Childs has to be The Thing at the end..
-
hafabee — 9 years ago(October 11, 2016 09:56 PM)
Childs is not a Thing because it's difficult to see his breath;
- This doesn't mean anything. His breath is simply difficult to see, but even if he is a Thing he's a perfect copy of Childs, and therefore anything Childs' body would normally do, its would do. Including having warm breath.
Childs is not a Thing because he wears an earring; - Ignoring the fact that it's a retcon from the remake/reboot/prequel of a few years back that states the Thing cannot imitate inorganic material, and was not present in this original movie, Childs, if he was a Thing, could have and would have easily reinserted his earring after it had assimilated him. The Thing is capable of dressing itself in the same manner as its host would.
Childs is a Thing because of the following;
#1) He's wearing a different coat at the end of the movie than the last time we saw him. We know the Thing rips through your clothing when it takes you over and thus Childs' sudden, and otherwise needless change of apparel suggests he has been absorbed by the alien entity, and it got itself a new coat after it tore through his original one.
#2) A rather damning shot. I actually put in my DVD copy of
The Thing
to find the exact time of this shot just now heh heh, so you can all see it for yourselves (if you own a copy, if not don't worry I'll describe the shot in detail here), and it's at the 1 hour, 29 minutes and 17 second mark.
The shot begins looking down the vacant hallway of the Outpost, then pans down to the stairway and doorway that leads to the generator room, then pans back up and moves over to the cloak room where Childs was suppose to be waiting for the others to come back from checking Blair's shack.
Except Childs isn't there.
The room is empty.
The shot heavily suggests that Childs was dragged down to the generator room, where Blair-Thing is revealed to be later. The slow pan down to the generator doorway, and then back up to reveal that Childs is missing from his post suggests that he's down in the generator room below, with Blair. And he was at his post just a few minutes before, at 1:26:40. But by 1:29:17, he's gone. And it's nice and convenient for the Thing to grab a new jacket for him from the cloak room Childs was suppose to be guarding, as we see several unused coats, pants and boots sitting right there.
That shot was completely intentional, although it's an easy one to dismiss at first glance because it seems meaningless, but it's not, there is definitely a reason why John Carpenter chose to put that shot in there, right after showing Childs in the exact same shot present at his post just a few minutes before. Blair-Thing came up behind him while he was watching his friends out the window, grabbed him, and dragged him down below to the generator room to be assimilated into the beast.
- This doesn't mean anything. His breath is simply difficult to see, but even if he is a Thing he's a perfect copy of Childs, and therefore anything Childs' body would normally do, its would do. Including having warm breath.
-
DrAndreiSmyslov — 9 years ago(October 11, 2016 11:21 PM)
Not a bad theory, but it's possible you're basing all that on a continuity error, hence not intentional.
In shot 1: Childs (looking out the window) is wearing a medium blue coat. There are a total of 6 coats hanging on the wall shown on screen.
In shot 2: Childs missing. There are still 6 coats, if Childs is now a Thing, grabbed one of those coats, wouldn't there only be 5 coats left? Plus, now the coats are a mixture of different colors, likely because when the film crew re-staged it with props they didn't place everything back accurately. There's other indicators it's a continuity error, so I can't get on board it was intentional, but you make a good case.One of these days I'm going to cut you into little pieces.
-
hafabee — 9 years ago(October 12, 2016 12:19 PM)
Well I don't think that Childs was done being assimilated yet by the time shot #2 comes up, I think that shot reveals that Childs is down in the generator room at that point in the story, and probably being imitated at that very moment.
I do think the shot is intentional, I can see no other reason why they would have chosen to include that shot, in particular the ominous pan down to the stairway leading to the generator room, unless it was to suggest that Childs is down there. I think he was carried off right before by Blair-Thing, and that he got fresh clothing later on, likely from that cloak room, to replace the garments that the Thing would have torn through when it attacked him.
