The Thing (2011) | Movie Reaction | First Time Watching | THE FRICKIN THING!!!

[@vilefly]

Lars is the one badass you need on your side when you fight The Thing. His character creation was perfect for tieing into the previous film. The could have just made him a cardboard character, but they made him real, likeable and just as determined as the demon he was hunting.

[@Tweezymane]

What gets me though, Lars disappeared just before the climax and then shows up when it’s all over. What happened to him when it all went down?

[@vilefly]

@@Tweezymane He was told to share the screen with the other actors. After all, it is called, "The Thing", not "Lars". lol. Ze americans tied him up.

[@tylermiller5904]

The struggle of trying not to traumatize your curious children.

[@BattleAngelFan99]

Yes, I was young when I asked my parents "Can I watch The Thing?" And they let me. And I had trouble falling asleep for the rest of my life. :D

[@khughes1997]

I was the kid that always got yelled at for coming in when anything “not suitable” was on the TV

[@slyesttrash6778]

I do appreciate their concern, my uncle had me watching the first alien movie when I was like 6 and my dad had me watching Evil Dead when I was about 12

[@andrewblanchard2398]

I was born in 1976 I watched HALLOWEEN 1978 when I was 5 years old I watched FRIDAY the 13th part 1 & 2 when I was 7 years old

[@tylermiller5904]

@@andrewblanchard2398 I...think your math is a little off?

[@bobmessier5215]

Who saw 1954's "The Thing from Another World"? This was the original film before John Carpenter's remake in 1982.

[@dorkmier]

1951

[@KthulhuXxx]

I really don[t' consider Carpenter's film a remake. It was far more faithful to the original short story than the '51 film.

[@bobmessier5215]

@@KthulhuXxx Lovecraft would've loved the cosmic horror element and effects. The original monster featured a vegetable man-creature, not a shapeshifter. This remake gave us a bit more of a look at the original Lovecraft-like cosmic alien, reminiscent of his tentacled gods, the Old Ones.

[@Lusciouslysorry]

It's a different adaptation of the novella "Who Goes There?" As such, there's more of an understanding and acceptance of differences in interpretation from the page to the screen. It's why the recent It films aren't a remake of the 90s miniseries, and why it's easier to appreciate what each version got right and wrong about the book, to see what they valued and chose to express in one way or another, and how faithfully they did so, in one way or another. Whereas, for example, something like the remake of A Nightmare on Elm St is judged much more harshly for its failings, because there's less to interpret and more opportunity to fail where the original succeeded. An adaptation will never be completely accurate to the creator's vision and the audience's imagination, so different adaptations can both have unique value from a unique interpretation. But a remake has a hard time adding anything that makes it worth existing as a remake, with it also being incredibly and inevitably easy to change and lose what worked and was loved about the original.

[@NecramoniumVideo]

It's still a scary movie, especially with the stuntman walking around on fire.

[@McPh1741]

This movie doesn't deserve the hate it gets. I thought it was good and it blends seamlessly with the beginning of the 1981 movie. If they had only went the practical effects that they had originally filmed, it would have been better. There's no way you can follow up the practical effects of Carpenter's movie with CGI. There's just no comparison on which looks better. Other than that, the story was good, and the cast was solid.

[@Temeraire101]

It woulda been a lot better if set entirely with the Norwegian team, in Norwegian language and finished with the helicopter chasing after the dog/thing. THEN it would have been seamless.

[@grunions9648]

I'm also quite fond of it, because it's such an homage to the 'original' and I really don't hate the CGI. The biggest problem I think is that the Carpenter movie already had a prequel: the scenes where they visit the other base. That was already such an elegant way of setting up what would happen, and then we got to see those same outcomes play out at the US base. The prequel really is redundant as a result. Still, I will always love that bit where the dude's skull cracks under his skin. Even as someone who has worked in (and will always champion) practical FX, that shot is fantastic.

[@grimmhead9583]

Nope. Well ( no offense ) you can't argue taste if you enjoyed it excellent! But for me not even close to the OG especially as they replaced the great looking practical fx with CGI.

