Come in without Expectations.

Rating: Null/10 (8 March 2018)

When I viewed "The Thing" for the first time at 16yrs it scared the living daylights out of me, and I had trouble sleeping for days afterwards. However, My 6yr younger brother, watched it a few months later and was not at all scared by it. I don't think there is such a thing as "scariest movie of all time", for sure some are scarier than others, but when it comes down to the best scary movies, some will affect more than others because of their inherent content. Some people think John Carpenter's "Halloween" is terrifying, I didn't find it scary in the least, but it is a very good movie none-the-less. I recommend knowing as little about the thing as possible, and not expecting it to be really scary, just enjoy it for what it is; a well-mace piece of sci-fi horror.
I won't say anything about the plot, especially any of it's revelations, it
is best enjoyed going in blind. This is not a fast paced movie, it takes it's time to develop and if that bugs you, don't watch, but it is this slower pace that can make it creep under your skin, the shots are often lingering on the creatures, and we are able to spend a decent amount of time with each of the characters in the film simpler because of it's limited cast and location. The arctic location makes it feel bleak and desolate just by nature, and also gives it a vast sense of hopelessness.
I enjoyed many of the characters, from Mcready's crustiness, to Window & Palmer's sarcastic nature, to Blair's intelligence and paranoia, to Rawls incessant music and rollerskating. The characters are all distinct and likeable, even if not all of them are necessarily compelling. This is something that really distinguishes it from most sci-fi and most horror films.
The score is always effective and interesting, it is one of the best scores of any movie I can think of, and is integral to the overall success of the film, it is never over bear and always adds to the moods of the moment within the film.
The cinematography is beautiful, especially the arctic shots, and there inside shots are well-done, they set the claustrophobic mood right out of the gate, often making the cramped quarters seem even more cramped, even in the larger open areas, even outside, simply because of the below freezing arctic temperatures.
If this movie doesn't scare you, hopefully you can at least appreciate the effects in the film. One of the greatest achievements of this film, is the practical effects that pushed the boundaries of those effects to their limit, and with a $10,000,000 budget($33,000,000 today), it has the budget to allow this, unlike most sci-fi/horror films, which have tight budget constraints. The effects are grotesque, but not so much for the sake of being grotesque, but rather by necessity, this is one case where a more is more approach actually works, each grotesque sequence often topping the next. I am always amazing, every single time, by the effects that were achieved, now some 36 years ago.
The 2011 "The Thing" prequel really proves just why practical effects often work so much better than digital ones, the digital effects often are to fast and jaunty, and over time, tend to look cartoonish; even mediocre practical effects do not suffer from this as much as digital ones. This is exactly why there has been a move back towards practical effects recently, they will almost always look more real. I believe both have their place, but in some movies, they have no place at all, and the original thing proves this, the only place the original thing may have benefited from digital effects, is in the last 20 minutes.
We only ever know as much as the characters in the movie know, and that isn't much, so if that bugs you, you probably shouldn't watch this. This is a who-dunnit in a way, and things do not wrap up in a neat package, not at all, why this will drive some crazy, it is one of the best things about the movie, you never have all the answers, and you never will.
~Amy