No it really isn't. Howard Hawks is a good director but this is a bad movie, it only has one or two good scenes and feels like a cheap Universal Horror rip-off (which it is).
It's pretty bad. It often feels like a screwball comedy, but with a monster.
>I BET YOU HECKIN THOUGHT I WAS TALKING ABOUT CARPENTERS THE THING BUT NOOOOOPE!!! I WAS HECKIN TALKIN ABOUT A FILM YOU DIDNT EVEN KNOW ABOUT !!! IM SO SMART!!! I DRINK SODA WITH EVERY MEAL!!!!
He keeps underselling Carpenter's version, even criticizing it for beign shallow and having boring characters. Something this movie is actually praised for. He generally has good taste in classic genre movies but this is the biggest exception.
No it really isn't. Howard Hawks is a good director but this is a bad movie, it only has one or two good scenes and feels like a cheap Universal Horror rip-off (which it is).
It's completely baffling to me how anyone could praise it for characters or the atmosphere while saying that the Carpenter version is just special effects. There's not a single aspect in the 50s movie that was done better compared to Carpenter's masterpiece.
I wouldn't say that it's a better film, but it was definitely ahead of it's time in 1951.
Very suspenseful, contains an actual hi tech and intelligent alien, gruesome elements(people strung up like slaughtered cattle), great music, great cast,...
It is an excellent movie, even better given it's release date.
John Carpenter would probably say much the same.
lol
no
Get wrecked.
>some homosexual wannabe internet celeb
Why should I give a frick about him or you? Do you also take the opinions of the RLM guys seriously?
>Do you also take the opinions of the RLM guys seriously?
What a loaded question.
Tell me you're a prequel gay without telling me you're a prequel gay
It's actually overrated. It's worse than most Universal monster movies I've seen. Certainly more boring.
>I BET YOU HECKIN THOUGHT I WAS TALKING ABOUT CARPENTERS THE THING BUT NOOOOOPE!!! I WAS HECKIN TALKIN ABOUT A FILM YOU DIDNT EVEN KNOW ABOUT !!! IM SO SMART!!! I DRINK SODA WITH EVERY MEAL!!!!
i miss the sodabrain meme
His intro needs an All Along the Watchtower analogy.
He keeps underselling Carpenter's version, even criticizing it for beign shallow and having boring characters. Something this movie is actually praised for. He generally has good taste in classic genre movies but this is the biggest exception.
>Look at me. I'm the mostest contrarianist!
No it really isn't. Howard Hawks is a good director but this is a bad movie, it only has one or two good scenes and feels like a cheap Universal Horror rip-off (which it is).
>Howard Hawks is a good director
He didn't direct this.
It's pretty bad. It often feels like a screwball comedy, but with a monster.
It's completely baffling to me how anyone could praise it for characters or the atmosphere while saying that the Carpenter version is just special effects. There's not a single aspect in the 50s movie that was done better compared to Carpenter's masterpiece.
theres no hot women in carpenters
Women are nothing but trouble. Also, The Thing could be a female.
So shoving women and minorities into films is good when it's the 50s?
>minorities
>50s
and if the women are being used for sex, and getting coffee, yes, it’s fine
Yes?
There's a black guy in Carpenter's version. Are you gonna boycott this woke movie now?
John Carpenter is literally genociding me. I won't be having it.
Emphasis on HOT.
Debatable. Very debatable.
>t. James Rolfe
Carpenter was a huge fan of this, hence why he remade this with a western composer, another genre he was a fan of.
stop being gay
>dude you can only like LE ONE MOVIE
Sure, Carpenter was a fan. He was also a fan of Rio Bravo. That doesn't change the fact that both movies were pretty shit.
Rio bravo is great you fricking low test queer.
We're reaching contrarian levels that shouldnt be possible
It was a time when remakes were better than the originals.
>b&w
cringe
better than both
I wouldn't say that it's a better film, but it was definitely ahead of it's time in 1951.
Very suspenseful, contains an actual hi tech and intelligent alien, gruesome elements(people strung up like slaughtered cattle), great music, great cast,...
It is an excellent movie, even better given it's release date.
John Carpenter would probably say much the same.
p.s. The 1950s and the 1980s are THE top tier decades for sci-fi and horror movies.
Any other director who wrote women so well they had a trope named after them? Hawksian/Hitchwienerian is the most common term thrown around.
No, James Rolfe. No, it's not. It has one scene that is better than Carpenter's. This one.
But I'd say it's not in the top 10 of Western sci fi movies of the 50s.