[@reconsoldier135]

people hate this movie?? weirdos

[@julianmarco4185]

Nope! Sorry it deserves the hate. And not just about the CGI. Please explain these 5 plotholes to me: 1) If the Ship was still working then why did the Thing leave the ship? 2) Science lady and Lars disabled all the vehicles... except these two! 3) I actuslly like the fillings explanation but the earring explanation makes no sense. Why? The thing is wearing clothes and shoes, but it can't wear a hanging ring?! 4) Instead of going back to camp to check on Lars she just disappears. 5) Instead of knowing about the American weather and research station, which should be common knowledge for the Americans, she goes the Russian camp... in the 80s... during the Cold War....

[@Hum0ng0us]

The studio thought nobody was going to go to a monster movie with no CGI, so they made them go over it.

[@scottstephens5443]

I turn 50 this year, and I've never had a cavity and also have all my wisdom teeth. We're out here. Among you.

[@TSIRKLAND]

I made it to 45. But then I got a cavity in one of my wisdom teeth, and the dentist said pulling it was easiest. So one cavity, one fewer wisdom teeth. Gotta up my oral hygiene game, to keep the record there...

[@behindthescenesphotos5133]

Got to 38.

[@doomedspacemarine5076]

41

[@ianaustin5012]

See this is why you always need someone who speaks Norwegian in your group. When the crazy guy in the beginning is shouting at them he’s telling them to get away from it and that it’s imitating a dog. We would’ve been long gone by then 😂

[@brianbooker8724]

Now you need to check out The Thing From Another World (1951).

[@kyleprokop2770]

honestly, the best thing about your reactions are the wholesome moments when your kids come in. It just gives a much more real sense to the channel.

[@degsbabe]

We didn't all tune in for that. And , honestly. if thats the highlight of this show. i won't be subscribing. The stupid inane remarks of the closet cowboy didn't help.

[@wayneresper7761]

You shouldn't have told her it was a prequel till the end when the dog starts running.

[@raven2435]

I mean that is kinda spoiled with them finding the UFO in the beginning. Lol.

[@khughes1997]

They make it very obvious this is a prequel nothing to spoil my guy

[@johnbrown8570]

@@raven2435 the whole movie was pretty much marketed as a remake. Even down to having the same exact title. So no it was not given away at all. I saw this in theaters opening day and no one was expecting it to be a prequel. We all gasped.

[@johnbrown8570]

@@khughes1997no they don’t, boy.

[@Dust468]

ABSOLUTELY!!! I WAS LIKE WTF DUDE

[@PuppetDungeon]

The really sad thing is the original ending got cut... where Studio ADI made a full sized giant alien pilot who is the race that made the saucer. They covered it up with the neon blue Tetris effect at the end. The creature would have then transformed into a Thingified version for the final chase. It's on their KZbin videos that go way more in depth than the official disc. They made their own homage to the original with a little indie film called Harbinger Down, mainly out of being upset about their practical effects being cut.

[@69coolchris]

It gets a lot of hate, but personally i love it. Despite the stupid decision by the studio executives to cover most of the practical effects with CGI, i thought it was an excellent story. Maybe one day they will re-release it with all the CGI removed. I'd love to see that.

[@Bambuzzsprosse]

That would be a dream come true. The movie itself is awesome; it's just the CGI that destroys it.

[@warlorddk2070]

I watched some of the practical effects... Im happy they went with CGI... Honestly the practical effects looked so fucking fake and trash the CGI was a defenite upgrade...

[@Bambuzzsprosse]

@@warlorddk2070 You are probably the only person on this planet thinking like that :D

[@NecramoniumVideo]

@@warlorddk2070 CGI is faker and even more trash BECAUSE ITS NOT REAL! A practical effect puppet can 100% be scary and more authentic, and the fact this movie bombed because of the cgi, shows the truth in this!

