MovieChat Forums > The Thing (1982) Discussion > Did anyone else see this in 1982?

Did anyone else see this in 1982?

posted 8 years ago by mackjay2
42 replies | jump to latest

I'm wondering if anyone else saw THE THING in 1982 when it was released....I went to a free sneak preview and was very excited to see it...Right away I could see it was brilliant and the most horrifying film I had ever seen.. The audience was packed and seemed to agree, gasping and laughing nervously the whole time. Then I read reviews and the film was dismissed for reasons many of us know but don't agree with today. It amazed me that THE THING was not seen for the masterwork that it is. Maybe it was ahead of its time, or maybe the theory that people wanted aliens to be like E.T. was correct (I doubt that since ALIEN was 3 years before this and it was a hit). Was it too gruesome for some. Many people said there were no real characters and it was just about special f/x...but I think the characters are all well-drawn and well played by the actors...and Carpenter's conception and direction are brilliant.

[–] cyrus1234 8 years ago

The critics were scared and disturbed, and took it out on the film.

[–] kurthowe 8 years ago

Good point. Due to current events of the time (the initial AIDS hysteria), this could have hit a little too close for some to admit. Completely ignoring the fact that even without the efx, it's a solid story.

[–] me-1523 8 years ago

The Thing is almost the perfect monster movie.

It is the standard I use for slasher flick characterization: You have (mostly) highly educated, intelligent men on an Antarctic research station. None of them make any stupid choices or decisions throughout the movie. The Thing simply outsmarts and outmaneuvers them, even when they know what it is and what it can do.

Every modern horror writer and director should study this movie as a template on how to create a compelling ensemble cast of characters and how to progress a story without being forced to write any of them into a corner for the sake of plot.

I hate movies with stupid people in them. Stupid people doing stupid things for stupid reasons because the plot wants them to. It pulls me out of the story when you can see the plot points coming a mile away.

It IS possible to make a good, compelling sci-fi/horror film full of intelligent characters who make rational, justifiable decisions and not insult the intelligence of your audience. Movies like Alien, The Thing and The Terminator are so perfect that they make their most recent sequels/remakes look awful in comparison.

[–] amadaca 8 years ago

Bit harsh IMO saying the Thing, "simply out-smarted them."

It had a HUGE (in real life, probably insurmountable) head start on its Human opposition and was clearly the superior organism. The Thing was not without errors in the film, and I tend to think people sometimes over-estimate the Thing's intelligence (or perhaps you could say, its common sense).

The construction of a vessel from Tractor and Chopper parts seems definitive proof of the Thing's supreme intellect (although we never see the device in working action, and are never clear on its intended use).

People love to assume it was headed off-world, but it could just as easily, and more plausibly, been headed for the nearest civilised landmass. There's a mammoth difference in intellect required between building a terrestrial vehicle and an inter-stellar one).

[–] ccr1633 8 years ago

It is the standard I use for slasher flick characterization: You have (mostly) highly educated, intelligent men on an Antarctic research station. None of them make any stupid choices or decisions throughout the movie. The Thing simply outsmarts and outmaneuvers them, even when they know what it is and what it can do.

I agree that none of the characters are stupid (by horror movie standards anyway), but they did do some dumb things. Given the elusive and unidentifiable nature of The Thing, why would Fuchs be off working all by his lonesome? Further, once Fuchs suspected foul play after the lights went out, why run off all by himself and chase a possible Thing, instead of sounding the alarm? Carpenter readily admits to using "cheap" horror movie tricks occasionally (e.g. the dog leaping out of the pen, previously noiseless, when Clark approaches it) and the Fuchs pre-death scene is one such instance.

[–] mackjay2 8 years ago

I agree that none of the characters are stupid (by horror movie standards anyway), but they did do some dumb things.

I think it's unavoidable to use some of these 'tricks'. If the characters all used very good sense and rarely ran into trouble, or outsmarted the Thing right away, it wouldn't be very interesting...Many of us watch a film like this to imagine ourselves in this horrific situation, hoping the worst will happen to the characters in the movie. But I think we all agree, Carpenter does not overdo the horror-movie cliché in this one.

[–] rascal67 8 years ago

Right away I could see it was brilliant and the most horrifying film I had ever seen......I read reviews and the film was dismissed for reasons many of us know but don't agree with today......Maybe it was ahead of its time....Was it too gruesome for some.....I think the characters are all well-drawn and well played by the actors...and Carpenter's conception and direction are brilliant.
_______________
I wholly agree. THE THING, came hot of the heels of POLTERGIEST, E.T., STAR TREK II, all hits in early June 82' and they released it at the end of June 82', the same day as BLADE RUNNER. Why? Quality year for films, and some got lost and caught up in a wave of marketing and hype, that won out for films more accessible for family audiences. Understandable, since it was Summer; but even BLADE RUNNER—another classic sci fi and cult film—needed more of a chance at the box office, to re-coup it's high production costs. THE THING, should have been held off until December, and it might have had a better chance amongst all the Oscar bait movies. It appeared to be a more appropriate winter release, due to it's setting.

