Every movie-person has a movie that they love watching with someone who hasn’t seen it before. When it comes to that experience, I can’t think of a movie I enjoy doing that more than with John Carpenter’s The Thing. For one thing, it’s one of my favorite horror movies of all time. For another thing, it’s one of those movies that makes you think about the story and outcome after the fact, even if you’ve seen it a million times. It has some of the best jump scares that will shock anyone who has never seen the movie. It is so effective at everything it does, I consider The Thing to be at the pinnacle of quality when it comes to horror movies and that particular generation of horror movies. In fact, there aren’t many horror movies that have come out since that are even comparable, in my opinion. Even some of my favorite newer horror movies like The Witch, The Conjuring, Cabin in the Woods, etc. I consider to be on a separate, lower tier when I think of my horror movie hierarchy. You may disagree, but you’re wrong.

Plot

A team of Americans in a base in Antarctica are going about their business when they’re suddenly visited by a dog and a couple of Norwegians who are determined to kill it. What exactly are the Americans doing down there? It’s never specifically disclosed, but everyone has their own role on the base and you have to assume that it’s some sort of science base. You don’t even have time to ask these types of questions, though, because, within the first five minutes of the film, the dog makes contact with the Americans, and the Norwegians meet an ill fate. The timing of all this event couldn’t be more unfortunate for the Americans, because it’s also the start of the Antarctic winter. This means that contact with the rest of the world is cut off and won’t return for weeks, due to the extreme weather. Isolated, the team has no method of asking for assistance and is unable to contact the Norwegian base to find out why they had some men go rogue and want this particular dog dead.

There’s more to this dog than meets the eye, as you’d expect. It turns out that the team from Norway uncovered an ancient alien crash site and dug an extraterrestrial out of the ice. Unfortunately for them, it wasn’t dead and it wasn’t friendly. More importantly, it is capable of absorbing and imitating other life forms perfectly. Given enough time, the creature would be capable of infiltrating any community and be able to slowly take it over with copies without anyone knowing. The dog that arrived at the American base wasn’t a dog at all, but an imitation. By the time the Americans all realize this, there’s no way of telling how many of them are no longer who they claim to be.

In addition to being one of the greatest horror movies of all time, this is also one of the best remakes of all time. John Carpenter is an outspoken fan of the original film by Howard Hawks: The Thing from Another World. It appears on the TV for a moment in Halloween, and he made sure to get the same opening title card effect of the original film. Not to downplay the quality of the original, but I prefer Carpenter’s version significantly more. The original film is more of a traditional monster movie with a creature roaming the base and slowly killing people off. John Carpenter’s version is more closely tied to the plot of the novella on which the films are based, Who Goes There? by John W. Campbell. I don’t have any issue with the traditional format, but this story allows for a more diverse horror experience. It’s not just a monster movie, it’s a movie about paranoia and being unable to trust people you might have known for years. That extra layer adds incredible depth to the film and makes it more unique.

What Works & What Works

Acting

Kurt Russell + Keith David

I could probably just stop writing and you’d understand based solely on those two names, but the truth of the matter is that the acting is terrific from everyone else in the cast as well. Both Russell and David would be featured in other Carpenter films for their obvious acting abilities and ranges, but The Thing is my favorite to feature either. Russell plays the level-headed protagonist who is able to make quick decisions, and think rationally in the most dire of situations, but also exudes a degree of reluctance at the leadership role that has been handed him. He constantly seems slightly irritated, tired, or depressed while still maintaining a strong survival instinct and understanding of what needs to get done. Russell is able to convey all of these emotions and characteristics in a depth and manner that other actors struggle to achieve.

Likewise, Keith David manages to steal every scene that he’s in because of, not only his notable voice but also his presence. David is also able to present more subtle nuance to his character, even though the character of Niles is a bit more aggressive and confrontational. While he presents himself as an individual who is more likely to seek power and control, and thus a likely impostor, you still want to see him survive because of how much his interactions might affect the other characters around him.

Every other actor does their part in conveying the fear, disbelief, and paranoia that a situation like this would entail, with Wilfred Brimley showing his various acting ranges throughout The Thing.

Directing + Pacing + Music = Atmosphere

I put all these different aspects into one section title because they can also act as a formula for another section title, if necessary: Directing + Pacing + Music = John Carpenter. Known for directing some of the most iconic horror movies, he’s also a composer of some great scores. While Halloween’s score and theme are probably the most recognizable work he’s done, the music to The Thing pairs flawlessly with his direction. Much of the film moves at a deliberately slow pace, showing the characters lost in thought or overwhelmed with fear. The slow pace then makes you just as unprepared as the characters when the proverbial crap hits the fan.