[@warlorddk2070]

​ @NecramoniumVideo Listen I am a big fan of practical effects okay? I get your frustration that studios tend to leave practical behind for trahs CGI... But lets be real the reason this movie failed was because people expected practical and there is a certain prestige and nostalgia in practical effects its sorta like stage shows where you can see the prop and backdrops if you look to the side... Its amazing what people can do with it sometimes achieving real looking products that feel more grounded than CGI. Its amazing how cool the effects were in the original im not saying the effects in the orignal were bad im saying the practical effects on this movie before the change were TRASH... Beyond repair level of bad... Some of it might have worked but my god some of the shots were just highschool project level bad... CGI was better in this case 100% which I say as a practical FX fan... Sure people like to pretend its because the CGI was bad looking people hated it... But the real reason is much more complicated... Promoting no CGI just to make it CGI... Americans disliking subtitles/foreign films, the brewing hatred towards CGI and the clear prestige in old fashion movie making instead of looking at the end product and what works.... All these things and more plus the fact that The thing was already pretty much a niche cult classic with a fanbase very much overlapping with the practical effects nerds me included... It all added up to the disliking of this movie but seperating this from the orignal and this is a great watch...​ @NecramoniumVideo Listen I am a big fan of practical effects okay? I get your frustration that studios tend to leave practical behind for trahs CGI... But lets be real the reason this movie failed was because people expected practical and there is a certain prestige and nostalgia in practical effects its sorta like stage shows where you can see the prop and backdrops if you look to the side... Its amazing what people can do with it sometimes achieving real looking products that feel more grounded than CGI. Its amazing how cool the effects were in the original im not saying the effects in the orignal were bad im saying the practical effects on this movie before the change were TRASH... Beyond repair level of bad... Some of it might have worked but my god some of the shots were just highschool project level bad... CGI was better in this case 100% which I say as a practical FX fan... Sure people like to pretend its because the CGI was bad looking people hated it... But the real reason is much more complicated... Promoting no CGI just to make it CGI... Americans disliking subtitles/foreign films, the brewing hatred towards CGI and the clear prestige in old fashion movie making instead of looking at the end product and what works.... All these things and more plus the fact that The thing was already pretty much a niche cult classic with a fanbase very much overlapping with the practical effects nerds me included... It all added up to the disliking of this movie but seperating this from the orignal and this is a great watch...

[@smokinggun8418]

They watched closely not only 1982 The Thing, but also anime Parasyte. Another thing is in 1982 The Thing stayed low. Now it's a king of intrigs from very start.

[@xepherkingdom0243]

Love parasyte the maxim anime series.

[@MrEthan80]

They could do a sequel with Russel and Winstead meeting at the Russia station 🤔

[@micksplace]

And they fall in love💞...till one day a French kiss goes terribly wrong

[@tommymayfield814]

Oh. Please let this happen.

[@KevDaly]

We used to have tourist flights to Antarctica until one slammed into the side of Mt. Erebus. In the original short story ("Who Goes There?") there's a very atmospheric, creepy scene where the future first victim is set to watch over the ice block and has his back to it - he can hear the drip, drip of the ice slowly melting as his imagination goes wild, and then the sound changes as it escapes from the block and its feet(?) hit the floor. And that's the end of him.

[@pikenemesis]

They actually made all the monster scenes with practical effects but the studio decided to overlap all of it in cgi in post production without telling the sfx and director.

[@AnthonyMartin-k8m]

I saw Jeff Goldblum on his Hot Ones episode and I can't remember how it came up but he's 71 and has never had a cavity. So if anybody could be the Thing, I could definitely see it being Jeff Goldblum. lol

[@NefariousKoel]

I've never had a cavity at 49. Must be an alien.

[@CrazeeAdam]

​@@NefariousKoelit is unironically hard to never ever have one. Even if you eat incredibly healthy and follow proper dental health. Genes have a lot to do with it as well I think.

[@NefariousKoel]

@@CrazeeAdam - Yeah, a lot is to do with genes, I expect. Also likely some degree of childhood diet and prevention. I definitely got lucky in this case.

[@linc131313]

I just commented saying that I've also never had a cavity/filling and I'm 46 years old. I think that genetics definitely play a huge part.

[@stephenkoehler4051]

The most interesting thing (no pun intended) about these movies, The Thing 1982 The Thing 2011 and the 1951 version is that after the last plane leaves the Amundson-Scott Station at the South Polo, leaving the winter over crew there, the initiations is to watch a marathon of all three films. They, of course have an extensive library of movies for the occupants of the station.

