John Carpenter's The Thing

But its also possible he just changed into it. Maybe the old one got wet or sweaty or was too light.

my theory is that they're both the thing.
they're both drinking out of the same bottle.

the bottle, we only see childs drinking on it.
it may be one of the molotov

It doesn't matter if is or not that's not the point

Sounds contrived.

They were both human and then they fucking died end of story

Why write it into the movie, then?
Carpenter was like "Ok we need Childs to have a different jacket at the end because he got sweaty.

you may not like it but the PS2 game is canon, Macready survives

MacReady can't be the thing.

This would have made the ending perfect. Macready burns Childs but we see that he was human after all.
Macready takes a drink and lies back in the snow, resigned to die.

>Childs had to change his socks because his feet were really sweaty hahaah

well then why are they pretending? unless the thing itself cant tell a copy and a human apart witch would be interesting

It's ambiguous, that's the point.

carpenter said one of them is the thing but he wont say witch one

>my theory is that they're both the thing.
That can't be. MacReady is obviously all right, but Child's most likely is not. In any case, they both survived and were rescued.

>The Thing escapes and consumes all of humanity
>But all the Thing copies keep pretending to be human because each one thinks there are still humans left
>Nothing really changes and all the Thing-humans keep going on as if nothing happened, occasionally consuming another Thing thinking it was human

>tfw we will never get movies with this perfect visual + musical aesthetic anymore because the 80's are long gone

>the thing itself cant tell a copy and a human apart
I think this is the case.
Also, I believe a thing disguised as a human, at least in some way, doesn't know that it's a thing.

>thing tries to consume another thing
>realizes its mistake
>oh shit sorry bro my bad
>puts its tentacles away and zips up

Except The Thing would make an effort to at least wear a similar jacket to make it look like nothing happened.
A normal person would grab whatever jacket was nearest if they had to go outside.

*Norwegians

Again, why write it like that
>Childs went to take his jacket but it was gone so he took another one

few things about childs in that last scene
>there isnt a glint in his eye
>no visible breathe yet with macready there is
>pretty sure childs is wearing another jacket compared to the one he was last seen in
>drinks a molotov cocktail (wear would childs get alcohol from)

>>no visible breathe yet with macready there is
The Things have warm breath too.
Like the one that did it wrong

They're both human. They both have lights shining on their eyes.

>why would a movie dedicated to obfuscation and misdirection have an ending that isn't clear cut
May as well ask why the Thing decided to stop bothering to blend in.

at the very least the blood taken from the thing is not thinking about sacrificing itself not to reveal the thing so in a way its possible Mac got infected and copied by the thing early on but he still killed other copies of the thing to save itself. theres a theory that Mac was the thing from early on when he got locked out and other believed he was, and every copy of the thing is out for itself. for me theres too much what ifs in this theory but its interesting

>no visible breathe yet with macready there is
youtube.com/watch?v=w0Z44BIDPPc

>drinks a molotov cocktail
dumb theory. the molotovs from the cellar are a) blown up and b) in different bottles, ones without labels. mac had the liquor and he's about to take a drink from it before he even spots childs approaching. what's actually significant about the liquor is that the sequence mirrors the opening scene in which mac gives the chess computer a drink and calls it a cheating bitch. mac suspects childs (in more than a general way), has perhaps even given up and admitted defeat, but whatever the details the ending is simply deliberately ambiguous, lots of movies do it.

It's deliberately ambiguous.

There's evidence and plenty of valid suspicion that Childs is a Thing.

But the point is MacReady is played out. He gives up. He gives Childs a drink, just like he gave the chess computer a drink in the beginning. He doesn't care anymore.

"If we've got any surprises for one another, I don't think we're in much shape to do anything about it".

If they're both men, they both die as men. If Childs is a Thing? The Thing gets to freeze and wait for a rescue party like it wants. If MacReady is a thing? Same deal.

Reminder this movie was a massive flop.

It got a Razzie too didn't it?

Came here to post this.

as i recall, during the final conflict between mcready and the thing, the thing roars at mcready
mcready responds with 'fuck you too', meaning he must be able to understand what the thing was saying, therefore mcready was a thing all along

Nominated for the worst score (Morricone)

Absolutely disgusting.
The Thing score is fucking amazing

None of them were, the Thing died and Earth is safe, but they will most likely die.

lol, what the hell

the thing lived and started spreading, they live is an unofficial sequel

E.T. fucking crushed this movie, based Spielberg

noe

and then he said none were
he contradicted himself every fucking time he spoke about the movie go fuck yourself

just a prank bro

Theres actual multipke situations where clothes and shit play in important role. Like when they make a camera shot of the jackets near the door where MacReady tried to get in. Ine one shot everything looks alright and in another shot all the Jackets and boots are mixed up (after everyone left the area already with only childs guarding it)

>there isnt a glint in his eye
>no visible breathe yet with macready there is
BECAUSE HE'S SITTING WITH HIS BACK FACING THE FIRE YOU DUMB MOTHERFUCKER

Attached: black.jpg (500x373, 28K)

if i remember right he gives the guy a drink of gasoline or some shit. he was the aliens all along.

