I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

Scientists and American Air Force officials fend off a bloodthirsty alien organism while at a remote arctic outpost. The Thing from Another World is the original The Thing film long before the one in 1982 and the prequel in 2011 and to be honest? It was better than i thought it was going to be, really fun and even tho we don't see the alien alot of times it does keep you quite hooked on it plus the ending was pretty cool how they defeated it and i think if you loved the other 2 you're going to love this version as well that holds quite well in my opinion. (7/10)

While yes, John Carpenters remake is superior and is one of the finest horror/sci of films of all time, that shouldn't devalue the original which is a tense and thrilling ride. One unique aspect about this film is the dialogue, it overlaps and feels natural making the characters more likable which in turn increases the tension. The movie never has a single slow moment or dull scene as there is constant dread throughout making this film a compelling watch. This movie is also note ale for being one of the first to pioneer the "less is more" technique as we never really get a good look at the monster which adds to the tension. Therefor,ancestry are all excellent with the character of Scotty being they standout character who is funny but not in a way that dissolves the tension. Overall I highly recommends this gem, but go in with the mindset that its own film and don't unfairly compare it to the remake as they are so vastly different I actually believe it would be more accurate to call alien (1979) a remake of this film then 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 its considered a classic by many fans of science fiction, but some other sci-fi fans consider it to be overrated and that it pales in comparison to the John Carpenter remake, but I think they are both just good enough for me to like them, not great, just good.The movie deals with the subject of how much should science advance?, this subject its presented to us by one of the scientist who wants to study the monster in order to get a much deeper understanding of this monsters origin, which its said to us that the monster came from a planet where plants evolved, instead of animals, this is a rather interesting theory.The film also has a overlapping dialog, which many people say its distracting, and other people say its realistic, but it didn't bothered me, it was definitely interesting but nothing that I think deserves high praise.Overall, the film may be slow at times or even boring and uninteresting, it has some elements to it that makes it different than a average monster sci-fi flick, its worth a watch.