MovieChat Forums > The Thing (1982) Discussion > The ending: Childs is the thing

The ending: Childs is the thing


A. MacReady has his flame thrower hidden underneath a cover

B. He hands Childs a bottle and Childs drinks from it. They were filling bottles up with gasoline.
EDIT: So he was about to take a sip of it eh? Ok - nevermind. Scratch that.

C. Carpenter says to pay attention to the "gleam" in a human's eye - i.e. the cpu chess game with MacReady demonstrates this and it is focused on throughout. It carries through to the end.

Very subtle - maybe a little too subtle and too convenient of an outlet to use to point to the answer? It is all perception anyways, right?

reply

Please stop with this 'the bottle has gasoline in it', its nonsense. Also if the Thing is an exact replica of a person it would taste gasoline and react exactly as a human would to drinking gasoline.

reply

Just for you - I think I might stop it. Just for you.

You're welcome.

reply

[deleted]

It's not gasoline. Mac is about to take a sip before child's shows up. The gasoline theory showed up on reddit a few years ago and every 5 cent smart ads has been repeating it ever since

reply

[deleted]

Great avatar by the way

and you're right - upon further viewing - my mistake

I still say the Gleam in the eye is a nice subtle possibility

reply

The case for Childs being assimilated is very simple. We know that Blair was in the engine room, the basement, and there's a camera shot (when Childs is standing guard) that establishes the proximity which would enable Blair to sneak up on him. Childs then runs out, later claiming he thought he saw Blair, but since the power goes out immediately we know Blair could only have been down at the engine room. After the blackout there's a shot back to the room where Childs was, and we see the coats rearranged (remember, the Thing messes up clothes during assimilation). When Childs does show up at the end, he wears a green coat (he's been wearing blue up until that point). You might say it's the same coat and that the lighting makes a difference, but I think the way the color matches the straps on the flamethrower is a strong indication the it's a green coat.

(Green coat)+(abandoning his post)+(lying about it)=Childs is the Thing.

EDIT: also regarding the aftermath, Mac absolutely does not have the flamethrower with him under the blanket. Probably just his gun, and maybe a stick of dynamite.

reply

On blu-ray, I'm not seeing green coat or green straps, I'm seeing brown, plus his coat is covered with soot from the fire. In fact with the golden sepia color tint from the fire, just about everything looks brown.

Plus, where would he have got a green coat? There were 6 coats hanging on the wall when he was in the coat room. Moments later, door open, he's gone, but there is still 6 coats there. Plus, the green coat is still hanging there after he's gone. Are you suggesting he went somewhere else in the facility to grab a green coat?





-------------------------
One of these days I'm going to cut you into little pieces.

reply

Is it the same number of coats? They are rearranged that's for sure. Could just be a production goof but I know one thing for sure, that was not a blue coat at the end.

reply

Is it the same number of coats?
6 coats before, 6 after. And besides the green coats are still there, all other coats are tan color. So he would have had to go somewhere else in the facility to find a green coat. Why? When there's a green coat right there within his reach.
http://www.scifimoviezone.com/imagethething/thething234.jpg

Could just be a production goof
Trying to build a fan fiction theory on a goof kills any chance for your theory to work.

that was not a blue coat at the end.
Understood, but it does not look green either.
http://www.scifimoviezone.com/imagethething/thethingscript525.jpg
That coat and strap are dark brown. Now you can change your theory that he switched from a blue coat to a brown coat, then your theory is back on track.

But then that would mean not only he went looking for a dark brown coat somewhere else in the facility, he also went looking for a brown flame-thrower strap to replace his green strap. You said yourself, "but I think the way the color matches the straps on the flamethrower." So he would have had to go on a brown coat, brown strap hunt. Which of course, would make no sense.

The color of the coat is not a reliable launch point for a fan theory. Watch that scene and name one object that doesn't look various shades of brown......that's due to the golden lighting in that scene.


-------------------------
One of these days I'm going to cut you into little pieces.

reply

You digressed. The color of the coats was one point and unless Carpenter comments on it himself then it makes no difference.

reply

No digression at all, not to mention you're the one asking me about the coats. If you didn't want the proof, you shouldn't have asked for it.

"(Green coat)+(abandoning his post)+(lying about it)=Childs is the Thing. "

The rest of your points are speculation.

"He abandoned his post"....he explained he thought he saw Blair, he was ordered, by Mac, to fry Blair.