[@donnaroo8042]

In what order?

[@stephenkoehler4051]

@@donnaroo8042 I'm not sure but its in release order. They have all three in the library there.

[@miker.9138]

Other than some questionable CGI, I actually quite like this one.

[@GeorgeTropicana]

There are plenty of people with terrible taste like you I'm sure

[@jeremycovelli]

I don't even think the CGI is questionable.. it's just not as good as the practical.

[@misterprickly]

Oddly enough, there was a full practical version BUT the studio had it scrapped and the effects replaced with CGI.

[@mcentepede]

You're being nice. This was trash. Good concept making it a prequel, but they dropped the ball in the endzone. Bad CGI, bad acting overall except for Mary Elizabeth Winstead and the dog.

[@BryanMasten-pn8wo]

I like how they found a new way to identify who might be replicated, i've wondered about the whole organic/inorganic absorption ever since i first saw it in theaters.

[@pdbordelon]

This movie gets complaints because of the CGI vs real effects of the 82' movie. BUT, the CGI is really good in this movie!

[@SeamusOToole-r6o]

Why

[@JulianTheTurtle]

the reason they removed the practical effects is actually more stupid, the producers wanted the thing to be faster "like a videogame". The funniest thing about it is that the company that made the practical effects made their own The Thing-ish movie out of pettiness for having their work go to waste and not only it sucks but the effects aren't even that good.

[@robertross9167]

Distress beacon sound is the same one used in Sunshine (2007) for the Icarus 1. Y'all should check out that movie as well!

[@user-vc5rp7nf8f]

mary elizabeth winstead is so gorgeous. she's amazing in everything she's in. this, 10 cloverfield lane, smashed, scott pilgrim...

[@evilsmurf2k8]

Death Proof and Final Destination 3 for me is when she was at her hottest but yeah she is gorgeous.

[@inlpwetrust]

She's looking more and more like Sigourney Weaver in recent years. She can totally play Ripley's daughter in an Alien Isolation movie.

[@BobCtabtree-pl6xq]

I first saw her in a campy MTV movie called Monster Island back in the 80s.Class trip to a tropical island,giant bugs,Adam West(TVs Batman)as a lone scientist,a lost civilization...and Carmen Electra sings.Sounds really silly..and it is..but I found it very entertaining.

[@BarryHart-xo1oy]

Very true.

[@NecramoniumVideo]

She also married a Jedi Knight.

[@carlossilva8087]

One thing that I always think about contact with Aliens is like: if we already have so many problems with virus and bacteria that are from our planet imagine what would happen if an Alien came and introduce a bacteria/virus that is aggressive for us. We would be so screwed !!

[@donnaroo8042]

Like the way native populations were decimated by new bugs back in the day. It depends on how similar our physiologies would be. Most of the buggies we have are specific to certain species at least to an extent, like how our pets don't catch our colds and vice versa.

[@86leewis]

You wouldn't know you're the thing in the sense that you would be dead. There is no surviving the digestion process

[@breakwoodhopper6739]

What about when it assimilate you like it did with the guy in this film

[@86leewis]

@@breakwoodhopper6739 which guy?

[@sugarbomb1346]

@@86leewis The one who became the two faced thing or the guy who had the hand thing stuck on his face.

[@86leewis]

@@sugarbomb1346 the guy with the hand stuck in his face was not part of the assimilation of the thing and the guy backing away. However after seeing windows turn during the blood test thing, I don't think it takes too long to start the process, but there indeed is a process and that's why it still was attached to its face and hadn't run off yet. It wasn't finished. Then again, this film didn't really do a good job, it almost was like a different alien. There were some interesting things, the non organic material getting excreted.

[@mattlovell4213]

Who let the dogs out should play when your dog walks in, like your daughter’s applause.

[@scottneil1187]

Please no.

[@prischm5462]

Remember "The Addams Family"? The hand that came out of the box was called "Thing".

