Added: 3 months ago
From: Lyaagato
Views: 212,189
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (924)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Im watchimg this movie tonight :p

  • funny how i just started eating when i saw this...

  • :killitwithfire:

  • menudos gays, -.-! yo veo que alguien tiene eso y lo primero que se me ocurre es intentar quitarselo con lo que sea

  • Mmmm, CGI monsters soo scary

  • good movie, but is it just me, or do new movies look less scary than old movies?

  • Damn good film, The classic was sweet but a bit dated in comparison.

  • Dafuq did I just watch?

  • what happened to the guy who had the thing on his face and where did the other parasite/arm thing go

  • The thing I don't get is why did she burn Derek he just got Impaled by the Edvard - thing he wasn't assimilated, and Adam just lied on the floor while it was ready to assimilate him

  • @jakemosswood He was infected !

  • Is there a reason why everybody has poor grammar and spelling in the comments?

  • How does it just fuse their faces together?

  • @Wunderwaff It's a thing. It can do that.

  • (john clark walks in)

    WTF WHER DID I PUT MY FUCKING PLASMA CUTTER!

  • I mean really why couldnt they just get outs the place jesus

  • this would fit for a boss in dead space i mean look at it

  • I feel like i just watched the whole movie now...

  • The movie was better than I expected. I'm not that much of a fan of the CGI effects, but they pulled them out surprisingly well, but they still don't compare to the practical effects in the '82 version by Carpenter. Although it's a quite entertaining movie, I don't see the point in remaking the movie again. The original "The thing from another world" was a great movie, Carpenter's remake was a great remake, quite different from the original, this was quite good, but enough with the remakes, okay

  • @MetalFPSC And when I say "surprisingly well" I mean better than I thought, not really great, they still look quite clumsy and don't have the same charm as practical effects.

  • So many people complain about the cgi, it looks awesome get over it. The original will by definition always be the original but this was one of the most underrated remakes to come out in the last 10 years, I loved it and if people could pull their head out of their asses and watch the movie and not worry about the cgi they'd maybe enjoy it for what it is and not what it's not. Is=great prequel using the latest technology, isn't= the original which had to use practical effects because the cgi ba

  • This is not the version of the movie the crew wanted to make, They originally wanted mostly practical effects with little cg but the studio wanted a "meaner and leaner" monster and we got this. There's a lot of tension building and expository scenes that were cut for the same reason. The movies still ok but if the original vision had of been released I bet it would be as much of a classic as the Carpenter version. Or be hated anyway for not being the Carpenter version.

  • Is this Dead Space or The Thing?

  • why do people like the 1982 one better? my feet are scarier than that crap

  • Well. That dose it for me. I wasn't hungry anyway.

  • 1:21 - "Hey hey, don't worry man! We'll put a band-aid on you, you'll be just fine. Band-aid on the hole where your heart was, you'll be o-k. You want a dinosaur band-aid? Yeahhh"

  • lol i got hungry from this :D

  • Soo everyone dies in this scene?Cool guess I don't have to see it lol

  • @Baird9214 Not quiet. You should check it out. Alot of other good scenes. Pretty disturbing

  • @doccaremel Meh I enjoy the original,I do enjoy how they tied the ending of this one with the beginning of the first one though

  • @Baird9214 Yeah. I didnt know it was suppose to be the prequel until i was half way thru the movie. Yeah they did pretty good in connecting. Im wondering now are they going to do another remake of the first one.

  • @doccaremel You never know,I enjoy movies that rely on physical effects rather than CGI,it gives the physicality that adds to the tension of the film because you feel like it could be something that you could touch and it would just tare you apart lol,any way I enjoy films like these,but that's one thing horror movies lack these days,that absolute tension of not knowing who is who,even to the ending,that's what made the first one so scary,the waiting of what is going to happen.

  • Comment removed

  • @Baird9214 Exactly!! I know just what you mean. Those are the movies that kept me up at night but the movies now have hardly the same effect. Still sometimes pretty good though. Cgi has a few advantages as far as being able to manipulate nature and some creature sizes and motions, but the lack of creativity really causes Cgi to suffer. I think now they are using real live people and they are mapping Cgi over there bodies to give characters more life like movement on the big screen.

