Discussion of The Thing's Themes.

[Flexo]

I know there are plenty of other The Thing threads, but I felt this one deserved its own spot since it's specifically talking about the movie's themes.

I believe the movie is based on irony and unification.

Just think about it; the characters that have the entire situation figured end up dying.

Blair, who is the first to realize that they can't make contact with the rest of the world or they'll let the thing escape, ends up becoming one of the things. Besides that, the Blair-thing destroys the generator, guaranteeing that none of the group escapes, completing the job he started as a human.

Windows, on the other hand, was right about everything. He wanted to burn the specimens found at the Norwegian camp, suspected that Norris was a thing, and trusted MacReady. (The specimen killed Bennings, Norris was possibly the first thing, and MacReady was the only man that could've stopped the thing.) The funny part is, no one listens to Windows because he never made his voice heard. He acted like a wimp and let others over rule him. (You'll notice that during the entire movie, he's bossed around. The only time he acts out, he's forced back into obedience at gun point.) Even better, his lack of a spine led to his death when he was too frightened to burn Palmer. (Another irony; Palmer acted as if he thought Windows was the thing.)

As for unification, the humans only survive due to their efforts to work together, and the thing fails because it tried to act alone. To minimize their chances of getting caught, they would treat other members of their race as enemies. (Like when Palmer points of the moving head of Norris.)

The humans act to protect the species as a whole, though. MacReady, Nauls, and Gary wire the camp for explosives, knowing that they won't survive if they detonate it. Yet they still go through with it to protect the rest of humanity.

Some of their efforts to protect the group end up tearing them a part and giving the thing a powerful tool. The thing uses suspicion to alienate them all and to not pay attention to the right clues.

Irony comes from the fact that the group is led by the most anti-social man in the camp.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Oh. I thought you were talking about musical themes, in which case I was going to say, "Get a DX-7. Locate low E. play it like a heartbeat. You are now John Carpenter."

 

[A.J.Rimmer(BSC)]

I know there are plenty of other The Thing threads, but I felt this one deserved its own spot since it's specifically talking about the movie's themes.

I believe the movie is based on irony and unification.

Just think about it; the characters that have the entire situation figured end up dying.

Blair, who is the first to realize that they can't make contact with the rest of the world or they'll let the thing escape, ends up becoming one of the things. Besides that, the Blair-thing destroys the generator, guaranteeing that none of the group escapes, completing the job he started as a human.

Windows, on the other hand, was right about everything. He wanted to burn the specimens found at the Norwegian camp, suspected that Norris was a thing, and trusted MacReady. (The specimen killed Bennings, Norris was possibly the first thing, and MacReady was the only man that could've stopped the thing.) The funny part is, no one listens to Windows because he never made his voice heard. He acted like a wimp and let others over rule him. (You'll notice that during the entire movie, he's bossed around. The only time he acts out, he's forced back into obedience at gun point.) Even better, his lack of a spine led to his death when he was too frightened to burn Palmer. (Another irony; Palmer acted as if he thought Windows was the thing.)

As for unification, the humans only survive due to their efforts to work together, and the thing fails because it tried to act alone. To minimize their chances of getting caught, they would treat other members of their race as enemies. (Like when Palmer points of the moving head of Norris.)

The humans act to protect the species as a whole, though. MacReady, Nauls, and Gary wire the camp for explosives, knowing that they won't survive if they detonate it. Yet they still go through with it to protect the rest of humanity.

Some of their efforts to protect the group end up tearing them a part and giving the thing a powerful tool. The thing uses suspicion to alienate them all and to not pay attention to the right clues.

Irony comes from the fact that the group is led by the most anti-social man in the camp.

Nice, I love this film but never looked that deep into it. Always loved the fact that the anti social one had all the respect and led the team.

Got the game, but never been on it. Can't wait.

 

[DOG LIPS]

This movie is in my top 5 greatest movies of all time. If it had more Bruce Campbell, it'd be top 3. It's creepy, paranoid, and the effects are naaassstty. The themes rocked, and I really liked how, no matter what happened, it was a hopeless situation. The true irony also came from the fact that the badass anti-social pilot not only became the leader/hero, he had the greatest hat of all time.

 

[Catman]

For once I agree with Dog Lips. This was an awesome movie. Its probably my favorite John Carpenter movie. Too bad it was the movie that ALMOST destroyed Carpenter's career. Well...Carpenter has no career now...but it could have been destroyed before he made classic films like Starman.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

The hat boosts it up from a great movie to a genius movie.

But seriously, the scene where they're tied to the chairs getting their blood tested is one of the best scenes ever filmed in any genre.

It's up there with any Scorsese or Kubrick or Coppola or Lynch or, anybody.
So genius and perfect.

 

[Flexo]

Who thinks Childs was human at the end?

I always did, but after the last viewing, I started to have some doubts.

Just his lines make him seem suspicious, and the fact that he survived an hour or two wandering around in the storm without looking too rough.

