I think it also gets faster at replicating humans the longer it's active. In the prequel when it harpoon'd one of the Norwegians and it seemed like it was taking its time, maybe the "hungrier" it is, the longer the process takes.
I like this interpretation, that the monster is constantly adapting to a species it's unfamiliar with. Potentially the species it has assimilated in the past have all been unintelligent or in circumstances where it didn't need to be secretive and could instead just be aggressive. However the prequel unfortunately kind of taints this since all the same paranoia occurred in that movie, but I prefer to think that what happened at the Norwegian camp was just an enormous clusterfuck rather than basically more of the slow build paranoia that happened at the American camp. Sort of like what would have happened if the dog-thing had evolved further and then broken out to attack the rest of the camp in the break room at once. That way the creature wouldn't have had the chance to approach things secretly, and instead would have learned to do so over the course of this film. That would explain why it was so overt and aggressive with the dogs, and why the subsequent attacks became more and more secretive with less evidence left behind.
@@coolbear6441 Judging by the wonky wobbly path the saucer takes towards earth, I'd guess the thing got loose on the ship. I have no idea it's level of intelligence though.
So pretty much, Childs gets infected and assimiliated while on guard, the Childs-Thing then goes out in the snow to attempt to avoid the final showdown, then returns after it notices the outpost burning. The Childs-Thing sees MacReady, tries to gather information, "you the only one who made it?", gets caught out by foolishly taking a drink from MacReady which the real Childs wouldn't do for fear of infection, at which point MacReady laughs because A. he realizes he has lost as he is too weak to stop the Childs-Thing, checkmate. Or B. he has a hidden flamethrower under his blanket and is about to incinerate him, checkmate.
But he does have a secret flamethrower underneath. It has been said in the script as far as I know. So I do believe that MacReady was smiling, because Childs-Thing fell for the same thing as the computer he played against. Kind of ironic. Because Childs was about to get fried. Just like the computer.
@@johnmcnamara8741 There was also some theory that I've heard and read regarding that. Macready might have decided to kill himself since he knows there's no way he'd survive in the cold, anyway so he should just kill himself than suffer longer, before he was interrupted by the Childs thing(I believe he is).
Are you seeing this Hollywood? This is how you create a movie. Something that we as an audience STILL talk about 36 years after release. Not this crap that you produce that will be forgotten within a year after release.
@@EbonyPope @EbonyPope Jurassic Park has the most impressive practical effects in terms of size and difficulty to create but I wouldn't say they're better looking aesthetically than every other movie. Although the T-Rex in the rain looked insanely realistic due to the darker lighting
The biggest mystery to me by far that I've never heard anyone talk about: the thing can obviously replicate humans perfectly including memories and speech, and as soon as it's cover is blown it immediately reverts to its alien animalistic form. But is it truly capable of speaking to humans, if they were to talk to the thing in human form and ask it where it came from or what it wanted would it be able to understand and respond to them? Is it aware of what its saying or to the thing is speech and human language just simply another defense mechanism to help it blend in and hide? To this day that question has been on my mind and it is one of the only things in film history that I am truly dying to know.
I assume that conversation will not occur since the alien goes ballistic the moment his cover is blown. If you watched the prequel however, you can see when kate confronts sam in the snowcat this doesn't happen right away.
This is something I've considered over the years, as well. To me, the Thing is perfectly capable of comprehending the ramifications of what it's doing as it finds itself within these two small human settlements. However, especially as of the events of the prequel movie, everything it has encountered from the humans is that they want to hurt and exterminate it. As it absorbs and replicates the humans around it, all it has been reading from the human minds is fear, paranoia, and likely a desire to kill 'it'. It is reacting in kind, trying to eliminate all potential threats to itself, using human emotions against the human station members. If the plot of the film was drastically changed, and the Thing was instead questioned by the humans and not had a hole drilled into its body, would the story unfold differently? More than likely it would, but I have a feeling that the end result would be the same. Going just by the 1982 film, it has been shown that it thinks of all other lifeforms as food or a threat. Even though it possesses higher intelligence, it seemingly lacks the same amount of empathy that would cause it to care about anything it's doing or any harm it's causing. The 2011 movie gives an apparent reason why it is so immediately hostile, though I don't even know if this really makes a difference. I don't know if I'd call the Thing evil, per se, but it certainly is a monster, in every regard. edit: I doubt that the Thing has access to all of the memories of its victims, more likely the events of the past week or so, especially strong surface thoughts. If it could access the deepest memories of its victims, it might think it more worthwhile to just feign a sickness, and try to get transferred to a more populated area, where it could feed and exist more easily. Notice that in both movies, there is never a Q & A session between station members to test if they/it remembers events from long ago, so this concept is never tested. No, the Thing behaves very much in the moment, reacting to the entire situation it found itself in much like if it were a cornered beast, trying to escape.
Used to debate this online, regarding how the Thing assimilates people. I reason that, assuming it isn't only playing mind games, that assimilation is faster if it can violently rip into your body from every available orifice as well as penetrate the skin and outer tissues. Assimilating Gary through his mouth might preserve his clothing and be quieter, less messy, but it might take longer since the alien cells need to diffuse throughout the entire body from a relatively singular point. Perhaps?
I believe that the Thing was learning how to assimilate its prey more efficiently and with less evidence left behind. I also don't think it was going for making a Garry-Thing, but adding Garry's and then Nauls's biomass into its own to create the gigantic Blair-Monster shape.
YES, but still was unable to overcome other things that would expose it, prosthetics, foreign objects adornments like earrings not essential to it's life cycle and ruse!
The extra door is to make it easier to load supplies into what appears to be the supply room. Interesting note, Childs staggers when he leaves the camp... maybe like Bennings' earlier he is not completely done transforming...
Other World Explorers, child's was staggering because it was extremely windy outside. if you had been paying attention, you would have noticed in the scene where McCready,nauls and windows were outside and McCready told windows to go back inside and tell the other's they found Fuchs. it was extremely windy even then. in every scene shot at night, it was always windy outside. As much as viewers want to go along with this ridiculous theory that child's was the thing... He wasn't!
Or was Mac really the Thing at the end? He had his clothes torn up, he set up the people to be tied up closely to each other making it easier for other things to attack them, he could have swapped his blood sample either with an uninfected person or he had the access to fridge to get a pack of blood because the keys were taken by Bennings and was hazy when Garry got them back, he said the Thing wants to freeze now and wait for the rescue team but a person would still try to survive by keeping a building and keeping warm not blowing everywhere up and finally when he hands the bottle to Childs he smiles as he has infected the contents of the bottle. Anyway I love all theories and like to discuss what isn't shown on the film and what I think happens.
@@busalove2013 so child's would just leave the door wide open and run into the Storm? That Makes zero sense. The generator shut down right when he leaves. Blair wasn't out in the storm he was in the generator room. Gary, Nauls and Macready were able to deduce that the Blair Thing was down in the generator room. If you think about it, the thing was probably hoping they would chase Child's into the Storm for them to freeze while Blair thing could continue building and could havest there Frozen bodies later but they went to the generator room. If child's was human he would have ran back inside when the generator shut off cause that means the thing is in the Generator room, not outside.
Childs is the Thing • Childs didn’t hear Mac's footsteps approaching him and Childs appears to be dozing off and tired indicating Blair could have easily snuck up on Childs. Blair is the only one infected right after the blood test, so Blair is the only one who could've infected Childs. • There’s no reason Childs needed to guard an empty base. He was left alone for plot reasons. Having Childs be alone gives the Blair-Thing the perfect opportunity to attack Childs. • After Childs is assimilated by Blair, Childs took the same Navy blue coat off the coat rack (debatable). • Childs then ran out into the storm without goggles or a hat and survives the cold for the entire final showdown, only appearing at the end of the film. Childs says he “got lost in the storm” indicating the storm and weather was really bad. If Childs was human, he wouldn't have run off into the storm, especially not without a hat or goggles. • Child's excuse of running outside to confront Blair is clearly a lie because Blair shut off the generator right after Childs runs outside. Childs never saw anyone outside. He ran off because he’s a thing. • One of the most important aspects of the film is the music and when it plays. The movie starts out with music that is dark with heavy bass. This dark music plays when the dog-thing is on screen, indicating the dog is infected. It plays when Childs drinks from MacReady’s whiskey at the end. Lastly, it plays during the shot of the door Childs was guarding is shown to be open, indicating Childs was assimilated. • Another use of music is when Blair attacks and assimilates Gary, creepy music begins to play. The same creepy music plays when Fuch sees a figure pass by his room, which means it was most likely Blair who passed by. • Fuch burned himself because he saw Blair outside and knew Blair was the Thing since Blair should’ve been locked in the tool shed. If Mac was the Thing, Mac would’ve successfully assimilated Fuch because Fuch was talking to him a moment ago and did not suspect Mac to be infected. • Mac was cleared of being a thing via blood test, which means he wasn’t the one who attacked Fuchs. This also means Mac would be able to relay to the crew of Fuch’s suggestion: do not share drinks or food with each other. During the blood test, it doesn't show Mac cutting is finger but I think that wasn't shown purposefully by the director to throw the audience off. I believe the blood test is 100% reliable and anyone in the room would've seen Mac trying to manipulate the blood test since they are all super paranoid. • Childs drinking Mac’s whiskey at the end with the music dark music beginning to play shows Childs is uncaring of whether Mac is a thing since Childs himself is already infected. The Child-Thing could’ve also been “flexing” to Mac showing that it won and there’s nothing Mac could do about it since Childs has a flamethrower. Mac laughs after Childs drinks the whiskey because he knows that Childs is a Thing. Mac knows he lost (Mac could also have a flamethrower but that's debatable because John Carpenter says the movie is about the end of the world. I don't think Mac kills Childs at the end) • If Mac is the Thing, he would’ve needed to be infected after the blood test but there’s no opportunity for the Thing to have infected him. • If Mac is the Thing, there’s no point of him killing Blair. If the Mac-Thing is killed in the same explosion that killed Blair, the Thing would have essentially killed itself since there would have been no one left that was infected. • The eye-gleam theory isn’t consistent throughout the film, but nevertheless it shows that Childs is the Thing at the end (not reliable evidence imo) • I don’t believe in the Molotov cocktail theory at the end but if it is true, it still indicates that Childs is the Thing. • I also don’t believe in the “no-breath” theory but if it is true, it still indicates that Childs is the Thing. • MacReady loses the game of computer chess, because he's just not that sharp and pours whiskey into the computer, destroying it. Nevertheless, he still lost the game, and destroying the machine gains him nothing. This mirrors the ending, where his plans fail, and he destroys the camp, gaining nothing. The thing still wins in the end.
That was super fun to read, and brought up a couple new points that really tipped me into the Childs-thing camp! Just a totally awesome breakdown. Thanks, brother!
My one refute. The scene doesn't make sense unless Childs is human. Why would a Childs-Thing even walk up to MacReady at the end in the first place? And he's got a flamethrower. Why not torch MacReady? Only a human Childs would behave the way he does in the end scene.