"He lied about it."....Says you, no canon confirms he lied. Nothing wrong with you concluding Childs lied in your Thing world, but you can't rubber stamp that belief on everyone else's Thing world.


Therefore, to update your "equation"......

(+Green coat,-coat doesn't look green)
+
(+abandoning his post,-he was following Mac's orders to fry Blair)
+
(+lying about it, -viewer suspicion is not evidence)
=
Score: O. Inconclusive Childs is the Thing.

Sorry, I welcome fan theories, but there has to be some amount of common sense to them.



-------------------------
One of these days I'm going to cut you into little pieces.

reply

1) I've already addressed his "I saw Blair" excuse: "We know that Blair was in the engine room, the basement, and there's a camera shot (when Childs is standing guard) that establishes the proximity which would enable Blair to sneak up on him. Childs then runs out, later claiming he thought he saw Blair, but since the power goes out immediately we know Blair could only have been down at the engine room."

2) Canon? This isn't Star Wars, the movie was done just the one way and in this way, his line comes across as a lie.

3)According to the filmmakers, the whole point is that you're not supposed to know who's who. We speculate for the fun of it. An actual argument is as moot as it gets.

reply

since the power goes out immediately we know Blair could only have been down at the engine room.
Or could not have.


his line comes across as a lie.
Enjoy that belief.....in your Thing world.


We speculate for the fun of it. An actual argument is as moot as it gets.
Wait...... are you seriously suggesting no one's speculation should ever be challenged or questioned? Especially when that person (you) came at me asking for proof?

Is it spoiling "our" fun, or did you really mean to say it was spoiling "your" fun? 





-------------------------
One of these days I'm going to cut you into little pieces.

reply

Oh f-off, you're not even countering with interesting ideas. Every one of your responses is basically "lol no".

reply

Dear buymyvcr,

That wasn't very nice.

you're not even countering with interesting ideas
you're speculation lacks common sense. Don't hate on me because you're an idiot.

Every one of your responses is basically "lol no".

How much detail do you need on the coats? I gave you full explanation and visuals. Sheesh....buy a clue.

I spared you embarrassment by avoiding detail on the "Blair's proximity." But you want to be a douchebag about it, fine.......

* We know that Blair was in the engine room, and there's a camera shot that establishes the proximity which would enable Blair to sneak up on him.

Quite likely BlairThing was in the generator room considering they found the generator missing. But "proximity" means nothing. The viewer doesn't even know if Blair knows Childs is upstairs. You want to use proximity as your argument. Look at Clark's proximity to the dogthing. He was ALONE for over an hour close with the dog. That proximity didn't equate to "automatic attack". Clark died as a human.

* The lights when out immediately after.

The figure ran out the door, THEN the lights went out. The generator was taken, did you see the figure carrying the generator outside? And when the lights went out, how would that put him in the generator room? Are you suggesting he was in the generator room, went upstairs, absorbed Childs, ran back down to the generator room I guess apparently the light switch is there? But he ran so fast back up stairs, we were able to see him outside before the lightbulbs went dark? He can run faster than the speed of light?

Or are you saying there is now a Blair-Thing and a Childs-Thing? Now Blair Thing absorbed Garry. Any particular reason Blair-Thing chose to absorb Garry, but chose to allow Childs to be a separate Thing in your fan fiction?

Did you think PalmerThing was trying to absorb Windows? Or was he trying to make him his little alien brother? He got chased out before absorbing him.

Did you think split face was trying to absorb Bennings or make him a little split face brother? Again he too got interrupted and escaped out the window.

Did you think the dogthing was trying to absorb the other dogs or make more dogthings? (BLAIR: "When this thing attacked our dogs, it tried to digest them. Aborb them.")

But let's assume for now Blair-Thing was "feeling generous" and allowed Childs to be his own alien. Did you ever see the aliens working together as a team? The novel is more clear on this - they will just as easily kill their own as they would a human.

With BlairThing now busy in the basement, if Childs was a thing, what was it's plan? To just go run around in the snowstorm? The point in that? If Childs was indeed attacked by Blair Thing, I want to see even a small hint Childs was attacked.

But a "coat goof" and "proximity" does not automatically equate to "Childs was attacked by Blair, so therefore he is a Thing!"

Your fan fiction contains zero common sense.


