THE THING (2011) MOVIE REACTION - HOW DID WE NOT CATCH ON SOONER!?- FIRST TIME WATCHING - REVIEW

Welcome to our first-time watching as we react to The Thing (2011). Delving into the mysterious Antarctic outpost and what lies within was truly a fun experience!
Directed by Matthijs van Heijningen Jr., "The Thing" (2011) serves as a prequel to John Carpenter's iconic film, following a group of researchers who uncover an extraterrestrial organism that can perfectly imitate any living being.
Mary Elizabeth Winstead plays Kate Lloyd, a palaeontologist, joins a team of scientists in Antarctica where they discover an alien buried in ice. However, things take a turn when the alien escapes and goes on a killing spree.
Missed some of the practical elements in this but it was so much fun exploring some more of the lore.
We hope you enjoy our reactions and commentary as we discuss the film, it's connections with the original (1982) and how this coudl've been a much better film had they released the original cut with the practical effects! A few months ago when we did our first time watching "The Thing" doing things practically is something we praised it for. It is a shame the studio replaced the practical for CGI.
If you'd like to support the channel and gain access to the full length reaction become a member of our patreon bit.ly/3ICVrJ6
Watch our reactions early! / @officialmediaknights
#TheThing #Reaction #TheMediaKnights

[@OfficialMediaKnights]

Hey guys! Thank you for watching and for your support. You guys have been nothing but the best! What are your thoughts on both The Thing (1982) & The Thing (2011)? We'd love to see the original cut of this film! If you'd like to support the channel and gain access to the full length reaction become a member of our patreon bit.ly/3ICVrJ6 Watch our reactions early! kzbin.info/door/iCUz1bHid4H9mu6g2IOjXgjoin

[@jbwade5676]

❤❤

[@AdrianSilva-y5n]

And thank you for reacting on this movie with my favorite actress Mary Elizabeth wintead 😍

[@theVersatileGamebox]

Absolutely

[@reduxmod9178]

That's right guys. It's a prequel. 😉😊

[@samcataldo4278]

HAVE YOU SEEN THE ORIGINAL FILM The Thing from Another World, 1951 ???? sometimes referred to as just The Thing, is a 1951 American black-and-white science fiction-horror film, directed by Christian Nyby, produced by Edward Lasker for Howard Hawks' Winchester Pictures Corporation, and released by RKO Radio Pictures.

[@AWhistlingWolf]

The joy of slowly realizing this was NOT a remake but a prequel about the norwegian camp.... the two-faced burnt monster, the axe on the door, the guy with the slit throat, Lars's dog, the broken block of ice, the hole in the ice field where they dug up the creature.....

[@ubik5453]

This prequel wasn't really needed.

[@jimmysmithjr4523]

If you enjoyed the original youll take it ​@@ubik5453

[@TempoMotions]

@@ubik5453 its not about if it was needed, its about introducing a movie to a new generation and the studio removed that opportunity by making it all of it CGI. Many prequels and sequels aren't needed, if you aren't happy about it then don't watch it

[@ubik5453]

@@TempoMotions 🤣 Someone's acting like a little bitch, eh?

[@AWhistlingWolf]

@@ubik5453 True, but most prequels in general aren't needed. Same for sequels, spin-offs, etc.

[@AlessaParker]

🤣 the way you ended with "KILL THE DOG PLEASE" beautifully circling back to how most reactors begin the Carpenter film reaction with "LEAVE THE DOG ALONE"

[@StephenCice]

Before they realized too late that it was The Thing.

[@Jayskiallthewayski]

I must have been one of the few that went "Kill that fucker!" at the time 😂

[@k1productions87]

I was waiting the whole time for that moment of realization "Wait, is this THE Norwegian camp?", but eventually I knew that wasn't gonna happen until right at the very end, and what an end.

[@schibleh531]

I read a theory here on KZbin on why the Thing is way more aggressive in this one. They said that it made sense because the thing never encountered humans, and it didn't know what they were capable of. It probably underestimated humanity after realizing that we can't transform or adapt to our environments, and that almost got it killed. This is why it takes a very stealthy approach in the original.

[@dustinmichel7608]

Exactly

[@dustinmichel7608]

It literally adapts from one film to the next.

[@jamiefarrell6049]

Yeah but as soon as it copies a person it should have a very good idea on how to behave!

[@krashd]

My theory has always been that by the time it gets to the US base it is exhausted, after all it has been fighting for almost two days by that point. It switches from confrontational to hit and run tactics.