@@jamesnye9372 Maybe because the thing thought that torching MacReady would be less useful than just waiting MacReady to fall from exahustion in order to win a "free extra slot" to infect others in case Child's body fails at the task (to achieve this Childs would infect MacReady like Blair did to Gary). The only fail I would see with this approach is that the thing would be taking an unnecesary risk (getting torched by a flamethrower hidden under MacReady's blanket). If that is the case maybe Child's body was not in good shape at the moment (hunger, cold, exhaustion, flamethrower weight...) to sneak properly to torch MacReady out of risk or he didn't know the exact position of MacReady to do this properly.
Something I've wondered is, why would Childs argue in 1 scene that: a). "Nothing human could have made it back here in this weather" b). "Just let him freeze to death outside"
I think the "freeze to death" was him being more emotional. It was likely meant that they should let it freeze, and leave it or go out later and burn it after it froze to ensure its death, but since Childs tends to speak rashly, he didn't communicate it well.
TheZaius in the 2011 version it's metal that it can't seem to get right and that is placed hours earlier in the thing timeline and child's ear ring dosent change position from the begging of the movie also the end so I think he's human plus he video game he's seen human and dead
I've seen The Thing on VHS, DVD, and Blu and I've NEVER noticed the detail of the open door behind Childes. If we follow your hypothesis the Blair Thing was already hiding in the power room, waited for everyone to leave then snuck up behind Childes. That would also mean he tunneled from the shack outside and into the power room. Blair Thing had hollowed out the space beneath the shack so it's not much of a stretch to say he changed forms and made a tunnel just in case.
Lost count of how many times I've watched the film and ditto, I'd not noticed that before either. :D This movie is like a choccy ice cream tub that just never runs out.
@@collativelearning I believe previous drafts of the scripts made it clear that The Thing was using the tunnels in the storage/generator room to move about the base undetected.
Hi there - I have something you never considered... I worked on the mechanical effects crew on Stage 27 on The Thing on the Universal lot... we were finishing principal photography before the crew went to BC on location and the final day of shooting was the molotov cocktail scene where Mac blows up the compound, room by room... well, all you could smell on that stage was gasoline and I saw all those beautiful arctic jackets hanging on the wall waiting to be blown up and it just seemed a shame to not save one from destruction so I grabbed one... I had it in my closet for 35 years until I starting talking about it with a few fans of the film... I honestly had no idea I grabbed one of Child's jackets... so, it was just a cool keepsake I took from the set... 😁
@@Clay3613 I have pictures of the jacket and I have licensed the jacket to a Thing Collector who displays it at all his events - Joe Hart's ThingNation - it was displayed at the Toronto Cineplex Theater on June 25th, the 40th anniversary of the film's release... cheers!
I always wondered if the Thing was either programed, by it's very DNA, to be hostile, or it was just scared and wanted to get out of there by any means necessary.
That is an interesting open question of not only the original but the prequel too. There is a lot of ways you could interpret things. It's ultimate goal seems to be questionable. In the original it apparently tried to make a space ship of its own. Logically that seems to mean it didn't want to take over the earth, but simply escape back to space. But if all it wanted was escape, it certainly went about it in an nonconstructive way that needlessly made enemies of the humans.
I don't think it would be scared once it assimilated the first human. It would know about humanity and would now be able to communicate peaceful intentions if it wanted to. It obviously didn't have peaceful intentions and was probably driven by a primal drive to assimilate and multiply.
In that nonconstructive manner it would have been acting like a cornered animal, maybe? But then, it does display some sentience and would try and repair the spacecraft to get off planet again. I can see a good debate about this.
(which one do you mean by original?) I think in this movie one of the characters says the ship the Thing was building was likely just something designed to get it somewhere else, some place with more people, away from the camp, probably just a quick hop to McMurdo, or maybe Australia or South America. Thus, do you mean in the B&W movie it was trying to build a proper spaceship? It's been ages since I've seen the earlier B&W film.
Original as in the one discussed in the video (JC's the Thing, not the prequel). I don't really see it using a space craft to just move about the earth when it has perfectly serviceable snow cats and helicopters in the camp (and since Palmer was one of the pilots, it would even know how to fly one). If it can make a space ship from their parts, I'm quite sure it could have restored their function even if we assume a non-assimilated Blair was the one to sabotage them in the first place, although if Rob is right and Blair was assimilated by that point, then it was the thing that sabotaged them, making it even more unlikely it wanted to simply move about the area.
I have one issue with your analysis on why Child's went out after Blair. McCready tells Childs to burn Blair if he comes back without them. So it's possible that Childs thought that Blair had escaped or killed the others. Childs doesn't strike me as a guy whose going to wait around for Blair to assimilate him.
Aye but that happend in 20 seconds, so Blair has to trick Childs into comming out, run his way into the facillity, go to the generator and totally making "gone", not plausible.
lucky dominguez Blair isn't the only thing matter still around, though. Remember in the final form there is dog matter and multiple human skeletons. It's possible that one thing was down destroying the power while another distracted Childs. That distraction may have even been necessary to safely get into the power room in the first place.
The time lapse was roughly 5 or so seconds. Way too little for him to be genuinely seeing Blair-Thing roaming around. It's _possible_ there was something else he saw or that his eyes were playing tricks on him, but I find it suspicious that he just went running off after ghosts in the storm instead of heading to the tool shed to verify if the guys were dead or not, and took way, *way* too long to get back to the camp itself. The last three guys take quite a while blowing up the ship, driving the tractor through the building, tossing Molotov cocktails everywhere and then traveling down to the generator room. Childs wants us (MacReady) to believe that he "got lost in the storm" for what must have been ten or fifteen minutes of explosions, walls being smashed open, and blazing fires? To quote Childs himself, "We ain't buying that."
as much as i love this theory, if you look all the way to the right in the shot where the door to the outside has been left open and childs is gone, you see the navy blue coat, just barely in frame (8:18). which leads me, unfortunately, to believe that its a continuity error.
I think the Blair Thing still attacked Childs in that room but did so in the same manner that it attacked Gary. Carpenter deliberately showed us the Gary death scene as a way to set up for Childs' fate.
I actually think there are 2 blue coats on the wall. In the first shot it kind of looks like there is, but even if we can't see it, doesn't mean it's not already there.
It was always my impression that ripping the clothing makes it happen a bit faster, to avoid ripping clothing makes the thing vulnerable to get caught as it takes longer.
Maybe Childs has OCD and had to rearrange the coats because he did not like the order. Either that order the Continuity Supervisor was on a coffee break.
This is some pretty good points and an interesting analysis, but I still firmly believe that Childs isn’t an imitation. And these are my reasons. 1) Aside from the coats being in different places, there’s no real sign of a struggle. There’s no blood, torn clothes, or anything being out of place or damaged to indicate a struggle between Childs and Blair-Thing. 2) if Childs got assimilated while on guard and replaced his coat, it would just grab the navy blue one and not even touch the other ones. 3) The Thing’s M.O. is to act in secrecy and hide in plain sight. And to not draw attention to itself. Palmer-Thing sold out the Norris head crawling out the door (probably noticed that others were noticing it too) and one of the Things framed MacReady as an imitation so that they could keep suspicion away from them. So with this in mind, if Childs was indeed a Thing, the smartest thing to do would be to stay on guard at the door, not go running into a blizzard and risk being found out. Also, MacReady said if he saw Blair by himself, burn him. He probably saw Blair and thought “he’s alone, I have to burn him, like Mac said.” There is a reason for the real one to go out. 4) He said that he got lost in the blizzard, so the explosion and the fire would be a very good way to help him find his way back. 5) If the Thing wanted to freeze itself again, it wouldn’t go back towards the fire to investigate. It would stay in the blizzard and freeze. There was no reason for it to come back. 6) MacReady and Childs both have been fighting against a shapeshifting alien, each other, on high alert for several days with little to no sleep. At that point, neither one has the energy to fight anymore. So it’s not unreasonable for both of them to just sit down and rest for a bit, and share a drink. 7) MacReady was cold, tired, vulnerable and alone. Childs-Thing had the perfect opportunity to kill him, but doesn’t. Goes against its MO a bit. These are just my observations. The ambiguity of this film allows for both of our opposing points to make sense, even 40 years later. One last thing, I also personally feel that the idea both MacReady and Childs are human but don’t trust each other one bit is a super dark and fitting send off for them. It’s poetic in a way. The monster is destroyed but it’s legacy of paranoia and distrust lingers on. The last survivors found one another, but both of them have never been so alone. Both men have been worn out, unable to keep fighting, left to freeze to death with the one they trusted least. Alien or not bother men were no longer truly human. Their humanity, their goals, dreams, hopes, everything that made them unique individuals have been completely stripped away, reduced to nothing more than a hunk of meat. In the end they were both simply just a thing.
I never took a lot of meaning out of the "it rips through your clothes when it takes you over" line. I thought that it was just morbid speculation by MacReady, trying to understand the beast.
Collative Learning's The Thing analysis videos are TH-cam classics. It's nice to be there when a classic is first made. It's like a little piece of history.
As someone who remembers having email correspondence with badass mr Ager himself back in 2009, fully agreed. I'm glad that he's been active for so long.
The bigger issue implicating Childs is how Mac and friends were busy blowing the living hell out of the base and Childs didn't turn up and ask them what the hell was going on. Given how fiery Childs historically was, it seems unlikely that he'd hang back and only show up after the explosions ceased. And the Childs who appears is very low-key, relative to the other appearances of Childs. That telegraphs (at least to me) that it's Thing-Childs, not actual-Childs. Also, curiously, you see Mac covertly slip the wick off that last Molotov cocktail, before slipping it to Childs. The side eye that Mac gives when he offers the drink to Childs is curious, as well as his chuckling to himself, once Childs takes the drink. It seems that Mac realizes that Childs is a Thing.
Completely agreed. Childs was high-strung and rather aggressive throughout the movie. When he turns up at the fire, he's unnaturally relaxed. Much like how Norris was a little too relaxed at various points before the "heart attack" or how Blair was behaving too calmly when visited again later in the outdoor shack. Though I acknowledge the possibility of exhaustion if he were human, I simply don't believe he was human at that stage. Sharing a drink from an open bottle wouldn't be very wise for the otherwise high-strung Childs. Also, it felt like Childs-thing was pumping Mac for possibly tactical information like, "You the only one that made it?" to which Mac wisely responded evasively. You really wouldn't want the Thing to know for certain you're all alone with it. Anyways, it's such a brilliant movie, and I think the proof is how so many people are still discussing it 30-some years later.
@@angewomon143 how could he? He bailed out into the Strom and the generator shut down a moment later. Nauls,Gary and Macready made the plan for blowing up the base afterwards. Child's was a ploy by the thing to have them follow the Child's thing and run out into the Storm, but Macready didn't fall for it.
The Thing perfectly imitates everything it assimilates. The fact that he’s low key is just that he’s exhausted and has given up, knowing he won’t make it out alive.
That was amazing. The way you explained Blair sneaking up on Childs gave me the chills. I've seen this movie so many times and there will always be more to learn or ponder.
Love this movie. I have a theory. (simple as it may sound) Mac wore a short leather coat and a blue hoodie under it. Child's wore a polar type longer coat with a fur ringed hood. The official movie poster shows a man, (or THING) wearing a long, dark polar coat with a fur ringed hood with light blasting out of it. The answer is in the poster. (Only a guess, but,......) Where do you hide something from someone?? RIGHT UNDER THEIR NOSE!!
