The Thing

Name: The Thing
Genre: Sci-Fi, Mystery, Thriller, Horror
Released: October 14, 2011
Duration: 103 min
Rating: 49

2011

METASCORE

Mixed or average reviews based on 31 Critic Reviews

See All

USER SCORE

Generally favorable reviews based on 302 Ratings

See All

6.3

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

6.3	Your Score
6.3	User Score Generally favorable reviews based on 302 Ratings

Would you like to write a review?

There is a 75 character minimum for reviews. If your review contains spoilers, please check the Spoiler box. Please do not use ALL CAPS. There is no linking or other HTML allowed. Your review may be edited for content. 0/5000

Check box if your review contains spoilers

Play Sound

Please enter your birth date to watch this video:

You are not allowed to view this material at this time.

The Thing

Now Playing: The Thing

Movie Details & Credits

Universal Pictures | Release Date: October 14, 2011 | R

Summary: Paleontologist Kate Lloyd has traveled to the desolate region for the expedition of her lifetime. Joining a Norwegian scientific team that has stumbled across an extraterrestrial ship buried in the ice, she discovers an organism that seems to have died in the crash eons ago. But it is about to wake up. When a simple experiment frees thePaleontologist Kate Lloyd has traveled to the desolate region for the expedition of her lifetime. Joining a Norwegian scientific team that has stumbled across an extraterrestrial ship buried in the ice, she discovers an organism that seems to have died in the crash eons ago. But it is about to wake up. When a simple experiment frees the alien from its frozen prison, Kate must join the crew's pilot, Carter, to keep it from killing them off one at a time. And in this vast, intense land, a parasite that can mimic anything it touches will pit human against human as it tries to survive and flourish. (Universal Pictures)

… Expand

Director: Matthijs van Heijningen Jr.

Genre(s): Sci-Fi, Mystery, Thriller, Horror

Rating: R

Runtime: 103 min

See All Details and Credits

Watch Now

Stream On

Buy on

Stream On

Expand

Metascore

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Critic Reviews

Mike Scott

Oct 14, 2011

Yes, it is derivative, but in a year in which films from the 1980s are getting needless remakes seemingly every other week, this one stands out as a rare one that works. That's a good "Thing." Read full review

Andrew O'Hehir

Oct 13, 2011

I'm delighted to tell you that the new Thing was made by people who understand what the horror audience wants and don't treat it like a bunch of brain-dead children. Mirabile freakin' dictu. Read full review

Tom Russo

Oct 13, 2011

The basic story is identical, and when there are fraught, climactic opportunities for the movie to make a gutsy departure, it passes up the chance. Read full review

Marc Savlov

Oct 13, 2011

Heijningen's The Thing is tightly paced, has enough imaginative horror to satisfy even the most jaded gorehound, and never strays too far from its source, so why do you come away from it feeling like it was the runner-up in a daylight nightmare festival? Read full review

Peter Hartlaub

Oct 13, 2011

It's an imperfect facsimile, guilty of borrowing too many ideas from the earlier film, and then executing them with differing results. Read full review

Jesse Cataldo

Oct 13, 2011

You can tell a lot about the film from its rough handling of the materials supplied by its predecessor, using these commonalities both to identify the bond between the two and signal how much further it's willing to push things. Read full review

Steve Persall

Oct 12, 2011

This Thing is purely for the gorehounds, and they aren't likely to leave impressed. Read full review

SEE ALL 31 REVIEWS

Write a Review

User Reviews

Muxika

Oct 14, 2011

How do you replicate the horror of John Carpenterâ

10 of 20 users found this helpful1010

ArkonBlade

Feb 2, 2012

i was very pleased with this film . i loved the 1982 version of The Thing it was ground breaking and the effect where and still are amazing . This is not a Remake like it almost would seem by the name . It is in fact a prequel set just before the events with kurt russell, now having seen thei was very pleased with this film . i loved the 1982 version of The Thing it was ground breaking and the effect where and still are amazing . This is not a Remake like it almost would seem by the name . It is in fact a prequel set just before the events with kurt russell, now having seen the 1982 version about 10x i kinda know whats gona happen for the most part in this film , now that doesnt mean there wasnt alot to enjoy , seeing cool new versions of the thing (which are very well done) , and still being in suspense on who is infected and who isn't. they stayed very true to leading up to every thing in carpenters version of the thing . the only thing that could have made this a much better film is if this was a sequel and we got to find out what happend to kurt russell and kieth david... maybe a trilogy?... hopefully. still though silid movie all around.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