[@brandonvortex995]

This was explain alot but the die hard fan refuse to listen to it. But yeah, why it was aggressive in the prequel it's because the alien lifeform never encounter a human before, soo after it's first defeat, the alien lifeform learn it's lesson and take more stealthy approach the next time it encounter a human being. My only critique is that sadly there is more of this prequel that was remove, supposedly there were an introduction of the Alien Pilot that was in stasis and the one that crash landed the Flying Saucer (and the UFO was probally somekind of research ship probally)

[@mustlearnmore4884]

I loved the twist at the end when the two KZbinrs realised this was a prequel all along! I thought you already knew this was set before the original! 😅😅

[@AWhistlingWolf]

I love how you went "That thing was crawling away on the ice because something forced it out and chased it", and then it turns out everyone in the spaceship was dead and that thing crawling on the ice was THE thing, trying to find other lifeforms to kill and replace. MacReady in the 1982 film: "So the ship crashed and this thing [the monster] crawled out, trying to get somewhere"

[@tinocontreras5105]

it wasn't Mac he wouldn't have killed The Thing in the end

[@chinruiz4113]

The marketing messed this one up by directly selling this one as a prequel. If they had held back that information, minds would've been blown (fantastically like yours did)

[@tygerchickchibi]

Tbh I didn't know it was a prequel until I saw it in theaters

[@williamgood1402]

I, fortunately, did not realize it was a prequel til most of the way through when I first watched in 2016- also didn’t know Prometheus was an origin story. Sometimes it helps not having cable or satellite t.v.

[@xenomorph2056]

Honestly, critics can never be trusted. Ever. CGI effects or not, this was a great movie. Movies are supposed to be about the story more than anything.

[@saltLTaylor]

Thank you.....I didn't care of what manner the effects came about the movie rocked

[@tenchraven]

Even if the effects look bad, it's the story. We don't complain about the original Godzilla because the man-in-suit looked bad, nor about Jaws because the shark is obviously mechanical to modern eyes who've grown up on better.

[@sillygoose4263]

This movie is more then awful cgi it's rehash everything from the first but worse

[@redemptionjack4657]

Uh it was a prequal like in the first film the Norwegians went trhough exactly what the americans went through.​@@sillygoose4263

[@levitaggart5943]

I agree. This movie was a long time coming. Anyone who's seen the J. Carpenter film has waited for the day that the Norwegian story gets told, especially since their base was visited in the '82 film. That one had everyone wondering why the 'copter crew was hunting a dog. Now we see why. It was well executed, considering the exotic & extremely odd nature of the alien. A lot of people like to knock it, but let them try to do better.

[@odemusvonkilhausen]

I'm glad y'all watched this. Nobody ever suggests this movie, because it's CGI instead of practical effects. Y'all just went up a notch, in my book.

[@OfficialMediaKnights]

Thank you so much for your support, it means everything to us!! We honestly enjoyed this film, the hate it gets is just mind-boggling!

[@pnaomiw]

I agree! I loved this movie! This is one of a few movies I liked where I also liked the original (the other one is Poseidon). You can keep the same story line and have different character arcs & obstacles to character development & that will still make the film super interesting and different .

[@StuckCrab]

It's not so much the fact that it's CGI that bothers people IMO. It's more that they had the practical effects for all, or at least most, of the scenes and then CG'd over the top of them. Other than that it's certainly not a bad movie. Not as good as the original but could've been worse.

[@blueturret5596]

@@StuckCrab​​⁠It’s not a bad film, but it could’ve been significantly better if the studio hadn’t interfered. Apparently, a collection of test screenings yielded a mixed response, so the studio panicked and had a bunch of scenes that were dedicated to character development and story building either significantly shortened or completely cut. They also replaced all the practical effects with CGI because they felt the practical effects “made it feel too much like an 80’s movie.” This choice apparently really upset both the writers and Amalgamated Dynamics. The ending for the film was also completely changed. Instead of the cheap looking CGI Sander-Thing, the final antagonist of the film would’ve been the Thing taking the form of the ship’s alien pilot in an attempt to escape the planet. Technically the alien pilot animatronic is still in the final scene, it’s just hidden behind the CGI Tetris effect.

[@Dinobottenbley]

@@blueturret5596it’s almost a complete retread of the original. There’s nothing that stands out on its own.

[@Zeradias]

Fun & True fact: they filmed this movie with 100% practical effects, but Paul Marketing said, "PrAcTiCaL dUmD, KiDs & TeEnS LoVe CGI, ReDo ThE wHoLe MoVie" So they CGI'd over every instance of the Thing's practical effects they had.

[@OfficialMediaKnights]

Gaaahhh, see, this is so upsetting!! We need the original cut with the practical effects, it's honestly criminal to change it after all of the hard work that has been put into it!

[@elduderino2462]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/aYObcoakZ5p6gsksi=LQtZU1KLVgSJkZWZ Its just sad what they did when you look at these tests...

[@TJMiton]

yup, studio totally ruined this movie.

[@hayatotheninja]

Yeah, when I watched the extras showing the practical effects, my heart was broken...

[@evilscary]

They also changed the final act. In the original the thing is revealed to have been a specimen that broke free of a containment tube, and one of the original pilots is still alive inside the ship.