As for my first point, it could have been a continuity error yes. They may have accidentally given Keith David a wrong coloured winter coat when they shot the final scene. They did do a pretty good job of clothing continuity throughout the rest of the film though. I think it's more likely, and more fun, to believe it was an intentional choice by John Carpenter! We'll never know if Childs (or Mac, for that matter) was a Thing or not at the end of the movie, but I'd say the slow pan down to the generator room hints at something sinister. -
DrAndreiSmyslov — 9 years ago(October 12, 2016 02:43 PM)
Understood, but for it to be intentional, it would require shot 1 (with Childs) and shot 2 (Child missing) to be identical minus one coat. And those two scenes are completely different. Here's a more detailed break down..
In shot 1:
1 - There are a total of 6 coats hanging on the wall shown on screen.
2 - The coat colors - 1 deep blue, 1 green, 1 light olive, 2 cream color, 1 black (can barely be seen stuffed between the two cream colored coats).
3 - 3 pairs of boots - one pair in the room corner, toes pointed out; 2 pairs shoved under the bench, toes pointed in.
4 - Coats are placed on various hangers.
5 - Childs (looking out the window) is wearing a medium blue coat.
In shot 2:
1 - There are still 6 coats, if Childs is now a Thing, grabbed one of those coats, wouldn't there only be 5 coats left? Plus, now the coats are a mixture of different colors.
2 - Now there are 2 green coats. Where did the second green coat come from?
3 - The other four coats are all now cream colored. What happen to the black, deep blue, and olive color coats? Well, Childs-Thing might be wearing one of them, though that doesn't account for the other two colored coats mysteriously disappearingbut lets go on for now
4 - The coats are now rearranged somewhat, on different hangers. A cream colored coat is now hanging where the deep blue coat was. The newly appeared second green coat is now hanging where the olive coat was.
5 - The 3 pairs of boots - all three pairs are now shoved under the bench.but this time all of them with toes pointed out.
So the only way that theory would hold up is if this event happen:
Blair-Thing ambushes Childs and assimilates him. The room shows no sign of struggle. Perhaps a surprise ambush that renders Childs completely helpless. I will give some leeway there that Childs had no chance of fighting back for benefit of doubt.
But then this is what would have to happen next -
1 - Blair-Thing (or Child-Thing, whatever) takes the time to dispose of Child's medium blue coat.assuming it was shredded. Or at least it's now somewhere off screen.
2 - Grab the black coat, the deep blue coat, and the olive coat, hand carry them somewhere else in the facility where it could find 2 cream colored and another green colored, coats. Bring those coats back into the room, and rehang them. This is the only way for the colored coats mentioned for shot #2 could be there.
There was no one else there that could have possibly did all that rearranging and replacing of coats. Why would the alien bother doing all of that?
3 - Blair/Child-Thing then takes the boots and lines them up under the bench and makes sure the toes are now pointing out. Againwhy would it bother with such an odd task?
All of that is quite the illogical stretch for all those off screen events to happen, not to mention that theory turns the alien into a fussy neat freak.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. And sometimes an inaccurate resetting a stage with props to film another scene is just an inaccurate resetting of a stage with props to film another scene.One of these days I'm going to cut you into little pieces.
-
hafabee — 9 years ago(October 12, 2016 11:30 PM)
You make a good point about continuity regarding the coats, but I still think that Childs was in the process of being assimilated DURING shot #2, and that Childs-Thing hadn't gotten itself a new wardrobe and dressed yet. It's only a few minutes after we saw him last, standing at the doorway, peering out the window with his back to the rest of the complex, and I think the downward turn of the camera to the generator room in shot #2 is suggesting that he's down there presently, being absorbed by the alien creature. Nice observation on the lack of shot continuity with the different coats though, that does lend some weight to the theory that Childs' change of coat at the end of the movie is simply a continuity error, and not meant to be read into.
-
DrAndreiSmyslov — 9 years ago(October 13, 2016 07:02 AM)
Well I think you took a very logical approach, it's just in this case you have a likely continuity error getting in your way. And for what it's worth, at the very least what's seen on screen towards the end, Child's activity is suspicious, so not a stretch at all for anyone to think that Childs was in the process of being assimilated during shot #2. And you supported your theory with the view of the basement staircase, an on screen event. Why was there focus on showing that? Well done.