 

[El Santo]

Bruce Campbell in JC's The Thing = Ruined movie.

As it is, it's one of the best movies ever created.

 

[DOG LIPS]

Who thinks Childs was human at the end?

I always did, but after the last viewing, I started to have some doubts.

Just his lines make him seem suspicious, and the fact that he survived an hour or two wandering around in the storm without looking too rough.

Have you played the game? It's a "direct sequel" to the movie and:

Spoiler

Childes' body is in the snow, deadeded.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Who thinks Childs was human at the end?

I always did, but after the last viewing, I started to have some doubts.

Just his lines make him seem suspicious, and the fact that he survived an hour or two wandering around in the storm without looking too rough.

Neither of them are the Thing or not the Thing. It's deliberately open-ended. Even Carpenter didn't decide on one of them.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Have you played the game? It's a "direct sequel" to the movie and:

Spoiler

Childes' body is in the snow, deadeded.

I couldn't believe the game was for Playstation 2.
The graphics were...unrewarding.
It behooved me to get it used.
In a post-Resident Evil 4 world, there's no excuse.

 

[Flexo]

Neither of them are the Thing or not the Thing. It's deliberately open-ended. Even Carpenter didn't decide on one of them.

I know that, but I'm asking for personal opinion.

 

[black_dust]

The effects in that kick ass, i really enjoy watching the thing i never grow tired of it Russel is the man

 

[Kevin Roegele]

I know that, but I'm asking for personal opinion.

Of course that is the intent of the ending for first time viewers - 'guess which one is the monster.' But once you are aware there is no intention from the scriptwriter, the director or the actors, how can there be personal opinion? It's their story and they didn't decide. What ever you decide, there can be no evidence to back it up. It's essentially adding your own ending.

 

[Flexo]

I don't get what you're saying.

I understand that they don't have an opinion on the end and that it's left open, but it was left open for the viewer to make up their own ending.

That's what I'm curious about. To me, I think that they're both human, simply because it gives MacReady's actions validation. However, I can see why others feel differently.

Childs dialogue makes him seem suspicious.

"You the only one?"

If Childs was a thing, he wouldn't want to burn MacReady and have other survivors ambush him. When MacReady says he's not the only one, it creates enough doubt that Childs decides not to kill him. (That is, if you buy into the "Childs is an alien" idea.)

I really don't understand why you don't believe that each person can have an interpretation.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

I don't get what you're saying.

I understand that they don't have an opinion on the end and that it's left open, but it was left open for the viewer to make up their own ending.

That's what I'm curious about. To me, I think that they're both human, simply because it gives MacReady's actions validation. However, I can see why others feel differently.

Childs dialogue makes him seem suspicious.

"You the only one?"

If Childs was a thing, he wouldn't want to burn MacReady and have other survivors ambush him. When MacReady says he's not the only one, it creates enough doubt that Childs decides not to kill him. (That is, if you buy into the "Childs is an alien" idea.)

I really don't understand why you don't believe that each person can have an interpretation.

I don't understand myself either. Really, I think you are right but I can't understand your thinking yet.

The ending is, "One of them might be the creature." That's it, that's all she wrote. If you think, "Childs is the creature," the film doesn't back that up. Any evidence you find is there specifically to make you wonder.

It's like looking at a painting of a field. You say, "If this painting was 10cm longer, I think there would be a tree here." Doesn't matter, the painting isn't 10cm longer, there is no tree.

On a different level, the paranoia is the whole point of the ambiguous ending. To infer either man is the creature is almost beside the point. Lack of trust, suspision, that's what the film is all about and that's the perfect ending.

 

[livrule]

I don't understand myself either. Really, I think you are right but I can't understand your thinking yet.

The ending is, "One of them might be the creature." That's it, that's all she wrote. If you think, "Childs is the creature," the film doesn't back that up. Any evidence you find is there specifically to make you wonder.

It's like looking at a painting of a field. You say, "If this painting was 10cm longer, I think there would be a tree here." Doesn't matter, the painting isn't 10cm longer, there is no tree.

On a different level, the paranoia is the whole point of the ambiguous ending. To infer either man is the creature is almost beside the point. Lack of trust, suspision, that's what the film is all about and that's the perfect ending.

mmmmmm, good point.

Its a wonderful movie and just shows what is possible when you cast the RIGHT actors ...

In my humble opinion I think they were both still human come the end, and they are doomed to simply sit there and slowly freeze to death because they just CANNOT trust each other after what has happened.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

mmmmmm, good point.

Its a wonderful movie and just shows what is possible when you cast the RIGHT actors ...

In my humble opinion I think they were both still human come the end, and they are doomed to simply sit there and slowly freeze to death because they just CANNOT trust each other after what has happened.

That would be perfect except the viewer themself should be part of the paranoia, not knowing who is who and not trusting either, as with the existing ending.