The Thing from Another World (1951)

It's an awesome and suspenseful movie. A fine plot & cast to match. James Arness is great, even though he doesn't say much ; ) Only one thing that i didn't care for, was in about every scene they were making a joke or wise crack. It just didn't seem to fit, especially in the more dire and intense moments. Still very enjoyable experience!

Probably the best science fiction movie of the early atomic age, and one of the best sci-fi movies ever. Even performances from the cast, a suspenseful, well-written plot, and an iconic man vs. (alien) Nature conflict add up to amazing entertainment.I've seen The Thing From Another World many times since the early 1960s, and it never fails to hold my interest throughout. This time around I noticed some 'Things' that hadn't really occurred to me before. The Thing clearly influenced another classic sci-fi thriller, 1956's Invasion on the Body Snatchers. The little pepper-shaped alien pods growing in the greenhouse, with the implicit threat of limitless aliens taking over the Earth, is the core premise of Body Snatchers.The remote location for The Thing also resonates with other monster/alien movies; the difference here is that we never leave the polar outpost, as the alien is destroyed before he and his potential replicants can wreak more havoc. The more interesting strand in The Thing isn't what it influenced, but the horror genre that influenced it.Some have found tracings of film noir in the claustrophobic setting, with the stark black and white lighting adding shadowy depths to the unfolding mystery. But I see the alien as a Frankenstein monster/Dracula figure. He has the lumbering menace of the Frankenstein monster--his fight with the dogs during a blizzard seems very much like a scene from a Frankenstein movie. And then, the alien seeks dirt, and lives on blood: Dracula's exact habits. The dimly lit passageways of the base look as much like gothic caverns and the hallways of decrepit castles at least as much as the dark corners and alleys of noir.So I think it's this blending of horror and sci-fi scenes and motifs that gives The Thing its abiding power; it takes old myths and recasts them with a modern, quasi-scientific veracity.

Movie Review: "The Thing From Another World" (1951)In the year 1951 when the final distributing decade for Golden Age Hollywood Mini Major RKO Radio Pictures had toll the first bell before closure of the studio in 1959, "The Thing From Another World" based on a story by John W. Campbell Jr. optioned by producer Howard Hawks, denying his own direction on the picture, focus on "The Big Sky" starring Kirk Douglas and the comedy "Monkey Business" (both 1952), considering the picture even all too silly at the time of release with the wish to pull his entire name from the production.Now in retrospective and after an indulging remake directed by John Carpenter, called just "The Thing" (1982) starring Kurt Russell, which eventually brought out the horror with skillful camera work and engaged acting towards splatter gore f/x, where the original version from 1951, just before television invaded citizen's living room, giving still some entertainment for the classic movie lovers with striking on stage pyro-effects of the inflamed creature from outer space, behaving mainly like Frankenstein's creature on acid, making this picture directed by future "Bonanza" (1959-1967) television director Christian Nyby, who occasionally moves the 35mm camera set through above-average B-movie, close-to A-listers, production design and hammering score by composer Dimitri Tiomkin.The acting ensemble surrounding by professional Industry actors from again future television cast as Kenneth Tobey and Magaret Sheridan keep face as North pole scientists discovering an invading parasite from outer space and confront it as a team toward annihilation, tolling the bells together with "The Day The Earth Stood Still" (1951) directed by Robert Wise for an era of an Hollywood Horror revival as Universal monsters in the 1930s, stating clearly that filmmaking, story-wised drive, runs in circles to be hyped again.© 2017 Felix Alexander Dausend (Cinemajesty Entertainments LLC)

There is really no doubt about it here, in my opinion. There are some examples of movies that people would qualify as being "sci-fi" prior to this classic. There were movies that co-mingled that idea of sci-fi with horror to some degree. None had the impact that this movie had on Hollywood. It launched the 50s sci-fi boom. It led to a legion of imitators. It created the blueprint for the entire history of sci-fi horror that comes after. Every ALIEN, PREDATOR, etc owes a debt to this film.Despite the fact that there were so many imitators to follow in the 50s, none of them come close to this film's power. None seemed able to capture what it is that truly made this movie so great. A large part of this begins and ends with Howard Hawks. He is not credited as the director, but I'm not going to retread that familiar territory. Spielberg isn't credited as the director of POLTERGEIST, but we all know who's movie it is. Christian Nyby is forever a historical footnote. The guy who gets no credit for the success of THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD because it is so clearly Hawks film in every way. The hordes of b and c grade films to come after clearly never had that luxury.I believe that one of the things that keeps this movie so tightly constructed is the co-mingling of military and science. Sure, other movies followed that blueprint, to varying degrees of success. I have seen A LOT of 50s drive-in films and a great portion of them tend to fall to far into one side or the other. The majority of them go too far into the science and forget the action. Too many nerds and not enough heroes, so to speak. We all know those movie I'm talking about where some scientist rambles on and on with big words and terms that almost sound made up, trying to forcibly to inject scientific credibility into its' monster. Too often, the end result reels like an old 60s educational film with made up mumbo jumbo that derails the movie. On the other hand, too much action without the scientific aspect of it, and some of the mystery is missing.This movie perfectly encapsulates both sides of that formula. The scientists want to preserve and study the monster. They supply us with meaningful explanations of its' origins and the nature of the creature, without ever feeling hokey. The soldiers are perfect heroes, cracking wise while playing brave. They are bent on destroying the creature and act as the duality to the science in a perfect way.The setting, also, has a lot to do with the success of this film. You feel the cold in a palpable way, especially when the heat goes out in the final act and the heroes have to deal not just with a monster, but with the stark reality of the nature around them. The history of horror and sci-fi has plenty of desert and jungle movies, but because of the natural difficulty in filming in the arctic, the snowy environment has not been done so much and it still feels fresh.One of the most genius aspects of the movie is that gradual way that it introduces its' monster. The biggest problem with much of 50s sci-fi is that the creature designs left something to be desired, yet the film makers constantly made the poor decision to highlight the monstrosities far too much. The more we see the monster the more ridiculous it looks. We all know the cliché that our imaginations provide much more fear and terror than our eyes can ever conceive. This movie plays with that wisely. We get a quick glimpse at first, then a silhouette. It is not until the finale that we really get a chance to breathe in the monster in full glory and that makes this movie all the more impactful and terrifying. When we do get to see the monster, it is a great design, simple yet effective. Something more than human, but reminiscent enough to have added impact.There are plenty of "classics" that film critics and buffs will tell you that you have to see. This is required viewing, though, an absolute classic that has stood the test of time and still carries terror.