The Thing creature did not realize that Wilfurd Brimley aka Blair had 'The Diabetus'. That is, the Brimley/Thing creature had 'The Sugars', and so was less effective in it's efforts to build an escape craft, and to flee the camp.
You know I don't even really care about knowing with 100% accurate precision about these details, I just wanna watch videos talking about The Thing, fucking love this movie
This is one of my all-time favorite movies. I never get enough of hearing about this movie. It is so good. And I didn't hate the prequel and I would even like to see a actual sequel
I'm very happy that it was released on Blu-ray so we can experience it properly. I have to say that you've made a very nice set of videos on this movie, thanks for that!
In my opinion , no way was Childs the thing at the end of the movie. If he was, there wouldn't have been any sit down and chit chat with MacReady. I love that the ending was left open to interpretation however.
@@FearNoSteel No, it is your opinion that Childs was the thing. My opinion is that you are wrong. There is no actual evidence beyond speculation that either of us are right or wrong. That is the beauty of the ending of this movie.
Yea and I reckon the thing was always the most wary of mccready. It knew mccready was gonna be its toughest test. It most likely knew he would’ve had a trick up his sleeve at the end like the flamethrower under the blanket. Probably strapped with some dynamite as well. So if child’s was the thing then it was a senseless risk to approach mccready.
love this video, it's so intriguing that all these years later people are still enjoying debating and putting new ideas and theories forward which leads me onto my next point Mr Ager, thanks for allowing comments on your videos again as it means we have this as platform for all the wild and wonderful ideas and theories to be put forward and discussed by community who I hope will still be talking about this movie in another 20 years. keep up the good work Rob.
Cheers, yeah I had the comments off for a while so I could focus on getting new vids done instead of getting distracted with the comment debates. In hindsight I realized it wasn't the best approach and I just needed to discipline myself to only bother responding to comments for a short while after a new upload then leave it at that.
It seems to me that the white shirt Blair was wearing was the shirt he was wearing under his yellow shirt. You can see it under the collar of his yellow shirt. I know the white shirt has long sleeves, but undershirts often have the sleeves rolled up a little under another shirt. I feel like if the thing had attacked him it would have ruined the undershirt and the suspenders.
@@jerryvan-hees7130 It wasn't Blair. He's just saying that it's likely that Blair killed himself then the Thing copied him afterwards so it didn't leave a mess.
Thank you, yes he was wearing long underwear under the yellow shirt. For those of you that don’t live in places that get cold, you wear long underwear and take off your (formal) outer shirt to prevent sweating if you want to shovel snow, chop wood and of course bust up communication devices to the outside world
Here's something I thought of this morning. Not sure if anyone ever thought about if before or anything but, here it goes. Child's WAS a thing at the end of the movie, Macready was going to get drunk and wait to die, his behavior is very human. No one was watching him, if he was a thing there would be no reason to drink the alcohol. John Carpenter stated on his twitter that of them was a thing, and that it was whiskey in the bottle, so therefore, due to Macready's behavior I conclude Child's was definitely infected.
Carpenter has consistently flip-flopped on his point of whether or not Childs is a Thing, including having said before Childs was not a Thing, and then also implying Childs was a Thing. It's likely that the situation was deliberately made ambiguous and Carpenter didn't have a solid idea if Childs was a Thing or not, so I personally think we should not take Carpenter's word as proof since he is known to flip-flop on this.
I believe it ultimately mattered on what or if any sequel was later planned. Then they would decide later. They left it open. However I'm sure Carpenter knew at some point during the making of the end scene which person he thought should be the Thing for a sequel to happen.
Both times when the camera peers into where Childs is standing and when he's vanished, it angles a bit to the right before panning more to the left, as if JC is trying to say 'hey people, notice how in the first shot, the door behind Childs is closed, and in the second, it is open'. You can tell in the first shot that this door is closed, because there's only a small sliver of light on the ground from under the door coming in from the other room behind where Childs is standing. I just noticed something else that I can't believe I didn't see before, if I'm actually correct with this observation: If you compare the jacket that Childs is wearing while he stands guard to the one hanging behind him, there are subtle differences in their design. The one he's wearing here has a bit of a shine to the material, and the sleeves and bottom hem are kind of 'puffy'. The other jacket is darker blue and has the same fur trimming around the hood, but notice the texture of the material it's constructed from. There is no 'puffiness' around the sleeves or pockets. It is more form-fitting and inflexible. When we see Childs in the last scene, when he comes across MacReady, he certainly appears to be wearing this more rigid, form-fitting jacket. Notice Norris' expression and actions at 7:45. He is looking at Childs' flamethrower, and during Childs' argument with the others appears to be ready to try and yank it out of Childs' hands, but decides not to.
An intricate theory, but there was nothing stopping Childs from incinerating Mac at the end. He was holding the flamethrower and would not have been able to see that Mac was armed. Furthermore, even if Blair had gone for a quiet kill, Childs still would have been armed with a flamethrower, and it would have been difficult to ensure that no incineration occurred. I remember concluding that they were both human and that they both died sitting there suspicious of one another.
Listen to what he asks Mac. You’re the only one that survived? If it’s infected it doesn’t know it it jumps MAC that someone will pop out of the snow with a flamethrower to torch them. It could be a human trap hence why it asks.
I have a friend that was once stationed at a research station in Antarctica, and occasionally playing “Coats and Boots,” as you called it, was apparently one of the “The Thing” inspired pranks they would play on each other occasionally. 🙂
Please keep making vids on the thing. You are the best at what you do man! I can watch your explanations all day and night man. The Thing is one of your most interesting explanations. Maybe the Prequel to The Thing could be reviewed and explained. Even though there isn't too much . There definitely is some stuff that can be talked about. But your absolutely amazing. Thanks for all these amazing videos
There's still one major problem with this (granted, your evidence is still fairly convincing). The Thing, despite being a master of manipulation and subterfuge, is less a living being and more so a virus. What I mean is that it's primary objective is to survive, infected other beings, and eliminate any opposition in its way. So, in the scene where Childs comes up onto Macready, he has the drop on him and it takes Mac several seconds to turn around and react to him. It comes down to if the creature is capable, or even interested in gloating about its apparent victory. I personally don't think so considering such emotional baggage would hamper its ability to survive. No, in my personal opinion, if Childs is the Thing, it wouldn't have wasted the opportunity to, as Palmer said earlier in the film, "Blow him away."
Well that goes into a diff issue. There's a big article on my site arguing that The Thing is actually a representation of evil, veiled under a surface plot of "scientific" rationale. A good example of it's desire to gloat is that it has an opportunity to kill Mac at the end, but chooses to let him see the next dog imitation being formed - like it's announcing its perceived victory.
It's an interesting idea; the creature can replicate a human, including that person's behaviour and mannerisms, but once assimilated, does it actually understand the *meaning* of anything the human normally did or believed anymore? But then this is why I pondered before whether the creature, fully assimilated, is able to tell if another person has only been partially infected or not. One could argue that Childs, if he's not human, didn't attack Mac because he didn't need to, either because Mac wasn't acting as a threat at that point (ie. acting out human behaviour without understanding it, see below) or because it could tell Mac was already partly infected, or soon would be... (human-based confidence that if Mac was still humans, the Childs thing could handle it no problem). That's what I love about this film more than any other, the endless potential for plot speculation. I doubt Carpenter intended that the movie could be perceived to have so many layers, but it's great that new fans keep discovering what I'm sure will be increasingly regarded as a classic over time. Perhaps in ten years' time we'll have a grand Thing conference where fans can debate the details! :D A final thought to consider: imagine you are Childs, and imagine you are still human at that point. Logically, from a strictly survival point of view, surely the most sensible course of action upon locating Mac would be to fry him instantly, ie. not to *take the chance* that Mac was either fully assimilated or possibly only just infected and not changed yet. Childs might discover he was wrong of course, oops, killed Mac and he was still human, but when it comes to raw survival these are always rough choices. Which of course leads on to whether a person is aware at any point that they have been infected, re Blair's hanging rope which he obviously never used. The notion of awareness of what is happening has echoes of Invasion of the Body Snatchers, not falling asleep, etc. I often wondered whether Blair got infected when he was doing the autopsy, the way he poked around with the pencil/eraser, and the fact it kinda looked like the meager gloves he was wearing would not have been enough to prevent at least some blood splatter from landing on him. Ian.
mapesdhs Also your own point about it's survival is actually a contributing factor tho the theory. The thing needs to survive and is counting on mac for that. Child's ask "so how are we gonna survive" and mac says we don't, we freeze, but the thing wants to live and spread and ultimately needs help for that.
Childs Thing wouldn't have to kill MacReady. Either way, it wins. Either it kills him and freezes, or it keeps Mac alive as either potential body mass to add to itself or for food... and _then_ freezes. Everyone keeps forgetting that the Thing _did_ fly to Earth in a flying saucer capable of faster than light travel.
I would have commented this on your latest two website promoting videos but the comments were disabled (and I know why), and I'm sorry if people give you a hard time for asking them to pay a small fee to watch your content. I understand the amount of hours of work you put into these videos and asking a few dollars isn't a lot to provide us with quality entertainment, and I understand you need to make a living. Most people expect infinite hours of entertainment for free and don't think about the effort that goes into videos like yours, so keep up the good work man, I recently purchased your latest thing effects analysis and it's great!
Awesome video, so interesting, not many people pay close attention to details, but they should, that's great writing, and directing. This movie was the most memorable horror movie for me way back then, a truely brilliant work that stands the test of time. One of the greatest movies ever made
This is an old video, and probably someone has mentioned it by now, but I want to say it here: I'm more and more of the opinion that Blair was NOT assimilated by another Thing imitation, but slowly over time by the particulate Thing cells, as he was repeatedly exposed during the autopsies. A small contamination of Thing cells would take longer than a fully human-sized Thing to replicate and absorb an entire organism of trillions of cells. I think he was turned into a Thing by that slow method and thus there was no clothing of his the Thing needed to rip through. It also means that it's not necessarily true that any other Thing snuck out and turned him, as he was already slowly turning Thing.
I like your theory about childs what you showed about him towards the end of the movie is possible, I just saw the "thing" last night and I remember a line Mcgrady said about the "thing" when they were closing in on it he said "it's trying to go hide in the ice again to be discovered by the next group let's heat things up around here!" Which they did so if child's was the thing when he ran out into the cold ❄️, why didn't he stay out there?
There's an issue with your theory though, because once Macready, Nauls, and Gary go back into the base after child's leaves we can see in the background right before they go into the generator room that the coats are how they were earlier. Meaning that the change of coats in the other shot was a continuity error.
I noticed in the shot where the door leading outside is open, you can actually see the navy coat. It's right next to the door the camera enters through. Check 8:32 in the video and look all the way on the right of the frame.
we know other coats have changed though, like the green coat that became 2 green coats. So even though I think this is a continuity error, the coat could have come from anywhere.
lolli pop You don’t see all the coats clearly in the first scene so it’s likely there was another green coat. The coats are probably all messed up because of the thing had to find something to wear
The Thing never needed to attack through the clothes, but could assimilate in numerous ways. Going through the clothes was faster, but also left a lot of evidence. I think Garry was completely absorbed, and added to the biomass, as somebody pointed out earlier. I also think that the final "floor crawler" version of the Thing was its original incarnation from its homeworld, assuming that at least that much of the original Campbell concept remained in the screenplay.
