Rotten Tomatoes

Movies / TV


      No Results Found

      View All
      Movies Tv shows Movie Trivia News Showtimes

      The Thing Reviews

      Prev Next
      Mar 31, 2023

      Pretty decent prequel. I am not sure why it got such low ratings.

      Mar 30, 2023

      My favourite horror film was John Carpenter's "The Thing" (1982). While I was too young to understand the political allegory at the time, but loved the tension and sense of dread it evoked. When this prequel was released, I remembered the negative reviews, focused on all excessive flailing tentacles, and the overabundance of CGI. Having finally watched this, they weren't completely off the mark. However, they also said this wasn't worth watching, and on that front I disagree. Regarding the excessive writhing tentacles, yes, they did seem kind of silly... but they were in the original as well. And the CGI unfortunately lost a lot of the tension; instead of suspension of disbelief, a lot of the creatures end up looking like they came from a video game. Not very scary, alas. To that end, I found out they had practical effects finished, and it was the studio that forced them to add the CGI, probably due to the incredible cgi in films just a few years prior (PotC 2 & 3, the CGI still holds up brilliantly, especially Bill Nighy's Davie Jones). But the practical vfx that they did keep looked great; realistic & unsettling. The story worked, until the end where the creature suddenly dropped about 100 iq points, which really killed the tension. But it was entertaining overall, trying to tee up the 1982 original (which it mostly does, save the footage from the 1982 original where they show on vhs how they disposed of the mothership). Not terrible, mostly good effects, 1 big misstep at the end, 6.8/10, C. YMMV: the stupidity at the end will ruin ir for some, in which case drop your score to 5.8

      Mar 22, 2023

      A great prequel which I enjoyed almost as much as the OG movie

      Feb 14, 2023

      I outright love this film. My biggest issue with it is the woeful use of way too much cgi. The true heart of the terror, brought to us originally by Rob Bottin and his team, was whitewashed by complete computer override. A true shame. That said.... The movie is very enjoyable as it stands on its own. It is a prequel in the purest since, with its ending leading up to the events in the original. Mary Elizabeth Winstead is awesome, and I give props to the entire cast for keeping me riveted.

      Feb 14, 2023

      The Thing ist ein Horror- und Science-Fiction-Film des Regisseurs Matthijs van Heijningen Jr. Der Film erzählt die Vorgeschichte zu John Carpenters Das Ding aus einer anderen Welt aus dem Jahr 1982, des Klassikers von Christian Nyby aus dem Jahr 1951… Diese Vorgeschichte wird gut erzählt und ist eine gute Ergänzung zu Carpenters Arbeit. Der Film ist eine lohnende Hintergrundgeschichte zu "Das Ding aus einer anderen Welt" aus dem Jahr 1982… Die schauspielerische Leistung ist überdurchschnittlich, es wird die Paranoia spürbar…

      Dec 24, 2022

      Really does not deserve the derision. Even though its credited as a 'prequel' its really not. It has the same tension, and same thrill as the original. Sadly not the SFX. Opted for CGI, but it's done well enough. You'll not learn anything new about the original, but I'd you loved it, this is a nice addition. Despite the ending... Worth a watch.

      Nov 18, 2022

      Okay, let's just start with the most obvious piece of information here about The THing (2011). This is not about a thing. It's an alien. That fact is stated before the opening credits are even done rolling, so I'm not spoiling anything, and it's a huge big time bummer. The mystery is gone! The suspense is gone! Part of the drama of a movie like this is not knowing what's going on. We know from the very beginning. An alien is trying to procreate and survive. Booo! Nobody cares…. It's been forever since I saw the original The Thing, but from what I remember… The original had good effects, a good story and some mystery behind it. This… this is just slow and dull. Twenty minutes into it and I was asking, when does something happen? Just… taking for-ev-er to set up an action/horror sequence that fades away and doesn't add value to the overall story. Blah. This type of story needs to keep the audience in suspense and asking what's going on? Is that person human or… something else? Think Invasion of the Body Snatchers. The horror is more psychological, not gross out jump scares. You can read my full review here

      Oct 28, 2022

      Not as good as the 1982 version, but has suffered undeservedly bad reviews in contrast to the "original" (excluding the 50s version). Solid writing, acting and directing but unoriginality and overuse of CGI brings it down from a rating of 4 and above. Definitely worth a watch. Especially if you like the 1982 version.

      Oct 3, 2022

      I believe this was a perfect compliment to the original. It perfectly explained the back story of the original. One of the greatest prequels of all time.

      Sep 19, 2022

      The original is better.

      Sep 3, 2022

      Honestly being an extreme fan of the original this is a small bonus, no way near the first one, but it's honestly not that bad.

      Jul 25, 2022

      My rating for the film is a 4.6/10

      Jul 23, 2022

      If you are a fan of the original you will enjoy this. A little heavy on the CGi but overall the writers and directors did keep the spirit of the first in this movie, a few misses here and there but overall decent.

      Jul 12, 2022

      Wow. How forgettable was this?

      May 17, 2022

      I thought it was pretty good until the end. The one thing missing were the short quip dialog and humor. Adding that kind of dialog draws people in to the characters and they become more interesting. The effects were great and the story was true to the original, even the ax placement on the door. I always wondered how that got there. It's worth it IMO.

      Apr 12, 2022

      I have to say there is at least some decent skills behind the film, fx are not super original, but some definitely decent ideas. The cinematography is amazing, but adeq

      Apr 10, 2022

      This is a feminist rewrite of a Male led classic. Who on earth thought that Mary Elizabeth Winstead could Replace Both Kirt Russel and Richard Dysart in the movie that they personally made a masterpiece? Well, nothing is sacred in todays progressive environment. And No one is saying it, so i will. This was rewritten for the express purpose of writing out the male leads to make the film more palatable to people who use the phrase "toxic masculinity" to describe traditional Masculinity. Don't get me wrong, i do think Strong female leads can carry a franchise, like Sugrony Weiver, to name one. Women can and do kick butt on screen. But I do not believe that any one should erase great characters in the name of feminism. In the end it only harms everyone.

      Feb 24, 2022

      The thing is... why should we watch a movie like this? Poorly organized ideas for the screenplay lead to a completely pointless plot. Furthermore, the visual effects are horrible and they don't give you any creepy vibe... Don't lose your time, look for something else, something better! My rating: 3/10

      Feb 20, 2022

      While not as good as John Carpenter's remake, this movie has a lot to offer in regards to that film with its effects

      Feb 5, 2022

      Why didn't people like this movie? in my opinion most who watched this here thought it was a reboot but for me this movie works until ok not bad, just, ok. but the biggest sin was not using practical effects but appealing to that horrible cgi that aged stupidly.

      Prev Next
      Do you think we mischaracterized a critic's review?