# Which was better, Alien (1979) or The Thing (1982)? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [June 24, 2014, 10:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521 "2014-06-24T10:35:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Maserschmidt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/maserschmidt/32/18829_2.png) [@Maserschmidt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maserschmidt)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2014, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521/81 "2014-06-27T14:53:19Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Wait, you think _including_ strong women lead characters in an SF film would be “typical Hollywood token casting”? In the late 70s/80s? Seriously? Well…some of that does get undermined by Ripley’s slow strip down to camisole and panties, lovingly ogled by the camera. That’s certainly classic 80s. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2014, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521/82 "2014-06-27T15:18:18Z")
> [@Maserschmidt](#): > > Well…some of that does get undermined by Ripley’s slow strip down to camisole and panties, lovingly ogled by the camera. That’s certainly classic 80s. Only _slightly_ undermined, IMO. And certainly made up for by her being the sole survivor when all the manly men are xenochow™ ---
**Author:** ![handsomeharry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e9c0ed/32.png) [@handsomeharry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handsomeharry)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2014, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521/83 "2014-06-27T15:18:31Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > The 2011 “The Thing” is technically not a remake, but a prequel. To be more specific, it isn’t a prequel, it is a turd. Wow. The worst movie that I have seen lately that is as boring is the latest Red Dawn. ---
**Author:** ![epbrown01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7ba0ec/32.png) [@epbrown01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/epbrown01)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2014, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521/84 "2014-06-27T20:40:00Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Wait, you think _including_ strong women lead characters in an SF film would be “typical Hollywood token casting”? In the late 70s/80s? Seriously? It can be. It’s all about the implementation. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2014, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521/85 "2014-06-27T22:10:38Z")
There are people who prefer THING to ALIEN? Who are they, and why are they allowed to walk the streets unmedicated? ---
**Author:** ![RivkahChaya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rivkahchaya/32/8919_2.png) [@RivkahChaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RivkahChaya)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2014, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521/86 "2014-06-27T23:36:56Z")
> [@Baal\_Houtham](#): > > The special effects [of _The Thing_] are impressive, but not smoothly integrated into the story – more like, hey lets take a break and look at this really neat and super gross stuff our effects staff devised. You hit the nail on the head. That’s exactly what bugged me about the film. And IIRC, the ads for the movie when it was in the theaters were all about the special effects, and not about the movie itself-- “Come see it for the cool FX! It’s like nothing you’ve seen before!” Nothing about acting, or story, or anything else. Of course, _Alien_’s tagline, “In space, no one can hear you scream,” was kind of stupid. ---
**Author:** ![Locrian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/locrian/32/14146_2.png) [@Locrian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Locrian)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2014, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521/87 "2014-06-28T01:33:02Z")
Alien, most definitely. Alien had two females, The Thing had none. 😃 Seriously, Alien was a NEW sci-fi concept which grew in the cinema world. The Thing was a remake and no real follow up to the creature or the story. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2014, 8:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521/88 "2014-06-28T08:48:13Z")
> [@epbrown01](#): > > It can be. It’s all about the implementation. “typical” means the normal thing, not the exception. In that time period, strong female leads in action/sci-fi were the exception, not the norm. ---
**Author:** ![Ashley\_Pomeroy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c68b51/32.png) [@Ashley\_Pomeroy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ashley_Pomeroy)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2014, 12:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521/89 "2014-06-28T12:13:43Z")
I think we can agree that _Alien_ had the best [trailer](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEVY_lonKf4). It’s downright unsettling and made me jump the first time I saw it. The trailer for _The Thing_ copies the graphic device of having the title assemble from white bars but doesn’t do much with it (which is odd given that it takes place in a snowbound environment). In my opinion _Alien_ has the better score, too - Jerry Goldsmith wrote something that sounds lush and beautiful but also sick and wrong at the same time. _The Thing_ has a great theme but my recollection is that most of Ennio Morricone’s music was dumped, and so beyond the theme the soundtrack is very thin. _Was_ or _is_? I’m with RivkahChaya on page one, in that some of _Alien_’s appeal doesn’t work any more; not just because of the casting but because the shocks have become familiar. In retrospect it’s a clever machine, and you can appreciate the workings, and once you’ve seen the tricks it’s still a good-looking film, but it feels like a mantlepiece ornament nowadays. _The Thing_ gets going faster and is a lot more visceral, and the twists are sufficiently complex that I’m not entirely sure I could write an accurate summary of the middle part of the plot from memory, despite having seen the film several times. Plot-wise the novelisation of _Alien_ explains why they do some of the things they do, but I’ve always wondered why