[@kuribayashi84]

I love that they got a bunch of experienced Norwegian Actors for this movie. I heard Trond Espen Seim, who played Edward, is very famous in Norway, basically their Brad Pitt. And Kristofer Hivju (Jonas) later was Tormund Giantsbane in _Game of Thrones._

[@nathanlindahl8336]

I laughed so hard at the end when you guys are screaming “KILL THAT DAMN DOG!!!” 😂😂😂

[@Wash869]

Despite the problems, I still consider it a good prequel, makes good connections with the classic film.

[@OfficialMediaKnights]

Absolutely agreed, it's not flawless by any means, but it carries many of the elements from the Carpenter 'The Thing' while still doing some things differently. We definitely had a lot of fun with this!

[@thedeegee1601]

Yep, it's good, nothing will top the original aesthetics anyways. The only thing i don't like is the alien fight on the ship near the end, the rest is just perfectly good to me.

[@extremerpg409]

One detail that I love is that at 3:10 the signal sounds identical to the Distress Beacon from 2007's "Sunshine," a criminally underrated movie with a stellar cast.

[@G3rain1]

I've always thought the same thing about the ship and it's original crew. In fact, if you think about it, Antarctica is THE best place to crash land if your are trying to prevent the spread of the thing. So I don't think the crash site was random chance. The ships crew was trying to be responsible and not infect all of Earth.

[@krashd]

They could simply have chosen not to crash into the Earth at all. Spaceships aren't like planes, they don't have to fall out of the sky when something goes wrong.

[@Gingerninja1138]

Hahaha that was awesome watching you guys realise its actually a prequel, watching you see the dog escape 😂 watching your react to the end made the hairs on my arms stand up, I know people give this movie a hard time but that's just because they went with the CGI instead of the practical effects.

[@jimamos7984]

When they were making this movie, they went frame by frame in the original with the Norwegian camp, and was asking questions like "Why was the axe in the wall?"

[@chefskiss6179]

Right or wrong, good or bad... major props, MAJOR props to you both for at least checking out this flick. I don't think any channel has actually done that (I could be wrong). Keeping an open mind in cinema, much less any medium, is something to be respected. In that vein, I hope you check out 1982's Gandhi at some point.

[@Shmurph]

It always made me mad that the lack of practical effects is what made people write this movie off. The characters are great, the actors give fantastic performances, the atmosphere of stress and distrust and paranoia was perfectly maintained as soon as shit hit the fan, and the creature design was actually pretty great. Sure, it was all CGI, but it's not like it was *bad* CGI or the creatures looked stupid or anything. The designs they came up with were absolutely horrific in the best possible way. Not to mention the twist on it not actually being a remake of the John Carpenter film. Also, Marco Beltrami was a fantastic choice to do the score, he excels at anxiety-inducing music.

[@Mugelbbub16]

Fun fact: Juliette's thing assimilation was part CGI and part prosthetic, the person who played Juliette's mutant self essentially had an arm puppet prosthetic, I watched this prequel YEARS ago then watched the bts because I'm a fan of sfx makeup (I have even done some myself), not even the fire scene was CGI the prosthetic was fireproof! the stunt double had to wear a protective cover tho.

[@misterhyde1971]

55:00-55:50 You’re spot on Sister 👍🏽 By the time the Thing got to the American station it had known about Ye Olde Blood Test. That’s why he got to the blood so fast to dump it out. Also, he got to the blood because windows dropped the keys when he turned around and saw his friend being absorbed in the storeroom…you can hear them drop. There was another Thing from the shadow silhouette earlier so that is the one who picked up the keys and got to the blood. This Thing was flying an intergalactic spaceship 100,000 years ago…intelligent beyond our comprehension. Also… We now know that the Thing does not retain memories and it is not the actual person not knowing if He/She is the Thing or not. Example… At the end, the helicopter pilot didn’t remember which ear was pierced. That’s a memory so if you do not retain the person‘s memories, then asking someone a very personal question could work. Last… At the end of the original “The Thing” when Kurt Russell and Keith David are the only two survivors of the explosion… We now know that Keith David was not the Thing. Example… When Keith David is talking to Kurt Russell after he sits down you can see that Keith David has an earring in his ear. 👍🏽 Thanks for the great reaction to a great prequel!

[@gundamsigma]

When the pin drops for both of you that this was a prequel was the best part of the reaction guys

[@maksphoto78]

The Norwegian with the ginger beard was in Game of Thrones, he was one of the Wildlings.

[@AWhistlingWolf]

The last scene with the earring answers my question of "But what if The Thing just takes the inorganic parts and puts them back on?" Basically, you have to hope it puts the tooth fillings on the wrong teeth or the earring on the wrong ear or something like that. If The Thing memorizes where each inorganic part goes, it can replicate that as well no problem.

[@blackwidow7804]

You cant just put fillings back so even if the Thing knew it cant put them back. Earing is something else. You just put it on.

