What Would 1951 Audiences and Critics Thought of John Carpenter's 1982 Version of the Thing ?

[Timebender]

Imagine all the movie theaters in 1951 , expecting to see their version the thing , suddenly via mysterious unexplained shift of a shift in reality instead, end up with is John Carpenter's 1982 Version of the thing. How do suppose the audiences would react to this film and , what do suppose the critics of that era would make of Carpenters version of this film?

I can't even imagine but I would love to see it!

 

[KiraAnn]

Well, most of the monster flicks of the 50’s were generally regarded as “make-out” time in the drive-in theaters, so perhaps not any different.

 

[Guttersnipe]

"Won't someone PLEASE think of the children?!"

 

[BAYLOR]

"Won't someone PLEASE think of the children?!"

People would still flock to see it , because something that banned and forbidden make people want to see it.

 

[KGeo777]

If the film was sent back in time--unknown origin and they just played it-I think it would shock people to distraction and it would be years before people would look at it as a story. I think the thing effects would really gross people out.
It would be regarded like Salo or 120 Days of Sodom.

 

[Servomoore]

Depends on the country. In France, they had already been screening films like Blood of the Beasts, which despite being in black and white is gorier than The Thing: 5 Old Movies that are Still Shocking