The Thing - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

The Thing Reviews

Page 1 of 211
½ May 19, 2018
another low quality prequel of a great original movie. way too much of cgi, bad acting.
½ May 16, 2018
Very entertaining movie. They did a great job putting everything together to fit with the 1982 film. The only thing I can complain about is the cgi was bad at times.
April 16, 2018
Con cada visionado me parece peor película. No solo porque artísticamente me parece horriblemente plana, sino porque además de la sensación de que sus creadores no tenían mucha idea de que hacer con ella y su parecido con la de Carpenter es excesivo.

Aun así, consigue mantener ciertos elementos que concuerdan con la de los ochenta, lo que para fans como yo, está bastante bien.

Aun así, le falta algo...
½ April 15, 2018
This film, despite the low ratings, isn't as bad as you would think. Though it is another example of studio executives butting in and thinking they're film makers.

One of the biggest criticisms of this film is its over use of CGI. Annoyingly enough, the film was not intended to be this way. Every single creature in this film was originally a practical effect that was intended to be slightly enhanced with CGI. Then, the studio, decided nobody wanted that and forced them to use CGI monsters instead. Look how THAT turned out.

The film itself isn't all that bad though. Good acting, great atmosphere, decent creature designs (despite CGI) and the film ties in well with John Carpenter's film by the end.