[@AWhistlingWolf]

@@blackwidow7804 I mean if the Thing can dissolve and re-build an entire human body piece by piece in just minutes, it can definitely place tooth fillings the right way during the process

[@berlyglobe7]

I loved this movie... and damn now i'm just realizing its a prequel...WOW!! amazing

[@KNK2116]

I absolutely LOVED what y’all said about remakes & peoples entitlement towards an IP! You both hit the nail on head. Idk if anyone could’ve made the point better than you both did in your commentary section of this video. I’m a newer subscriber, within the past 2-3 months or so, & I’ve got to say I really enjoy not only your reactions but the commentary/analysis of the film you just watched. I cannot say the same for other reactors, even ones where I love their reaction but just feel like their review of the movie isn’t interesting (for lack of a better term atm) enough to listen to. You both always have such intelligent & insightful things to say & you often get me thinking more about a film or sometimes making me understand another point of view that I hadn’t previously. Coming from someone who loves everything that goes into making films (acting, writing, special effects, set design, etc.) I just want to say thank you both for taking the time to speak so passionately, eloquently & intelligently about the films you watch! ❤

[@Thundarr100]

I saw this movie in theatres when it came out. At the time, most everyone knew that this was a prequel to the original. And, I think that a lot of the hate came from knowing that it was a prequel to the original, telling the story of the Norwegians that found the alien and the ship. Knowing that took away a lot of the tension, because we already knew what was going to happen, if not exactly how it happened. Then there were some story elements that made no sense. Like the alien exposing itself and causing the helicopter to crash. True, the sick guy was way too obvious of a red herring, but deciding to crash the helicopter and risk dying rather than return to camp made no sense. The others hadn't even figured out how to tell the difference between a human and a replica yet. Add to that the crappy CGI instead of the original practical effects, and you've got a recipe for hatred.

[@dljprogun]

16:37 No, that is some alien life form that it killed and is imitating. We never find out what the thing's true form is. 36:47 You forgot Norris's head? 51:55 The 1982 film is a remake itself from the 1951 movie "The Thing from Another World" 52:03 Yeah, I think it's good too.

[@GeraldWalling]

This was actually a prequel to The Thing (1982). The Dog being chased at the end is the opening scene for the 1982 version.

[@Non_Descript_Individual]

1) About the blood in the shower: NO, no one cleaned it up. What actually happened that this movie didn't simply come right out and explain (but that those of us who remember the hot needle blood test scene in the original film will already know), is that the left over blood itself conciously moved out of the shower stall (yes, as a self-moving sentient fluid trickling its own way across surfaces) and went into hiding elsewhere int he building until it had an opportunity to secretly infect the next person. 2) About the end of the scene where everyone's tooth fillings were getting checked witgh a flashlight, specifically the part where the one guy sneakily whispers "...and now she's in charge" to the man next to him: I'm amazed it didn't click for you two at the end when you found out that guy was already taken over, that what he was doing by making that comment with the other quaranteeded guys was basically that he was a 'thing' and trying to gain their trust by attempting to make them not only distrust her more, but hopefully to the point of suddenly being motivated to stage a coup to basically overthrow her influence over everyone altogether. It's called "projection." That's when, whatever you accuse someone else of doing or being, is exactly what you actually are or what you're really doing. The idea here is that by accusing someone else of your misdeeds or wrongful nature, you both distract any unwitting spectators from the possibility of discovering the truth about you AND getting yourself the opportunity to take over in that person's place once you've fully usurped his or her place as the leader through your clever planting of mistrust of that person in everyone's mind. In other words, the creature was making what would've been a skilled deception move (if it had succeeded) to take power and thereby cleverly gain all the opportunity it needed to eventually absorb & imitate everyone once and for all.

[@Sawyer1982OAC]

Going from lead singer in a band at community college to scientist! Eat that, Britta!

[@TheMostWanted92]

Getting rid of Britta, getting rid of the B.

[@Gojira1701]

You did see the ice outline. The two-face was the one they brought back and dissected. And yes, we all knew it was a prequel going into the theater. The only thing is, we never find out what happened to Kate.

[@gustonzimasheen]

I love the behind the scenes videos where they show the practical FX from Amalgamated Dynamics, INC (ADI). And they really did set stunt ppl on fire.

[@MCBunkerwelt]

One of the reasons this wasn't that well received on release, is that it was filmed with all practical effects and there were articles about this in Fangoria and other magazines, so everyone was hyped. When the movie was finished, the producers decided they didn't like the practical effects and replace most of them with CGI. However, you can still find the making of on the Blu-ray and I think even on KZbin and the effects looked absolutely amazing.

[@TK-ff5kc]

I was giggling when I realized you didn't know this was the prequel early on. Now you have to watch again. Your realization was hilarious 😅

[@blueroninstudios]

A worthy companion piece to the original in my humble opinion. Loved how you guys figured it out by the end: it's the Norwegian outpost McCready investigated in the original!