[–] mackjay2 8 years ago

Interesting point about the release month. It could also be that neither THE THING nor BLADE RUNNER were typical 'summer movies'. I saw BLADE RUNNER that summer, liked it and was greeted with indifference by others. One friend even said it had "no story". Another friend was impressed by its production design only. I guess we can be glad that both these films now have the reputation they deserve.

I'm still wondering if anyone else here saw THE THING in 1982. It was quite an experience

[–] rascal67 8 years ago

Neither THE THING or BLADE RUNNER, were going to pander too, or were designed to appeal to the average filmgoer. BR, had Harrison Ford as it's main selling point and did the better business; but it still wasn't enough and both were also 'R' rated in the US. I didn't see 'Blade Runner' until early 83', as I don't reside in the US and have to admit, I was pretty blah about it at the time. Time is a true teller though and the devil is also in the details with BR. I find the THE THING, an easier and more enjoyable watch, which I did see towards the end of 82'.

[–] Catman_Scrothers 8 years ago

God if I had a timemachine that's the stupid thing I would do, is find years like that and take my Back to the Future "money briefcase" and be on my way just to see the looks on peoples faces when they see these movies for the first time and of course to see them on a huge screen.

[–] washclothrepairman 8 years ago

'82 is a few years before my time.

Never trust a black man named "Chip." 

[–] Binkconn 8 years ago

I think we saw it right when it came out on video in like '82-'83...during the dead of winter in Anchorage, Alaska (great idea!), and right after pop wanted me to go into the basement to look for some tools (even greater idea!).

[–] mackjay2 8 years ago

That's great, seeing it in Alaska! ;)

[–] rc_lrd 8 years ago

I saw it as a special feature of the Edinburgh Film Festival in August 1982 - the premier of its release in the UK. It began at midnight. The cinema was full. Particularly spooky: after about 25 minutes (during the autopsy of the creature) somebody in the front row started gibbering in panic  and was escorted out! We learned later that that was a hoax planned by the Festival organizers...

I still watch it on DVD occasionally - its one of my favourite films.

[–] mackjay2 8 years ago

thanks for that, rc_lrd, good story...I've been curious over the years about people's first impressions in 1982

[–] omendata 8 years ago

Yes it was so good we stayed in the cinema in those days to watch it twice.

It still is the most awesome scifi movie I have ever seen and I have probably seen it over 30 times and it never gets boring, its simply an incredible feast of almost every old style glorious effect without false CGI and the acting from all was spot on!

The fact the Macready survived and Childs was the Thing at the end was really obvious to us back then but so many people didnt get it at the end - couldnt believe the critics panned it and especially those from the Mag Starlog - Bet they are embarrassed now!

[–] J'Ennui 8 years ago

Yes, I saw it (twice) when it was released. I am a Los Angeles County native, and still live there. I saw it at a prestigious single-screen theater in West L.A., with my best friend at the time. We both found it to be very impressive. The audience we saw it with, however, seemed to be rather subdued at the end. Perhaps it was too disturbing for their tastes?

Having seen "E.T." a little earlier in the year, I had a feeling that the critical and public consensus was leaning against the bleakness of "The Thing". While I saw "E.T." again (in a theater), and enjoyed it quite a bit, I have not revisited it since; however, I've seen this "Thing" several times since, including a few DVD viewings, and a midnight screening in recent years. It is still my favorite sci-fi/horror movie -- in fact, it's one of my favorite movies, period.

[–] Ashaod43 8 years ago

Saw it at the drive in back in the good old days. I loved it right away and after seeing halloween earlier I was a real Carpenter fan. It wasn't until a few years later that I saw this film being way way ahead of it's time and just still to this day is brilliant. People bitch about the effects which still are amazing but the thing is, like Jaws, the story is so good you don't have any issues with effects because it is just that good.

[–] Peter-507 8 years ago

Saw it on its UK release in late 82, I remember it being a "must see" film at the time due to the rumoured special effects and it certainly scared the bejeezus out of me. It was well received by the circle of people I was hanging with at the time. Watched it quite a few times over the years, and I'd rate it as one of my favourite films. In fact I just watched it online last night which is why I decied to visit this board. I think it's aged very well, the effects don't look corny, the performances are first rate and all that smoking and drinking (in a place apparently full of rifles, flamethrowers and dynamite!) provides a glimpse of healthy 80s living.

[–] Carycomic 8 years ago

Yes, I saw it when it first came out. I was in junior college, at the time. And I loved it! Not as much as the Howard Hawks original, perhaps. But, I gave John Carpenter much-deserved props for being a little more faithful to the source material.

[–] bluefishbythesea 8 years ago

Yep saw it at the drive-in with my mom and sister who both fell asleep as it was the 2nd movie, blew my mind I was 11-12 years old. Also saw Escape from NY at the drive-in the year before, what a great time to be a kid!

Funny I thought ET at the time was ok, I remember thinking how stupid all the people were for crying, especially at the end(I was 11), same with Poltergeist, after watching The Thing it set the bar.

Just want to say I think ET and Poltergeist are excellent movies having watched them several times over the years, but I still think The Thing is a better movie.