The Thing (1982)/Theories

Related terms:
See also:
Click here for related articles on Fanlore.

In The Thing, many plot threads are set up throughout the course of the story. However, most of these threads are never solved, in order to build tension and contribute to the film's overarching theme of paranoia. In addition, details on the titular Thing, such as its motivations and how its biology works, are often left ambiguous.

The lack of clear answers to the film's mysteries has set up room for fan theories on the causes and outcomes of these situations. Debates on these theories take many forms. The most common form of these debates are fan essays and online and offline discussions. Many online discussions take place on sites such as forums and Reddit. As The Thing is also the subject of academic analysis, there is often overlap between academic and fan debate. Most speculation takes a Watsonian perspective on the film's events, or a blend of Watsonian and Doylist. No definite fan consensus has ever been reached for most theories.

Interpretations of fan theories and the film's events occasionally appear in fan works for The Thing, most commonly fanfiction. Common types of fanworks that include such interpretations include:

• post-canon works
• alternate points of view
• works that take place from the perspective of the Thing

Theories

Consciousness of victims

Consciousness destroyed

A Thing is no longer the person that was being imitated. That person is dead, and an alien imposter is in its place. So, there is no longer awareness coming from the human that once was for it to know or not know. Therefore, if you are sitting there wondering if you are a Thing, you certainly aren't. In the blood test scene, the men themselves appear to doubt their humanity, but they probably weren't operating at peak logical power (several days of no sleep), still didn't know 100% how the alien operated, and were unaware that a Thing had been out consciously scavenging parts and framing people (except for Mac, the victim of a framing, who seemed very confident in who he is). It was also an important dramatic device to keep the tension up in that scene.

Todd Cameron

Consciousness remains

It has been asserted by many that the Thing eliminates the person it overtakes at the time of assimilation. By that I mean that were I to be attacked by the Thing my personal consciousness would be erased, or my “soul” ejected in place of the consciousness of the Thing itself. However it is my belief that if the Thing is to successfully imitate me to perfection then certainly it couldn’t recreate my personality without doing something wrong at some point in time. Something suspicious or unusual for me would certainly occur at some point. Also consider that the Thing I’ve become isn’t a single uniform organism like you or I. Every cell is a whole, an individual animal with a desire to survive at all costs no matter how this might affect the whole. Basically if you are assimilated by the Thing your body politic is no longer a socialist dictatorship, in so much that your mind controls the body entire and the body works towards the good of the whole, but rather a capitalist confederacy, a weak central power surrounded by stronger individual powers that live via the tenets of survival of the fittest.

Schuyler Gray

Ending

Spoiler Warning: This article or section may contain spoilers. If this bothers you, proceed with caution.

One of the most common sources of fan theories and debates is the ending of the film, specifically on whether or not MacReady or Childs may be an instance of the Thing. There are four distinct possibilities:

• Neither are infected
• MacReady is infected, Childs is human
• Childs is infected, MacReady is human
• Both are infected

Various pieces of evidence are cited for all four theories, including:

• The consumption of alcohol
• MacReady's and Childs' actions
• Lack of condensation from Childs' breath
• The blood test

Neither Infected

I've seen this movie over 100 times since I was a Child and I kind of love the ambiguous ending. However, I've never really dwindled on Child's being a thing. We obviously know MacReady wasn't, as he killed Blair and that was all she wrote. But as for Childs, I think this was about the time that Blair was realizing that he had no way out except to kill everyone or freeze them and hibernate. I think the thing knew there was too much at stake to risk taking 10 minutes or so being vulnerable to assimilate Childs and it would've just killed him like it did Gary and Nauls. Also, I believe if Childs really was a thing, he would've recognized MacReady as a great potential threat at the end and burned him while MacReady was unarmed and he had the flamethrower pointed on him... I mean seriously, why wouldn't he?

jt2002b

Just a thought.... mac gives the bottle of alcohol to childs at the end... and childs drinks it. then mac chuckles.

i see this as: alcohol = poison childs successfully drinks poison mac chuckles = relief that childs is not the thing (b/c drank poison voluntarily and his body didn't react like the blood did to heat in the petri dish).

No?

If you wanna go all philosophical with the theory... the opening scene, you see the power of alcohol destroying the computer. Pretty random scene to start out the movie with and end the movie with alcohol. But this part may just be reading into it too much.

slaydemon

When Mac, Gary, and Nauls find that Blair had left the tool shed, and had been working on the space craft, Childs thinks he sees Blair in the storm and goes after him, getting lost. Blair had actually been gone by the end of the blood test, and already tunnelled into the generator room. It took Blair time to get the generator out and move it away, explaining why it took some time for the power to go out after Childs left. Mac, Gary and Nauls go back to the base and blow it up, Blair takes Gary and nauls, and then steals the generator and tries to get Mac, but is blown up by him instead. Mac goes to the rubble and see Childs arrive, then gives him his drink, because he’s pretty sure childs is human.

Evidence:

-Mac is not a thing-

At the UFO Mac was with Norris (who was assimilated all ready) and palmer, who was not assimilated yet. If Palmer had been assimilated, he and Norris would have got Mac as well, but since Palmer wasn’t thingified yet, Mac was ok.

During the blood test Mac is shown to be ok.

The blood test is right before Mac, Gary and Nauls go out.

There are very few times we see Mac alone, a tiny amount of those having a thing attacking him alone.

-Childs is not a thing-

He is wearing the same jacket he was wearing at the door, it’s just covered in snow and orange light from the fire.

Blair would not have time to get Childs if he was occupied with the generator, and Childs was out in the storm.

Childs (if assimilated) could’ve killed Mac with the flamethrower because it didn’t need to be deceptive anymore, because Mac had confirmed he was the only one left. Because he wasn’t assimilated, he didn’t kill Mac.

ZealousidealGur1858

Childs Infected

MacReady is breathing out freezing water vapor breath like a steam engine. Childs is not. He might not even be breathing.

Earlier on, we see at least one partially assimilated thing breathing mist, but it was still of human body temperature, and still had water vapor in its lungs, and still had lungs, probably, because it was still breathing. It didn't have time to reach ambient temperature. It hadn't time to complete assimilation.

Childs had plenty of time to complete assimilation. And plenty of time to cool to the ambient air temperature, where even if he had lungs with water vapor in them, his breath would not mist.

fishrock

Official responses

Both John Carpenter, Kurt Russell, and others involved in the production of The Thing have responded to the popularity of theories from fans, most often in response to speculation regarding the ending of the film. Some specific pieces of evidence have been addressed by official responses. However, responses by those involved in the film's production refuse to confirm or deny any interpretation, due to the film's themes and the intentions of the filmmakers.

It does not have a real happy ending. And it has what a lot of audiences cannot stand, which is an ending that has no real conclusion. It’s ambiguous. Now, I do know, in the end, who the Thing is, but I cannot tell you.

John Carpenter

Further reading

• FAQ page on Outpost31.com