"John Carpenter's The Thing" review by Ben Kenber

Many of you probably know the story behind “John Carpenter’s The Thing;” It came out in the summer of 1982, two weeks after Steven Spielberg’s “E.T,” and while the alien from that movie was warm and cuddly, the one in Carpenter’s movie was cold, ugly, and utterly vicious. As a result, the movie was unceremoniously smashed by both critics and fans alike, and they never tried to hide their disgust towards Carpenter for what they saw as pornography of movie violence. In all fairness though, the movie was released at the wrong time of the year. To release this movie during what Carpenter had called the “summer of love” opposite not just “E.T.,” but also “Star Trek II” and “Tron” among other movies was a big mistake on the part of Universal Pictures, and they would have had more luck with it had it been released during the winter instead.

Years later however, “The Thing,” like many of John Carpenter’s movies (“Big Trouble In Little China” is another perfect example) ended up finding the audience it deserved through home video and later DVD. Perhaps it was ahead of its time, but it is now considered (and rightly so) one of the best horror and sci-fi movies ever made, and it is easily the best horror remake in a sea of horrendously crappy ones. I think plays better today than it did when first released, and it is still utterly terrifying 25 years or so after its initial release.

Unlike the original Howard Hawks version of “The Thing,” Carpenter’s movie hews much closer to the short story it was based on called “Who Goes There?” by John W. Campbell, Jr. The movie takes place at an American scientific research outpost in Antarctica, perhaps the coldest place to be on the entire planet. We are introduced to a bunch of men who are studying the surrounding area, and they look bored and listless as they pass the days smoking, drinking scotch, watching “Let’s Make A Deal” reruns, and playing ping pong. Then they are met by a wolf that is being shot at by a Norwegian for no discernable reason. This later leads to events that make them realize that they have encountered an alien of unknown origin that has been unearthed from the ice after thousands and thousands of years. It then proceeds to imitate every creature it comes in contact with, however imperfectly. Soon, they come to realize that anyone of them could be the thing, and they have to destroy it before it reaches the civilization and infects all living things on this planet.

The premise of this movie is genius because it allows for an unending escalation of tension and suspense throughout. Like the characters, you have no idea who to trust and of who is the thing. The paranoia that closes in on these characters puts them in an airtight cage that gets smaller and smaller as it heads to its inevitable climax. There are no women to be found in this movie which eliminates any sexual tension that might have added an unnecessary element to the movie. Many say that this makes the movie sexist, but that’s a ridiculous charge. There’s no hatred of women to be found here, unless you count how Kurt Russell’s character treats the Chess Wizard computer with a female voice.

This movie also came out when the whole world was starting to become aware of the AIDS virus. The idea of any sort of virus infecting us completely and rearranging our body to the point may have seemed unreal to us back then. But today, it is a reality that is more horrifying than ever, and it still presents itself with no real cure. This makes “The Thing” all the more scarier to take in when watching it now. The scene where Dr. Blair (Wilford Brimley) observes a computer image of the virus infecting a human host is one of the movie’s scariest moments, and seems all too real a possibility when watching it today. The only thing truly dated about that scene is that the computer graphics look like they are from an old Atari game, but it doesn’t change the frightening concept that it is. Other movies like “Outbreak” have used imaging like this, and it is still an incredibly effective way of conveying the danger of an uncontrollable disease.

“The Thing” also marks one of several collaborations between director John Carpenter and actor Kurt Russell who started working together on the TV movie “Elvis.” After all these years of being a movie star, Kurt can still make you believe that he is a down to earth guy like the rest of us, and his role as helicopter pilot R.J. MacReady is one of his most underrated. You never get the feeling that Kurt is acting in this film. Instead, Kurt inhabits the character he plays, and you follow him every step of the way without any doubt of who the hero (or in this case, the antihero) is.

Carpenter cast the movie perfectly with such actors as future SAG President Richard Masur, Richard Dysart, Donald Moffat, and David Clennon among others. But one of the best performances to come out of “The Thing” was from Wilford Brimley as Dr. Blair. In the past, we have been exposed to Mr. Brimley through countless oatmeal commercials and roles as the grandfather we had or wished we had in our lives. But his role in “The Thing” offered him one of the few opportunities he had to go completely against type. As Dr. Blair, Wilford goes from curious to utterly horrified by what this unknown creature can do, and he ends up wreaking havoc in a way that you would never see in any oatmeal commercial (except maybe for the ones with not enough fiber). In a movie where no one can trust anyone around them, Dr. Blair becomes the one that people want to trust but don’t dare to all the same.