they can’t ask for help, or divert to the nearest space station, or something similar (or return to the place they came from). _The Thing_, on the other hand, has a sense of inexorable doom about it. Dallas and his crew are essentially fighting for their own personal survival, whereas the chaps of the snowbase have to catch and kill the monster otherwise humanity is doomed. If a rescue party had found the Nostromo I’ve sure that the alien would have run amok, but they would have subdued it in the end; they’re not invincible, and against a well-lit backdrop the alien would be very conspicuous. The Thing, on the other hand, would slowly assimilate the rescue party, and so in a way it was fortunate that the isolated snowbase found it first, albeit not fortunate for _them_. On a tangent, when the Thing is imitating people, does it understand the things they say? When you’re talking to a Thing-person, is The Thing talking to you? Or does it just allow the minds of its victims to continue believing that they are not The Thing? ---
**Author:** ![MichaelEmouse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/michaelemouse/32/101_2.png) [@MichaelEmouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MichaelEmouse)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2014, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521/90 "2014-06-28T13:32:43Z")
> [@Ashley\_Pomeroy](#): > > On a tangent, when the Thing is imitating people, does it understand the things they say? When you’re talking to a Thing-person, is The Thing talking to you? Or does it just allow the minds of its victims to continue believing that they are not The Thing? Not sure about the movie but in the short story, the infected people still behave the same way. The only exception being when The Thing sees that it’s threatened or has a good opportunity in which case The Thing takes over. Working from my own memory: An infected person never seems to act in The Thing’s interest while looking like a normal person. Whenever The Thing acts in its own interest, its vessel becomes monstrous. I cannot recall once when an infected-yet-normal-looking person or dog acted out of character. Which would suggest that The Thing lets its vessel act as it normally would unless it has a reason to take over. The short story explains this by saying that since it has to pass off as the local lifeform, it lets it do its own thing because otherwise, it would behave in a way that would be detected as odd by the non-infected. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2014, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521/91 "2014-06-28T14:22:36Z")
> [@MichaelEmouse](#): > > Not sure about the movie but in the short story, the infected people still behave the same way. The only exception being when The Thing sees that it’s threatened or has a good opportunity in which case The Thing takes over. > > Working from my own memory: An infected person never seems to act in The Thing’s interest while looking like a normal person. Whenever The Thing acts in its own interest, its vessel becomes monstrous. > > I cannot recall once when an infected-yet-normal-looking person or dog acted out of character. Which would suggest that The Thing lets its vessel act as it normally would unless it has a reason to take over. The short story explains this by saying that since it has to pass off as the local lifeform, it lets it do its own thing because otherwise, it would behave in a way that would be detected as odd by the non-infected. That’s pretty much par for the course for people-imitators in science fiction. Read Philip K. Dick’s _The Father Thing_ or Jack Finney’s _The Body Snatchers_. ---
**Author:** ![RivkahChaya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rivkahchaya/32/8919_2.png) [@RivkahChaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RivkahChaya)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2014, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521/92 "2014-06-28T16:15:45Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#): > > That’s pretty much par for the course for people-imitators in science fiction. Read Philip K. Dick’s _The Father Thing_ or Jack Finney’s _The Body Snatchers_. So I’m not the only one who thought the 1982 _Thing_ borrowed pretty heavily from _Invasion of the Body Snatchers_? I’ve read Jack Finney’s book, but I’ve never read “Who Goes There?” How similar are they, and which came first? ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2014, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521/93 "2014-06-28T16:25:47Z")
Campbell’s story is from 1938. Finney’s is from 1955. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2014, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521/94 "2014-06-28T16:50:19Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#): > > That’s pretty much par for the course for people-imitators in science fiction. Read Philip K. Dick’s _The Father Thing_ or Jack Finney’s _The Body Snatchers_. Wait, what? When do the pod people in _Invasion of the Body Snatchers_ turn into hideous monsters? I’ve never read the book, only seen the first movie adaptation, but the pod people in that are clearly very much aware that they aren’t human, and frequently act in furtherance of the invasion while still appearing perfectly human. Plus, the pods are imperfect imitators - people can tell that there’s something “off” about them, to the point that the movie starts with a doctor treating a spate of patients who are convinced that a close loved one has been replaced. That’s very different from _The Thing_, where the creature can imitate its victims so perfectly that it’s an open question if even _they_ know that they’re not human anymore. Maybe they were better copies in the book? But I’m still pretty sure they didn’t do [this](http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/JjIXwkX1e48/maxresdefault.jpg) when they got discovered. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2014, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521/95 "2014-06-28T16:51:11Z")
I’ve never actually seen either version of _The Thing_, but _Alien_ is damned near perfect, so I voted for it. The only thing I can think of that could improve _Alien_ would be if Ripley disrobed completely at the end (and I say that not just for prurient reasons), but _The Thing_ doesn’t come close to meeting that. ---