Loving this continued focus on The Thing, probably my favourite film alongside Close Encounters and 2001. Keep up the excellent work dude! Your channel is great!! Btw, many years ago I loaned a friend the movie on VHS. She said she'd watched it, alone, sitting on a low chair. She told me that when Norris' chest bites off Copper's arms, she was so shocked and surprised that she fell off the back of the chair. :D
Yup! People I've talked to over the years said their other big jump is the blood test scene. :D But such clever film making to have that fantastic line from Garry about the couch after the blood scene is over, give the audience a chance to take a collective deep breath, like a coach mopping a boxer's brow during a fight break. It's genius. :D Carpenter controls the tension without treating the viewer like a moron, something which loads of movies do all the time these days. It would be very interesting to see how many people showed up if big cinemas did a special screening of this 1982 edition. I've been to a few such classic screenings, always a great day out.
I'm already hooked on binge watching my favourite films you have analysed (the shining, the thing, T1) In another life you would have made a brilliant police detective great videos great channel
Thanks for the upload. I've bought 5 or 6 of your digital downloads but always appreciate free stuff on this channel. Great stuff as always, will share with friends.
I believe Child’s was the thing bc my theory is, in beginning of the movie Macready was playing a game of chess against the chess wizard and when he lost he gave his alcohol beverage to the computer. At the end of the film Macready offer his bottle of liquor to Child’s saying he became frustrated and tired and lost to the opponent (Thing). Therefore, child’s was the thing.
wouldn't there be uninfected blood left on the floor after Childs was attacked if we are to assume the clothes and boots were moved from a scuffle? or does all the blood converge after assimilation?
It's simply that you will never see a perfect continuity in any movie. A movie is complicated and involves a lot of people. The best film makers are able to fool us into thinking the continuity is perfect in every way, but it's never actually the case, or very rarely.
They employ one person to manage continuity and then everyone in the art department, costume/wardrobe, hair/makeup departments are trained to watch for it. Trained actors will even match minute body motions between takes to enable smoother cutting. A boot being knocked over on the ground is 100% on purpose.
@@-BuddyGuy That doesn't mean it's 100 percent on purpose. Watch youtube videos on movie errors. It's crazy how wild of screw ups that happen in movies. Sometimes they are very large and serious even. It's just too hard to catch everything and sometimes something major even gets through. There are like 50 goofs in The Thing already.
Illegal Aliens I watch the movie 100 times. But I’m saying what would be the reason for Fuchs to kill himself. I think Palmer kill him. Remember someone shadow went past Fuchs and fuchs said who’s there.
@@WHALEDOGS9111 I think the shadow was from Blair. It looks like a similar size and shape to him, and the audio cue is the same as when Blair attacks Garry.
Rob, love your videos and analysis on The Thing. I'm the founder of www.outpost31.com, a fan site for the film that has been around since 2001. I'd like to correct a statement you made; the story takes place over six days, not three. It's easy to lose two full days in passing, and the story crosses past midnight into a sixth day. Please see the "Timeline' section on our website. The late Steve Crawford and I spent countless hours laying out. It's my favorite section along with the 'Maps' page. Again, great work. Maybe one day we can discuss the film together.
Hey, Todd! I apologize if this comment is a year too late, but I would greatly appreciate your personal input on the possibility of Fuchs being assimilated. Your in-depth analysis and cataloguing of the film’s events could help make or break this fringe, but entirely plausible, theory I have developed. I will provide the necessary details and evidence pertaining to this theory, contingent upon your response.
Great ideas as always. I noticed, you can see the door behind Childs is open while he's standing in there too. You can't see the door but you can see the hinge panels. something you could only see if the door was open to reveal them.
there is still a blue coat in that shot, it's on the right side, considering all the coats are there and just in a different spot, i think it was just a error from a stagehand when setting up the scene.
@Fox hound I always laugh at that scene... I actually many years ago edited that line and removed everything except "COUCH!" And than I had that as a text-signal... People hated me...
Have you considered making a model of the camp, and using miniatures to show all movement? Either a physical one, or one made on a program. Maybe having one on your computer that you can spin in all directions is better for transfer to one of your videos; but a physical is more fun ;)
Don't forget that it was that DOOM map that revealed the impossible doors or hallways. Maybe something similar would pop up when you make a model of the camp. Or get someone to make a model of the camp.
I am loving your in-depth analysis of John Carpenter's The Thing. Ever since the day I saw it in theaters (opening day, first in line at my theater) it has been my favorite film and I knew it was destined to be a classic that would withstand the test of time and be talked about for years to come. Question: have a you analyzed or featured a video on who might have killed Fuchs?
Is it possible that Norris was the one wrecking the helicopter after the burning of Bennings' body and not Blair to give the Blair thing more time to finish before destroying the radio room?
Opens up the question of to what extent assimilated humans are able to communicate with each other, and if they do, what they actually say, or are they somehow more like a hive mind (pheremone or other info exchange). Who knows, but speculation is fun. :)
Good thinking! But perhaps the takeover is one that rapidly destroys the mind and assumes the personality of the person. Much like how the flood ravaged captain Keyes mind in the first halo game. Minus taking on the persona of course.
Thing is (ahem), if the mind was wrecked, the creature wouldn't be able to maintain the pretence of normal behaviour. Consider the way Norris, Palmer, etc. are able to continue acting as if they are who they appear to be, without raising suspicion, in a group who by that time would have been very aware of each person's normal behavioural quirks. So, perhaps not the entire mind, but parts of it which allow the Thing to take control; maybe it leaves the memory intact, enough to extrapolate appropriate behaviour and interactions.
The one thing that always bothered me about The Thing. If every part of the organism acts as a whole as indicated in the story, wouldn't the WORST thing to do is explode it? That would send pieces of it in so many places, you couldn't possibly gather it all back up for disposal.
I prefer to think Childs is human in the end, because after all the horror that happened earlier, it was time to have a nice moment. Two buds sharing a drink. Also the 2002 game might confirm Childs humanity, as he is found frozen to death.
Just because he's frozen doesn't mean he's human. He could be a Thing that just fell into hibernation like the original one in the block of ice. Maybe it was weak after the last few confrontations and wanted to take Macready out the easy way after he fell asleep or whatever, but it froze solid before it got the chance.
And he took his yellow shirt off because he was doing physical work (smashing everything with the axe). Pretty normal thing to do when you get too hot.
$100,000,000 dollar question needing a $200,000,000 dollar answer and that mushroom is who I believe to be the only surviving Thing by the movies end....
You cant SEE what happens to Nauls but if you turn up the volume you can HEAR what happens to him....You can hear these Schlllluuuuuing slime like sounds similar to what you hear when Windows sees Bennings assimilated.
Such a genius movie love the attention to small details and the use of facial expressions. I love how Windows looks guilty and wants to speak up, but he knows he can't out of fear of being accused of being the thing.
I really enjoy your analyses of films but after several returns to The THING, I'd love to see your take on other films like Inception, The Fountain, Memento, Coherence, The Prestige, etc. Looking forward to more, either way!
The Thing is capable of learning. Once it overheard the humans discussing ripped clothes, it corrected it's behavior.
I think it also gets faster at replicating humans the longer it's active.
In the prequel when it harpoon'd one of the Norwegians and it seemed like it was taking its time, maybe the "hungrier" it is, the longer the process takes.
I like this interpretation, that the monster is constantly adapting to a species it's unfamiliar with. Potentially the species it has assimilated in the past have all been unintelligent or in circumstances where it didn't need to be secretive and could instead just be aggressive.
However the prequel unfortunately kind of taints this since all the same paranoia occurred in that movie, but I prefer to think that what happened at the Norwegian camp was just an enormous clusterfuck rather than basically more of the slow build paranoia that happened at the American camp. Sort of like what would have happened if the dog-thing had evolved further and then broken out to attack the rest of the camp in the break room at once. That way the creature wouldn't have had the chance to approach things secretly, and instead would have learned to do so over the course of this film. That would explain why it was so overt and aggressive with the dogs, and why the subsequent attacks became more and more secretive with less evidence left behind.
Obviously The Thing is intelligent and capable of planning/learning. It comes on a spaceship for Christ's sake
Yes, but the thing was a captive on the ship wasn’t it..
@@coolbear6441 Judging by the wonky wobbly path the saucer takes towards earth, I'd guess the thing got loose on the ship. I have no idea it's level of intelligence though.
So pretty much, Childs gets infected and assimiliated while on guard, the Childs-Thing then goes out in the snow to attempt to avoid the final showdown, then returns after it notices the outpost burning.
The Childs-Thing sees MacReady, tries to gather information, "you the only one who made it?", gets caught out by foolishly taking a drink from MacReady which the real Childs wouldn't do for fear of infection, at which point MacReady laughs because A. he realizes he has lost as he is too weak to stop the Childs-Thing, checkmate. Or B. he has a hidden flamethrower under his blanket and is about to incinerate him, checkmate.
But he does have a secret flamethrower underneath. It has been said in the script as far as I know. So I do believe that MacReady was smiling, because Childs-Thing fell for the same thing as the computer he played against. Kind of ironic. Because Childs was about to get fried. Just like the computer.
I think if childs was a thing your B would be what happened then Macready would freeze to death, sad ending for a cool story
He laughs because the bottle is filled with gasoline to make molotov cocktails and Childs didn't react
@@andrewewald13 Mac was about to drink from the bottle himself, so that can't be true. Also clicking Like since you're watching in 2019.
@@johnmcnamara8741 There was also some theory that I've heard and read regarding that. Macready might have decided to kill himself since he knows there's no way he'd survive in the cold, anyway so he should just kill himself than suffer longer, before he was interrupted by the Childs thing(I believe he is).
How incredible is this movie that we're still talking & debating on details 36 years later!? Just incredible
Are you seeing this Hollywood? This is how you create a movie. Something that we as an audience STILL talk about 36 years after release. Not this crap that you produce that will be forgotten within a year after release.
Also a testament to how good practical effects age. Just mind boggling. Jurassic Park is the only one up to date to even surpass it.
Oh please, it's not like the Internet was what it's like today decades ago, it's just now everyone can launch a channel about everything
The fucking movie is the only horror movie to actually genuinely give me nightmares and it all came from that damn palmer and Benn assimilation.
@@EbonyPope @EbonyPope Jurassic Park has the most impressive practical effects in terms of size and difficulty to create but I wouldn't say they're better looking aesthetically than every other movie. Although the T-Rex in the rain looked insanely realistic due to the darker lighting
Maybe Carpenter is the Thing and he's trying to frame Childs.
The movie itself on the poster is titled "John Carpenter's The Thing". Maybe *it's* trying to tell us something.
TheKanonHara 😂😂😂
Maybe the Thing is an Equal Opportunity Destroyer.
Tolyngee Damn, even aliens are racist
Hang on, Nauls got assimilated like the others. So there, it's all good.
The biggest mystery to me by far that I've never heard anyone talk about: the thing can obviously replicate humans perfectly including memories and speech, and as soon as it's cover is blown it immediately reverts to its alien animalistic form. But is it truly capable of speaking to humans, if they were to talk to the thing in human form and ask it where it came from or what it wanted would it be able to understand and respond to them? Is it aware of what its saying or to the thing is speech and human language just simply another defense mechanism to help it blend in and hide? To this day that question has been on my mind and it is one of the only things in film history that I am truly dying to know.