One of the other truly great actors in this movie is Keith David (not to be confused with actor David Keith) who plays Childs. Keith has a “don’t mess with me” intensity, and he matches Kurt Russell’s intensity every step of the way. The tension between the two is almost as frightening as is waiting for that alien to make its next horrifically gory entrance. Keith was later cast in John Carpenter’s “They Live,” and he remains one of the most underrated actors working today.

But c’mon! Let’s talk about who the real star of “John Carpenter’s The Thing” really is, other than the director himself. That would be Mr. Rob Bottin who designed the movie’s horrifically brilliant special effects and makeup designs. Long before the advance of computer technology and CGI, Rob had to make all these designs from scratch, and what he came up with is now considered a benchmark in the field of special makeup effects. This is not your typical slasher movie where the murders are bloody but not altogether creative. The thing mimics everything it touches, and this must have been a pure inspiration for Bottin to let his imagination run amuck with what he could come up with. You never know what’s coming next in this film, and that makes it even scarier than it already is.

Some have called the movie a “geek show” that was only made with the intention of grossing people out. Granted, a good case could be made for that, but “The Thing” is a lot more than that. It explores a theme that is commonplace in many of John Carpenter’s movies; the struggle to maintain one’s individuality. Of never letting go of who you see yourself as, because that allows you to survive in a world that keeps finding new ways of robbing it from you when you least know it. The threat of that loss is ever so real in this movie, and the characters have the unfortunate disadvantage of being stuck in one of the most remote and desolate places on the face of the earth.

I also imagine that a big complaint people have about “The Thing” is that we never learn much about the alien or where it came from. Basically, we know it’s from outer space (the spaceship crashing on earth during the opening credits pretty much spells that out), that imitates whatever it comes in contact with, and that it deals with the cold better than any of these men do. Here’s the thing, do we really need to know everything about this creature? Maybe not knowing is more terrifying than knowing. It leaves a lot of things to the viewer’s imagination, and I love that because it leaves open so many possibilities for how this horrific situation is going to play out. Your worst fears come out of your unconsciousness, and you find yourself experiencing the movie more than watching it.

The ending of “The Thing” is quite ambiguous as we never come to know which of the remaining characters is human and who is not. In an age where people need to have everything explained or spelled out for them (especially if it involves math), this drives people nuts. I dig these kind of endings sometimes though, as it leaves a lot to the imagination. It also leaves you with an unsettling feeling that stays with you long after the movie is over, making it a very unforgettable experience. Maybe we are lacking completely in the imagination if we have to know what happens at the end of the movie. It’s one of the fill in the blanks endings, and we can only assume what happens. Not knowing can be more truly terrifying than knowing.

I still think that this movie is really John Carpenter’s masterpiece, even over the classic “Halloween.” With this movie, he proves to be one of the true masters of horror and suspense as he endlessly generates unbearable tension throughout the movie’s running time. Just when you think the movie has peaked, you quickly realize that it has not. Carpenter’s goal here is not just to make us jump out of our seats (he does get some serious ones in though), but to make us feel the terrifying isolation and complete lack of trust that these scientists cannot escape from. What the hell would we have done in that situation?

Carpenter has said that this movie was the first in his apocalypse trilogy (the other two were “Prince of Darkness” and “In The Mouth of Madness”), and the movie does have an unrelentingly bleak tone which made it seem completely out of place back in 1982. As time goes on though, many of us keep thinking the world is coming to an end (the economic crisis we are currently in seems to enhance this feeling all the more strongly). Plus, with more deadly diseases like the Ebola Virus among others, the scenario of “The Thing” feels all the more frighteningly real.

The popularity of “The Thing” still does not seem to have reached its peak just yet. Its influence on popular culture is felt more and more to the point where as we speak, Ronald D. Moore (executive producer of the new “Battlestar Galactica”) is working on a prequel. “South Park” even spoofed the blood test scene in one of its episodes as Cartman tests his friends for head lice. Stan even tells Cartman that he knows he stole this idea from Carpenter’s movie. There was even a video game that acted as a sequel to the original movie released a few years back. “The Thing” is clearly on people’s minds then when it was first released.

Some movies are robbed of their greatness through the passage of time, and some now seem horrendously stupid in how stylistically dated they are. We watch some things from the past, and we wonder why we liked them so much in the first place. What the hell were we thinking anyway?! But “The Thing” is an exception to this case as time has made it seem all the more effective. You can’t help but think that this movie may have been ahead of its time when it was originally released in 1982. It remains one of those movies that I never ever tire of watching and it more than it deserves its place as one of the greatest movies to come out of the 1980’s.

**** out of ****