[@disturbed1013]

JC 82' "The thing" is one of my favourite movies. I went into this (2011) film thinknig it was a remake, but it was pretty obvious from the start that it was a prequel. The norwegians, finding the spaceship and getting out that ice cube with the thing. It's what McReady finds in the norwigian base. Then, obviously, there's that famous two faced half assimilation, where they show how it came to be. It was a nice movie, I did like it in the end, and the end was the best part :) the very last scene with Lars shooting at the dog from the helicopter is actually the scene from the 82' openning scene. Love when things come full circle :)

[@my_randomology]

Honestly, one of the biggest problems I had with this was how much it relied on CGI which literally covered the practical effects they had done. If you want to see what this special effects team can do, they made a movie, THE VOID, which you should TOTALLY see to really appreciate what we lost here. Practical effects throughout and they are GLORIOUSLY gruesome. Otherwise, though, I think it's a decent enough prequel. It keeps continuity with the original pretty well and has some good scares. and I actually get to know these people before the horror starts. It's nowhere as bad as some people say it is, and I'm saying that as a lifelong THING fan and John Carpenter fanboy for thirty years.

[@UberNoodle]

They also did a movie with Lance Henriksen. I forget the name of it. The movie wasn't great, but the practical effects were amazing.

[@my_randomology]

@@UberNoodle Harbinger Down. Yeah, it was pretty good!

[@johnishikawa2200]

The blood in the shower implies that the victim is attacked and killed . Then the thing consumes/assimilates and finally replicates the person . The victim is deceased , and a monster is imitating him or her , waiting for another opportunity to transform and attack someone else .

[@J_C_CH]

I remember back in 2012, I had never seen the original 1982 film. I ended up renting the 2011 film from Blockbuster alongside buying the 1982 film. I watched the 2011 film first having no idea it was a prequel, and then immediately after I watched the original. So I ended up watching the films in chronological order by accident lol. I was initially also happy that Lars survived, only to be devastated when watching his brains get blown out in the original 😂

[@markeldamgaard]

Just discovered your challen recently. I subscribed and I love your longer reactions. Plus your genuine without being over the top just to get attention.

[@scooter1687]

im so happyfor your guys growing in subscribers. sometimes if forget to look and your at almost 140k. great job guys

[@Munkeephat]

Been a fan of the original since it came out and the biggest issue i have with this movie is the inconsistency with the ship. Its clearly shown in the original that the Norwegians found the ship and placed explosives to uncover it. It was exposed when the American team showed up. They completely ignored this in this film. I wasnt a huge fan of the CGI, but it wasn't a complete dealbreaker. And the fact that the thing was way more aggressive was too different. But i just chalked that up to it learning and being more careful when it got to the American outpost.

[@15blackshirt]

Besides this and 10 Cloverfield Lane, Mary Elizabeth Winstead is also in Sky High, Scott Pilgrim vs the World, Live Free of Die Hard, A Good Day to Die Hard and a lead role in a Star Wars series. Other notable actors in this include Joel Edgerton and Eric Christian Olsen

[@andymason3555]

Your realization at the end that it was a prequel was amazing 😊. I know the effects aren’t very good, but this is still fun. I appreciate them setting it up for John Carpenter’s The Thing

[@phousefilms]

Two things I hate about this movie(other than the fact the original is a hundred times better despite being not as advanced with CG or anything): a)The movie is pretty much a carbon copy of the original. Not completely shot for shot or anything, but come on. -Plan to figure out who is the Thing with blood samples leads to someone(not revealed)getting to the blood. -Main character is suspected of being the Thing and gets locked up, breaks out and holds people up with flamethrower. -Person gets injured, then turns out to be a Thing as people try to tend to them. -Attempt to recreate the "blood test"scene with fillings. -Final battle is with a Giant Thing and it gets blown up. b)The movie initially had amazing practical effects(to the point of looking totally realistic)and studio covered them up with crappy CG.

[@krashd]

You are referring to the John Carpenter remake as the original, this might confuse people.

[@EddieSLX]

Was expecting you guys to catch on when they showed the block of ice and the room it was in both before and after the alien escaped, glad you didn't good reaction.

[@taloselohim1022]

50:11 kill the damn dog and in The thing original why are you killing the dog got it lol

[@OfficialMediaKnights]

Ahahah we learned our lesson, okay?! 😂

[@newbiesama]

There are 2 things I don't like about this movie: 1) how can a ship be functional after thousands of years 2) The thing acts like an animal most of the time. It only steals intelegence to fit in. SO how could it have build or controled the craft(if he stole the craft from another world)

[@krashd]

We don't know anything about their tech, for all we know it maintains itself using nanotech.

