Rating: 
Summary: Mature effort from director of Halloween
Review: This is an interesting sci-fi horror film, from one of the greatest horror directors of all time, and his greatness shows throughout.A UFO has landed in Antarctica 100,000 years ago and is buried under the snow. An American team is located there, and when the alien life form is uncovered by a fellow research team it infects their dog unknowing to them. Soon the dog rips open, and The Thing is now "imitating" the dog, so it can go on killing disguised. This alien, The Thing, is found out to absorb living things, mutate into an exact copy of it, and then go to kill. The American team is stranded there, and isolated, soon growing more and more paranoid one of their fellow team members is infected by The Thing. The effects are not very realistic, some of the acting is bad, as is the dialog, but that does not take away from the overall experience. The tension is built up slowly, as each new member is infected, discovered, and killed. The pace can be somewhat slow, but is the film is always interesting. This is a must see for fans of either sci-fi or horror. But to others this may be a little to B level for them. Anyway, I enjoyed it, and the DVD has a ton of extras, so this should at least be rented. 4 stars, check it out.
Rating: 
Summary: The Master of Creep!
Review: OK. All you squeemish woosies can leave the room. It's dark out. The lights are turned down. I've got the surround sound cranked up and the widescreen is ready. A mixed drink in one hand and the remote in the other. It's time to start one of "The Master of Creep's" best horror flicks. THE THING is an orgy of terror. Just imagine spending an entire Antarctic Winter with a motley crew of researchers: The isolation, the bitter cold, the low morale, the paranoia, the...THING! These guys never had a chance. John Carpenter grabs you out of your seat and plants you smack-dab in the middle of it all. Another fantastic music score completes the apocalyptic mood of this desolate and doomed Outpost. The entire cast is excellent. I cant pick out a favorite because they all play their respective parts so well. I cant believe this movie only got so-so ratings when it first came out. Seems the critics were more taken by the friendly 'E.T.' But THE THING doesn't play warm and fuzzy, so grab a blanket and keep that drink topped off because you're in for a chilling experience! You'll enjoy the commentary by John Carpenter and Kurt Russell. They reveal some interesting facts about the making of the movie and it sounds like the cast and crew had a good time on the set (it sounds like they're having a good time during the commentary, too. You can hear drinks being filled and lighters flicking. Pure speculation!) Other John Carpenter notables: The Fog: Awesome ghost story set in a sleepy coastal town. Halloween: Needs no introduction. Escape From New York: Apocalyptic Sci-Fi at its best!
Rating:
Summary: Maybe not the ultimate in terror, but pretty darn close
Review: Ooh boy, what is there to be said about this modern horror classic that hasn't been said before. Yes, it is closer to the original story than the Howard Hawks version, and yes, it might very well be the most violent major studio production ever made. But if you disregard all that, what do you have?
To be quite blunt, one of the most effective and horrific monster movies ever made. John Carpenter manages to establish a kind of feeling of paranoia and dread that simply has to grab almost anybody by the throat, and it doesn't let go easily. The extremely graphic monster effects by Rob Bottin and his crew are unbelievable and realistic at the same time. Many of the monster effects are definately not appropriate for the squeamish. But in the end, above average acting from the cast (especially a stoic performance from Kurt Russell) and the impeccable pacing from director Carpenter lead to an almost oppressive atmosphere of distrust and alienation that really fuels the movie.
Lastly, I just want to comment on the music, which I honestly have to say doesn't pull me one way or the other in the debate on it's merits.
On to the DVD. Basically, this is as good a DVD as you are likely to find, with one problem. The good things include a commentary by carpenter and russell which is a good and entertaining listen, a great documentary and a bunch of other extras. The one big problem (for the enthusiasts at least) is the lack of an anamorphic presentation. But don't let that stop you, it's one of the best letterboxed presentations I have ever seen.
In conclusion, all I can say is, buy this movie now, unless you have problems with the violence level.