Regarding Childs (who originally had on a medium blue coat) in the last scene:
Some here have argued, "Childs is a Thing, here's why. MacReady sees Childs at the end, watch closely, his coat is a different color then what he wore in the previous scene!"
In the last scene, I have watched it closely countless times over the years and cannot determine the color of his coat.
First of all, it's covered with soot from the fire.
Secondly, his coat may 'appear' brown as some have claimed, but the golden sepia tinted light from the fire makes just about everything in that scene look brown. Can you find any object in that scene that does NOT look brown?
Thirdly, the tote straps for the flame thrower are an Army green or olive green when he is in the coat room. But look at the scene when he is sitting in the ruins with Mac, because he is covered with soot from the fire, and the sepia tone lighting, the straps are now the EXACT SAME COLOR as the coat. So if we are expected to buy into this coat-change-theory, are we to believe that not only the alien changed out coats, it went looking for matching color tote straps too?
So there's even no real evidence he is wearing a different colored coat.One of these days I'm going to cut you into little pieces.
-
replicant01 — 9 years ago(October 12, 2016 07:47 PM)
IMO, the pan of the outpost is Childs pursuing Blair. He sees Blair across the complex & went after him. Blair throws him off by opening the outside door, but went down to the generator room instead. Time-wise Childs exiting the complex & the power being shut off not long after seems to support this. Only thing that doesn't work is this is the entrance Childs was previously watching, but maybe he left momentarily for a piss break or whatever.
-
hafabee — 9 years ago(October 12, 2016 11:24 PM)
Haha, I like your piss break theory, could be.
On top of the other things I listed about how I think Childs was assimilated I don't really buy Childs' explanation that he saw Blair run off into the Antarctic wilderness and decided to pursue him during a snow storm at night either, it sounds flimsy. Childs was suppose to guard the doorway to KEEP anything other than the survivors from getting into the base, it was an important job, and I kind of doubt he'd charge off into the dark in the Antarctic because he thought he saw Blair out there. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
As you say though it could be that Blair-Thing lured Childs out into the storm, and then doubled-back to the base and then headed down into the generator room to cut the power, leaving Childs wandering aimlessly out in the storm at night. I don't think that's what happened, but it's certainly a possibility. There is still the problem with Childs' change of coat, and the suggestive shot that pans down to the generator room though. -
vonstadt2000 — 9 years ago(October 24, 2016 12:31 AM)
I am a bit ghoulish I suppose when it comes to such endings. For me, I think neither of them are infected. Yet both are causalitiesneither able to trust the other and in the end even if they did, there was just no way to survive. So our 'heroes' just freeze to death when the fires around the camp die out
Now come spring
I mean between the two outposts being destroyed. There are enough bits and pieces of the thing, probably still alive on a cellular level and fast frozen, and spread out all over both outposts. Just waiting for what ever Norwegian or American teams that show up in the 'spring' to find out what the hell happened to their outposts. I mean evidence has to be collected to find out just how two separate bases killed each other offtaken back, studied yet without really knowing what they are looking for, I truly doubt they will isolate and quarantine the way that would prevent such a spreadi mean why would they? By the time they discover the truth..it is too late.
Plenty of ways for the Thing to get off Antarctica nowand spread. It no longer really needs Childs of Macits basically Already won. The pieces just have to wait as it did after the saucer crashso in the end we as a race lose anyways.
Now that is horror.
-
DrAndreiSmyslov — 9 years ago(October 24, 2016 07:45 AM)
That seems like a very logical approach, a sound theory.
Now in your theory, are you envisioning the rescue parties do or do not discover the alien ship site?One of these days I'm going to cut you into little pieces.
-
Cognoscente — 1 month ago(February 07, 2026 04:48 AM)
What was Childs drinking?
When MacReady last saw Fuchs in his laboratory, Fuchs was so nervous that he grabbed a beaker containing a chemical that was obviously so lethal that it could be used as a projectile. MacReady was perceptive about this since he came into the lab to see if Fuchs had devised a way to defeat the thing. Perhaps, after Fuchs died, MacReady found a way to put it into a bottle so as to trick a thing into drinking it.