person who seems to have seen the 82 version of the monster for half a year during the day It is generally said that the prequel is seriously plagiarized and not innovative enough. But I want to say, for someone who hasn't seen the original and just watched this prequel, would he be bored? No, his score will definitely be high. Because the theme of the monster is very different and the special effects are in place, it is a rare sci-fi horror masterpiece in recent years.
Regarding the doubts that many people have about the plot, I will express my own opinion. It is really unacceptable that aliens with such a high degree of civilization still have to 'eat' in such a low-level way. I tried to help the screenwriter come back, and I am more inclined: this monster is not the pilot of the spaceship, it may be the pets and research products of these high-intelligence aliens. When the UFO fell, those aliens piloted All members died, but these 'lower creatures' survived by chance, relying on tenacious vitality to hibernate in low temperature, waiting for the right time to find a host. Or more sinister intentions: artificial lifeforms developed for plundering resources and doing preliminary space exploration (animals used in cosmic experiments, similar to the cats, dogs and small plants that Earth people would bring along for research when they launched space stations) Alien planets Animals are definitely smarter and more capable of learning than those on Earth. Dogs can learn to move things, and 'alien dogs' can learn to drive spaceships from aliens.
The original Thing is the epitome of sci-fi horror, and blindly asking for a sequel to surpass the original is unrealistic. I originally wanted to give it 3 stars, but seeing as the prequel to The Thing is well-made and well connected to the original, I gave it 4 stars to show my support. This spirit of exploring and perfecting the original needs to be encouraged. Hope 'The Thing' will develop other sequels!
View more about The Thing reviews