[@valeria262]

The makers of this film were hardcore fans of the original practical effects and wanted to stay true to that but then a producer came in and said "the kids love cgi so make it cgi" so they painted over their already completed effects

[@robertbarron283]

I know most ppl 💩 on this movie, but I enjoy it. The two things that REALLY grinds my gears: 1. They include the original practical Thing FX monsters in the special features. They actually worked & looked GOOD! But some exec at the Top went, "Na, put CGI over everything". 2. The very least they could have done, stick a beard on the end credit helicopter pilot, and find a damn husky who's markings match the original wolf dog. If you're going to lead us straight into footage from the original, those are two things that really would have sold it a lot better.

[@williamweber9390]

People who don’t know should not be told it’s a prequel. I didn’t know that and it made the movie so much better

[@dude-man]

Remember, during this film, McReady is playing PC chess... 🤔🥃

[@ChrisReise]

10:00 How did they cut the block out?? I understand that they would cut down into the ice however far they would need (looks like about 2-3 feet) but how would they have cut out the BOTTOM of the cube?

[@toddhill7483]

When Kate was asked how long it would take to extract the creature in ice, she responded maybe half a day, ASSUMING YOU HAVE THE PROPER EQUIPMENT. My guess is that the "viewing audience" never actually saw what this equipment was, but one must assume they had what was needed for the "extraction". After all, they knew beforehand that there was a specimen in the ice and would have brought everything needed for an expedition of this sort. Good question though. Cheers.

[@TheMrSarcastic]

There’s an audio book version of Peter Watts short story “The Things” here on KZbin. Told from the point of view the Thing during Carpenter’s movie. The Thing is as terrified of us as we are of it. That’s as far as I go, without giving away spoilers, but the story is quite good.

[@aintsam9952]

I watched this twice in theaters before my deployment. I liked it very much. Of course it's not as good as the original but it's still enjoyable. They took the same film and did it in a different way. no blood test but they had the filling test. And now we know Childs was human in the end of the 1982 film because he still had his earring in his right ear

[@cassandramcbride7007]

well according to Carpenter, childs wasnt human. But following the narrative of the popular idea, the thing may have learn how to avoid some mistakes. Like been less aggressive and more stealth... probably with childs it learn some small details..

[@aurora8042]

I was amazed to find out when I first watched this in theaters, that this was the prequel. Especially the ending.

[@mercurioslevin1877]

I think the mention of the Russian base is indeed to link it into the game as in that the player take command of a US rescue team sent to the outpost from 80's The Thing before finding out at the 2011 base that a team from a nearby Russian base had secretly visited both infected bases and took all the infected remains back with them which leads you heading said base only to find it to is infected XD

[@shocbomb23]

In the Dark Horse mini comic series the Russians take the Things remains aboard a submarine. The SyFy channel actually had a 10 or 12 part mini series planned as a sequel around 2005-06 where the Russians get the remains and bring them back to a lab in Siberia and all hell breaks loose and they gotta call in the Americans for help stopping the infection spreading worldwide. It was canned at the last minute before production sadly. You can read about it on certain horror websites and KZbin videos. Search SyFy Thing series or something like that

[@Vinsensee]

6:15 you know what Mrs movies you would DEFINITELY survive a horror movie though 😭😭😂 Edit ; if they mad a horror movie for yall it would be so short 😭😂🩷

[@jasonlane1528]

If they used practical effects I think it would have been much much better received

[@MrCrniVrag]

They did, until the studio decided to CGI over every single practical effect in post production without telling the team that made the practical effects until they've seen it at the premiere. Also they used the original footage to do so, so there is no way of a practical effect directors cut.

[@mercedesdrake9113]

blame the studio execs that forced them to cover the practical fx with cgi

[@sugarbomb1346]

Try looking for the Thing-ish type film the practical effects guys made with their stuff. It looked horrible. So, no, i dont think it would've been better received 🤣🤣

[@MrCrniVrag]

@@sugarbomb1346 that movie was made to show off the animatronics that the other studio covered up with zero cgi. Nobody said they couldn't use cgi to enhance the animatronics, to add a condensation effect around their mouths, add more slime, blood, tiny tentacles, or whatever.

[@CyberBeep_kenshi]

just proves once agian studios don't understand their audience ​@@MrCrniVrag

[@ChrisReise]

41:51 Looks like Luke Skywalker's Uncle Owen gets burnt to a crisp AGAIN.

