Scan barcode
fekete_macska's review against another edition
5.0
Short, creepy and really modern for its time (the 30s) it's a great read for anyone who's seen the Carpenter movie (The Thing) and wants to appreciate how great the adaptation was.
marde_reads's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.5
amusedmuse's review against another edition
4.0
The novella that spawned two iconic sci-fi films can be read in an afternoon. The 1951 "The Thing from Another World" borrows the novella's concept, but not much else. John Carpenter's 1981 adaptation is closer to the novella, though the endings differ.
Campbell's techno-babble, scientific writing is fantastic, but his pulp origins are apparently in some of this descriptions, like MacReady being a man of bronze. (What, like Doc Savage?)
Definitely a must read for fans of the genre, and the films in particular.
Campbell's techno-babble, scientific writing is fantastic, but his pulp origins are apparently in some of this descriptions, like MacReady being a man of bronze. (What, like Doc Savage?)
Definitely a must read for fans of the genre, and the films in particular.
devonxk's review against another edition
1000 Degree Knife vs Alien Blood!!!
Room full of scientists and Macready is the only one smart enough to run the blood/heat test
Room full of scientists and Macready is the only one smart enough to run the blood/heat test
devannm's review against another edition
3.0
A decent enough short story but I felt like it focused a bit too much on the science side for my personal taste to the point where I didn't really feel the mood of the isolation and most of the dialogue had that really awkward quality where it's clearly just there for the exposition and not how any group of people would actually talk to each other in my opinion. Definitely worth your time if you're a fan of isolation horror just to see a really early forerunner in the genre but honestly one of the few times I would say the movie is better.
fizzypixie's review against another edition
challenging
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.0
leomit's review against another edition
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
2.75
Still liked it because I’m such a fan of the Carpenter film adaptation, and the premise is fascinating. But god this novella really fails to produce even a fraction of the tension that it promises, partly because it’s too busy telling the reader how tense it is.
Also quite ironic that a seminal sci-fi writer would later have a role in the pseudoscience that forms the basis of Scientology. Campbell was also a racist freak.
Also quite ironic that a seminal sci-fi writer would later have a role in the pseudoscience that forms the basis of Scientology. Campbell was also a racist freak.
dt_seg's review against another edition
2.0
How did such a mediocre novella get turned into such a great movie. "The Thing" is almost always on any critic's top horror list, and in my opinion it lives up to its reputation. Unfortunately, this book didn't do it for me. I thought the writing was bland and the idea just didn't feel the same. The only time it gave me that feeling of foreboding was when I was comparing it to the movie and reminiscing about how much I enjoyed how creepy this idea can be.
I understand the point it was making and the relevance it had during the red scare but I personally wouldn't recommend this book to anyone unless they were a die hard 50's science-fiction fan. I know John Carpenter's remake was very updated but I thought the book felt more like something that odd kid in your 5th grade class would read in the dark holding a flashlight, never to be taken seriously or given any real credit other than influencing one of my favorite horror movies of all time.
I understand the point it was making and the relevance it had during the red scare but I personally wouldn't recommend this book to anyone unless they were a die hard 50's science-fiction fan. I know John Carpenter's remake was very updated but I thought the book felt more like something that odd kid in your 5th grade class would read in the dark holding a flashlight, never to be taken seriously or given any real credit other than influencing one of my favorite horror movies of all time.
darthkatya's review against another edition
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.75
selaslavo's review against another edition
3.0
Some of the language is dated and repetitive ('McReady is a big bronze hunk' ad infinitum), but I still had a good time with it. John Carpenter's adaptation is one of my favorite movies and I was surprised at how close the narrative matched the source material. Of course, Kurt Russell's 'MacReady' is a much more likable, and human, flawed hero compared the the demi-god of the book. For the record, I thought William F. Nolan's screen treatment was...not great.
3.5/4
3.5/4