Sharkey1337

Oct 17, 2011

I'm a huge fan of John Carpenter's "The Thing" film, so I was somewhat anxious when I heard they were doing a prequel starring the Norwegian camp seen in the first film. To my delight, the film was actually pretty decent and goes along with the origal film rather nicely, aside from someI'm a huge fan of John Carpenter's "The Thing" film, so I was somewhat anxious when I heard they were doing a prequel starring the Norwegian camp seen in the first film. To my delight, the film was actually pretty decent and goes along with the origal film rather nicely, aside from some glaring plot holes that don't match up with the first film. The entire acting crew does a marvelous job and the special effects are pretty nice. The film only slightly treads on rehashing scenes of the first film, the spots are few but are painfully obvious to fans. Thankfully the film forges new material on the creature, giving it a uniqueness from its predecessor. The main difference with this Thing is that it's more of a monster flick than the suspenseful horror that Carpenter delivered. It's definitely faster paced and ends sooner than you may want to, at least for me as I was really enjoying it. Hopefully we'll see an extended director's cut that delves more into suspense and story that may have been cut out. For fans of the first film, the final ending scenes are the most spectacular in linking directly into the opening of the first Thing. Recommended for horror/sci-fi fans!… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

kris2fur

Mar 18, 2012

I really enjoyed this movie, I love the special effects and the varying differences with the first one. Though I have never seen it. I really went into this movie with an open mind and it was not disappointing.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

BuzterOne

Jan 20, 2012

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I love J.Carpenter's The Thing and i saw it with an open mind. If you think this CGI effects are better then the 82 version you're .. i dont even have the words for it. And how it just exploads all the f******* time in this movie. It looks like unfinished effects in almost all scenes. And if this movie didnt have the text: "1982 Antarctica" at the beginning i would never .. f*** it! I cant buy that. They listen to "Men at work" but they dress like the 90s.. nice cover up movie. It feelt like the Elm Street remake at some points. Many pointless jump scares and they skipped character development. The only one i liked was Lars but he was outknocked 2/3 of the movie by Adebisi from Oz. But i liked the joke in the beginning and i never heard that before. They could have built more suspense between the US and NOR people cuz they dont realize what they are saying in some scenes. It was an "Avarage" horror movie. Nothing more and nothing less in my eyes.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

asthobaskoro

Jun 18, 2012

First I haven't seen Carpenter's so I won't compare it, it's prequel after all. The Thing is an alien-horror movie but neither scary nor thrill. Mary Elizabeth Winstead even couldn't save it.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

Ptoto1474

Nov 7, 2021

This is stupid unrealistic inconsistent **** . Everything in this movie goes out of its way to have drama shots and dialogue, which would never happen in real life. I can't believe even after 20 years, it still sucks.

Find an alien frozen in ice? Better take it before contacting anyone andThis is stupid unrealistic inconsistent **** . Everything in this movie goes out of its way to have drama shots and dialogue, which would never happen in real life. I can't believe even after 20 years, it still sucks.

Find an alien frozen in ice? Better take it before contacting anyone and put it inside where the ice can melt for some reason!

Doing an autopsy on an alien? Better only use short gloves to be protected. They couldn't be bothered to put on a mask, yet a full-body suit and clean room. Then they start casually talking to each other over the literal alien body that could carry a lot of viruses like nothing.

Alien creature trying to kill someone next to two people with weapons that can kill it? The two people stand there in shock and don't do anything at all, even after the same person kills a man in an instant.

I could go on, because the movie's whole plot is based on how garbage the writers are, I'm going to say every scene but one in this movie is -5/10. The best scene in this movie is the three second one where the guy looks for his flashlight on his person. I'm not joking. The scene is around 1:00:29.

The saddest part about this is that the plot, scenes, everything had to go through multiple people beforehand. The characters in this movie literally committed a crime against humanity. How did nobody at the studio not see how stupid this is?… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

SEE ALL 102 REVIEWS

52	#52 Most Discussed Movie of 2011
45	#45 Most Shared Movie of 2011