[@IceCenders]

Awesome, intelligent reaction! Made even more entertaining by the fact that you did not know until the very end that it was prequel! I love that movie as well, it's great seeing other people enjoy it too! I hope you react to more horror movies in the future! You guys rock! A few awesome movies that don't get enough love on KZbin: Ghostland (can't recommend enough, full of surprises, amazing tension), Housebound (horror comedy from New Zealand, one of the rare ones that manages to actually be funny and scar), The Void (one of the best cosmic horror movies of all time, made on a budget, full of awesome practical effects).

[@Cameron5043]

Fantastic reaction, guys! You made my day! It exactly IS the prequel to The Thing! Yes, the guy with the cut throat, the burned corpse with the two heads melted, the cut out ice block, the fact that it was the Norwegian station, all of it, yes! The fact that it can't absorb metal was a genius move, since the possibility of the blood test was destroyed. The guys in the "original" Thing were able to do the blood test, so they didn't get to the metal idea. I was not put off by the CGI. The jump scares were awesome, the grotesque level was absolutely on point...and remember in the original, the guy's HEAD detaching, sprouting LEGS, and scuttling away??? Oh, yes, those hands and arms can detach and scuttle! I sometimes think it's the popular thing to hate on CGI just because we can. Practical affects are fantastic, CGI is an amazing tool! Combining the two can produce God level visuals (LOTR anyone?). Yes, there is some cheesy CGI out there. There are also some really bad practical effects, too. This movie, for me, is NOT one of the bad ones! For me, they nailed it! And I loved it! There is a certain approach to watching movies, the suspension of disbelief, that allows us to invest in what we're seeing, to buy in to the world that been built for us. And that's on us to do. To not go, that's CGI, so I'm going to not buy in, but to revel in the overall power of what we are seeing! And you guys, by the way, are wonderful at this, investing in that suspension of disbelief and taking joy in what you see! You may discuss the CGI or practical effects afterwards, but you go in hard at investing in what you're watching, and I treasure that about you both! I will admit, when I realized, early on, that you thought you were seeing a remake, and didn't catch that it was the Prequel, I laughed like a maniac the whole way! It was just too good! Now....if they'd just go for part 3, because she's headed in the opposite direction to the Russian station, 50 miles away....I can think of SO many things to do with that for a 3rd movie!!! Hope somebody does it someday!

[@OfficialMediaKnights]

Thank you so much! Totally agree with you. The best use of CGI is when it’s working in tandem with practical sets and effects. Together they can be a very powerful tool. The issue here was the studio meddling with a product that would’ve surely been better had they not gotten involved. Even then, the visual effects here are not crappy. It just looses some of that magic the original had since it became such a staple of practical effects. That is the biggest downside this film has. Even then we believe the amount of hate it gets is not justified. The final minutes and how it connects to the 1982 film was such a cool experience. Caught us off guard because we really thought this was a remake 😂

[@mrkoda3992]

This one is actually a prequel, it's what leads up to the guys chasing the dog in the chopper

[@MsKareboo]

And guys ! There’s a game for ps2 and it’s a “sequel” for what happened in the original, I don’t remember if it’s cannon or not but it’s so cool to see what happened next for the original in the American camp, that’s so cool !!! And it’s going to have a remake this year or next so the game is going to look awesome !!!!

[@ed301]

If anyone’s interested there is a fan fiction short book called “Things” and it’s from the perspective of the aliens(s). Not official cannon but fascinating none the less. You can find it on KZbin.

[@fearful1139]

You guys should watch The Fly 1986! Would love to see it. Great film.

[@Washinyot]

wait this isnt cloverfield paradox

[@OfficialMediaKnights]

Not yet, but it'll happen soon!

[@TheLisa-Al-Gaib]

I wish I could give you a thousand thumbs up. This reaction was SO much fun! What a ride!!!

[@haarektheginger]

I got my Bluray copy of the thing 2011 signed by the actor who played Lars as he lived at my hometown in Norway thnx to my little brother who knew him. Sadly he passed away in 2021. He did alot of amazing tv and movies.

[@LibertineDeSade]

From what I remember they played it up like it was a remake/sequel. I was sp shocked to find out it was a prequel, and it is so cool how they did it. I really like this movie, my only gripe is that they didn't use practical effects more, considering the original is largely know for that. Would have been really cool to remain in that spirit. Other than that, I thought it was great. Love MEW as usual she's awesome.

[@karthiksubramanian2279]

If you guys have already watched John Carpenter's 1982 The Thing, you should also take time to watch the gameplay or full cutscene video in youtube of a video game with the same name released in 2002 as direct sequel to the 1982 movie. It also has Kurt Russel's RJ Macready character in it who spent time in the destroyed Norwegian base, hiding. A US strike team lead by J.F. Blake is the protagonist of the game. The game is a pure horror scifi and you would love it!

[@D0S81]

watching these films always changes the way my mind hears the word ''thing'' every time anyone says it. lol.