[@terryhughes7349]

no way you can beat the original but they did a good job.

[@julianmarco4185]

I'm sorry but they didn't. If you can explain these 5 plotholes to me, it would improve my opinion about it: It has 5 plot holes that ruin it: 1) If the Ship was still working then why did the Thing leave the ship? 2) Science lady and Lars disabled all the vehicles... except these two! 3) I actuslly like the fillings explanation but the earring explanation makes no sense. Why? The thing is wearing clothes and shoes, but it can't wear a hanging ring?! 4) Instead of going back to camp to check on Lars she just disappears. 5) Instead of knowing about the American weather and research station, which should be common knowledge for the Americans, she goes the Russian camp... in the 80s... during the Cold War....

[@scottneil1187]

​@@Dave-hb7lxOriginal was the short story Who Goes There.

[@garbageday587]

You didn't see the final scene at the end during the credits. You can see the dog , the same dog of The thing 1982. And they tried to kill it from the helicopter. It is a prequel which explains what happened to the Norwegians.

[@sugarbomb1346]

Did you watch the video until the end? They watched all that

[@kevaunmitchell1316]

I still haven't saw this version yet and I still have it in a 3 pack with the original and the John carpenter version

[@pvanukoff]

You're not missing anything.

[@scottneil1187]

I'd say it's worth a watch. Doesn't come remotely close to Carpenters though.

[@pickmeasinner]

7:46 your appreciation for the glacier jusst gave me a great memory of taking a tour through one in I _think_ the French Alps. It was a week long school trip, first time abroad, 14 years old, everyone having teen crushes everywhere lol. It wss an amazing tour through a carved out glacier complete with whole rooms with sculpted ice furniture. I'm glad for that flashback!

[@ChrisReise]

27:29 The guy that was shooting at the dog at the beginning of the other one didn't wasn't speaking English, so at least HE was not one of the two guys that just returned from the helicopter crash.

[@johannesbowers7467]

In a really fun universe, all of the above happened on the same Antarctica: 1. The Thing 2. AvP 3. Monsterverse 4. Stargate SG1

[@christophersims7060]

😂😂 at the AMONG US refrence and visual! There is also a good sequel story in Dark Horse Comics, I think there was 3 different series 10-12 comics/graphic novels. This as well as The Blob deserve new sequel movies.

[@shocbomb23]

Yup I actually bought those Dark Horse comics on eBay about 3-4 years ago.

[@josephmummerth]

its based on a novella by John w,. campbell written in 1938 entitled who goes there ! there is an earlier film based on it , the thing from another world , from 1958 , James arness plays the part of the creature !

[@greglaplante7593]

Remember the Kurt Russell doctor told him it’s been there one hundred thousand years

[@daviddowsett1658]

I've got no fillings at 52 ... so I'm The Thing ...

[@doctoraugustuskwembe]

IMO 1 of the only movies that is close to as good as the original though it was a prequel, you get my drift

[@Charles-yt5ve]

You guys and 'Dasha Reacts', are wearing me out with the "That's What She Said" comments. I don't know why it never gets old..but it's funny every time - in an exhausting kind of way, LOL.

[@davegnarlsson4344]

We know what is under the ice. Antarctica was covered in vegetation/forests. The arctic also had a very mild climate.

[@ChannelReuploads9451]

Joel Edgerton (Sam) is the Brother of Nash Edgerton, who was the producer of an Australian Crime Drama TV series, Mr Inbetween.

[@emsleywyatt3400]

They used to call them the "Cleveland Cadavers".

[@michaeldavis2001]

Lars didn't miss the dog in either movie. No-one ever considers that the dog is A SHAPESHIFTER! Bullets probably would have no effect. MacReady never actually drank from that bottle.

[@darknessssenkrad]

I love this channel and watch it all the time, but they don't understand CGI, there is no "CGI always looks bad an fake" it's just bad CGI vs invisible CGI, (invisible CGI, means it's so good you can't tell it's there) and what they hate about CGI it's when it's so distracting it ruins everything, but CGI can be super effective and it has nothing to do with CGI vs Practical, well in this case the CGI sucks because it's not invisible and it's a main element in all the action scenes that why it looks so fake cause it's not perfectly done

[@michaelproctor8100]

6:29 If it was supposed to be Kurt Russell, I think he would be wearing a sombrero.

