Plot so thin, it passes unnoticed.

Horrible, fascist and poorly acted

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

No pun intended but this "Thing" kind of... left me cold, even by fifties' standards, something was way off. Sorry but even by taking into account the limitations of the era in terms of special effects, I couldn't pretend to ignore that a certain movie called "The Day the Earth Stood Still" was made the same year, was more visually convincing, no less irrelevant in its contemplation of the future of mankind and had more three-dimensional protagonists AND antagonists. Yet Christian Nyby's "Thing" is considered a landmark of the sci-fi genre as well as the one with Gort. I can only attribute this status to its timely relevance and the fact that the film (for its defense) doesn't fall into the predictable camp so typical of lousy B-movies, it's not "Ed Wood" bad. And the film is hailed by sci-fi aficionados as a powerful allegory of the atmosphere of paranoia induced by the Cold War and the pessimism and defiance toward science in the atomic age. Fair enough, but I think it's digging a bit too deep and this block of meaningfulness is ultimately as disappointing as the one that revealed the monster, a cheap-looking thing that can't fool an audience used to more mature, shocking and -let's just be honest about it- entertaining material.Is there any good thing about "The Thing"? Two actually: an iconic opening and a classic ending, when the curtain call-line came, I had totally forgot it came from this film. But in between, "The Thing" was nothing like what the chilling score promised and nothing justifying the journalist's enthusiasm at the end, it was a dud, a verbose abundance, people talking, smoking, commenting on military bureaucracy and flirting in total 50's fashion. At the end, what we've got despite a few attempts to reveal a menacing presence is a weird feeling of... not emptiness, but harmlessness. Even the coldness never seems to be an issue. The Monster has its moments of course and some jump scares are efficient but the film was so slow in its pacing, so unambitious that it needed more than adrenalin shots, it needed a defibrillator.Notice that I'm making a nod to the remake, seriously, in John Carpenter's "The Thing", moments of total stillness, a simple shot, could fill your heart with the thrills of morbid anticipations and the Thing from the other world was one we couldn't see coming. In its predecessor, we don't even have the luxury of moments of stillness, or quietness, we beg for them, we beg for one minute of death glares, of silence, of anticipations, one minute of nothingness, just let us hear the blizzard in the background, but seriously, this got to be the most talkative movie ever and given how the appeal of science fiction depends on atmosphere, this is a disastrously uninspired directing. And don't get me started on characterization, how could the "remake" be criticized on that level when it's "The Godfather" compared to this.What we've got in the film is all good and clean-cut American heroes steady and focused like in a Simpsons parody, the scientist is recognizable by his white hair and self-righteousness, the nerd by his baldness and the fact that he faints during the battle while the hot secretary in tight skirts keep on flirting with the handsome captain... and we even have a scene where she ties him and offers him a drink, as if it had any relevance. Granted not every scene should enhance the plot but I expect a movie to be listed in the American Top 100 Thrills to be more concerned with the thrills and feature a few scenes where lives are at stakes, it does happen at times but when the real excitement starts, the countdown to the conclusion started with it. Nyby denied that Hawks directed the film, and I'm inclined to believe him.For the fourth or fifth time, here's a reminder of Hawks' golden rule for a good movie: three good scenes and no bad scenes. I don't think "The Thing" was made with that mindset, the film contains many bad scenes or awkward in the best case or good scenes that aged badly... and I sincerely can't think of a third impactful scene between the opening and the ending. Even the monster's entrance is nothing new since Frankenstein and his demise is laughable, let's not kid ourselves about it. This is not even to dismiss the film, I didn't even mention the implausible stuff or the plots holes, but its greatest fault is the lack of entertaining value.That's "The Thing"'s main flaw, it either never tries to be more than a B-movie, or it doesn't even try to be a plain and fun-to-watch B-movie. Its greatest flaw is that it's a serious film, taking itself seriously... and getting quickly and seriously boring. Five for the historical relevance. (Interestingly, this film and the "making of" of John Carpenter's version has the same running-time, and at least one of them keeps you excited in every single minute, it's a miracle if "The Thing" ever keeps you awake or at least focused)

