This is a prequel/sequel/reboot/rework to John Carpenter's 1982 classic horror The Thing. There is the big reveal twisting the story to loop it around. They could have played with this a lot more than what they actually did. It's convoluted but I'm willing to buy it. In fact, it added something interesting. Not the same for the FX.

The aliens are now almost all CG. That's a big problem since the original had some of the most iconic real FX. It's a spit in the face for fans to replace it with CGI and it doesn't look good anyways. Going inside the saucer is a big mistake. This stars Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Joel Edgerton, Eric Christian Olsen, but nobody really stands out. This is a good idea but executed without understanding the appeal of the original.

This movie, billed as a prelude to the John Carpenter original telling the story of the Norwegian camp seen at the beginning of that film, was bound to struggle from the start. Although technically it's a prequel, it feels much more like a remake of the Carpenter movie, albeit with a few twists here and there to differentiate it. As most movie fans will tell you, the Carpenter movie is an outstanding piece of filmmaking, and I don't think anybody can ever hope to equal it. 2011's THE THING doesn't even come close.

Saying that, this film is not without merit. As a stand-alone film, it's actually pretty decent: well paced and fairly disturbing in places. It goes without saying that it would be a lot better if the original movie didn't exist; I'm sure some would be hailing it as a modern day classic. Those familiar with the Carpenter movie will be under no illusions about just how derivative this is.

Still, THE THING utilises some excellent CGI effects work (for the most part) that brings the body-horror storyline to vivid life; a crucial set-piece that takes place towards the climax is grim, gruesome and chilling in equal measure. However, it's perhaps a little bit too explicit and fast-paced; there are monster encounters galore and constant action, whereas a more subtle approach layered with tension and paranoia would have been more effective.

The cast don't get much of a look in, and Mary Elizabeth Winstead displays the same level of blandness as I've seen from her other movies; you just can't remember her face once the film finishes. Also, things get a little too science-fictiony at the climax, which goes all out and loses some believability as a result. Had they remained more restrained, the end result would have been much more realistic – and frightening.

First of all, sorry for my english, I'll try my best.

There are a lots of prequel for cult movies, whats try to be better than the original. This film is not want to be better and made a great respect to the original The thing.

What I really like this film that the creators payed attancion to the details, such as the first deformed 'double-faced' body what they found in the original movie. Why left the axe on the wall, and what I really liked, that they found a different method, to find out who's who, not copying the blood test method from the original!

I just wondered what heppened with Kate at the end? Went to the other base: "Hi guys, we have just found an alien what killed everybody, but don't do anything, Kurt Russel will handle it tomorrow".

As a low budget film the CGI is good enough, still using puppets what made it more realistic, the actors are good, the film is just exciting.