**Author:** ![RivkahChaya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rivkahchaya/32/8919_2.png) [@RivkahChaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RivkahChaya)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2014, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521/96 "2014-06-28T18:42:25Z")
Both versions of _The Thing_ are worth seeing. I personally prefer the older one, but I almost always prefer the simpler version of a film over the big FXsplotation version. I like the 1956\* Ransom!\* over the Mel Gibson “big” version from 1996. I by far prefer the 50s version of _Invasion of the Body Snatchers_ over any of the other versions. There are exceptions: I like the Hayley Mills\* The Parent Trap \*over the film _Twice Blessed_ that it’s based on, and I like \*Alien \*over _It! Terror from beyond Space_, but _It!_ really isn’t such a great film (neither is _Twice Blessed_, for that matter). _It!_ is interesting mostly because of its influence on _Alien_– and _Alien_ had other sources. _The Thing_ prequel, or whatever the hell it was, was, as someone said upthread, a turd, and should be avoided at all costs. IMO, of course. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2014, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521/97 "2014-06-28T18:51:08Z")
Invasion of the Body Snatcherrs is the derivative oner – Jack, Finney’s book followed not only John Campbell’s _Who Goes There?_, it followed the first movie version of _The Thing_ AND it followed Robert Heinlein’s _The Puppet Masters_ (which for my money is the much better expression of the idea). Finney’s story also has a terrible ending - the film adaptation (especially the original version, before the front office screwed with it) was better. As for “The People in Invasion of the ody Snatchjers didn’t act like that!” – yes they did. In all of the cases I cite, the alien invaders take on nt only the outside form of the people, they also take on their memories and knowledge (they don’t have any problem, speaking English) and the ACT just like ordinary people --even when they don’t obviously think people are watching. As for whether they KNOW they’re aliens – who can tell? We’re never told of the interior life of any of thee Things. But the inhabitants of the Southern California town acts like the ordinary humans they’ve taken over, just like the people taken ovber by the Things do. The ones in Heinelein’s The Puppet Masters don’t, but tt’s a difgferent case – they’re not people replaced by shape-shifting aliens, they’re “hag ridden” by controlling aliens, and in that case we know the psychology – the aliens are in control and thinking their own thoughts, and only act human as long as they know they have to fool other, non-“assimilated” humans. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2014, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521/98 "2014-06-28T20:11:11Z")
**Cal** , I don’t think you’re quite catching the distinction being made here. The observation was made that, in _The Thing_, we never see any of the infected humans acting to further the goals of the creature. Whenever an infected human acts against the other humans, it’s always preceded by a violent physical transformation. This raises the question, “Is the Thing in conscious control of its human pawns, or does it let them run on autopilot, and only takes over when it’s physically threatened?” If an infected human says to one of his friends, “Hey, there’s something you should check out in the tool shed,” is that a deliberate ploy on behalf of the creature to separate and infect another human, or does the creature not have any idea what it’s host just communicated to its next victim, and only preys opportunistically? I don’t recall any ambiguity on this part from the movie version of _Body Snatchers_, but like I said, it’s been a long time since I saw the movie, and I never read the book. I’m not questioning whether the aliens had human memories or not, or tried to pass themselves as normal, I just don’t recall there being any real question that the aliens knew they were aliens. ---
**Author:** ![RivkahChaya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rivkahchaya/32/8919_2.png) [@RivkahChaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RivkahChaya)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2014, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521/99 "2014-06-28T20:30:48Z")
Yeah, the Pod People knew they were Pod People, to the point of specifically targeting for “podding” the people expressing skepticism that Uncle Whoever wasn’t really himself. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2014, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521/100 "2014-06-28T22:20:24Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > **Cal** , I don’t think you’re quite catching the distinction being made here. The observation was made that, in _The Thing_, we never see any of the infected humans acting to further the goals of the creature. Whenever an infected human acts against the other humans, it’s always preceded by a violent physical transformation. This raises the question, “Is the Thing in conscious control of its human pawns, or does it let them run on autopilot, and only takes over when it’s physically threatened?” If an infected human says to one of his friends, “Hey, there’s something you should check out in the tool shed,” is that a deliberate ploy on behalf of the creature to separate and infect another human, or does the creature not have any idea what it’s host just communicated to its next victim, and only preys opportunistically? > > I don’t recall any ambiguity on this part from the movie version of _Body Snatchers_, but like I said, it’s been a long time since I saw the movie, and I never read the book. I’m not questioning whether the aliens had human memories or not, or tried to pass themselves as normal, I just don’t recall there being any real question that the aliens knew they were aliens. I’ve got the distinction. But it’s not clear to me that THing-ified people don’t know that they’re Things. The Thing might just be a really good actor. And whether they turn into hiseous monsters is irrelevant to this. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-was-better-alien-1979-or-the-thing-1982/691521.md?page=6)