John Carpenter's "The Thing" is a masterpiece. In fact, it's one of my all time favorite flicks. A truly near perfect science fiction tale of paranoia, that still boasts some of the most beautifully gruesome, and agelessly awesome F/X work ever burned to celluloid. Not only was Carpenter's work a remake of "The Thing From Another World," it also used other elements from the original short story that both features were based upon, "Who Goes There?" A team of soldiers are sent to the North Pole, to investigate a downed craft that has crashed near a U.S. research base housing fellow servicemen, civilians, and scientists. It isn't long before they all make the remarkable discovery that the transport is alien, and the passenger within is still alive. Split between the soldiers duties to protect mankind, and the scientists desires to understand this new creature, everyone fights to stay alive, as the life form that is now among them fights to rule the world. My worries began to solidify when the black and white opening credits began to roll, proclaiming that the following was an R.K.O. Picture, the first sign of a nearly 60 year old motion picture. The low expectations I had going into it were not only wrong, they were completely unjustified. "The Thing From Another World" hides it's age well with witty, smirk inducing dialogue (not to mention some of the most realistic conversation I've seen in a film, with players constantly cutting each other off and/or talking over one another), playful characters (sometimes making quips just before an impending attack), and a uniquely different take on an alien organism hell bent on planetary domination. Bypassing the traditional alien invasion style used by "Independence Day" and "World of the Worlds," The Thing instead follows a different path, with only one single entity (still posing a potentially far greater threat) for the human race to overcome. What made the experience still more gratifying, is the fact that the space invader doesn't even pose the same kind of danger as in the 1982 remake. It's still very much the same plot-line in certain ways, but completely different in other aspects. The only downside still comes from its era of creation however, as the horrible and destructive monster determined to end our species, is still just some guy in a mask and costume. Luckily, most of the shots of the antagonist are quick and reveal little detail, that is until the final showdown. Not only was this film a pleasant surprise for someone who finds it hard to swallow most 50's sci-fi, but ultimately it gave me something even more, a deeper appreciation for John Carpenter's "The Thing."

There is really no doubt about it here, in my opinion. There are some examples of movies that people would qualify as being "sci-fi" prior to this classic. There were movies that co-mingled that idea of sci-fi with horror to some degree. None had the impact that this movie had on Hollywood. It launched the 50s sci-fi boom. It led to a legion of imitators. It created the blueprint for the entire history of sci-fi horror that comes after. Every ALIEN, PREDATOR, etc owes a debt to this film.Despite the fact that there were so many imitators to follow in the 50s, none of them come close to this film's power. None seemed able to capture what it is that truly made this movie so great. A large part of this begins and ends with Howard Hawks. He is not credited as the director, but I'm not going to retread that familiar territory. Spielberg isn't credited as the director of POLTERGEIST, but we all know who's movie it is. Christian Nyby is forever a historical footnote. The guy who gets no credit for the success of THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD because it is so clearly Hawks film in every way. The hordes of b and c grade films to come after clearly never had that luxury.I believe that one of the things that keeps this movie so tightly constructed is the co-mingling of military and science. Sure, other movies followed that blueprint, to varying degrees of success. I have seen A LOT of 50s drive-in films and a great portion of them tend to fall to far into one side or the other. The majority of them go too far into the science and forget the action. Too many nerds and not enough heroes, so to speak. We all know those movie I'm talking about where some scientist rambles on and on with big words and terms that almost sound made up, trying to forcibly to inject scientific credibility into its' monster. Too often, the end result reels like an old 60s educational film with made up mumbo jumbo that derails the movie. On the other hand, too much action without the scientific aspect of it, and some of the mystery is missing.This movie perfectly encapsulates both sides of that formula. The scientists want to preserve and study the monster. They supply us with meaningful explanations of its' origins and the nature of the creature, without ever feeling hokey. The soldiers are perfect heroes, cracking wise while playing brave. They are bent on destroying the creature and act as the duality to the science in a perfect way.The setting, also, has a lot to do with the success of this film. You feel the cold in a palpable way, especially when the heat goes out in the final act and the heroes have to deal not just with a monster, but with the stark reality of the nature around them. The history of horror and sci-fi has plenty of desert and jungle movies, but because of the natural difficulty in filming in the arctic, the snowy environment has not been done so much and it still feels fresh.One of the most genius aspects of the movie is that gradual way that it introduces its' monster. The biggest problem with much of 50s sci-fi is that the creature designs left something to be desired, yet the film makers constantly made the poor decision to highlight the monstrosities far too much. The more we see the monster the more ridiculous it looks. We all know the cliché that our imaginations provide much more fear and terror than our eyes can ever conceive. This movie plays with that wisely. We get a quick glimpse at first, then a silhouette. It is not until the finale that we really get a chance to breathe in the monster in full glory and that makes this movie all the more impactful and terrifying. When we do get to see the monster, it is a great design, simple yet effective. Something more than human, but reminiscent enough to have added impact.There are plenty of "classics" that film critics and buffs will tell you that you have to see. This is required viewing, though, an absolute classic that has stood the test of time and still carries terror.

THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD is indeed a classic science fiction and horror genres. Deviations from the stories on which the movie is based are partly justified.Unusual movements of "meteor" on the radar are sufficient for alarm. The group of scientists and soldiers launch an investigation into an isolated cell reveal a flying saucer buried in the ice in their base yields frozen corpse of an alien creature that comes to life and began to attack them. The thing who was created in alien costume, despite the year filming and everything else, is the weakest link in the whole movie. It is much more about him best, which from the looks, as one of its action against the crew members. The dialogues are long and intelligent, but my concern amazing relaxation of characters, and this fact considered the tension and atmosphere. The effects are not bad. The characters are passive. The final calculation of the alien is sure to remember.Some elements are simply incompatible. At the beginning of the great atmosphere in the cold and the growing tension, are "loss" in totally inappropriate and unnecessary romance. The conflict between the Nobel laureate and a captain who comes down to a simple decision to investigate or kill is pretty good. An interesting movie with a lot of smart dialogue, cold conflict and unconvincing alien who deserves to be burned.