The Thing (2011)

The Thing (2011)

(2011)

Prequel to the 1982 John Carpenter sci-fi horror about the titular Thing, a shapeshifting alien and one of movie’s most iconic monsters. ... More

Paleontologist Kate Lloyd (Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Scott Pilgrim vs The World) travels to Antarctica for the expedition of a lifetime: she joins a Norwegian scientific team that has stumbled across an extraterrestrial ship buried in the ice. Inside she discovers an organism that seems to have died in the crash eons ago. When a simple experiment wakes the alien, Kate must join the crew's pilot, Carter (Joel Edgerton, Animal Kingdom), to keep it from killing the group off one at a time.Hide

On Demand, DVD & Blu-Ray

Available from 2 providers

The Peoples' Reviews

Average ratings from 15 ratings, 17 reviews
Your rating & review
Rate / Review this movie

Being a huge fan of Carpenter's original (remake!) THING, I went to see this expecting the worst - and came away pleasantly surprised. It's no CITIZEN KANE, sure, but it's a sold, well-made action / sci-fi / horror that's only let down by a less than subtly wrought script. Still, as a homage to Carpenter's (far better) movie and as a bit of escapist nonsensical fun - it's pretty darn good! Interesting though to see that despite advances in CGI - the old style "real" effects and goo of... More Carpenter's movie and the likes of Peter Jackson's BRAINDEAD still can't be beat for good old visceral gore :)Hide


BY RealityCheck superstar

As I thought this was a remake I was quite prepared for a bit of a let down, however it pleasently surprised me. I enjoyed the horror side, and in this pre-quel/remake the director/writers focused on the effects as much as the storyline. This made for an interesting movie and the acting (if a little static at times) wasnt o.t.t considering the setting. I was scared, monsters, alien ships, I laughed, so good all said & done.

Genre : horror, thriller, suspense, scifi

3/5 : although good,... More the original was great (for its time) and unfortunately I dont see this becoming a classicHide


Not as good as the original/sequel but still pretty good! I enjoyed MEW.

It wasn't very scary, but it had genuine nailbiting moments. Worth a watch!

Thanks to flicks.co.nz for the free screening! You guys ROCK!


BY Jordan superstar

An odd entry to the box office, "The Thing" is not a remake, but a prequel made close to three decades after the original.
It takes someone with utter confidence in the script and direction to think that a prequel would work better in this day and age rather than that of a remake, so it's disappointing to see that it doesn't quite get there.

In many ways, it is predictably similar to that of the original. A small group of people stuck with an alien that can duplicate humans perfectly... More and the suspense that follows as mistrust of one another comes into play.
The cast is made up of some known's (Funnily enough, the American members of the cast, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Joel Edgerton (Australian, but American in the film) and Eric Christian Olsen) with the rest rounded up by actors playing Norwegian's.
It is not the cast that let's the film down though, but the pacing, script and the lack of urgency or "fright factor". While the "Thing's" are particularly creepy, with tendrils and bodies exploding here and there, like the cast, there is an expectation that everything that happens is going to occur, and paired with the slowness of the film, it can be quite disengaging after some time.

While it isn't a bad film, for a prequel to a cult classic it carried some gravitas behind it to create an experience similar to the original, if not better.
Though it doesn't do that, it add's some nice backstory to the original and the updated effects again are fantastic.

Unfortunately in the end though, this "Thing" is but another popcorn flick that may be easier watched at home.Hide


It's a reasonably safe bet to say that very rarely will a remake of a film meet the standard set by an original, as of course if the source material was bad in the first place, a remake would likely not even be considered. The number of times a remake is better than the original can probably be counted on one hand. Steven Soderbergh's Ocean's Eleven and David Cronenberg's The Fly spring to mind as a couple of those rare examples. And, of course, John Carpenter's 1982 masterpiece The Thing,... More which goes beyond being a superior remake to being considered one of the finest sci-fi/horror films ever made. As for prequels, it's hard to come up with a single example that improved on its predecessor. In modern Hollywood, there are prequels, there are remakes, and then there is Matthijs van Heijningen Jr.'s 2011 version of The Thing.

Ostensibly a prequel of a remake, The Thing finds itself uncomfortably torn between the two. The story concerns the initial discovery of an alien artifact buried deep under the ice of Antarctica, and the events that follow lead directly to the opening scene of Carpenter's 1982 film. So, it's a prequel, right? Well, not quite. The way the events unfold is almost a beat-for-beat copy of the earlier film, and a number of well-known scenes from Carpenter's version are recreated. So maybe it's a remake?I don't know, and it seems like van Heijningen doesn't know either. There's only one sure way to clarify what this movie is: terrible. Van Heijningen's The Thing is derivative, pointless, four-quadrant filmmaking at its absolute worst. It tries so hard to recreate the atmosphere of paranoia and claustrophobia of Carpenter's film, but fails to engage on any level.

The problems go well beyond what any comparison with the 1982 version could reveal, but by trying so hard to mimic the far, far superior film, van Heijningen holds his film up to be judged against it, and it's not pretty. The first issue lies with the characters. To lead the story, Carpenter gave us RJ Macready, played by Kurt Russell at the peak of his badass days. Van Heijningen gives us Kate Lloyd (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) and Sam Carter (Joel Edgerton), unnecessarily dividing the Macready role to make way for a female lead, obviously in the hopes of expanding the potential audience by drawing women to the cinema. Winstead does the best she can, but it's difficult to buy her as an expert paleontologist, particularly when there doesn't seem to be any real reason for her character to be there. She is even told that she isn't there to think, just to make sure they can get the thing out of the ice. Why a scientific facility doing research on things drilled out of the ice needs to bring in an 'expert' from America to help them drill a thing out of the ice is never made clear, but I guess they needed to get the American stars in there. A female lead in a sci-fi/horror film has worked before, but it's not the case here. As for Edgerton, he seems to be there simply because he looks tough and has a beard (like Macready!). As for the other characters, they really aren't given much of a chance to establish themselves, so it's hard to care as they are picked off one by one. Carpenter subtly developed his supporting characters to make audiences feel for them, but van Heijningen simply throws them all out there and tries to focus on an unconvincing lead.

Perhaps the two most enduring elements of Carpenter's The Thing were the terrifying special effects and the excellent ambiguous ending. The new version fails here as well, with atrocious CGI which lacks a tenth of the impact of the 30 year-old practical effects, and a woeful third act that obliterates what little atmosphere the film had developed. The men of Carpenter's version were not heroes, they were simply working-class guys faced with a situation they were ill-prepared for and ill-equipped to deal with. Van Heijningen insists on giving audiences an awful 'hero moment', before ruining the one slightly interesting plot point by having a character spell everything out for the audience. It's insulting that Hollywood filmmakers nowadays don't trust their audiences enough to pick up on nuanced visual cues, we must have everything very deliberately spelled out for us. And the less said about the ham-fisted credit sequence, the better.

2011′s The Thing is among the most redundant and dreadful prequel/remakes since Gus van Sant remade Psycho. It is a film to be avoided, particularly if you have any attachment to Carpenter's 1982 version. Thankfully the legacy of the previous film cannot really be scarred too badly, as it's unlikely anyone will remember van Heijningen's The Thing by this time next year.

tinribs27.wordpress.comHide


Showing 5 of 17 reviews. See all reviews

The Press Reviews

79% of critics recommend.
Rotten Tomatoes Score. More reviews on Rotten Tomatoes

  • A cinematic hot dog: It's full of body parts, but you won't get much from consuming it. Full Review

The Talk
58 %

Want to see it

What say you?
Movies like this one