  • why are womens always the heroes in horror movies now!!!!!!!!!

  • um how does it just absorb him?

  • @TheDaltonGillespie Thats what it does. IT attacks the cells and then mimics them. Bad thing is. It cam absorb a person completely and then it just hides in its host until it wants to come out.

  • @doccaremel so like it could litterally be all of them at the same time in one cluster f*ck of a monster? D:

  • @TheDaltonGillespie Exactly. What made the movie freakish is that a person can be the monster and not know they are. It will just start to rip and transform the persons body apart You should check it out. I think they did a good job on this one. But I was honestly a little disturbed afterwards and i love horror films..lol

  • @doccaremel Skankiest monster ive seen in awhile...

  • The Halloween Horror Night House was cooler.

  • its like dead space ish

  • wow i think i need help cause at first this freaked me out but then i started laughing

  • What a rip off, basically copied the scene from Carpenter. Even used similar sound scream

  • its disturbing. but not scary

  • why wouldn't they use the gun to put the bearded guy out of his misery. They're like "yeah we know you got a fuckin alien latched onto your mouth, but if you could just sit tight while we shoot you with a flamethrower that'd be much appreciated"

  • I wonder how it makes there face melt.

  • john shedletsky was proud to see his mother in htis video 

  • OGM I TAKE A PART OF UR TUMMY HAHAHAHA

  • OGM I TAKE A PART OF UR TUMMY HAHAHAHA

  • This movie was one of the best horror of 2011 maybe the best but John Carpenter's "The Thing" was soo much better then this prequel 100 times better

  • Comment removed

  • @jblackrupert Acting was pretty shty though... : (

  • Almost nothing in this scene (if anything) is CG, watch the "Thing 2011/Creatures by ADI" video (linked somewhere close to this vid). Most of the creatures are actually practical! Amazing work.

  • @magnusxxx Man, there's a lot of people that get this fact wrong. They planned to use only practical effects, Universal demanded cgi so ALL YOU SEE IS CGI in the finished film.

  • If anyone actually watched the movie this one is actually a prequel. Watch this one then go watch the old one and you'll see what I'm talking about.

  • It saddens me that film these days are as retarded as the technology they use is advanced.

  • well that was stupid when the arm came off and attacked the guy at the beginning shouldn't they have come up to help the guy?

    and that my dear friends is the difference between proper horror movies and slashers... horror movies make more sense whereas slashers at times say: fuck common sense we want some blood and gore flying about... it all depends on what you prefer really

  • @mmirekelite56 There's nothing wrong with slashers, slashers are as much "proper horror movies" than any other style, slashers, like any other kind of horror, can be made badly though. So don't just bash on the entire slasher genre.

  • It wasn't even that bad.

  • Fuck everyone of you. This was a great movie.

  • @16807SeldomLeniency Then watch the original, 'cause it's a couple thousand times better. In every way, even special effects.

  • @Xocoatl99 I've seen both films, and I know which one is better. But the hate this movie gets is completely undeserved. I think it was a wonderful addition to the franchise that neatly tied both films together. The day I saw this film I went home and watched the Carpenter one and all the pieces (almost) meshed together without incident. All we have here are god damn hipsters that say this is crap because it's not the Carpenter version. this was a perfectly fine film.

  • @16807SeldomLeniency People have a lot of good reasons to hate it. There are inconsistencies, BIG plot holes etc. the cgi is the least of the prequel's problems and a lot of people don't bash it because of cgi. It does not tie in neatly with Carpenter's movie.

  • @16807SeldomLeniency THANK YOU

  • @16807SeldomLeniency I personally find fault in this film's misunderstanding of how the Thing operates. It's almost as if the creature cannot control itself in any capacity.

    This scene in this video is not an example of that (as it is a well executed ambush that takes out many survivors and the Thing walks away unharmed), but other scenes like the helicoptor transformation are just stupid.

