is another Carpenter film to get a mixed response from me. He's a good filmmaker, but I highly doubt I will ever sit down a re-watch his films as religiously as some film fans do. Perhaps I'd like Howard Hawks version better.

+Score

+Effects

-No character depth

-Feels derivative

6.4/10

The last John Carpenter classic

[DavidSim240183 · 10/10 · 1 May 2008]

In 1982, two films were released within weeks of each other that were both about aliens. Steven Spielberg's ET, and John Carpenter's The Thing. Of the two of them, ET was the one that won the hearts of people the world over, even though The Thing debuted first. Because people were so entranced with Spielberg's warm, fuzzy feelgood alien fable, they stayed away from The Thing in droves.

Its not hard to see why. The two are diametrically opposed. One is an optimistic tale designed to warm the cockles of the still-beating heart. The other is a harsh, uncompromising film that paints alien life as something purely determined to destroy us. I guess audiences felt ET was a much cuter prospect than The Thing's tentacles and slime coated saliva!

It's taken some time, but The Thing has gone on to win over a substantial cult audience. As it should. Because The Thing is that rare example of a superior remake. It takes all the best qualities of the 1951 classic, and reinvents them in startling and imaginative ways. Indeed Carpenter does his job so well he actually succeeds in making a film that is in every inch the equal of the genre's showrunner, Alien. And that's even rarer!

Carpenter's film follows its source material more faithfully than The Thing From Another World did. It keeps the frigid wastes of Antarctica as a setting, because its the perfect backdrop when you're trying to establish a heightened sense of isolation. But although a bit thin on characterisation, the remake gets right inside the mindset of the actors, and amplifies the uncertainty and fear that slowly surrounds them.

Frequent Carpenter collaborator Kurt Russell returns, hot off the success of Escape From New York, cast once again as one of Carpenter's perpetual anti-heroes. He plays MacReady, the helicopter pilot at an Antarctic research station (what they're researching is anyone's guess). The trouble begins when a Norwegian chopper from a nearby station flies over MacReady's, trying to gun down a Siberian Husky from the air.

They end up dying for their troubles, and while the camp tries to solve the mystery of what happened, they take in the Husky and add it to their own. Except that this Husky, is not a Husky at all. But a shape-changing alien. The Norwegians discovered it frozen in the ice, and when they thawed it out, it massacred their crew. Capable of absorbing its victims at will, it can duplicate a living being right down to the smallest detail. Soon paranoia and suspicion works its way through the 12-man crew, until no-one is certain who is human and who is not.

The Thing is one of John Carpenter's finest films. In fact I'm tempted to say its the best film he's ever made. Even surpassing classics like Halloween and Dark Star. The reason why I place The Thing at the top of Carpenter's list is that it feels like the last film of his that could truly be called a classic. All the others thereafter have felt like Carpenter was slumming it. Films that didn't flow with the cool sophistication and ragged intensity so prevalent in his earlier works.

But The Thing had John Carpenter at the peak of his powers. Never has he generated suspense to such an unbearable degree. Not even in the ferocious Assault on Precinct 13. From the second the alien makes its presence known, Carpenter ratchets up the tension level relentlessly. And when he delivers his punches, they come with an agonising jolt.

The film is a blend of pure atmospherics and visceral horror. An approach that can often seem at odds with one another, but in Carpenter's hands melds together beautifully. Bringing in Rob Bottin of The Howling fame, he lays to bear some of the most astonishing transformation effects you'll ever see in a horror film. Amorphous shapes. Half-formed human features starkly contrasted with gaping jaws, spider legs and fully flexible tentacles. Indeed the film's effects are so amazing and squirm-inducing, The Thing came under fire for being too realistic!

That type of thinking misses the point entirely. It only shortchanges the film's values. And there are many. Carpenter only stages an effects setpiece when he needs to. Its in the film's quieter moments where he seems especially attuned to the story. The Thing is an often bewildering tale of shadows, whispers and implications. Characterisation has never been one of John Carpenter's strong suits, but it works to his advantage in The Thing. Because we hardly know anything about the cast, it only makes the present situation that much more confusing. We're never certain, from one moment to the next who is who. And because of this, The Thing holds up very well and maintains its mystery on subsequent viewings.

A special mention should go to the excellent film score from Ennio Morricone. A pulsing thud thud every two seconds. It creates an eerie, spooky feeling that is very hard to shake. The whole film is a wonderful exercise in paranoid manipulation. The scene where they blood-test each other to see who's human is wound up with such dexterity by Carpenter, you may find yourself biting your nails without even realising.

The Thing is a pure unadulterated classic. Even the ending leaves you with the vague suspicion that not everything is resolved. An underrated film, well worth the reappraisal it received. And so much better than ET!

Really good remake

[blazeboy754 · 7/10 · 6 August 2010]

Well this movie was very good for a remake usually remakes are way to different from the original and they make it more violent well this movie did do that but it follows the novel more the violence in this movie is very graphic and quite sickening but its a effective movie its john carpenter was a big fan of the movie because he used clips of it in one of his halloween movies. This movie did follow the original but it followed the novel much more because now the monster takes on the body of others whereas in the original it looked slightly like the frankenstein monster all in all this movie was really well done and a worthy remake but i have heard that their going to remake it again and i hope they don't do that because too many movies are being remade lets leave these to movies the way they are and don't remake then again.

The Thingie

[Matthew_Capitano · 5/10 · 14 April 2014]

Half-good (which means half-bad) sci-fi about a cosmic creature that causes havoc on the frozen tundra of Antarctica.

Amidst the most unscientific scientists on Earth, this thing from outer space tries to copy the DNA of every researcher on the base and it's up to Kurt Russell(?) to save the day.... I've gone to sleep with more comforting thoughts.

When the rest of these idiots are not smoking grass or pouring liquor into their electronic equipment (that was smart), they try to help figure out what to do next, however futile their various suggestions and actions may be.

John Carpenter's take on the 1951 'classic', though you might want to take a rain-check on this and watch the original instead.