At an Antarctica research site, the discovery of an alien craft leads to a confrontation between graduate student Kate Lloyd and scientist Dr. Sander Halvorson. The Thing (2011) is nowhere near as good as Carpenter's The Thing of course but for a prequel and judging it on it's own it's quite fun and pretty interesting as a whole plus the acting was good but unfortunately the film relied more on CGI and the ending result did not look that scary but mostly cheap but still not a bad movie it's just that the cgi was really not all that good. (6/10)

I can not believe they remade one of the best horror movies ever made

The thing that made 'The Thing' such a good watch, was the tension that steadily ramped up from start to finish. It had 'characters' and a story to it. Here, we basically get fast-forwarded to the CGI fest, that connects the dots of a flimsy plot. The CGI is technically OK, but the people being killed by it don't mean anything to the viewer, as character development was pretty much zero. The Norwegians were comic book Vikings, the Americans...well, American and the British chap was straight from a potty mouthed version of Mary Poppins. I half expected the cockney sparrow to bleat out "Half a bladdy sixpence!" on seeing the digitised doppleganger. The two leads that emerged out of the carnage (Mary Elizabeth Winstead and Joel Edgerton) did a good job, but they weren't given a lot to work with. I was a little dismayed to see they had to throw in the old 'all run away, but the screaming girl falls over' routine, that has by now become a parody of a parody. Personally, I'm a big believer in letting classic movies well alone, and this did nothing to change that view. You know what they say 'If it ain't broke.........'.

I feel I was biased, being a fan of the original, so I recorded the reaction of a 16yr old 2yrs ago. He had never seen either movie before, but was desensitized because he was a horror fan. (used to gore-violence)This prequel never made him jump out of his seat, but the original did. (2 inches, in fact) He said the creature had no consistent strategy, except at the end. "there was a little paranoia, but not enough to put you on edge." The creature effects weren't as scary as the original, because it wasn't "juicy and organic and messy". He also noted that there were no uncomfortable silences, either. He did like the alternative test idea to find out who was who....but wondered why they didn't go for the blood test 1st thing. I told him it would have been copycat work to do so....and this had to be different. He agreed. The rec room gore scene did make him cringe, though. To sum up: this prequel was a creature-feature movie, the original was a horror movie.For me, I knew there was too much to live up to, and simply accepted it. Would have loved more final dialogue between the Thing-guy and the heroine when she had the flame thrower pointed at him....something like: "where are you from?" "I don't know." "Are you a weapon of some kind?" "I don't know." "What are you?" "That which survives." "Not this time." "Not here, but somewhere else for sure."