Great comment
I assume that conversation will not occur since the alien goes ballistic the moment his cover is blown.
If you watched the prequel however, you can see when kate confronts sam in the snowcat this doesn't happen right away.
Either way is plausible.
Or it would deny it til it was undeniable or it couldn’t hide it anymore
This is something I've considered over the years, as well. To me, the Thing is perfectly capable of comprehending the ramifications of what it's doing as it finds itself within these two small human settlements. However, especially as of the events of the prequel movie, everything it has encountered from the humans is that they want to hurt and exterminate it. As it absorbs and replicates the humans around it, all it has been reading from the human minds is fear, paranoia, and likely a desire to kill 'it'. It is reacting in kind, trying to eliminate all potential threats to itself, using human emotions against the human station members. If the plot of the film was drastically changed, and the Thing was instead questioned by the humans and not had a hole drilled into its body, would the story unfold differently? More than likely it would, but I have a feeling that the end result would be the same. Going just by the 1982 film, it has been shown that it thinks of all other lifeforms as food or a threat. Even though it possesses higher intelligence, it seemingly lacks the same amount of empathy that would cause it to care about anything it's doing or any harm it's causing. The 2011 movie gives an apparent reason why it is so immediately hostile, though I don't even know if this really makes a difference. I don't know if I'd call the Thing evil, per se, but it certainly is a monster, in every regard.
edit: I doubt that the Thing has access to all of the memories of its victims, more likely the events of the past week or so, especially strong surface thoughts. If it could access the deepest memories of its victims, it might think it more worthwhile to just feign a sickness, and try to get transferred to a more populated area, where it could feed and exist more easily. Notice that in both movies, there is never a Q & A session between station members to test if they/it remembers events from long ago, so this concept is never tested. No, the Thing behaves very much in the moment, reacting to the entire situation it found itself in much like if it were a cornered beast, trying to escape.
Used to debate this online, regarding how the Thing assimilates people. I reason that, assuming it isn't only playing mind games, that assimilation is faster if it can violently rip into your body from every available orifice as well as penetrate the skin and outer tissues. Assimilating Gary through his mouth might preserve his clothing and be quieter, less messy, but it might take longer since the alien cells need to diffuse throughout the entire body from a relatively singular point. Perhaps?
I believe that the Thing was learning how to assimilate its prey more efficiently and with less evidence left behind. I also don't think it was going for making a Garry-Thing, but adding Garry's and then Nauls's biomass into its own to create the gigantic Blair-Monster shape.
YES, but still was unable to overcome other things that would expose it, prosthetics, foreign objects adornments like earrings not essential to it's life cycle and ruse!
If it perfectly imitates people's hair style and facial hair, then it can imitate a pierced ear and put in the victim's earring.
BulletTooth504 The Thing is unable to assimilate metal, this has been proven in the prequel and in a few other cases I believe.
@@PsychicViper He didn't say assimilate metal, he said assimilate the pierced ear and then put in the earring.
The way they were able to simulate Blair-Thing's hand fusing with Garry's face is deliciously fucked up.
All the work that must have gone into the effect when Blair was dragging him across the floor and it lasts like one second and is easily missed.
It shows the absolute love and attention to detail that went into this film. This sort of craftsmanship is almost non-existent today.
Rubber prosthetic.
The extra door is to make it easier to load supplies into what appears to be the supply room.
Interesting note, Childs staggers when he leaves the camp... maybe like Bennings' earlier he is not completely done transforming...
Other World Explorers, child's was staggering because it was extremely windy outside. if you had been paying attention, you would have noticed in the scene where McCready,nauls and windows were outside and McCready told windows to go back inside and tell the other's they found Fuchs. it was extremely windy even then. in every scene shot at night, it was always windy outside. As much as viewers want to go along with this ridiculous theory that child's was the thing... He wasn't!
Hayabusa-Rider- 4-Life there are good clues that he was though.
Or was Mac really the Thing at the end? He had his clothes torn up, he set up the people to be tied up closely to each other making it easier for other things to attack them, he could have swapped his blood sample either with an uninfected person or he had the access to fridge to get a pack of blood because the keys were taken by Bennings and was hazy when Garry got them back, he said the Thing wants to freeze now and wait for the rescue team but a person would still try to survive by keeping a building and keeping warm not blowing everywhere up and finally when he hands the bottle to Childs he smiles as he has infected the contents of the bottle. Anyway I love all theories and like to discuss what isn't shown on the film and what I think happens.
@@gr15hnak2 If all three were infected, wouldn't you want them closer to easily burn them all?
@@busalove2013 so child's would just leave the door wide open and run into the Storm? That Makes zero sense. The generator shut down right when he leaves. Blair wasn't out in the storm he was in the generator room. Gary, Nauls and Macready were able to deduce that the Blair Thing was down in the generator room. If you think about it, the thing was probably hoping they would chase Child's into the Storm for them to freeze while Blair thing could continue building and could havest there Frozen bodies later but they went to the generator room. If child's was human he would have ran back inside when the generator shut off cause that means the thing is in the Generator room, not outside.
Childs is the Thing
• Childs didn’t hear Mac's footsteps approaching him and Childs appears to be dozing off and tired indicating Blair could have easily snuck up on Childs. Blair is the only one infected right after the blood test, so Blair is the only one who could've infected Childs.
• There’s no reason Childs needed to guard an empty base. He was left alone for plot reasons. Having Childs be alone gives the Blair-Thing the perfect opportunity to attack Childs.
• After Childs is assimilated by Blair, Childs took the same Navy blue coat off the coat rack (debatable).
• Childs then ran out into the storm without goggles or a hat and survives the cold for the entire final showdown, only appearing at the end of the film. Childs says he “got lost in the storm” indicating the storm and weather was really bad. If Childs was human, he wouldn't have run off into the storm, especially not without a hat or goggles.
• Child's excuse of running outside to confront Blair is clearly a lie because Blair shut off the generator right after Childs runs outside. Childs never saw anyone outside. He ran off because he’s a thing.
• One of the most important aspects of the film is the music and when it plays. The movie starts out with music that is dark with heavy bass. This dark music plays when the dog-thing is on screen, indicating the dog is infected. It plays when Childs drinks from MacReady’s whiskey at the end. Lastly, it plays during the shot of the door Childs was guarding is shown to be open, indicating Childs was assimilated.
• Another use of music is when Blair attacks and assimilates Gary, creepy music begins to play. The same creepy music plays when Fuch sees a figure pass by his room, which means it was most likely Blair who passed by.
• Fuch burned himself because he saw Blair outside and knew Blair was the Thing since Blair should’ve been locked in the tool shed. If Mac was the Thing, Mac would’ve successfully assimilated Fuch because Fuch was talking to him a moment ago and did not suspect Mac to be infected.
• Mac was cleared of being a thing via blood test, which means he wasn’t the one who attacked Fuchs. This also means Mac would be able to relay to the crew of Fuch’s suggestion: do not share drinks or food with each other. During the blood test, it doesn't show Mac cutting is finger but I think that wasn't shown purposefully by the director to throw the audience off. I believe the blood test is 100% reliable and anyone in the room would've seen Mac trying to manipulate the blood test since they are all super paranoid.
• Childs drinking Mac’s whiskey at the end with the music dark music beginning to play shows Childs is uncaring of whether Mac is a thing since Childs himself is already infected. The Child-Thing could’ve also been “flexing” to Mac showing that it won and there’s nothing Mac could do about it since Childs has a flamethrower. Mac laughs after Childs drinks the whiskey because he knows that Childs is a Thing. Mac knows he lost (Mac could also have a flamethrower but that's debatable because John Carpenter says the movie is about the end of the world. I don't think Mac kills Childs at the end)
• If Mac is the Thing, he would’ve needed to be infected after the blood test but there’s no opportunity for the Thing to have infected him.
• If Mac is the Thing, there’s no point of him killing Blair. If the Mac-Thing is killed in the same explosion that killed Blair, the Thing would have essentially killed itself since there would have been no one left that was infected.
• The eye-gleam theory isn’t consistent throughout the film, but nevertheless it shows that Childs is the Thing at the end (not reliable evidence imo)
• I don’t believe in the Molotov cocktail theory at the end but if it is true, it still indicates that Childs is the Thing.
• I also don’t believe in the “no-breath” theory but if it is true, it still indicates that Childs is the Thing.
• MacReady loses the game of computer chess, because he's just not that sharp and pours whiskey into the computer, destroying it. Nevertheless, he still lost the game, and destroying the machine gains him nothing. This mirrors the ending, where his plans fail, and he destroys the camp, gaining nothing. The thing still wins in the end.
Brilliant.
That was super fun to read, and brought up a couple new points that really tipped me into the Childs-thing camp! Just a totally awesome breakdown. Thanks, brother!
My one refute. The scene doesn't make sense unless Childs is human. Why would a Childs-Thing even walk up to MacReady at the end in the first place? And he's got a flamethrower. Why not torch MacReady? Only a human Childs would behave the way he does in the end scene.
Fake
@@jamesnye9372 Maybe because the thing thought that torching MacReady would be less useful than just waiting MacReady to fall from exahustion in order to win a "free extra slot" to infect others in case Child's body fails at the task (to achieve this Childs would infect MacReady like Blair did to Gary).
The only fail I would see with this approach is that the thing would be taking an unnecesary risk (getting torched by a flamethrower hidden under MacReady's blanket).
If that is the case maybe Child's body was not in good shape at the moment (hunger, cold, exhaustion, flamethrower weight...) to sneak properly to torch MacReady out of risk or he didn't know the exact position of MacReady to do this properly.
Something I've wondered is, why would Childs argue in 1 scene that:
a). "Nothing human could have made it back here in this weather"
b). "Just let him freeze to death outside"
They all know it won't "die" in the cold, but they do know it will eventually freeze and stop.
Because he really hates McReady.
I think the "freeze to death" was him being more emotional. It was likely meant that they should let it freeze, and leave it or go out later and burn it after it froze to ensure its death, but since Childs tends to speak rashly, he didn't communicate it well.
Nothing human could have made it back. And Mac made it back. HMMMM???
@@robertjoseph2535 But so did Childs. And Mac was blowing shit up so he had more heat around him.
Childs couldn't have died at the end of the movie. He had to live on to fight Roddy Piper in They Live.
Well MacCready was assimilated and became Ego The Living Planet. ;)
TheZaius Great reference, but maybe childs had a twin.
TheZaius in the 2011 version it's metal that it can't seem to get right and that is placed hours earlier in the thing timeline and child's ear ring dosent change position from the begging of the movie also the end so I think he's human plus he video game he's seen human and dead
Yeah, he had to put the glasses on or he was gonna eat that trash can.
He's dead in a outbuilding in the 2002 PC game The Thing.
I've seen The Thing on VHS, DVD, and Blu and I've NEVER noticed the detail of the open door behind Childes. If we follow your hypothesis the Blair Thing was already hiding in the power room, waited for everyone to leave then snuck up behind Childes. That would also mean he tunneled from the shack outside and into the power room. Blair Thing had hollowed out the space beneath the shack so it's not much of a stretch to say he changed forms and made a tunnel just in case.
