this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2023
38 points (97.5% liked)
Science Fiction
898 readers
1 users here now
This magazine is aimed at fans and creators of sci-fi and related media of all kinds. It includes all content related to the sci-fi genre and only content related to the sci-fi genre. The goal is to build a community for everyone who enjoys science fiction and related topics. This includes the obvious books, movies, and TV shows, but also original writing, the discussion of writing SF, futuristic art and designs, and the science and technologies that inspire the sci-fi genre. **Team Top 20**
founded 2 years ago
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I dislike the gasoline theory, Things have the memories, mannerisms, and skills of their hosts. Childs thing would know that the contents of the bottle is not booze, and it would know what gas smells like.
My "fan theory" is that Things aren't consciously aware that they are Things. Easiest way to pretend to be someone, is to actually be someone. The Thing is acting as a higher layer of consciousness within them. The Thing doesn't control their every movement, but it makes subtle unconscious directions to the host, but the host never knows they are a thing.
I get that, although I think the thing has to learn a lot when it start to replicate people, I don't think it instantly understands everything after assumng a form. A form is very powerful even without convincing dialogue or behavior. If the form is perfect and you are fairly agreeable, the schematic perceptions of others do most of the heavy lifting for the thing.
With the combined cold, a chemical explosion in the background and strong antarctic winds, I wouldn't be surprised if there was no discernable smell from the bottle, then childs takes a swig and even though the thing realizes it's a caustic liquid, I don't think gasoline would be instantly perceptibly more caustic than high-content ethanol to an imperfect alien sensibility and he would immediately know to spit it out.
I don't recall the thing havingv the memories, skills or mannerisms of their forms, otherwise I don't think the thing either have destroyed everything rather than using the machines to escape.
The thing often plays along with a scenario until they're alone with someone else and then reveals it's true nature, either signaling foresight and planning, self-awareness, or such a high level of biological automation that the humans may as well be considered the same sort of biological automatons, since their behaviors are not much more complex than that of the thing.
The vodka might not be the answer, but it does fit in so well with what is shown on screen. Of course there's so much that is not shown, but voids, unless heavily framed into unrelenting specificity, aren't really a point for or against anything
They speak English. What are the chances that's the native language of the Thing? They obviously make a perfect copy of their victims, even to tiny details like heart defects.
The chances that English is the creature's native language is just about zero.
All indications pointed the thing arriving extraterrestrially, but even if it was from an earlier terran civilization, I don't see how modern English would be its native language.
The perfect copy thing is an interesting point, but I don't think is borne out by the movie since every character who's opened up in one way or another has alien physiology under the skin, regardless of exposure or assimilation time.
I think even if the alien were able to perfectly recreate a specific human brain, that doesn't necessarily mean it could act on the whole of that information instantaneously or comprehensively, but I can't recall if the movie bore this out either, other than circumstantially.
Like having a perfect dictionary and encyclopedia right in front of you with every question you could ever ask, but you'd still have to flip to the pages to figure out what was the most likely behavior and motivation, even if you're flipping through those pages mentally.
I do see people mentioned a perfect recreation more than once, is this because it appears to perfectly copy the cells under the slide? Does some character say it's a perfect copy? The doc says "given enough time a copy would be perfect", right?
Because a lot of theories talk about perfect copies egardless of the imperfect copies the movie shows us with larger organsms even though the thing apparently as enough time to recreate any large being perfectly with such a rapid rate of cellular, assimilation and copying.
This is really making me want to watch the movie again.
Definitely rewatch, especially with winter and Halloween coming up. In case you don't rewatch it, consider the scene with Bennings-Thing in the snow. The Thing hadn't finished copying him yet, so there is some "setup" time. Bennings didn't talk, he just kind of moan/howls at the men, it is unclear whether he hasn't replicated vocal chords yet, or if the Thing hadn't finished copying his mannerisms. It's the only scene where you actually see the Thing in the process of copying it's victim.
Consider these factors. It has clothes on, so the assumption that the thing has to rip through your clothes is not correct. Edit: the previous scene shows Benning's shirt and vest ripped up, but his pants and shoes are still intact. So it doesn't have to rip all the clothes, but I'd guess that extra physical contact accelerates the process. ~~It has his glasses on and wearing them correctly. So the Thing even copies imperfections and is aware that the glasses are need to correct for them.~~ I thought this dude had glasses for some reason. It's mouth just hangs open when it vocalizes, no lip or tongue coordination, but it still produces tone. To me, this indicates that it physically has the hardware to copy Bennings voice, but at this point, it has not completely copied his mind. To further explore this, It was able to move around, and open doors, which are typically complex and coordinated locomotions.
When you re-watch, pay special attention to this scene. Maybe you'll see something that I have forgotten.
I know exactly the scenes you're talking about, but I interestingly(and instinctively) came to the opposite conclusion, that it had mostly copied his brain, but hadn't yet copied the right hardware for speech to become possible, since all of the autopsied organisms we see are largely alien inside.
I'm definitely going to rewatch it again, I have the DVD and I just took it out to make sure I still had it ready to go.
So the things I'm going to look at are weather. The thing can duplicate a multicellular organism perfectly, what the indications for the efficacy of retaining memories following that duplication (whether it's more like a reference book or like automatic perfect memory), and what else should I be looking for?
Oh I'll definitely be marking down the voids, basically anytime someone or something is not on screen and could have been infected.
I wonder also if there's any indication that the creatures don't know each other. If they're infected and they signal to each other or test each other to see if they're infected are real.
I'm definitely going to watch it again, soon, and this will be my most detailed watch ever where I'm actually taking notes. Taking notes. I'm even going to come up with questions beforehand. Written down so I don't lose track while I get caught up in the movie.
What else is worth looking into?
Hmm, a theory I've had for a while is that the thing isn't making careful calculated plans. It's actually kind of desperate, feral, and afraid of the people.
I don't think the Things are coordinated/working together, or are aware of other Things that they haven't created. Consider that when Bennings gets attacked, Palmer is already a thing at that point. It didn't need to do anything else to get off Antarctica.
I think Things are greedy. It wasn't enough to just get away, It was compelled to quietly assimilate all the life at the outpost. Only at the end, when it became clear that the people had the tools and knowledge to deal with it, did it try to just kill everyone and freeze again.
Yeah, definitely think the thing is terrified and desperate and also that they're separate beings.
But I just found out that the 2011 movie and the 2002 video game are supposed to be canon, at least the 2002 video game. Everyone is claiming that John Carpenter explicitly stated it was canon, which would answer the childs question definitively, but I haven't found that interview that everyone is talking about yet.
I'm going to do more research before I rewatch the movie I think and try and figure out how Canon the other entries into the series are first.
Great excuse to go read a bunch of essays and analyzes and watch interviews about a movie and lore I love
The only time you see the innards of a thing is when it has already revealed itself to be a thing, and they people have killed it, or it is the frozen one that was an incomplete transformation. It copies at a cellular level, and can change its structures at will. Palmer didn't walk around with an alien set of jaws in his head and chest, just underneath his skin. If he had been "killed" and examined before being caught and transforming, his innards would appear to be completely human.