  • @SgtHydra Well, this is the thing's first time on earth; maybe where it used to be, its lack of subtlety was just fine. In the following movie, the earlier one, I just assumed it is supposed to be the thing, as the dog, was able to learn from this experience with humans and adopt more cunning mannerisms. At least, that little theory helps to explain why the alien acts differently in this one.

  • @AitoHidenori There is something known as "tactics" and they are fairly universal.

    Big #1 about tactics is to wait, watch, and listen.

    The Thing in this movie didn't do any of those things very well and it should have known to do those three things naturally.

  • @SgtHydra If we are talking about a completely alien conscience - something evolved in a completely different environment out of analogous but not the same macromolecular components...what is "natural" for complex organisms here on earth should not be assumed instinctual for something like that. For all we know, this thing could have been assimilating aliens that, in whatever strange environment we cannot imagine, adopted behaviours that do not coincide with our own mental patterns.

  • @SgtHydra So the Big #1, which is derived solely on our carnivorous attribute to gain prey, may not have been entirely familiar or expected by it initially. There are creatures demonstrable here lacking tactics - bacteria and other microbes that practice phagocytosis do not actively seek out prey/nutrients. They will just bump into their food source, recognize it, and automatically absorb it once recognized. Almost like how the thing is behaving here - recognize and absorb.

  • @SgtHydra And considering how in the original movie, the thing was postulated to be a collection of micro-organisms, I would expect it even less to have a firm understanding of the human psychology - these little organisms would only be able to communicate with each other via simple chemical signals, with a collective conscience a human would not be able to begin to understand. 

  • @AitoHidenori Every multicelled organism is a collection of micro-organisms. The fact that Thing cells can react more independently than most multicellular creatures is what makes it appear to be a mere colony.

    And, if you buy into the idea that the Thing's psychology is transmitted to infected organisms, it would indeed have a notion of patience.

    The only reason why the Thing got so uppity in the original was because McReady was a paranoid killjoy.

  • @SgtHydra "Appear" to be a mere colony? It is a colony if the cells possess an independence not exhibited by the multicellular eukaryotes known on earth! We do not call a colony of bacteria, each autonomous but currently cohabiting a particular, closed area, anything else, I do not possess awareness of every single cell in my body - every one of my cells is not an individual seeking to preserve itself when members of the same hive are in danger, so my point is, seeking to compare...

  • @AitoHidenori What I am saying is that it is more than just a colony of cells.

    Yes, each cell has a mind of its own, but unlike a colony of cells it is capable of cooperation on a scale only seen in multicellular organisms.

    I would compare it more to a pack of wolves than a colony of ants.

  • @SgtHydra cont. this thing to any multicellular organism's behaviour known on earth simply is not logically done. My purpose in mentioning how such a colony of individual communicate - simple chemical messages - brings up another point - the thing does not HAVE a psychology, at least in the way we can conceive it. As far as I can tell, it is a lifeform that acts only on instinct carried by genetic memory and what interstitial conscience it might possess to record sensory data.

  • @SgtHydra Meaning when it assimilates a foreign organism, it is as instinctual, nearly as thoughtless as a virus injecting its own DNA or RNA into a foreign cell, becoming, as they love to repeat in the movies, a perfect copy of the person, save that it inevitably maintains the collective sensory conscience. I am not saying that it could not learn and record human behaviour - the memory involved in the sensory perception could allow it to adjust the....

  • @SgtHydra cont. interstitial behaviour to improve its chance of preservation, which it obviously did between this movie and the next, but I just cannot believe anything so alien could initially possess a notion of common behaviours on this planet when it first comes here, unless it ran into something exactly like earth mammals somewhere else in the universe - thus, that is why I can find how the thing is acting here not far-fetched.

  • @16807SeldomLeniency I agree.

  • @16807SeldomLeniency HELL YEA!

  • @16807SeldomLeniency

    Sorry but in the Carpenter version there was tension as you did not know who was infected. In this clip it shows who has become infected, the premise of the Carpenter interpretation was that you could not trust anyone as they could be a thing. I am not a "hipster" as you put it just a fan of good movies.

