Based on 232 votes and 82 reviews
good prequel to '82 carpenter's version. good digital vfx, definitely not "sub-par" as some people would believe.
i 'm a fan of john carpenter's remake, this was by far the best sci-fi i have seen in awhile. watch it, it's worth it.
Great rendition of John Carpenters classic.
interesting twist on the original movie - better than what the critics are saying about it.
Passable,the 80's version was alott better.
Excellent CGA. Love the way it appears even when I have never seen the original
Lots of jump and startle scares in this movie but still not as good as the 80's versions. A solid effort but wait to rent it.
This is a very well made prequel to John Carpenter's The Thing. Story line is good and special effects are great. Stay for the credits as it has a good lead in to the original. Only complaint would be that the movie was a little short.
A barely scary movie. More sci-fi then horror and a poor prequil to the 1982 John Carpenter version. Over use of CGI special effects is one of the downfalls of this movie. It should have been used to add on to the effects, but not as the main effects. There is very little tension, and the horror aspects are very "startle me" moments than really scary tension. Unfortunatly the ties to the 1982 version and the lead in to it made this a very predictable end to the movie.
I really enjoyed this movie. I hope they make another one.
This is a good prequel to the Classic "The Thing" Answers some questions left unanswered in the original, and leaves some more questions at the end. I look forward (And Hope) that they make a few more of these
Normally I am not a big fan of remakes but I did like this movie. If you like the original, of which I am a big fan, then you will enjoy watching this remake. Seemed a little short in terms of time - I mean why take an entire cast and film crew all that way and not make it a 2 hour movie! Maybe everyone got bored of the cold and they wanted to head home early.
Great movie but the original still whips its ass..
well i liked this movie but not as much as u liked the first one,it has tons of action and will leave you wanting more i give this movie 4 out of 5 stars just because it couldve been alil bit better
First movie that made me afraid of the dark at the age of 12.
Ihave seen the original version from the 50s and the remake from the 80s and I've gotta say that the best one in my mind is still the 50s original. They worked very hard on the plot because they did not have the technology they have today for special effects and as such did the best they could to make a great movie that was more than just computer graphics. When I saw the preview for this film I actually looked forward to it because I thought they would keep true to the original but when I actually saw it I was very disapointed.
I have seen all three versions of this movie and I still prefer the original black and white film. This version is definitely more high-tech and shows a lot more gore but I do not think that that makes this the best one. It also changes the story quite a bit to accommodate the new effects. Okay but not the best.
I remember watching the original and being scared silly but this just did not measure up. Maybe it's bcuz I am so much older now? Just ok.
Meh! not the greatest! and not that scary if your into scary Movies!!
This prequel, while not living up to the original,is still a very enjoyable film. The effects should've been done practically and used CG only as an aid, and the tension wasn't used very well as the focal point of fear, but the story was still good and I felt it covered the bases in terms of staying true to the original. If you go into this film expecting something amazing, you are being unrealistic. You need to go into this film already knowing, as it is common sense, that it won't be as good as the original, but it will still be a nice fun movie.
I was really disappointed with this movie and it wasn't what I expected to be and really wan't that scary and the preview was actually better than the movie it self and this movie it is better to rent from the store when it comes out please don't waste your money to go and see this it is not even worth $2.00 and this how much it really sucks please son't spend your money save it for a better scary movie this is for sure.
how many remakes do we need
I didn't see the original movie, but this movie was nicely done -- keeps you thinking!
I enjoy that movie. It was a good story but some effects were not good at all. For example, when they are in the helicopter and you saw outside of it, nothing move outside. The first movie "the thing" has better visual effects than the new one. And for those who saw the first one, it's really the same story with some differences but it don't worth the price to see the movie in theater
For all of you who are saying it isn't as good as the original 1982 movie you should do some homework. John Carpenter's version, while the best IMHO, is not the original. The age of Google and people are still bozos. Geesh
Great companion piece to Carpenters Masterpiece.
It was an average movie with some cool special effects, but it doesn't come close to the original with Kurt Russell
This was a great remake, and the special FX was great. ha high recomend for a never seen the original "The Thing" with kurt russel. and still a high recomend for those that dont like people messing with them it does it justice.
meh. Could take it or leave it.
Watched this one last night. I usually dont let my boyfriend choose movies but this one was a good choice. If you like a movie that makes you think...This is the one.
Be aware that this movie is more about suspense and thrills rather than horror. It tied up any loose ends I had with the original and was very well played out. No, the CGI isn't something you'd see in a $100 million dollar movie, and the actors aren't Robert Downey Jr. or Brad Pitt, but do their roles very well. If you pay great attention to details, they set things up for the original very very well. I was more than pleased with this movie, I loved it.
Interesting movie, although a little overdone on the graphics.
This movie was great! very suspenseful! and scary!!!!
Remakes - Remakes where was Kurt Russell (1982)when this new one was made ---- good special effects and entertaining however- it lacks one big "Thing" namely Kurt Russell as R.J. MacReady
This is a horrible thing to watch.
Enjoyed. Thought it was intense at times.
good prequel, even though it is much like the original it has a good backdrop and gruelling effects loved it!
My mate told me the plot followed the 1981 version, as i've never seen it I'll never know lol. It was good, i jumped a few times but then again, i jump a loud noises lol
Not so good
The original was really good and really scary at its time. This however, not so much. Absolutely no need for a remake, didnt like it at all.
it was very suspensful and creepy, but its one of those movies that your to regret not seeing!!
People who don't like sci-fi horror movies should not review them.
Poor Acting, Inappropriate Soundtrack. If I didn't like the first one so much, I would give it a one.
i think the pre prequel deserves a 4star it will never achieve the effect of the original release in the fiftys who doesn't remember when gunsmoke (james arness) get's electricaly smokes at the end! the new version is quite good!!
Did a good job asa prequal/sequal.
Felt a little bit rushed.
This is NOT A GREAT MOVIE. It's terrible. Anyone who thinks this film stands along side the John Carpenter original is insane or maybe just stupid.