[@mikemckague9506]

Such an amazing prequel definitely doesn't deserve the crap it gets

[@thaistomp]

A lot of people just like to hate on everything lol 🤷‍♂️

[@kingstonian7066]

Forreal

[@scottneil1187]

​@@thaistompNothing to do with that, you can't just keep using that blanket statement when it was universally panned. The cg is garbage.

[@thaistomp]

@@scottneil1187 I never cared about what critics think. I liked it 💯😎

[@krdragon6950]

36:08 They have to leave the axe wall, so Kurt Russell can find it in the next movie.

[@JaimeCard]

Saw this is theatres when it came out, knew it was a prequel the entire time, so no idea why so many people think you spoiled the movie for the Mrs. But anywho, I love Eric Christian Olsen, who plays Adam. He's in one of my all time favourite movies Fired Up! 😂 and he's great in NCIS:LA

[@deathfab]

They should of called it "First Things First" Also, this film is good but like a lot of people have mentioned, they should've stuck with the practical effects. They should re-release it like that if they still have the footage.

[@georgenelawson9917]

Its the hand that escapes not the dog? Lol that's why there's A axe in the wall in original because of the hand lol

[@MRC_5000]

to be honest, i think your reaction to this movie helps me to appreciate it more. i was really disappointed by the CGI cover-up, when this first came out, but have become more tolerant with time. this has probably been mentioned, but i got the impression mrs. movies had a misconception about the thing (when she deduced that the hand started it): the thing does not really have a specific form. i would even go so far to say that the thing actually infected the original owner of the space ship causing it to crash to earth, where it froze (maybe 100 years ago, maybe 20,000 years ago, who knows) just to be discovered by those curious people. i couldn't really say what the original form of the thing was, but as it consumes, it grows... and it can manipulate its own form into anything it has assimilated, divide up or basically emulate the behaviour of the consumed creature. i was wondering about the aspect of the fillings a few times... would it just remove the fillings or would it somehow complete the missing parts of the teeth with pre-consumed information (like for example AI-generated pictures) to stay inconspicous? hm.

[@scottneil1187]

Another great Mary Elizabeth film nobody seems to talk about is Kate if anyone is interested. The Thing video game isn't very good.

[@FREAXZGamePGW]

You guys should react to short circuit (1986) and short circuit 2 (1988) its a really good science fiction movie of the 80s.

[@js6729]

I know you were probably joking about getting a flamethrower but it is actually legal to own a flamethrower in most of the US, it's even legal to fill it with napalm (which is actually really easy to make at home)

[@Hum0ng0us]

John Carpenter says that he feels the video game is the proper sequel. The game is so much fun but a bit disappointing. ABSOLUETLY worth playing!!!

[@MrAmc1291]

I agree! I need to play the video game again!

[@georgenelawson9917]

Mary is becoming a expert in killing aliens and driving off in the distance at night lol

[@Neck41]

Want to know what would have made the ending much better? Imagine if Carter wasn't infected and he lost his earring on Accident. Imagine how badly Kate would react and how traumatizing it would have been if she realized she made a mistake? It would have been very unexpected. I say it would have made it better to me.

[@bensneb360]

Mary Elizabeth Winstead is very underrated as a final girl in this, very fun and cool

[@My-Name-Isnt-Important]

There actually was a planned The Thing tv series, but before it went anywhere it was cancelled. I have no idea how you could turn the Thing into a television series but there were plans for one.

[@ulyssescpt]

People have already commented about the 1951 The Thing from Another World, and the original story. I wish YMATM would watch the original 1951 movie. Just to get a big kick out of the differences in the movies. I liked the 1951 version, because of the sarcasm. I never read the original story. I wish the 1951 version would be remade, and stay faithful to that movie. I don't believe in reboots. But with today's practical effects with cgi enhancements, I think a remake would make the 1951 version as scary as it should have been.

[@Realmasterorder]

The First one was One of the Best flicks of its kind of all time the prequel aint Bad.