Lost count of how many times I've watched the film and ditto, I'd not noticed that before either. :D This movie is like a choccy ice cream tub that just never runs out.
Interesting idea about the tunnelling, thanks.
@@collativelearning I believe previous drafts of the scripts made it clear that The Thing was using the tunnels in the storage/generator room to move about the base undetected.
Hi there - I have something you never considered... I worked on the mechanical effects crew on Stage 27 on The Thing on the Universal lot... we were finishing principal photography before the crew went to BC on location and the final day of shooting was the molotov cocktail scene where Mac blows up the compound, room by room... well, all you could smell on that stage was gasoline and I saw all those beautiful arctic jackets hanging on the wall waiting to be blown up and it just seemed a shame to not save one from destruction so I grabbed one... I had it in my closet for 35 years until I starting talking about it with a few fans of the film... I honestly had no idea I grabbed one of Child's jackets... so, it was just a cool keepsake I took from the set... 😁
You have Twitter or FB to show this off?
@@Clay3613 I have pictures of the jacket and I have licensed the jacket to a Thing Collector who displays it at all his events - Joe Hart's ThingNation - it was displayed at the Toronto Cineplex Theater on June 25th, the 40th anniversary of the film's release... cheers!
Lmao, so you're the cause of all these discussions on continuity decades later. Well done.
@@vonbabasin9544i would like to see youtube video of this for proof
I always wondered if the Thing was either programed, by it's very DNA, to be hostile, or it was just scared and wanted to get out of there by any means necessary.
That is an interesting open question of not only the original but the prequel too. There is a lot of ways you could interpret things. It's ultimate goal seems to be questionable. In the original it apparently tried to make a space ship of its own. Logically that seems to mean it didn't want to take over the earth, but simply escape back to space. But if all it wanted was escape, it certainly went about it in an nonconstructive way that needlessly made enemies of the humans.
I don't think it would be scared once it assimilated the first human. It would know about humanity and would now be able to communicate peaceful intentions if it wanted to. It obviously didn't have peaceful intentions and was probably driven by a primal drive to assimilate and multiply.
In that nonconstructive manner it would have been acting like a cornered animal, maybe? But then, it does display some sentience and would try and repair the spacecraft to get off planet again. I can see a good debate about this.
(which one do you mean by original?)
I think in this movie one of the characters says the ship the Thing was building was likely just something designed to get it somewhere else, some place with more people, away from the camp, probably just a quick hop to McMurdo, or maybe Australia or South America. Thus, do you mean in the B&W movie it was trying to build a proper spaceship? It's been ages since I've seen the earlier B&W film.
Original as in the one discussed in the video (JC's the Thing, not the prequel). I don't really see it using a space craft to just move about the earth when it has perfectly serviceable snow cats and helicopters in the camp (and since Palmer was one of the pilots, it would even know how to fly one). If it can make a space ship from their parts, I'm quite sure it could have restored their function even if we assume a non-assimilated Blair was the one to sabotage them in the first place, although if Rob is right and Blair was assimilated by that point, then it was the thing that sabotaged them, making it even more unlikely it wanted to simply move about the area.
I have one issue with your analysis on why Child's went out after Blair. McCready tells Childs to burn Blair if he comes back without them. So it's possible that Childs thought that Blair had escaped or killed the others. Childs doesn't strike me as a guy whose going to wait around for Blair to assimilate him.
I agree to me it looks like Blair lures Childs out into the storm, so he could get in and take out the generator.
Aye but that happend in 20 seconds, so Blair has to trick Childs into comming out, run his way into the facillity, go to the generator and totally making "gone", not plausible.
lucky dominguez Blair isn't the only thing matter still around, though. Remember in the final form there is dog matter and multiple human skeletons. It's possible that one thing was down destroying the power while another distracted Childs. That distraction may have even been necessary to safely get into the power room in the first place.
You're right he's not...
The time lapse was roughly 5 or so seconds. Way too little for him to be genuinely seeing Blair-Thing roaming around. It's _possible_ there was something else he saw or that his eyes were playing tricks on him, but I find it suspicious that he just went running off after ghosts in the storm instead of heading to the tool shed to verify if the guys were dead or not, and took way, *way* too long to get back to the camp itself. The last three guys take quite a while blowing up the ship, driving the tractor through the building, tossing Molotov cocktails everywhere and then traveling down to the generator room.
Childs wants us (MacReady) to believe that he "got lost in the storm" for what must have been ten or fifteen minutes of explosions, walls being smashed open, and blazing fires? To quote Childs himself, "We ain't buying that."
as much as i love this theory, if you look all the way to the right in the shot where the door to the outside has been left open and childs is gone, you see the navy blue coat, just barely in frame (8:18). which leads me, unfortunately, to believe that its a continuity error.
Good eye!
I think the Blair Thing still attacked Childs in that room but did so in the same manner that it attacked Gary. Carpenter deliberately showed us the Gary death scene as a way to set up for Childs' fate.
Or as a way to communicate Nauls' fate without showing it.
I actually think there are 2 blue coats on the wall. In the first shot it kind of looks like there is, but even if we can't see it, doesn't mean it's not already there.
Even if the coat is there it still supports a struggle in the room followed by someone putting the coats and boots back in a hurry.
7:44 The fact that there are two doors to that storage room also explains how Norris and Nauls snuck up behind MacReady.
when did norris and nauls sneak up behind macready?
@@KanonHara When he was a suspect and he was backing forcing Childs, Palmer and Windows to back off.
There's something hilarious about the thought of censors objecting to Bennings being naked when assimilated.
It was always my impression that ripping the clothing makes it happen a bit faster, to avoid ripping clothing makes the thing vulnerable to get caught as it takes longer.
The more skin contact it can make, the quicker the assimilation.
Maybe Childs has OCD and had to rearrange the coats because he did not like the order. Either that order the Continuity Supervisor was on a coffee break.
"Coffee break? Get him off the coffee break!"
This is some pretty good points and an interesting analysis, but I still firmly believe that Childs isn’t an imitation. And these are my reasons.
1) Aside from the coats being in different places, there’s no real sign of a struggle. There’s no blood, torn clothes, or anything being out of place or damaged to indicate a struggle between Childs and Blair-Thing.
2) if Childs got assimilated while on guard and replaced his coat, it would just grab the navy blue one and not even touch the other ones.
3) The Thing’s M.O. is to act in secrecy and hide in plain sight. And to not draw attention to itself. Palmer-Thing sold out the Norris head crawling out the door (probably noticed that others were noticing it too) and one of the Things framed MacReady as an imitation so that they could keep suspicion away from them. So with this in mind, if Childs was indeed a Thing, the smartest thing to do would be to stay on guard at the door, not go running into a blizzard and risk being found out. Also, MacReady said if he saw Blair by himself, burn him. He probably saw Blair and thought “he’s alone, I have to burn him, like Mac said.” There is a reason for the real one to go out.
4) He said that he got lost in the blizzard, so the explosion and the fire would be a very good way to help him find his way back.
5) If the Thing wanted to freeze itself again, it wouldn’t go back towards the fire to investigate. It would stay in the blizzard and freeze. There was no reason for it to come back.
6) MacReady and Childs both have been fighting against a shapeshifting alien, each other, on high alert for several days with little to no sleep. At that point, neither one has the energy to fight anymore. So it’s not unreasonable for both of them to just sit down and rest for a bit, and share a drink.
7) MacReady was cold, tired, vulnerable and alone. Childs-Thing had the perfect opportunity to kill him, but doesn’t. Goes against its MO a bit.
These are just my observations. The ambiguity of this film allows for both of our opposing points to make sense, even 40 years later.
One last thing, I also personally feel that the idea both MacReady and Childs are human but don’t trust each other one bit is a super dark and fitting send off for them. It’s poetic in a way.
The monster is destroyed but it’s legacy of paranoia and distrust lingers on. The last survivors found one another, but both of them have never been so alone. Both men have been worn out, unable to keep fighting, left to freeze to death with the one they trusted least. Alien or not bother men were no longer truly human. Their humanity, their goals, dreams, hopes, everything that made them unique individuals have been completely stripped away, reduced to nothing more than a hunk of meat. In the end they were both simply just a thing.
Bleak, but logical.
Bleak but logical.
I never took a lot of meaning out of the "it rips through your clothes when it takes you over" line. I thought that it was just morbid speculation by MacReady, trying to understand the beast.
I'm honored to have watched one of your The Thing analysis this early.
Collative Learning's The Thing analysis videos are TH-cam classics. It's nice to be there when a classic is first made. It's like a little piece of history.
As someone who remembers having email correspondence with badass mr Ager himself back in 2009, fully agreed. I'm glad that he's been active for so long.
The bigger issue implicating Childs is how Mac and friends were busy blowing the living hell out of the base and Childs didn't turn up and ask them what the hell was going on. Given how fiery Childs historically was, it seems unlikely that he'd hang back and only show up after the explosions ceased. And the Childs who appears is very low-key, relative to the other appearances of Childs. That telegraphs (at least to me) that it's Thing-Childs, not actual-Childs. Also, curiously, you see Mac covertly slip the wick off that last Molotov cocktail, before slipping it to Childs. The side eye that Mac gives when he offers the drink to Childs is curious, as well as his chuckling to himself, once Childs takes the drink. It seems that Mac realizes that Childs is a Thing.
Completely agreed. Childs was high-strung and rather aggressive throughout the movie. When he turns up at the fire, he's unnaturally relaxed. Much like how Norris was a little too relaxed at various points before the "heart attack" or how Blair was behaving too calmly when visited again later in the outdoor shack. Though I acknowledge the possibility of exhaustion if he were human, I simply don't believe he was human at that stage. Sharing a drink from an open bottle wouldn't be very wise for the otherwise high-strung Childs. Also, it felt like Childs-thing was pumping Mac for possibly tactical information like, "You the only one that made it?" to which Mac wisely responded evasively. You really wouldn't want the Thing to know for certain you're all alone with it.
Anyways, it's such a brilliant movie, and I think the proof is how so many people are still discussing it 30-some years later.
Slackie Onassis i thought childs knew they were blowing it up? I could be wrong though
@@angewomon143 how could he? He bailed out into the Strom and the generator shut down a moment later. Nauls,Gary and Macready made the plan for blowing up the base afterwards. Child's was a ploy by the thing to have them follow the Child's thing and run out into the Storm, but Macready didn't fall for it.
The Thing perfectly imitates everything it assimilates. The fact that he’s low key is just that he’s exhausted and has given up, knowing he won’t make it out alive.
зизиза actually, in the comics that follow after the end of the movie, Childs is proven to be human.
That was amazing. The way you explained Blair sneaking up on Childs gave me the chills. I've seen this movie so many times and there will always be more to learn or ponder.
Love this movie.
I have a theory. (simple as it may sound)
Mac wore a short leather coat and a blue hoodie under it.
Child's wore a polar type longer coat with a fur ringed hood.
The official movie poster shows a man, (or THING) wearing a long, dark polar coat
with a fur ringed hood with light blasting out of it.
The answer is in the poster. (Only a guess, but,......)
Where do you hide something from someone??
RIGHT UNDER THEIR NOSE!!