>He gives Childs a drink, just like he gave the chess computer a drink in the beginning
you cannot be this fucking stupid

that's fuckin nuts, it's one of the things i remembered and loved the most about it growing up

That's a deliberate parallel. Regardless of whether or not it was meant to be a "game ender" as it was with the computer.

It's even addressed as such in the screenplay.

Fun Fact:

Were you also aware that 2+2 is equal to 4?

He didn't mean that the computer could actually drank you fucking retard. It was a figure of speech

Attached: 6dcfab43b415c56503655b404f0d6117.jpg (1024x1024, 161K)

Carpenter isn't exactly popular in US.

but with the computer he refuses to accept defeat, with childs he seemingly gives up

this is a good point that everyone is ignoring

dont think so, Palmer looks like he already knows whats about to happen with his blood.

youtu.be/m6shktwDwzM

But why his movies tended to just ooze atmosphere & feelings of dread?

This isn't serious, right?

Americans are brainlets. See: Every "The Thing" thread that ever gets posted on Yea Forums

Wow, you mean he looked worried? SO DID WINDOWS SO WINDOWS MUST ALSO BE THE THING BUT HO DID HE PASS THE BLOOD TEST THEN? WTF CARPENTER YOU HACK!
Kys

Windows looks concerned and then sighs with relief.

Palmer's reaction is "Well, here we go"

Difference between Palmer's "It's been a good run" face and worried face.

Attached: palmer.jpg (1216x570, 43K)

good point

Proofs

>"Paulmer, we've got yer blood, Paulmer!"

Attached: hqdefault (3).jpg (480x360, 13K)

Child's was the Thing. Kurt's character switched the bottle of liquor with gasoline, and was watching Child to see if he would drink it and cough it up. He was watching with fear and anticipation as they both sip, and knew that he wasn't coughing it up that the Thing was just sitting there beside him ready to accept his fate and die by the cold or the Thing.
Any of you hoping for a happy ending are brainlets

Keith David literally laughs at how stupid the gasoline theory is.
He also confirms the breath theory is bullshit and you just cant see because hes near the fire
SOURCE: youtube.com/watch?v=OYYiamGQP0Q

Why didnt the thing try to weazel itself out/try to communicate? Maybe the true horror is knowing any word spoken by a Thing is something even the Thing doesnt comprehend and is merely a reflex to imitate human behaviour.

but the thing must be intelligent because most likely he built the spaceship that crashed

I don't like the idea that Childs is a thing, mostly because I want them to come out of this alive after all the shit they've gone through.

When the resuce mission tiurns up the survivors will be arrested.

Expect the thing would know what gasoline would taste like, since you know, he is a perfect copy.

You're not supposed to know. It's an ambiguous ending.

This, Guantanamo for everyone.

I think absolutely a huge part of the horror of this movie, and what gives it rewatch value, is that you never know just how smart The Thing is or isn't.

Was Diabeetus a Thing when he smashed all their communications and got himself put in solitary? Or was he was just losing it and got taken over later?

Was Palmer already a Thing when he pointed out the Norris head scuttling away, thus earning a level of trust? Or was he still human?

Carpenters music for this was kino

What would happen if thing made it to civilstaion??

I think that's a valid interpretation.

this, a perfect copy would have all their memories and knowledge
if the thing copied and attacked the aliens on the ship he'd know how to build the ship for the same reason

Its the one thing I didnt like about the Things charactersation. Would have preferred it if it was are feral incomprehensible being which is as incomprehensable as the mutations it seems to do at random.

Or it killed the being who owned the spacecraft and crashed

You mean Ennio Morricone

I always wondered why the thing didn't just infect people by casually scratching people and just claiming it was an accident, or infecting food, or splitting into a thousand smaller forms.

I can only assume it isn't as devious as a human would be.

Norris was the only one to die to infection outside of an actual attack.

Neither of them was.

All of these theories have been debunked, user. I'm sorry.

but the thing starts building a new ship at some point so its either the original owner of the crashed ship or its intelligent enough to understand how to build it based on the memories of the alien it killed and copied

I would think the ship was stolen from whatever race the thing absorbed.

Reason: the ship is fucking huge, and only one small thing form was using it.

carpenter has confirmed that one of them was the thing. seems most likely it was childs.

>What the fuck was this ending? Was Childs the Thing or not?

They were both Things, and both were unsure of the other.

if one was the thing it would've attacked the other since their alone.

Since the creature is so completely selfish that even a vial of blood will want to escape to live. Its probably the one fatal flaw of the creature that it will do whatever to survive so it can act "irrationally".
I dunno

>send a muslim to antarctica
>the thing get it and copy it
>wallah wackbar BOOM
>the end

This is how you know someone is a moron.
>Was Childs or Macready the thing?
>Did Liam kill the wolf? I wanted to see him fighting wolves.
>I would fly to Thailand and fuck a bunch of hookers then fly back home
>etc

Every time. Every movie.
You can always tell who the retard is.

