while New Yorks David Denby lamented that the Thing's threat is shown only externally, without focusing on what it is like for someone who thinks they have been taken over. Roger Ebert considered the film to be scary, but offering nothing original beyond the special effects, while The New York Timess Vincent Canby said it was entertaining only if the viewer needed to see spider-legged heads and dog autopsies. Reviews of the actors' performances were generally positive, while criticizing the depictions of the characters they portrayed. Ebert said they lacked characterization, offering basic stereotypes that existed just to be killed, and Spencer called the characters bland even though the actors do the best they can with the material. Times Richard Schickel singled Russell out as the "stalwart" hero, where other characters were not as strongly or wittily characterized, and Variety said that Russell's heroic status was undercut by the "suicidal" attitude adopted toward the film's finale. Other reviews criticized implausibilities such as characters wandering off alone. Kehr did not like that the men did not band together against the Thing, and several reviews noted a lack of camaraderie and romance, which Arnold said reduced any interest beyond the special effects. The film's special effects were simultaneously lauded and lambasted for being technically brilliant but visually repulsive and excessive. Cinefantastique wrote that the Thing "may be the most unloved monster in movie history... but it's also the most incredible display of special effects makeup in at least a decade." Reviews called Bottin's work "genius", noting the designs were novel, unforgettable, "colorfully horrific", and called him a "master of the macabre". Arnold said that the "chest chomp" scene demonstrated "appalling creativity" and the subsequent severed head scene was "madly macabre", comparing them to Aliens chest burster and severed head scenes. Variety called it "the most vividly gruesome horror film to ever stalk the screens". Conversely, Denby called them more disgusting than frightening and lamented that the trend of horror films to open the human body more and more bordered on obscenity. Spencer said that Bottin's care and pride in his craft were shown in the effects, but both they and Schickel found them to be overwhelming and "squandered" without strong characters and story. Even so, Canby said that the effects were too "phony looking to be disgusting". Canby and Arnold said the creature's lack of a single, discernible shape was to its