  • Shitty CGI and shitty acting

  • lolz itz a facehugging arm

  • AAAAWWWWWWWW DAMN MAN........ it must suck to be them

  • Oh no...cgi....I'm shivering in my little boots.

  • 2:05 Congrats You have a two twins

  • 1:12 Racist 

  • Wow, stupidest FUCKING survivors ever..

  • Wow, awful CG and completely missed the point of the original film. The whole point of the Thing is that it prefers to remain out of sight and doesn't just go round killing people. This is why remakes/prequels/sequels should not be made by people who don't appreciate what made the original film great.

  • first watched this, after the end watched the 1st one!!! wow really nice film

  • LOL love how the black guy goes DIE MOTHER F$#%KER *BOOM* *BOOM* and the alien go not today this time u die

  • I dont understand why everyone says this movie was so much worse than the first one. Seen both of em, love both of em. The only things JC's version has over this one is its originality and a flagship actor (Russel). The stories mesh so well together and they both have very strong actors. Also the two-faced creature is a personal favorite of mine. Cant imagine being the helpless guy on his back...

  • @GrizbyK72 I think it has more to do with the CG rather than the plot really. I fyou compare this to the previous, the amount of blood and gore has been toned down. A scene like this probably would have had much more blood.

    I guess its just one of the few complaints I have. I wouldnt buy this (I didnt buy the previous one either), but your right. They are still good movies in their own respects.

  • @biggydx Oh yeah the CG was a little over the top, but apparently there was a conflict between the practical effects guys and the CG guys, with the latter winning most arguments. Neither movie was really scary as much as disturbing, but I wouldve liked to see more practical effects, like the alien movies.

  • @GrizbyK72 I am so glad someone else thinks this is a good follow up!

  • Should of had a V8... And a 12 gauge shotgun.

  • i thought it was prety cool. not as good but jus watched it to see what else the Thing could do

  • Two heads are better than one!

  • It pisses me off the fact that no one tries to help Jonas when the arm thing attacks him. Also its annoying because Jonas was a likeable character in the film and dies in such a horrible way, none of the other characters are particularly likeable.

  • umm.. lol im sorry but this is nothing scary, just a bunch of people screaming, exploding and a giant CGI clay monster smacking people around.

  • @spoonmonkey14 yet you're here watching it you muppet.

  • 1:28 Love at first site.

  • This 2011 Thing is abomination to the franchise.

  • @spoonmonkey14 Bullshit. They're both good, you fucking baby.

  • dead space?

    

  • fucked up shit lol i was freaked out

  • the movie was originally supposed to have practical effects but because of studio pression everything was scrapped away and replaced with shit CGI because the original effects were judged "not scary enough" and "too slow" by the studio.

    I have seen a video of those effects and I can say they were much scarier and fast enough.

  • 1:41 I didnt think about thos before, but did that thing just rip his heart out?!?

  • @1991Hatcher It's lower than the heart.

  • Hey thats my name

  • Fucking dead space for ya only one weapon to kill these mother fuckers *gets the phone and calls Isaac*

  • The original was scarier than this shit

  • @whouston33wh True, but i enjoy the visuals.. just not the dead space nightmares..

  • @whouston33wh There both fucking scary!!

  • @whouston33wh Scarier? Hell yeah. More disturbing? Fuck no.

  • @Isdate

    Scary puppets beat scary CGI any day

  • @whouston33wh Amen

  • @whouston33wh Then Don't Look it up And they our both good :)

  • @whouston33wh HEY! Fuck you man!

  • @ion010101 Yeah, Sharktopus was WAAAAYYYY better. Just kidding.

  • 2:50 I like the reference to John Carpenter's The Thing. One of the VERY few things I liked about this movie.

  • These people are stupid, It's pretty obvious how to kill it. All you have to do is call...(Dunn Dunn Dunn Duunnnnnnnnnnn).... Chuck Norris!

  • @iPhuckSlow I used to make childish jokes like you, but then I took a diploma to the head.

  • @iPhuckSlow : are you eight

  • WOW!

  • Resident evil flicks would've been better with these type effects for the Tyrant/Nemesis/licker creatures, imo.