The Thing creature did not realize that Wilfurd Brimley aka Blair had 'The Diabetus'. That is, the Brimley/Thing creature had 'The Sugars', and so was less effective in it's efforts to build an escape craft, and to flee the camp.
You know I don't even really care about knowing with 100% accurate precision about these details, I just wanna watch videos talking about The Thing, fucking love this movie
This is one of my all-time favorite movies. I never get enough of hearing about this movie. It is so good. And I didn't hate the prequel and I would even like to see a actual sequel
I'm very happy that it was released on Blu-ray so we can experience it properly. I have to say that you've made a very nice set of videos on this movie, thanks for that!
Great work again Rob, keep it up!
This film still has an amazing impact, nearly 37 years on.👌
I think I'm going to draw Blair sneaking up on Childs from that weird extra doorway behind him. Thanks for the inspiration.
Did you do it?
In my opinion , no way was Childs the thing at the end of the movie. If he was, there wouldn't have been any sit down and chit chat with MacReady. I love that the ending was left open to interpretation however.
Child's was the Thing. The Thing knows Macready is in no position to do anything about it. Time is on the side of the Thing.
@@FearNoSteel No, it is your opinion that Childs was the thing. My opinion is that you are wrong. There is no actual evidence beyond speculation that either of us are right or wrong. That is the beauty of the ending of this movie.
Yea and I reckon the thing was always the most wary of mccready. It knew mccready was gonna be its toughest test. It most likely knew he would’ve had a trick up his sleeve at the end like the flamethrower under the blanket. Probably strapped with some dynamite as well. So if child’s was the thing then it was a senseless risk to approach mccready.
J D what if it was trying to hurry up and destroy its last obstacle out of impatience
Please keep doing these analyses. Scene deconstructions, theories....very entertaining. You're very observant.
love this video, it's so intriguing that all these years later people are still enjoying debating and putting new ideas and theories forward which leads me onto my next point Mr Ager, thanks for allowing comments on your videos again as it means we have this as platform for all the wild and wonderful ideas and theories to be put forward and discussed by community who I hope will still be talking about this movie in another 20 years. keep up the good work Rob.
Cheers, yeah I had the comments off for a while so I could focus on getting new vids done instead of getting distracted with the comment debates. In hindsight I realized it wasn't the best approach and I just needed to discipline myself to only bother responding to comments for a short while after a new upload then leave it at that.
It seems to me that the white shirt Blair was wearing was the shirt he was wearing under his yellow shirt. You can see it under the collar of his yellow shirt. I know the white shirt has long sleeves, but undershirts often have the sleeves rolled up a little under another shirt. I feel like if the thing had attacked him it would have ruined the undershirt and the suspenders.
I think Blair killed himself before the Thing got him. It didn't need to violently kill him.
@@toatahu2003 thatz impozzible than who or what attacked Gary if that wasn't blair
@@jerryvan-hees7130 It wasn't Blair. He's just saying that it's likely that Blair killed himself then the Thing copied him afterwards so it didn't leave a mess.
Thank you, yes he was wearing long underwear under the yellow shirt. For those of you that don’t live in places that get cold, you wear long underwear and take off your (formal) outer shirt to prevent sweating if you want to shovel snow, chop wood and of course bust up communication devices to the outside world
Collative, you're a sweetheart for making these, but look at 5:27 on the right side. You can see a whole navy blue coat hanging just barely in frame.
oof
One of my favourites, I really enjoy your analysis.
I absolutely love your in depth videos of The Thing!
Here's something I thought of this morning. Not sure if anyone ever thought about if before or anything but, here it goes.
Child's WAS a thing at the end of the movie, Macready was going to get drunk and wait to die, his behavior is very human. No one was watching him, if he was a thing there would be no reason to drink the alcohol.
John Carpenter stated on his twitter that of them was a thing, and that it was whiskey in the bottle, so therefore, due to Macready's behavior I conclude Child's was definitely infected.
Carpenter has consistently flip-flopped on his point of whether or not Childs is a Thing, including having said before Childs was not a Thing, and then also implying Childs was a Thing. It's likely that the situation was deliberately made ambiguous and Carpenter didn't have a solid idea if Childs was a Thing or not, so I personally think we should not take Carpenter's word as proof since he is known to flip-flop on this.
I believe it ultimately mattered on what or if any sequel was later planned. Then they would decide later. They left it open. However I'm sure Carpenter knew at some point during the making of the end scene which person he thought should be the Thing for a sequel to happen.
Both times when the camera peers into where Childs is standing and when he's vanished, it angles a bit to the right before panning more to the left, as if JC is trying to say 'hey people, notice how in the first shot, the door behind Childs is closed, and in the second, it is open'. You can tell in the first shot that this door is closed, because there's only a small sliver of light on the ground from under the door coming in from the other room behind where Childs is standing.
I just noticed something else that I can't believe I didn't see before, if I'm actually correct with this observation: If you compare the jacket that Childs is wearing while he stands guard to the one hanging behind him, there are subtle differences in their design. The one he's wearing here has a bit of a shine to the material, and the sleeves and bottom hem are kind of 'puffy'. The other jacket is darker blue and has the same fur trimming around the hood, but notice the texture of the material it's constructed from. There is no 'puffiness' around the sleeves or pockets. It is more form-fitting and inflexible. When we see Childs in the last scene, when he comes across MacReady, he certainly appears to be wearing this more rigid, form-fitting jacket.
Notice Norris' expression and actions at 7:45. He is looking at Childs' flamethrower, and during Childs' argument with the others appears to be ready to try and yank it out of Childs' hands, but decides not to.
Wonderful, love these The Thing analysis videos you provide
Awesome video and great analysis
An intricate theory, but there was nothing stopping Childs from incinerating Mac at the end. He was holding the flamethrower and would not have been able to see that Mac was armed. Furthermore, even if Blair had gone for a quiet kill, Childs still would have been armed with a flamethrower, and it would have been difficult to ensure that no incineration occurred. I remember concluding that they were both human and that they both died sitting there suspicious of one another.
Listen to what he asks Mac.
You’re the only one that survived? If it’s infected it doesn’t know it it jumps MAC that someone will pop out of the snow with a flamethrower to torch them. It could be a human trap hence why it asks.
I cannot watch Childs without hearing: Is it the frank or the beans?
Ramirez, is it the frank or the beans?
I have a friend that was once stationed at a research station in Antarctica, and occasionally playing “Coats and Boots,” as you called it, was apparently one of the “The Thing” inspired pranks they would play on each other occasionally. 🙂
Please keep making vids on the thing. You are the best at what you do man! I can watch your explanations all day and night man. The Thing is one of your most interesting explanations. Maybe the Prequel to The Thing could be reviewed and explained. Even though there isn't too much . There definitely is some stuff that can be talked about. But your absolutely amazing. Thanks for all these amazing videos
There's still one major problem with this (granted, your evidence is still fairly convincing). The Thing, despite being a master of manipulation and subterfuge, is less a living being and more so a virus. What I mean is that it's primary objective is to survive, infected other beings, and eliminate any opposition in its way. So, in the scene where Childs comes up onto Macready, he has the drop on him and it takes Mac several seconds to turn around and react to him.
It comes down to if the creature is capable, or even interested in gloating about its apparent victory. I personally don't think so considering such emotional baggage would hamper its ability to survive. No, in my personal opinion, if Childs is the Thing, it wouldn't have wasted the opportunity to, as Palmer said earlier in the film, "Blow him away."
Well that goes into a diff issue. There's a big article on my site arguing that The Thing is actually a representation of evil, veiled under a surface plot of "scientific" rationale. A good example of it's desire to gloat is that it has an opportunity to kill Mac at the end, but chooses to let him see the next dog imitation being formed - like it's announcing its perceived victory.
It's an interesting idea; the creature can replicate a human, including that person's behaviour and mannerisms, but once assimilated, does it actually understand the *meaning* of anything the human normally did or believed anymore? But then this is why I pondered before whether the creature, fully assimilated, is able to tell if another person has only been partially infected or not. One could argue that Childs, if he's not human, didn't attack Mac because he didn't need to, either because Mac wasn't acting as a threat at that point (ie. acting out human behaviour without understanding it, see below) or because it could tell Mac was already partly infected, or soon would be... (human-based confidence that if Mac was still humans, the Childs thing could handle it no problem).
That's what I love about this film more than any other, the endless potential for plot speculation. I doubt Carpenter intended that the movie could be perceived to have so many layers, but it's great that new fans keep discovering what I'm sure will be increasingly regarded as a classic over time. Perhaps in ten years' time we'll have a grand Thing conference where fans can debate the details! :D
A final thought to consider: imagine you are Childs, and imagine you are still human at that point. Logically, from a strictly survival point of view, surely the most sensible course of action upon locating Mac would be to fry him instantly, ie. not to *take the chance* that Mac was either fully assimilated or possibly only just infected and not changed yet. Childs might discover he was wrong of course, oops, killed Mac and he was still human, but when it comes to raw survival these are always rough choices. Which of course leads on to whether a person is aware at any point that they have been infected, re Blair's hanging rope which he obviously never used. The notion of awareness of what is happening has echoes of Invasion of the Body Snatchers, not falling asleep, etc. I often wondered whether Blair got infected when he was doing the autopsy, the way he poked around with the pencil/eraser, and the fact it kinda looked like the meager gloves he was wearing would not have been enough to prevent at least some blood splatter from landing on him.
Ian.
'as Palmer said earlier in the film, "Blow him away."'
mapesdhs Also your own point about it's survival is actually a contributing factor tho the theory. The thing needs to survive and is counting on mac for that. Child's ask "so how are we gonna survive" and mac says we don't, we freeze, but the thing wants to live and spread and ultimately needs help for that.
Childs Thing wouldn't have to kill MacReady. Either way, it wins. Either it kills him and freezes, or it keeps Mac alive as either potential body mass to add to itself or for food... and _then_ freezes.
Everyone keeps forgetting that the Thing _did_ fly to Earth in a flying saucer capable of faster than light travel.
I would have commented this on your latest two website promoting videos but the comments were disabled (and I know why), and I'm sorry if people give you a hard time for asking them to pay a small fee to watch your content. I understand the amount of hours of work you put into these videos and asking a few dollars isn't a lot to provide us with quality entertainment, and I understand you need to make a living. Most people expect infinite hours of entertainment for free and don't think about the effort that goes into videos like yours, so keep up the good work man, I recently purchased your latest thing effects analysis and it's great!
Thank you :)
Awesome video, so interesting, not many people pay close attention to details, but they should, that's great writing, and directing. This movie was the most memorable horror movie for me way back then, a truely brilliant work that stands the test of time. One of the greatest movies ever made
I love your observations. And it does bring out a lot of questions
This is an old video, and probably someone has mentioned it by now, but I want to say it here:
I'm more and more of the opinion that Blair was NOT assimilated by another Thing imitation, but slowly over time by the particulate Thing cells, as he was repeatedly exposed during the autopsies. A small contamination of Thing cells would take longer than a fully human-sized Thing to replicate and absorb an entire organism of trillions of cells. I think he was turned into a Thing by that slow method and thus there was no clothing of his the Thing needed to rip through. It also means that it's not necessarily true that any other Thing snuck out and turned him, as he was already slowly turning Thing.