If you watch it, at least think about what it was trying to do.
½ April 7, 2018
The 2011 take on the Thing manages to wring a handful of good ideas from its time-worn premise with the occasional moment of tension, but is largely undone by a lack of imagination or subtlety to make it anything more than a trashier, if slightly less brainless, retread of the 1982 version.
½ March 31, 2018
I never actually saw the original and I've never heard of it before this movie but unless it is not only better in execution but also the plot I have no interest in watching it.
I went into the movie as a biology major that is used to being disappointed in the "science" behind movie monsters but this was on a whole nother level.
Firstly what was the logic behind the aliens actions? It was clearly highly intelligent, indicated by the fact that it's species was able to solve the problem of space travel not to mention it's amazing understanding of human behaviour. I understand that this was meant to be explained by the absorption. Yet if this process is so complex that the thing is able to absorb human memory, interpret it and learn human behaviour this fast you'd think that it would also be at least smart enough to have a better plan of surviving than killing every human and establishing it's evil intentions so soon, especially considering it's alone on a strange planet with no way of escaping if it was hunted by the entirety of the human species. I also don't really understand what the master plan of the alien species was supposed to be, and they have to have had one. why would they send only one boarded ship to earth to exterminate the human race if they're technology had to be also advanced enough to achieve this without setting a foot on earth?
I can understand and enjoy "dumb" monsters that kill humans for food or other motives, but I not only failed to find a motive and logic in the aliens behavior (which again should've been present considering), I believe whoever wrote this script didn't think it needed one, because people would watch the movie regardless and enjoy it as long as it was gorey enough and copied enough from the original and the alien franchise.
Even the actions of the very dull and not in the slightest bit fleshed out characters were, keeping in mind that half of them were supposed to be smart intellectuals, utterly stupid.
Yes, most horror movies (I am reluctant to call it that because it was so predictable it wasn't even scary), have their characters behave stupid, otherwise the problem would be solved a lot quicker, but it didn't make sense to have scientists act this incompetent.
Firstly, why the hell didn't they try to kill it in a different way after it was able to survive the flamethrower TWICE and after they saw it surviving after it's whole body stood aflame? Didn't they try to stop and think to change their tactic?
Secondly why did they all believe the main character? She was the only one who established that the aliens weren't (for whatever reason) able to synthesise anorganic material and she alone was the one who proclaimed people as potential aliens. (If I was the alien I would act just like that to infiltrate a place.)
On that, why would the alien first of all not be able to create anorganic material which shouldn't be that hard for their species, but then also not grow the teeth in a way where the filling would fit?? It doesn't have to synthsise something which is already available and if it can synthesise organic material this would make no sense.
But the reast of the story didn't make much sense either so I can not expect this much.
Let's just say I had high hopes, not because I had seen the original, but because I thought the premise of the movie was interesting, only to be gravely disappointed.
If you want to watch a good movie about alien liveforms "infiltrating" earth check out Alex Garland's new movie "Annihilation". It's a lot more creative that's for sure.
March 6, 2018
From the 2000s you can forget about any remake, and look at the original !!! They had less money, computer effects, time ... and made movies that you can never forget - !!! Now they have everything and make films to forget. All the people of Hollywood - what's up with you? You can not even do finished work the same or better than the original one, what do you learn at the film school? The more you have, the less comes out, NO REMAKE is good for the last 20 years in all genres, shame on you all who call themselves filmmakers and their people.
½ March 1, 2018
Meh. Started off really good, and seemed like it was going to be, but then just becomes too fake and unbelievable.
½ February 23, 2018
Although alto of people complain about the switch from practical effects to CG. It still wasn't a horrible movie. In fact I'd say it's quite good, but certainly not as good as the original (As I believe many people are comparing it to the original).
February 10, 2018
A good prequel and well-acted. Just a pity the studio demanded CGI everywhere rather than the superb practical effects that were being developed. It falls into monster-chase territory too often as a result.
February 6, 2018
An American paleontologist joins a Norwegian expedition team in Antarctica after they discover a UFO and its apparent navigator. The being from another world soon thaws out and starts attacking the members of the team and then replicating them. The 1982 John Carpenter version had much more tension as the Thing did not make itself known so often and there was much more drama in the form of suspicion as the individuals srat accusing one other of being infected. This remake was not as good as the original for that reason as well as replacing the practical effects with CGI. Worth a watch for certain, but not a classic as its predecessor is.
February 3, 2018
Actually a great prequel!
January 28, 2018
LISTEN UP!!! I so would love to call certain reviewers idiots but will refrain LOL! So FIRST OFF, I've read several reviewers mention "REMAKE"!??? WHAT??? Guys & Gals..THIS IS A PREQUEL! .. and as most Prequels to a CLASSIC.. DO NOT COMPARE IT TO THE ORIGINAL! I as a HUGE fan of the ORIGINAL, Loved this movie! YES, the CGI does not compare with Good animatronics, but that DID NOT ruin the movie as some have stated! And fans of the original SHOULD LOVE THE TIE-INS to it! Seeing how the Axe got there, the Block of ice removed, the suicide guy, the dog escaping, the 2 headed burned Thing creation, Lars going crazy to stop it and why he gets shot in the originals beginning!... GREAT PREQUEL, Good suspense and some clever twists with the tooth fillings.... WATCH THE ORIGINAL 1ST, then watch this one..THEN WATCH THE ORIGINAL AGAIN RIGHT AFTER, and you will have FULL appreciation for this Prequel!.... P.S.- The person that said they didnt like that the dog at the end was clearly different! Please go get a life.... REALLY?
January 21, 2018
I great effort and gripping horror. that had me on the edge of my seat.
November 29, 2017
why the hate? this was a pretty cool movie.
November 24, 2017
Not too bad, and seems like the original owes to it in ways, the prequel installment, is still a good frightfest, even if it's a bit of a nightmare itself.
½ November 21, 2017
Replacing practical effects with CGI and John Carpenter with someone whose name I can't spell or pronounce, The Thing is a major step down from the 1982 film. That being said, it's actually a good horror flick. The score is surprisingly good, the acting is great, and the scares work more often than not.
November 17, 2017
What a good prequel of a sci-fi horror film. The Thing is really a good film talking about how these people found the alien first before the cult classic film I love very creepy and sci-fi well done of a prequel I love it.
½ November 12, 2017
I really appreciate a prequel that does its homework to preserve continuity. This ties in perfectly with the original. It had everything I love about the original, although I agree with some people that the monster seemed to have conflicting goals about whether to take over the humans or escape.
November 8, 2017
Look for this film to come out 30 years later this is an excellent prequel. If you watch how the film was made you'll be impressed. There was only plot to go off of but they broke down the brief moments that we go to see from the Norwegian camp and was able to explain it. But just like the original then I fell this film won't gain any popularity until years later. The only thing that bothered me was the cgi but that was ruined because of the studio.PLEASE FOE THE LOVE GOD WATCH THE BEHIND THE SCENE AND YOULL GAIN A NEW RESPECT FOR THIS FILM.
Page 1 of 211