  • We'll that thing looked a lot like a necromorph

  • @Squidew *A necromorph looked a lot like that Thing.

  • 1:37 sounds like a fucked up tarzan screech....

  • why was everything in the hallway on fire when she looked out it... lol

  • @lejendjackson Because Peder's tank exploded 5 minutes beforehand.

  • Someone needs to call Isaac to clean this shit up.

  • @Cavstic except that dismemberment wont really work. :P only fire

  • I'm just going to sy it, if this was real we would all be screwed -_-

  • anyone noticed his penis ? it was also a solitary creature O_o

  • This movie reminded me a lot of Dead Space, and that game scared the shit out of me.

  • @GoddessThatScreams Alien thingy: I was frozen today!

  • @GoddessThatScreams The thing inspired Dead Space :)

  • @GoddessThatScreams have you watched the first one?

  • the whole time i was like

    um that black guy could just shoot him with the pistol.

  • i

    will

    not

    sleep.

  • 1:52 Reminds me of my sex life.

    jk I have no sex life.

  • what the hell did i just watch...

  • @papaslake the tragic downfall of a great franchise

  • @tornadomaster96 Downfall only if you masturbate to The Thing.

  • I'm glad I watched this here and not at the theater. Sorry, but this is no where near as brutal and awesome looking as the John Carpenter one. I knew the CGI was going to look super fake and not realistic. When will Hollywood learn to make their own special effects by hand and not over do it with CGI? fucking disgrace.

  • @84jesterx You know the majority of the effects are animatronic/guys in suits? Watch the special features, dumbass.Almost the whole scene with Split-face was animatronic, as was the Juliette-Thing being a stuntwoman in a suit.

  • it just wants a little love...

  • oh the kitty cat is purring on the dude

  • the general thought of this film seems to be: old thing amazing, cutting edge, creepy, and filled with fear of russian invasion. modern thing ok, not bad, unneeded, but lacks subtext, almost a remake

  • @XRatedTacoProd Russian Invasion? What the hell are you smoking?

  • sorry i said that wrong. lots of films were made in response to the cold war. people thought neighbors and friends were spies and traitors. (see invasion of the body snatchers)

  • @XRatedTacoProd They've said it in interviews it was more a vehicle for the HIV scare at the time (infected didn't show symptoms, you could easily get infected, a 'blood test' to prove it).

  • o. ok I took a class a year ago and i do recall hearing something like that. the Russian thing too.

  • Baby from Resident Evil 2

  • I thought this movie was over all a pretty entertaining horror flick. I was squeamish the while time and creeped out which I haven't been while watching a scary movie in a long time.

    While i appreciate the character development of the 1982 version, it took waaaay long to go anywhere. And at every glimpse of the alien you didn't really get to see much or saw nothing at all. I almost fell asleep. Idk I guess I'm bias towards my generation of scary movies than previous, though there are some exc

  • It was alright ... But nowhere near as scary and suspenseful as John Carpenter's film.

    The effects used in The Thing in 1982 were cutting edge for it's time.

    The effects for 2011 pale in comparison to what other films are doing today

  • i thought it was just as good or better than the original

  • Shit, it's Resident Evil all over again.

  • @lordxeras No, Resident Evil is The Thing all over again.

  • This movie wasn't that bad. I'm an 80s baby/Thing fan, and I found this to be the "Matrix Reloaded/Revolutions " of The Thing franchise, ok but clearly inferior to the original: it's not the "The Phantom Menace"... UTTERLY BORING DOGSHIT

  • There is no way those flamethrowers could have been used indoors without killing everything inside. Even if you avoid the flame, it sucks all of the oxygen from the room. God i love movie rules though.

  • Of course the black guy dies.

  • @kenshiro69 That's why you always keep on with you

  • @kenshiro69 the black guy didn't die first -__-...

  • @thatsnotchocolat are u f$ucking racist go join your K.K.K buddies DOUCH!!!!!!!!!

  • @thatsnotchocolat That just means this movie doesn't suck dick.

  • that think/guy looks like earving from resident evil 5