Rating:
Summary: this thing likes to hide in an imatation
Review: Well this is a great horror movie, no wait, this is THE best alien infestation movie I have seen. This movie has a certain aoura about it. This makes Pennywise look like Ronald McDonald. This is the movie I have been waiting for, for a long time. There is no holding back, there is mutations everywhere.
This is set in an Anartic research station and stars a very young ( and bearded ) Kurt Russel. Now this starts out when they find a charred thing outside the ruins of an other research station they bring it back to study. The rest of the movie is a phsycological horror fest with some pretty good eye-candy for 1982.
My only gripe is a sequil that is a video game which is to frickin' hard to complete.The good side is that there is no movie sequil so then we can use our own thinking power to see what happens to Mcready and Childs... a.k.a. fan fiction at outpost31.com
Rating:
Summary: Holds up even after after 20+ years
Review: The Thing is such an amazing movie. The effects only serve the story, which is the true focus. The storyline doesn't move along just to set up another fx shot (Do you hear any of this Mr. Lucas?) A wonderful mystery shrouded in terror. And who knows, maybe somewhere out there thawing, waiting to be discovered lies humanities end...I wish Carpenter was able to make movies like this again.
Rating:
Summary: Pretty decent remake .....
Review: I don't always care for John Carpenter's brand of movies, but this one is an exception. Having seen the original first, my expectations weren't that high on recreating such a suspenseful atmosphere. But I was wrong, this film had suspense, great special effects, and spectacular acting.
All of the actors did a wonderfull job of portraying paranoid, scared, and confused men at an antarctic installation that happen to stumble upon an alien entity with amazing capabilities. Including the ability to copy its image after whatever it sees as it evolves.
Although the premise of the alien discovery is a little different from the original, its still creative.
Rating:
Summary: a THING of beauty
Review: This is one of those movies that I have been waiting a long time for. In fact I had almost forgotten about it when I saw it on the store shelf recently. I had to pick it up and relive the movie that my brother had introduced to me oh-so-long ago. This is one of John Carpenter's best films, and Kurt Russell is incredible. This movie will definately make you jump. My recommendation is to turn out all the lights, turn up the volume, and get ready to have your girlfriend hold on for dear life!!!
Rating:
Summary: John Carpenter rules!!!
Review: One of my old time favorites! Rusell's most intense interpretation of a character on the silver screen. I read the original story "Who goes there?", and I imagened Kurt as Mac. He lived that character, and the work of Carpenter is exquisite. I felt chills during all the ... flick!!! It's the perfect movie. No flaws. You gotta see it, folks! With the THX sound technology, the fear factor increased! If you wanna get scared, turn off the lights, and pump up the volume! Enjoy!!!
Rating:
Summary: "The Thing" goes on the sci-fi classics list.
Review: I only review the DVD's that I buy. If I buy a DVD then it has to be good. This movie rocked years ago when I first saw it on HBO and it rocks even better now to see it in the widescreen/letterbox format. The special features are all very entertaining. I particularly liked the feature lenth commentary by Carpenter and Russell. You could really tell they had fun viewing the film again and talking about it. This movie goes on the all time sci-fi classics list. Buy it! you wont be dissapointed.
Rating: 
Summary: Pornographer of violence? Or innovative groundbreaker?
