Type in any movie or show to find where you can watch it, or type a person's name.

User Reviews for: The Thing

simonynwa
10/10  7 years ago
There are a lot of qualities that make The Thing work so well as a horror film. It has been rightly lauded for its set-piece moments and striking practical effects, but what keeps this timeless are the same elements that can be found in a similar classic film of the time, Ridley Scott's Alien - the beautiful yet harsh outdoor locations photographed to stunning effect, creating a sense of scale and isolation that remind the viewer how cut-off the characters are and contrasting sharply with the claustrophobic interiors ; the minimalist score from Morricone that adds to the tension ; the great production design that ensure the setting feels like a realistic working environment ; the memorable characters, notably of course Kurt Russell's Macready ; the efficient script that introduces the personalities of the main group quickly and the camaraderie between the characters that ensure the audience believe in the group as a working community and care about their survival. But this is no mere retread of another film - the alien presence here working from within to split the group apart rather than bringing them together. Unlike Alien, the central villain is harder to define and from the opening moments, Carpenter creates a sense of unease and paranoia that permeates the whole film right through to the final frame, ensuring the audience like the characters themselves are never quite sure who to trust. The effects may have dated to a modern audience (though the tangible feel to the practical work is creepier than anything that could be created in CGI) but it's the quieter set-piece moments of tension and mistrust that remain just as strong as ever and make this Carpenter's best film.
Like  -  Dislike  -  140
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
manicure
8/10  3 years ago
"The Thing" could be seen as the natural evolution of the formula that began with Ridley Scott's "Alien". The two movies have an entirely different setting and atmosphere, but share the same simple structure: a group of humans ends up being stuck in a confined space as they are chased by an unknown alien entity. However, the "Thing" manages to become something more than a beautifully designed hungry monster: it's a threat with no discernible appearance, as it has the ability to imitate the organisms it consumes and blend in with its prey. This allows Carpenter to convey his trademark cynical, nihilistic view of humanity, focusing on how easily a team of highly unlikeable characters can fall apart as they slowly get consumed by their distrust and paranoia. The "Thing" has no evil intentions and is just trying to survive, but it won't take much for the humans to end up turning against each other.

It must be said that the film takes a damn long time to get to the point, but Carpenter's "chilly" cinematography and slow camerawork manage to build the story's tension and keep us craving for more flamethrower bursts to warm up the atmosphere. As mentioned, the "Thing" never shows its true self, but in return offers a lot of grotesque "transformation" sequences that managed to turn a mild psychological horror into a true cult film. The practical effects surely aged a bit, but the art direction and design are so over the top and visionary that the final result still holds incredibly well.

On a side note, the film is supposed to be a remake of Christian Nyby's "The Thing from Another World", but is actually based on the science fiction short story "Who Goes There?" (which also inspired Nyby's film). Other than the title font, the two movies are very little in common. Just think that "The Thing from Another World" cannot change appearance, is always recognizable, and gets its ass kicked by a cohesive team of heroes.
Like  -  Dislike  -  10
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Whitsbrain
10/10  2 years ago
I've seen this movie so many times. I own it twice on DVD, I own it on Blu-Ray and I even have a copy on the now defunct HD-DVD format. I regret not seeing it in the theaters back in 1982. I don't know why I didn't go. I was certainly old enough to appreciate it. Instead, I saw "E.T.". I got swept up in happy little alien fever. I went with the crowd. All I had to do was wander over to a different screen and watch Carpenter's creation in all its paranoid glory. Sigh...

As with all good movies, music, or books, I experience something new every time I view it. I keep trying to piece together how the Thing spread throughout the camp. I keep looking for clues. Like when Blair performs an autopsy on the recently roasted Thing. While he's presenting his thoughts on what the Thing is, he absent-mindedly taps his pencil eraser on the steaming carcass, crosses his arms and brings the pencil eraser perilously close to his mouth. Then he makes a talking point by waving the pencil in the air and ever so briefly...it touches his lip! Did he infect himself? Is it too late?!?!? Has the Thing spread itself to Blair?!?! These kinds of moments fill the movie. It so suspenseful and so paranoid. And the isolation is torture. You know they all have nowhere to go. All those nameless men. Well, they aren't nameless, it's just that it's hard to remember them all. And the strange thing about it is, we still seem to care about them. I think that's because Carpenter has done such a masterful job of building the suspense through threat and isolation that we can't help but subconsciously put ourselves into their places.

There are so many great scenes. The opening helicopter-chases-dog scene. The horror of finding the Thing in the dog pen. The death and subsequent transformation of Norris. Wow! Is it gory! And in this particular case, I think the gore is absolutely necessary. That's kind of the knock on this film. The gore has been classified as extreme. And it is. But this is a story about such a faceless, out-of-this-world beast that it all seems so appropriate. And those effects. I don't think I need to say anymore than others have already posited about the very special practical effects by Rob Bottin. They have to be the best I've ever seen.

Then there's the "blood test" scene. All of the men at the Antarctic station volunteer to give a blood sample and then have it tested, while tied to chairs, to see if it reveals which of them are actually the "Thing". One by one, a heated copper wire is placed into a petri dish of blood from each one of the men. Seeing the smoke rise from the wire when its touched to the dish of blood brings some relief. Will the next dish be Thing-free? You'll have to watch it and see for yourself. The setup and execution of this scene is one of the most intense and frightening things I've ever watched.

I am very happy that this film has found it's place thanks to Home Video. It's now considered a Horror/Sci-Fi classic. It is without a doubt my favorite Horror movie, perhaps my favorite monster flick and quite possibly my top SciFi feature. It's that good.
Like  -  Dislike  -  10
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
John Chard
/10  6 years ago
Flips the scenario round from the original to great effect.

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
Like  -  Dislike  -  0
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
fenicka
/10  6 years ago
It was a good and original movie but some parts were still too boring, am i the only one who thinks like this?
Like  -  Dislike  -  0
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Back to Top