Reviews

My opinion on this movie has remained pretty much unchanged throughout the years, and that's that The Thing is a very simple, but very effective monster movie.

(The aforementioned blood test scene provides a rare moment of clarity.) And the movie compensates for the possible resulting lack of human interest by casting a murderer's row of male character actors: Kurt Russell (hiding his movie star charisma under his tremendous facial hair and coiffure; it's ...

This movie has the right amount of everything in its conclusion.The cinematography of the movie is awesome.

It's a lean, mean, fighting machine with almost nothing in the way of wasted scenes and a strong sense of its own capability of holding your interest while taking it's sweet time in building things up.

It's a movie that would fit right into my all time favourites and a movie i will be re-watching very very soon.

However, once it is revealed that the thing can perfectly emulate its victims, the whole film turns into a guessing game and you can't help but be as pre-cautious and suspicious as the characters in the film are.

The story was creepy and suspenseful and the setting in a remote Antarctic research station made the movie forbiddingly desperate.

If you were to similarly boil down The Thing to such a basic narrative, then it's definitely a monster movie, but of course it's a testament to the talent on display that it becomes so much more than that.

After Director John Carpenter screened his completed film, the movie studio insisted that he go back and film a scene where MacReady is in a hospital, explaining how he alone survived.

Said by many to be a remake of the 1951 movie "The Thing From Another World", Carpenter's movie is simply based on the same novel "Who Goes There?"