Review: While I watched this often grisly movie, I was thinking how Carpenter's use of gore could almost make him a 'pornographer of violence'. It was THAT extreme and gratuitous. Then later when I watched it with the commentary enabled (featuring Carpenter and Russell), he actually mentioned that very phrase. Apparently the ultragore in this movie upset a lot of people when it was originally released, and he was accused of being a pornographer of violence, which is too strong a term, but still an adequate way of putting it. He just snickered and shrugged it off, calling them "wusses", and Russell literally went into laughing fits at most of the hideous gore scenes. They see it as only special effects, forgetting that most filmgoers don't know movie tricks and are thoroughly repulsed, not entertained or humored, by the gore. For instance, when you see a dog's head graphically split wide open, or a man stick a knife under his thumbnail and begin carving up his thumb while blood spurts out, it's really rough going; but when you hear Carpenter's commentary at the same time telling how the effect was achieved, it becomes laughable. Problem is, there was no director commentary for theatergoers, most of whom ended up vomiting and leaving the theater. I can't understand why they allow a movie with such astonishingly heinous, vile scenes to get an R rating, but if you show a naked man in a movie, it gets an NC-17. I guess it's fine and dandy to show people being eaten, dismembered, disemboweled, and burned alive, but just don't show people having sex. Something's not right. I'll never understand Carpenter's moviemaking goals. He obviously has (or had) appreciable talent, but he seems to delight in making the audience squirm and feel queasy at every chance he gets. With The Thing, he created a great, highly entertaining movie, with appropriately gruesome and fantastic special effects for the monster scenes. I can appreciate that, and it helps the film to be memorable. In fact, there are some special effects in this film that could be considered groundbreaking. Highly creative and amazingly well crafted, at the very least. But for some sick reason, he added in loads of closeups of needles penetrating skin, people slicing themselves up, disgusting bloody entrails being squeezed, and other stuff that has absolutely no reason whatsoever for being there other than to make people vomit, or at least turn away. I don't understand why anyone would have that as a goal for a movie, or be proud of it in any way. You want people to WATCH your movie, not turn away. It is not a positive thing to make a movie memorable, when the most memorable things are repugnant and disgusting. Carpenter does this in many of his films, and it indicates to me a strange guy who is using his directorial power to manipulate a little too much. Ok, so he can make people throw up; does he derive pleasure from that or what? I don't deny his filmmaking talent, which is very evident in The Thing, but his quirk for including such repellant, sadistic scenes is really perplexing, and knocks his directorial quality down a notch. Ok, with that complaint out of the way, I'll say that The Thing was very well made, entertaining all the way through, and features good acting from everyone, even the dog Jed, and especially Wilford Brimley who shows once again that he's one of most underrated actors in the business. I think this film is Carpenter's second best after Halloween (having not seen all his films, I admit.) Why? Because he did better when he was an unknown independent guy working with a tiny budget. He showed more creativity that way and he didn't use special effects as a substitute for quality filmmaking. With the bigger budget he had for The Thing, he got a little preoccupied with special effects and explosions, like most directors do. But that's not a rap on The Thing in particular, just a comparison. The Thing works, definitely. For this movie he and his crew created a very claustrophobic feeling, and a massive sense of paranoia and dread. You begin to realize the guys are in a hopeless situation, with no Hollywood happy ending to bail them out. The movie has no phony, unfunny humor it, it's deadly serious at all times. Very impressive. I dock the movie a star only because Carpenter's sadism makes itself a little too obvious for my taste. The commentary on this DVD is from the mid-90's, from the old laserdisc version. No problem, it's good stuff, why not use it again? Carpenter is somewhat technical, not afraid to use professional terms, and I really appreciated that. Like all directors who do commentary, he rudely interrupts the actor whenever necessary to point out a scene he likes. Russell doesn't have much important to say except to laugh a lot at most of the scenes. Although he does make one incredible statement: "the violence in this movie is very subtle." And he wasn't being ironic! WHAAAT? Subtle? This movie has some of most grotesque, repellant, repulsive scenes of explicit gore in any movie, ever. Subtle, it is not. Even Carpenter had a bit of a snicker at Kurt's nonsensical line. Even though I've made some gripes about The Thing and Carpenter, I dig this movie and recommend it, but only if you have a strong stomach. Actually, there's nothing here as disgustingly unwatchable as the ear-slicing scene from Reservoir Dogs, or even anything from Carpenter's recent bomb, "Ghosts Of Mars".
|