[@levitaggart5943]

Regardless to critic hate & unfulfilled expectations, this movie is fantastic. The similarities & connections made with J. Carpenter's classic are necessary & proper. Some people fail to realize that the making of an alien movie with such a complex organism is no simple task. In reality, a Thing like this Thing would be much more terrifying. It likely wouldn't have been defeated in either movie. To encounter a monster you don't understand, that has abilities you don't have, that is extremely difficult to kill with modern weapons & fire, is like, WELL, I GUESS THIS IS HOW I DIE TIME ! A dozen people in a remote environment who ignore safety precautions in dealing with an unknown, aggressive organism from who knows where, & the threat it presents, is likely going to be an End Of Days type encounter. Moral of the story: Don't dig up unknown organisms you find in Nowhere buried in ice, because they might thaw out, wake up, & probably not in the best of moods. They may not be interested in stimulating conversation. They may not bring you a cure for cancer or world peace & likely won't want to do anything else except EAT ALL OF YOU, ENTIRELY, & then all your friends & family ! So, in closing, just LEAVE IT ALONE !!! PLEASE !!!

[@jamiefarrell6049]

The glowing tech thingy you see on the spaceship is covering up the dead pilot who had hung itself. They cut it out

[@evilash2010]

I am glad you guys gave this a watch, I think you may be the only reactors to have. Back when it came out everyone was complaining about how the thing acted (also the bad CGI) and back then I came to the same conclusion that you did about it being new to the world and hadn't learned yet to be sneaky with humans. Since I liked both movies I made myself a super edit of both movies together to make an epic ride from both camps. The 80's movie really only needed the video and references to using thermite charges to clear the ice off the ship to make them fit together pretty well. Great Job with your reactions and looking forward to more.

[@richardhall800]

It would be fun to see your reaction now to the 'original' original, the 1951 "the Thing from another world"

[@Gojira1701]

Yes, you did see all that correctly. The director of this film, apparently, had hundreds of photos of the original film and sets so that he could recreate the Norwegian camp as much as he possibly could.

[@SpOoNmAn365]

Good movie. Great cast, great suspense. I went to see it in theaters just to see Mary, but walked away impressed with the entire movie. Saw the og in theaters too, it was a good year for aliens, between that and E.T.

[@ablazindevilhead]

KATE is a great Mary Elizabeth Winstead flick as fight sequences go.

[@busfare5660]

I love when prequels do this. Like Star Wars Rogue one basically going straight into Episode 4. You can just go straight into the next movie

[@McBlamRacing]

This movie is probably one of the better prequels made. Lots of attention to detail that other filmmakers tend to just forget or literally care nothing about, but... the overuse of bad CG stinks, especially knowing what happened during production and you can tell it was a rush job. The writing takes a couple of leaps like Lars literally getting yeeted out of the movie until the end when he was needed, but it does successfully generate tension akin to the original, keeping the audience guessing and, unlike most prequels, there was legitimate care put into making it a part of the world that was developed in the original. I'll always appreciate that. I don't remember this being marketed as a prequel. It seemed like it was a remake, but I probably missed promo material. I didn't watch it for a few years. I caught on that it was a prequel when they first found it in the ice. I didn't really hear a whole lot about this movie, save for critical reviews which you always have to take with a grain of salt, but I imagine most had the same reaction going in, stumbling upon the realization that this was THE Norwegian camp at some point in the movie. If not, the end definitely solidified it. Lol

[@mauricedelorenzo5213]

Compared to others who do movie watches you guys are the best... I literally can't watch anyone else. You both add so much quality commentary!!!

[@kornishpasty]

Not going to lie I was kinda disappointed neither of you picked up the plot points which heavily leant into it being a prequel. But you guys at least go there in the end. Id say this is perhaps a mini lesson learnt that if you're going all in on a franchise/ set of films you watch them together or close after one another just for continuity sense :)

[@nikkisatchel4699]

once thie thing grabs u, it instantly assimilates the person...It becomes the the person or thing it takes, bit by bit...for ex. it takes an eye, and it grows its own at the same time...its why in the 1st movie when they cracked it open, it looked like 2 people inside...these people caught the one Kurt Russell found, changing and killed it mid assimilation

[@jamesgeorge2852]

If you guys love Mary Elizabeth Winstead don't miss her 2021 movie Kate she's absolutely amazing in that film

[@sebweyer]

What if this "Thing" that crashed was a criminal of the species, that would make sense, also it can copy from a single cell, in the Carpenter film, the scientist that figures the time line shows you the time it takes to absorb a victim. The more starting cells it has in your system the faster it can convert you. Great vid btw.

[@ThePorkchopExpress975]

omgg your reaction at the end when the dog runs out!!! priceless!!