[@zlipus]

The tragedy of this movie is that it could have been soooo much better. The director, the crew all wanted to stay honest to the 82 version by using all practical effects and making it more in line with a psychological horror movie. They even wanted to have a scene with the original owner of the space ship, not some weird pillar of light. They had all these neat things ready to go and if you're inclined there should be some footage of some of their practical effects they had already built before filming started. Unfortunately this movie was "executive'd" to death and the studio demanded a ton of reshoots/script rewrites because they thought it would be too boring and they also wanted more CGI to "get the younger viewers out"

[@Rutgrr]

Practical > CGI. When I first watched this I didn't care for it much, but it has grown on me after a few viewings. I would love to see a Practical only version of this Prequel.

[@05hundredlive]

I actually liked both, I grew up with the Kurt Russel one so it’s more nostalgic to me.

[@JMK248]

Lars is the guy you need in this situation he doesnt hold back he follows through no hesitation. Zombie apocalypse or an alien attack im choosing Lars

[@unkown34x33]

if you think about it... this movie it's not bad at all. of course it's not a master piece like the thing, but! it holds up pretty well. people that watched the thing should give it a go

[@JJgibson1]

Check out the movie The Descent Part 2(2009).

[@mcentepede]

Descent, the first part scared Mrs Cowboy's Movies . Apparently she's a scaredy cat when it comes to horror.

[@owlman9079]

There's supposed to be a new remake coming out, called 'Frozen Hell', by John Carpenter.

[@Nexils]

I think it's somewhat cool to see how hostile and offensive the Thing is in this movie, compared to its more sly and defensive approach in the movie that takes place after this. Like it has learned from this experience.

[@KonohazFinest]

"until that little fella pops out" thats what she said 🤔🫢

[@obscuramask7435]

This is a guilty pleasure. I do love this movie. When you guys get to Cheech and Chong, would you be called "You Me and the Doobies"?

[@Gr8movies12]

Always liked this movie especially if you watch it back to back. With the new rule about only absorbing bio matter, this movie does (somewhat) prove that Childs from the original was not The Thing. If you look at him, he has his earring at the end.

[@CrazeeAdam]

Love this movie as a prequel to The Thing. Mary Elizabeth is great in it. And the story is great too

[@fullmoonprepping4024]

Tesla makes a flame thrower and there are at least 2 other companies that do as well. They're badass.

[@noneya3635]

The among us site gag was excellently placed and hilarious. You guys rock!

[@SonOfMuta]

30:24 Porcelain is still an inorganic material. The Thing wouldn't be able to replicate.

[@ChrisReise]

12:08 I THINK you flinched HERE. LOL

[@rachaelhogan7850]

This is a BRILLIANT FLAWLESS PREQUEL, when people moan about this there bat ass crazy don’t no what there on about this films really good love it and it flows lovely into john carpenters film.

[@SonOfMuta]

6:09 Actually you can. Anybody can go to Antarctica whenever they want to. It's as simple as booking a cruise.

[@Dust468]

When I was young! Adults had to ask for my help when it came to setting things up

[@SonOfMuta]

19:28 The Thing is unable to replicate inorganic matter. In the original it was a pacemaker.

[@autowaagh99]

I didn't think eyes could get that wide open.

[@benjimlem1284]

>"there are people who think CGI looks more real" yeah... and then there are people who aren't horribly wrong : ^) While I don't actively hate this movie like some other pre/sequels/remakes cause people making it were clearly passionate about it and also tried doing most stuff practical, it's just not as good as the original... it's basically more of the same except you know how it's gonna end, and calling it 'The Thing' didn't do it any favor, either

[@wolfwing1]

it's actually not hostile or evil, just asumed they wre trying to kill it by drilling into it :>

[@JackOiswatching]

I'd be screwed! I'm in my early 40s and I've never had a cavity, no fillings. Don't light me up! 😬

[@grabtharshammer]

Quite a good movie, but the problem is that we already know that the Thing survives and makes it to the USA camp, so saying "please work, please work, please work" is a little over-optimistic 😉 - and we already know that only two people were left alive at the Norwegian Camp (unless some got away .... which leaves the way open for a sequel sequel

[@pickmeasinner]

The score is so epic. Simple but perfect