I like your theory about childs what you showed about him towards the end of the movie is possible, I just saw the "thing" last night and I remember a line Mcgrady said about the "thing" when they were closing in on it he said "it's trying to go hide in the ice again to be discovered by the next group let's heat things up around here!" Which they did so if child's was the thing when he ran out into the cold ❄️, why didn't he stay out there?
Thank you so much for all these videos!
You are making a great explanation, man. I like it so much.
There's an issue with your theory though, because once Macready, Nauls, and Gary go back into the base after child's leaves we can see in the background right before they go into the generator room that the coats are how they were earlier. Meaning that the change of coats in the other shot was a continuity error.
I noticed in the shot where the door leading outside is open, you can actually see the navy coat. It's right next to the door the camera enters through. Check 8:32 in the video and look all the way on the right of the frame.
we know other coats have changed though, like the green coat that became 2 green coats. So even though I think this is a continuity error, the coat could have come from anywhere.
lolli pop
You don’t see all the coats clearly in the first scene so it’s likely there was another green coat. The coats are probably all messed up because of the thing had to find something to wear
Love these vids man. You get me through my days
Outstanding work.
The Thing never needed to attack through the clothes, but could assimilate in numerous ways. Going through the clothes was faster, but also left a lot of evidence. I think Garry was completely absorbed, and added to the biomass, as somebody pointed out earlier. I also think that the final "floor crawler" version of the Thing was its original incarnation from its homeworld, assuming that at least that much of the original Campbell concept remained in the screenplay.
Loving this continued focus on The Thing, probably my favourite film alongside Close Encounters and 2001. Keep up the excellent work dude! Your channel is great!!
Btw, many years ago I loaned a friend the movie on VHS. She said she'd watched it, alone, sitting on a low chair. She told me that when Norris' chest bites off Copper's arms, she was so shocked and surprised that she fell off the back of the chair. :D
Haha, yeah I can't imagine anyone in the world saw that chest split moment coming.
Yup! People I've talked to over the years said their other big jump is the blood test scene. :D But such clever film making to have that fantastic line from Garry about the couch after the blood scene is over, give the audience a chance to take a collective deep breath, like a coach mopping a boxer's brow during a fight break. It's genius. :D Carpenter controls the tension without treating the viewer like a moron, something which loads of movies do all the time these days.
It would be very interesting to see how many people showed up if big cinemas did a special screening of this 1982 edition. I've been to a few such classic screenings, always a great day out.
Nice video ! Great attention to detail
I'm already hooked on binge watching my favourite films you have analysed (the shining, the thing, T1)
In another life you would have made a brilliant police detective
great videos
great channel
Thanks for the upload. I've bought 5 or 6 of your digital downloads but always appreciate free stuff on this channel. Great stuff as always, will share with friends.
I believe Child’s was the thing bc my theory is, in beginning of the movie Macready was playing a game of chess against the chess wizard and when he lost he gave his alcohol beverage to the computer. At the end of the film Macready offer his bottle of liquor to Child’s saying he became frustrated and tired and lost to the opponent (Thing). Therefore, child’s was the thing.
That's a nice twist to put together. I doubt they thought that deeply but it still works whether they did or not.
Wow, and I thought the original Childs infection analysis was brilliant. Amazing analysis of an amazing film. The secrets of The Thing never cease!
Brilliant movie and brilliant review, as always!
wouldn't there be uninfected blood left on the floor after Childs was attacked if we are to assume the clothes and boots were moved from a scuffle? or does all the blood converge after assimilation?
It's simply that you will never see a perfect continuity in any movie. A movie is complicated and involves a lot of people. The best film makers are able to fool us into thinking the continuity is perfect in every way, but it's never actually the case, or very rarely.
They employ one person to manage continuity and then everyone in the art department, costume/wardrobe, hair/makeup departments are trained to watch for it. Trained actors will even match minute body motions between takes to enable smoother cutting. A boot being knocked over on the ground is 100% on purpose.
@@-BuddyGuy That doesn't mean it's 100 percent on purpose. Watch youtube videos on movie errors. It's crazy how wild of screw ups that happen in movies. Sometimes they are very large and serious even. It's just too hard to catch everything and sometimes something major even gets through. There are like 50 goofs in The Thing already.
I like how in depth you think about this !
I love these. Thank You!
God i love this channel
What about Childs' gold tooth? You can see it glimmering in the fire light before he takes a drink.
If it’s just a cap I could see the thing using it just like the headphones to complete the deception
@@bigtravis6159 good catch on the headphones.
great video!
Very interesting analysis
can you do a theory on who attacked Fuchs?
Fuchs killed himself. You can see by the way he's laying, he burned himself. His last moments were extreme agony.
Ston why would Fuchs just kill himself????
@@WHALEDOGS9111 maybe if you watch the movie you'll hear the cast saying why no 10 seconds later.
Illegal Aliens I watch the movie 100 times. But I’m saying what would be the reason for Fuchs to kill himself. I think Palmer kill him. Remember someone shadow went past Fuchs and fuchs said who’s there.
@@WHALEDOGS9111 I think the shadow was from Blair. It looks like a similar size and shape to him, and the audio cue is the same as when Blair attacks Garry.
Rob, love your videos and analysis on The Thing. I'm the founder of www.outpost31.com, a fan site for the film that has been around since 2001. I'd like to correct a statement you made; the story takes place over six days, not three. It's easy to lose two full days in passing, and the story crosses past midnight into a sixth day. Please see the "Timeline' section on our website. The late Steve Crawford and I spent countless hours laying out. It's my favorite section along with the 'Maps' page. Again, great work. Maybe one day we can discuss the film together.
Hey, Todd! I apologize if this comment is a year too late, but I would greatly appreciate your personal input on the possibility of Fuchs being assimilated. Your in-depth analysis and cataloguing of the film’s events could help make or break this fringe, but entirely plausible, theory I have developed. I will provide the necessary details and evidence pertaining to this theory, contingent upon your response.
Great ideas as always.
I noticed, you can see the door behind Childs is open while he's standing in there too. You can't see the door but you can see the hinge panels. something you could only see if the door was open to reveal them.
this is so much more interesting than I anticipated
there is still a blue coat in that shot, it's on the right side, considering all the coats are there and just in a different spot, i think it was just a error from a stagehand when setting up the scene.
It's pure nonsense. Doesn't prove a thing.
Best comment
The CineRanter ha! cheating bitch...
We'll do you last..
@Fox hound I always laugh at that scene... I actually many years ago edited that line and removed everything except "COUCH!" And than I had that as a text-signal... People hated me...
I thought you might say that.. you were the only one who could've gotten to that blood... 😒 we'll do you last...
Great analysis I never paid attention to that door behind childs
Having just seen The Thing (in full, finally) in an anniversary screening, I ran here to see what Rob has to say about it.
Same!
Have you considered making a model of the camp, and using miniatures to show all movement? Either a physical one, or one made on a program. Maybe having one on your computer that you can spin in all directions is better for transfer to one of your videos; but a physical is more fun ;)
Don't forget that it was that DOOM map that revealed the impossible doors or hallways. Maybe something similar would pop up when you make a model of the camp. Or get someone to make a model of the camp.
@@karstenvonfjellheim5321 DOOM map?
@@Johnspartan296 The 1993 smash-hit computer game, DOOM.
@@DropTehBazz Yes, I'm aware of the game. I was asking what map.
I could make it in Lego, with Lego mini figures.
In the comic book it says childs wasn’t assimilated
Right.
If john carpenter didnt write it, it isnt canon to this version of the thing.
I am loving your in-depth analysis of John Carpenter's The Thing. Ever since the day I saw it in theaters (opening day, first in line at my theater) it has been my favorite film and I knew it was destined to be a classic that would withstand the test of time and be talked about for years to come. Question: have a you analyzed or featured a video on who might have killed Fuchs?
it's always good to revisit this movie looking for new clues
Is it possible that Norris was the one wrecking the helicopter after the burning of Bennings' body and not Blair to give the Blair thing more time to finish before destroying the radio room?
Opens up the question of to what extent assimilated humans are able to communicate with each other, and if they do, what they actually say, or are they somehow more like a hive mind (pheremone or other info exchange). Who knows, but speculation is fun. :)
Good thinking! But perhaps the takeover is one that rapidly destroys the mind and assumes the personality of the person. Much like how the flood ravaged captain Keyes mind in the first halo game. Minus taking on the persona of course.
Thing is (ahem), if the mind was wrecked, the creature wouldn't be able to maintain the pretence of normal behaviour. Consider the way Norris, Palmer, etc. are able to continue acting as if they are who they appear to be, without raising suspicion, in a group who by that time would have been very aware of each person's normal behavioural quirks. So, perhaps not the entire mind, but parts of it which allow the Thing to take control; maybe it leaves the memory intact, enough to extrapolate appropriate behaviour and interactions.
I always thought it looked like norris every time I watched the film. Although Blair is wearing the exact same jacket when locked up in the shed.
Anyone else catch WhatCultures video that said Child's was infect because he had no breath?? I redirected people to this channel. Haha.
The one thing that always bothered me about The Thing. If every part of the organism acts as a whole as indicated in the story, wouldn't the WORST thing to do is explode it? That would send pieces of it in so many places, you couldn't possibly gather it all back up for disposal.
Exactly
Great catch with the supply room door and attack on Childs!
I prefer to think Childs is human in the end, because after all the horror that happened earlier, it was time to have a nice moment. Two buds sharing a drink.
Also the 2002 game might confirm Childs humanity, as he is found frozen to death.
but in the blood test scene he is proven human......
w0lm yeah but after that scene he was gone for most of the movie and people thought he was assimilated.
Don't forget Clark was around the Dog and he was human even after his demise....
Just because he's frozen doesn't mean he's human. He could be a Thing that just fell into hibernation like the original one in the block of ice. Maybe it was weak after the last few confrontations and wanted to take Macready out the easy way after he fell asleep or whatever, but it froze solid before it got the chance.
Andrew Whitehead ,that was some huge assumption, you'd literally have to ignore all evidence presented to make that assumption.
3:37 - His sleeves are just rolled up.
And he took his yellow shirt off because he was doing physical work (smashing everything with the axe). Pretty normal thing to do when you get too hot.
Is amazing how even today this movie creates so many speculations and when you watch it on a second view is like to watch it again.
God damn I love your analyses
How do you think what happened to Nauls?
$100,000,000 dollar question needing a $200,000,000 dollar answer and that mushroom is who I believe to be the only surviving Thing by the movies end....
You cant SEE what happens to Nauls but if you turn up the volume you can HEAR what happens to him....You can hear these Schlllluuuuuing slime like sounds similar to what you hear when Windows sees Bennings assimilated.
@@TheTitto I always liked that Nauls' death happened off screen. It's so much more eerie and unsettling that way.
How is the bluray, anyway?
It's excellent. Film looks much more well shot in full glory.
Thanks
Collative Learning is it easier to see who Fuchs sees when the lights go out I personally think it's Blair who makes Fuchs kill him self
Such a genius movie love the attention to small details and the use of facial expressions. I love how Windows looks guilty and wants to speak up, but he knows he can't out of fear of being accused of being the thing.
I really enjoy your analyses of films but after several returns to The THING, I'd love to see your take on other films like Inception, The Fountain, Memento, Coherence, The Prestige, etc. Looking forward to more, either way!