Long rolling shots through empty hallways are accompanied by an ominous, plotting * thud * thud * from the score. The music does a lot to add to the tone and experience of everything. There are plenty of moments in the film that are horrific and shocking, but a majority of the film is focused more on paranoia. When you’re paranoid of everyone around you, what do you say? Who do you talk to? Where do you go? The music is terrific at conveying this quiet terror.

While a majority of Carpenter’s movies after the 1990s were missteps, or just plain bad, Carpenter was at his peak in the 1970s and 1980s.

Special Effects

I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention the incredible effects that are used in this film. There are many out there who feel that the special effects in the graphic scenes are too gross or distracting. They’re wrong, but they’re entitled to their opinion. The effects are gross because they’re effective and the perfect demonstration as to why the ‘80s was one of the best decades for horror. The Thing is meant to look like a creature that has taken traits and characteristics of the different life forms it has encountered in the past, with some extreme and other-worldly details. So while there are familiar things like the shape of a dog, there are also tentacles of a Lovecraft-like monster, and a flower with teeth, and eyes scattered throughout the skin. The Thing is supposed to look familiar but alien at the same time. The horrific way it looks is similar to how HP Lovecraft always strove to convey the monsters in his stories: something that is so shocking and disturbing it might make you go mad in the process. When survival instinct is no longer enough for the characters to keep them grounded, you can tell they’re likely to go mad, given enough time. The list of special effects people responsible for this monstrosity is long, but I tip my hat to each of them for making it as gross and disturbing as they did. It only saddens me that we’ll probably never see practical effects like these in films again.

Why You’re Wrong if You Disagree

"The Thing" is a great barf-bag movie, all right, but is it any good? I found it disappointing, for two reasons: the superficial characterizations and the implausible behavior of the scientists on that icy outpost. Characters have never been Carpenter's strong point; he says he likes his movies to create emotions in his audiences, and I guess he'd rather see us jump six inches than get involved in the personalities of his characters. This time, though, despite some roughed-out typecasting and a few reliable stereotypes (the drunk, the psycho, the hero), he has populated his ice station with people whose primary purpose in life is to get jumped on from behind. The few scenes that develop characterizations are overwhelmed by the scenes in which the men are just setups for an attack by the Thing.

-Roger Ebert

Far be it from me to disagree with a man who has seen more movies than I ever will, I’m going to disagree anyway.

First of all, there are less than 6 total jump scares in this movie. By most horror movie standards, that’s very few, especially if you compare it to some of the horror remakes that Michael Bay has resurrected. Every one of the jump scares serves a purpose for that moment and scene, unlike the fake scares where someone is started by a random cat or something. The Thing’s horror operates on dread, anxiety, and paranoia. The shock of the jump scares is there to release the built-up tension of the scene, and in every one of the jump scares, there is something there that is a threat. So what Ebert is writing doesn’t strike me as accurate when it comes to that.

I also think that his attitude towards the characters and their behaviors is inaccurate. I’m not sure which stereotypes he’s talking about in his short list because Kurt Russell’s character is a blend of the drunk, psycho, and hero. No one person in the group can so easily be categorized as one of those stereotypes. The behavior they employ also does not come across as unbelievable to me. How are they supposed to behave? They’re isolated, surrounded by people they’ve known for years who may not be their friends anymore, and they’re being hunted by a creature that is completely alien to them. Their actions of trying to be as calm and rational towards each other while being only a hair away from snapping and killing the other seems pretty realistic to me.

The last line of his quote is something that I really don’t understand: “…the men are just setups for an attack by the Thing.” The only instance in which the group is being actively stalked is towards the end of the film, when the tension is at its highest and you’re expecting the climatic confrontation. The rest of the film is focused on the characters interacting with each other, which happens to have plenty of characterization. I’ll extend an olive branch to his review and say that not every character stands out from the group, and I don’t know what a majority of them do in this station in Antarctica. However, it’s a horror movie with a lot of characters who add to the body count and add to the fact that you don’t know who or how many of them are the Thing. Even some of the more prominent characters you wouldn’t expect to be the Thing become it by the end.

The only criticism that I’m really willing to accept is how gross it is and how that’s a turnoff for some people. If that’s your only real complaint, then that’s fine. I’m not a fan of gross effects either, but I am willing to put up with it because I think it actually serves a purpose here at making the monster more horrific and terrifying as a sharp juxtaposition against the horror that is being isolated and surrounded by strangers you thought you knew.

How Tasty Is It?

Without a doubt in my mind, this is one of my favorite movies ever made. I’ve seen it countless times and am captivated every time by the sound, the music, the special effects, and the drama. If there’s ever an opportunity to show The Thing to a person who has never seen it before, I jump at the chance. I want to see them experience it for the first time, see how they react at the specific moments of shock and horror, and see how they think the Thing made its way through the facility. If I were to simply look at John Carpenter’s attempt at a vision and how well he succeeded at making that vision a reality, I’d say he knocked it out of the park.