>>I would fly to Thailand and fuck a bunch of hookers then fly back home
What movie is that user ?

This.
I hate movie retards

The eye gleam thing is bullshit. The cinematographer must be misremembering because this is the scene where this fuck is revealed to be a thing and he has the eye gleam

Attached: 1.jpg (794x663, 52K)

its interesting to think about how self-aware the thing is.for me it would be pretty strange if a vial of blood was fully self conscious, but at the same time the thing shows intelligence and cunning when its a full human copy. maybe the thing's intelligence and self-awareness depends on the creature it copies

Proof?

Right.

It Follows

>dont think about it lol
t. intellectuals

Holy shit you're almost as stupid as stupid as your parents think you are.

You idiot. We the viewers was the Thing.

Attached: 1557964526998.gif (680x510, 146K)

Don't forget my favorite:
>Was it a vision or was it real? Did the storm really happen?

>Cobb was still inside a dream

The 80's was Divine Masculine, today is Divine Feminine.

you want to test your frens,show em pi/related & see how long they last

Attached: Mission to Mars 2000.jpg (1200x1600, 217K)

youre like the dumb kid in kindergarten yelling at others, stop please its cringe

Since the release of Take Shelter, viewers have discussed the meaning of the film's ambiguous ending. In an interview with Creative Screenwriting five years after the release of the film, Nichols reflected, "I had a very strict idea of what the end of Take Shelter was. I know exactly what happens, and it’s fascinating to see people respond to it in their own ways. The beautiful part of storytelling is that you’re not just telling people a story, they’re also telling you something about themselves too through their reactions. In that situation you’re in a conversation with your audience. I really can’t think of a more rewarding or fulfilling result for something you’ve written. It’s active, kinetic, and really humbling."

I can talk to like 10 different people about any film and they will all give the same 'hot take', thinking they are so smart and original. It drives me crazy sometimes.

Sure thing, champ.

At last, after all these years finally, I have become, The Thing.

>It’s specifically designed to be ambiguous. That really riles some people and some people really love it. What’s funny and interesting to me — and not to sound too cocky about it, but I really do think it worked — is everybody talks about the specifics of what’s happening in that scene. And to me, the specifics don’t matter that much. And I’ll explain.
>What is happening, what is going to happen, all that is just fun to talk about. But what’s important to me is that these two people are on the same page and are seeing the same thing. There’s several interpretations of where they’re at. And that’s great. But as long as they’re seeing the same thing I think there is a resolution and the possibility of hope in the film.
>Some people get it, some people don’t. But by God, we’re the ones making independent films here. We’re the only ones that get to do this.

This is the guy who can't get anyone to watch Pulp Fiction with him because he spends the whole going on and on about what was in the briefcase.

>ok so in this one Childs wet himself offscreen and now has to wash and dry his filthy, piss-soaked pants by hand for everyone to see haha and action

Yeah fuck that movie, El Espielbergo lo vuelve a hacer.

Ironman IV

based

shitty prequel took all the mystery out of it. No he wasn't the Thing, cause the Thing can't imitate piercings or teeth filling or similar shit

thanks a lot shitty prequel

Attached: childs-earring.jpg (500x333, 48K)

the prequel and the video game mean literally nothing

the game was lit tho

Yes and it really says more about Razzies than it does about the movie

The whole point and theme of the movie is to make the viewer feel uncertainty and fear of the unknown, the ending reflects this perfectly. You will never know the truth no matter how many theories are there, not even the "It's a parallel to the computer at the start of the movie" one.

There's supposedly clues pointing out to the Thing's hivemind-like behaviour, trying to eliminate the people most likely to discover who it is; before Fuchs dies, you can see the characters who turn out to have been taken over, standing around Fuchs in a way that suggests they're trying to isolate him from the rest.

I've only read this theory somewhere online tho and I haven't watched the movie to actually pay attention to see if it's true yet tho

Yeah the thing is a brilliant movie and had a brilliant score

The director has used some memes to show which characters in the movies were thr thing, their placements in the group and eye shinning. You can clearly see in the scene who has the eye shine and who doesn't

Attached: 1557526342305.jpg (430x292, 67K)

I think the point of the ending is that MacReady is too weak (or something, I don't remember the exact circumstances of the scene) to do anything about it even if he knew Childs was the Thing.
Personally, I choose to believe that neither was the Thing, and they both freeze to death.

anyone who believes the bottle theory is a confirmed retard

'The Things' short story really adds to the thing movie from an alternate perspective. Really makes me want childs to be the thing
clarkesworldmagazine.com/watts_01_10/

>He was just imagining that he was killing all of those yuppies!
Everytime

I like this theory most of all. It's like the jews in sheep's clothing comic edit

they were both directed by john carpenter :^)

Idiot.

The fire is behind him.
Watch a HD version.
No.
That's whiskey. Why would a perfect imitation not recognise the difference between petrol and whiskey?

Kurt Russell was the thing his thumb was in the container when he did the blood test

Would the thing throw flames on to a human or just assimilate it?

There's also two shots of the wardrobe with the second one missing a jacket, it was done on purpose.