Kind Regards,
SFMZone
Destroyer of Bad Fan Fiction




-------------------------
One of these days I'm going to cut you into little pieces.

reply

[deleted]

SFMZone, I took you for an accidental nuisance, but it turns out you are quite the intentional scoundrel. Here's why you're wrong (I'll be brief, since I actually aim to be efficient with words):

1) The proximity is intentionally established by the camera shots.
2) He can subdue people quickly, the final showdown establishes it.
3) If so then he subdues him rather quickly, returns to the engine room, freaky-Childs runs away and transforms by the time the base explodes. There was plenty of time for that.
4)This makes sense because in order for the Thing to ensure survival, it would want a separate body away from the base and maximize the odds in its favor. And when Mac survives it returns to examine him, for many possible reasons.
5)Do you know what fan fiction is? Is English your second or third language? Or do you simply post drunk? Mac and Childs having sex in the snow would be fan fiction. Trying to put together pieces of the puzzle is part of the fun for the movie. It was made so that people like myself, could school people like you, with the aforementioned details.
6) If you'd like to counter, that you should counter with "here's a good reason why Childs is NOT the Thing". Simply negating points I've made, that are meant to be speculation, are not feats of great intelligence.
7) I hope you appreciate how well organized this response has been. It was tailored specifically for your level of understanding.

reply

LOL at how mad you got.



-------------------------
One of these days I'm going to cut you into little pieces.

reply

lmfao you couldn't hack it in the intellectual level so you're gonna claim a win on the emotional one? Losers are always looking to revise what happened

reply

No sweet pea, I was fixing a pot of coffee. You're not my highest priority, so calm down, here we go.

Okay, I tried responding without snorting with laughter.......

1) The proximity is intentionally established by the camera shots.
I see. The same was shown with a slow glide in empty rooms, what did proximity play a role there? I mean, they were very purposeful long camera pans and you seem to think that automatically equates to some proximity advantage. So what was it?

2) He can subdue people quickly, the final showdown establishes it.
Okay....thanks for that, Captain Obvious.

3) If so then he subdues him rather quickly, returns to the engine room, freaky-Childs runs away and transforms by the time the base explodes. There was plenty of time for that.
I see.......... so Childs Thing knows Mac and gang were going to blow up the camp..........before they even decided to blow up the camp and that's why the childs alien booked out of there and into the snowstorm to save the species....got it.  (Never seen fan fiction written by Wylie Coyote before)

4)This makes sense because in order for the Thing to ensure survival, it would want a separate body away from the base and maximize the odds in its favor.
Of course! Since according to your daft logic above, this species can predict the future! It knew the base was going to explode before the humans decided it! 

5) Do you know what fan fiction is?
No! Please tell us! Form a half circle boys and girls. This is going to be good, I can tell! 

Is English your second or third language?
Sólo un idiota pediría eso después de hablar con esa persona en inglés previamente

Or do you simply post drunk?
People showing you inconsistencies in your laughable fan fiction does not equate to posting drunk. I think we get it. It hurts your widdle feelwings when someone pokes holes in your fan fiction.

Trying to put together pieces of the puzzle is part of the fun for the movie.
But you have to have all the puzzle pieces to complete the puzzle. Carpenter intentionally removed a few pieces. You will neeeeeeeeeeeever complete it.

It was made so that people like myself, could school people like you, with the aforementioned details.
The only thing you've schooled me in is bloated ego fools like you fall too much in love with your own fan fiction.

6) If you'd like to counter, that you should counter with "here's a good reason why Childs is NOT the Thing". Simply negating points I've made, that are meant to be speculation, are not feats of great intelligence.
I'll pass nor did I ever once claim Childs is NOT the Thing. I have nothing concrete he is human. But if I'm going to entertain that he is an alien, I prefer more substantial common sense than your whining, "Liar, liar, Childs pants on fire!"

7) I hope you appreciate how well organized this response has been. It was tailored specifically for your level of understanding.
Oh, he mad.



-------------------------
One of these days I'm going to cut you into little pieces.

reply

watch the very end..the hint is there

reply

The first time that MacReady laughs in that scene is when Childs attempts to explain why he was missing. Childs doesn't stop to ask MacReady why he's laughing because the thing isn't familiar with laughter, and just assumes that he's coughing or groaning.

reply

"Carpenter says to pay attention to the "gleam" in a human's eye - i.e. the cpu chess game with MacReady demonstrates this and it is focused on throughout. It carries through to the end."

So, they were all Nexus 6 replicants the whole time?

reply

I love this movie and it has very good rewatchability factor going for it

reply