[@nathanw2775]

There were a few reasons why this wasn't received well: - It was announced as a prequel and so there was no surprise to anyone that it led into the 1982 film. - The trailer(s) gave away too much. The helicopter Thing scare scene being a big one people were upset seeing before the film came out. - At the last minute the studio executives replaced all of Amalgamation Studios practical effects with digital ones. This altered the final scenes dramatically. I saw this in the theater during release week and there was only four other people in the audience. I appreciated it for what it was but after finding out what could have been it hits a sour note in my memory.

[@superjohhny]

27:50 "Among Us" nice reference to the game 😂

[@lordofalltime]

I actually saw NCIS: los angles before watching this, so I knew Eric Olsen (Adam) from that, the creature did the splitting bit before with the head/spider

[@ZombieShobb]

In John Carpenter's The Thing Fuchs reads to Mac from Blair's notes that: "It could have imitated a million life-forms on a million planets. It could change into any one of them at any time. Now, it wants life-forms on Earth". So The Thing has no real form... what we've seen anyway.

[@sladestrife9788]

I love the fact when, if you think about it, the movie makes you believe it's a remake but it's a prequel. Just like the thing monster, it's just imitating.

[@heymima1990]

The props team took what they made for this film (that later got replaced with awful cgi) & made their own film called Harbinger Down. It’s pretty good tbh.

[@regusters]

Although not perfect it was a good sequel. If you re- watch the original It has the WOW factor of how much detail is there from when they visited the Norwegian camp. The man in the chair, the double faced alien, the axe in the door. Lots of easter eggs.

[@newbiesama]

31:05 I have no filling. 33:05 Squid can produce ink. So it can be natural

[@SallyKennedy-cc4kv]

I had the same reaction in the end once I heard that music I knew it everything was coming together 😂💚💚💚

[@18videowatcher41]

There was initially a plan to at least include, if not mostly use, practical effects. But unfortunately they were entirely replaced with CG effects due to executive meddling.

[@kinGsaL1515]

9:54 Damn thats so interesting! I never ever thought of that and that opens up a whole new world of ideas and theories with that perspective!

[@simongeoghegan9842]

This of course is a prequel to the original movie and better for that.Mary Elizabeth Winstead is always amazing to watch. Thanks for this.👍🇬🇧

[@AniwayasSong]

There are elements of this movie that I actually enjoyed/respected, but it doesn't hold a candle to the previous!

[@UberDurable]

Other than the excessive CGI, a good movie that blends well with the original.

[@michaeldavis2001]

Watching the original, everyone assumes that the Norwegian is a bad shot, who keeps missing the 'dog'. But the 'dog' is a shape-shifter. Would bullets have any effect? I think that one of the problems with this movie is that the producers insisted on replacing the (perfectly good) practical effects. I believe that there is a documentary out there somewhere that shows that. I have a fan edit that knits the two films together and it's good stuff.

[@kyleord]

Sadly it was marketed as a prequel so it was awesome to see you guys discover it organically

[@saltLTaylor]

My absolute fave version ....and you two are the only ones I follow that have reacted to it....and what a fabulous reaction Thank you ❤❤ Now add Identity (2003) to your list. You two won't be disappointed.

[@cuoresportivo155]

Honestly, one of the best prequels out there. It answers all the stuff that was revealed in the original, and didn't add much confusion.

[@princesilver1387]

the reason it got so much flak was because it was almost a beat by beat of the first film and they took Kurt Russell's character and replaced it with a girl. i thought the same as you in the beninging thinking she was someone like Ripley and be her own character but no, with the beat by beat shots it seem the film needed a "Strong female lead" in Kurt Russell's character position in the film. i mean, they was gonna test blood like in the first film. they destroyed blood samples like the first one, there's a guy with a weapon pointing at them as they test for fillings and the second one Kurts Character tested there blood while you guessed it, pointing a weapon at them so. I'm all for positive female lead characters if there done right. Ripley, Sarah Conner, Kill bill uma's character is good examples.

[@TrentRushton]

I remember seeing a interview John Carpenter did and he considered the Thing to be kind of an end of the world movie, he said if it got loose there would be no defense.

[@ryanhart8740]

Love this movie, so many details to connect it to John Carpenter’s The Thing, a worthy prequel, the only thing for me personally, is the CGI instead of practical, they should have done it practical… But still a really great movie and an underrated movie prequel… John Carpenter’s The Thing is one of my favorite movies of all time in this genre… Great reaction, loved the “ahaaaa” moment at the end and finally a reaction on this movie and love your debate and critique, this movie does not deserve the ish that some give it… The bonus material for this movie is so cool, they have really studied John Carpenter’s The Thing and latched on to getting the details right…

[@nitrokid]

Some people would recommend you to steer clear from this movie. Just another example for you to not listen to some public opinion. Because yeah, this movie uses lots of CGI (modern movies, what can I say), but still kinda a banger.

[@annemariegeudeke8378]

I'm happy to finally see someone react to the prequel, cause I don't think anyone has so far on youtube.