EVERY. SINGLE. REACTION: "What, no! Don't shoot the dog!" At the end of the reaction: "...man, they should have shot that dog..." Also, the fact that people get shook and disgusted is actually a hidden compliment to the brilliance and effort of the practical effects team.
I cannot believe that this unbelievably wholesome woman who BARELY made it through John Wick 1 back in the early days has become *this* brave. Legitimately inspiring.
My second favorite movie surprise to watch others experience for the first time. First being the genre shift in From Dusk Till Dawn after telling them it's a Tarantino-written crime road movie and saying nothing of the second half :)
The Thing is probably one of the scariest creature movies of all time. Not only is it really horrifying, the cold and the isolation and the sense of paranoia are intensely terrifying.
Completely agree with you.I saw it when it came out in 1982, and thought Carpenter gave us a classic.Much better than the 1951 original.Sadly the critics hammered it, calling it a load of rubbish.Thankfully it’s been reappraised by modern film critics as a classic Sci Fi horror.The same CRITICS that panned THE BLUES BROTHERS two years earlier, and that film has now got cult status.
Well, The Thing came out the same year as E.T. too, so the contrast in portrayals of extraterrestrial life from optimistic and whimsical to nihilistic and monstrous probably swayed a few critic's opinions. But yeah, critics those days- *🙄puh* those days- nowadays, can be pretty lightweight.
Not only is this one of the greatest horror movies ever, but it was filled with people that acted their arses off. Kurt, Keith David, Wilford Brimley, Don Moffat. Richard Masur. A stellar cast that made this movie what it is; a masterpiece.
I can't believe this was the first time I noticed Doc's nose ring. I musta watched this 20 times not including reactions. Considering the year this was made that is something.
@@niallhughes2697 It's not one of my top 10... but it's sooooo good !... Definitely a bucket list movie ! I'd recommend "The Thing" to anybody because it's legitimately a compelling movie no matter what your tastes are (I'm not a big horror fan...). This and "Alien" for the exact same reason... old school horror at it's finest !
Guess who took 12 yr old me to the theater to see this movie? My 67 (at the time) yr old grandmother!! She was an eccentric lady who loved horror and adventure movies. Spent the whole time laughing her you know what off. 12 yrs later I took her in a wheelchair to see Jurassic Park and her mind was blown. RIP NaNa.
This is one of those movies that isn't scary based on jump scares, it's the paranoia and isolation that makes it scary. And it's still the best practical effects ever put on film.
The film did have a few well-placed jump-scares, but in the end, you are right: The horror from the film is not based on them. Instead, it creates a realistic paranoia among the characters resulting from an unknown lifeform that is imitating them, coupled with the isolation of Antarctica. Add the astounding practical effects, and this is among the very best horror films: It still succeeds in scaring people over 40 years after its production.
@@hellohi821 The jumpscares in The Thing work because of how well they are used after building tension. That's usually how film makers try to utilize them - the slow panning camera, and then something jumps out at you - but this movie gives them room to breathe. The tension starts building well before the scene in which the jumpscare appears.
@@ArcexeyExactly. And not only were they earned they were unexpected as well even with the dog jumping out at Clark at the beginning. We knew there was going to be a jump scare but we expected it to be The Thing jumping out not the dog, but the dogs jumping out made more sense because The Thing has trouble moving sometimes.
This movie was decades ahead of it's time. The fact that the ending is still hotly debated 41 years after it was made is a testament to is greatness. Truly one of the all time greats.
@@ChadSimpson-ft7yz it's debated as to who was the thing, if either. there is a lot to point to Macready as he could have been exposed right after the dog showed up.
@ChadSimpson-ft7yz controversy is defined as giving rise to public disagreement. How can something be debated if there isn't disagreement? You asked how it was debated, I told you, your welcome.
The key indicator to Childs being the Thing at the end is the music cue that plays when he accepts a drink from MacReady. Fuchs let MacReady know that... "If a small particle of this Thing is enough to take over an entire organism, then everyone should prepare their own meals, and I suggest we only eat out of cans." In the time that Childs and MacReady were separated, both of them would be suspicious of each other. Childs asked straight away: "You're the only one who made it?" "Did you kill it?" Meaning, "Do I have any friends? Do I have anyone left who witnessed me taking the blood test?" MacReady starts to provoke him when Childs asks, "How will we make it?" And MacReady says, "Maybe we shouldn't." The Thing never thinks this way; its only objective is survival... So this makes Childs defensive, "If you're worried about me..." Then, MacReady immediately diffuses the situation... "If we got any surprises for each other, I dont think we're in much shape to do anything about it..." Then Childs relaxes, but, here's the reason why Mac doesnt believe Childs... He doesn't believe he thought he saw Blair. This is expressed in his laughter at Childs's excuse. Blair tunneled underneath the tool shed and into the camp. When we follow his POV with the camera from where he's exploring, he finds the door wide open... Childs was given strict orders to stay until they made it back with Blair... "If he makes it back here, and we're not with him, burn him..." There's not a single reason why Childs would not trust MacReady to follow this order, as they're both human. Subsequently, if Blair arrived through the floor and walked to exactly where he does in the film, where the door is open, and Childs had stayed at his post... Blair would have been burned. There's only one explanation for what happened on screen: he infected Childs, vame back to see if he was done becoming an imitation, and bee-lined back to the generator to shut the power off when he saw Childs was gone This allows Childs a way out if Blair doesnt win. When Childs undoubtedly saw the explosion and heard the howl of the The Thing, he knew it lost. So, why return? Why not just freeze and wait for the rescue team? Childs has the flamethrower... The one thing that can destroy the Thing. Now, he can overpower MacReady. The more people it imitates, the stronger it becomes. Leaving MacReady alive, and risk him surviving means the end for the Thing, because MacReady knows too much. There's no reason why Childs shouldn't allow MacReady to administer a second blood test if he trusted MacReady enough to take a sip from his bottle. Thus, this shows that Childs is indeed a Thing, and was attempting to pacify the situation with MacReady by sharing a drink. Look at the intent in MacReady's eyes when he hands him the J&B. He chuckles afterward because he realizes Childs wouldn't be stupid enough to drink it, if he was aware he could be infected by one particle. Therefore, Mac figured out his identity... the bittersweet end is that the Thing has the flamethrower. Checkmate, Checkmate? To prove my point, see how suspicious of MacReady Childs was earlier in the film, during periods of separation, that tension built up between them... Here, at the end, Childs is not the least bit suspicious of Mac being infected, yet he should be... and takes a drink anyway. That's why the music cue goes, dun dun, right when he sips it. That's the Thing's cue. Lol
Fun Fact: The "Dog-Thing" That initially brought the infection was a Siberian Husky named Jed. Jed was actually part wolf, which is why he was very stoic, quiet, and imposing. Jed was very well trained, but he was still in touch with the wild side of his lineage. The actor who played Clark specifically asked for the role so that he could work with Jed.
My dad took me to see this theatrically in 1982 when I was about to turn 15. 41 years later and it’s still my favorite horror film ever. Thanks dad, R.I.P.
Had a manager whose dad took him and his brother to see this when he was eight. He said for about a week after he wouldn’t let his dog come up to him and would take off if he was in a room alone and the dog came in. 😂
Yeah, you think that after a while they'd catch on that fear has basically been the same with us since the dawn of man. What scared people then will scare people now, and in the 70s and 80s they'd really push boundaries that most modern films are scared to push.
That's about the same way i approach modern horror films lol. Feels like cookie cutter cheap jumpscare fests for the most part, instead of tension building
Cassie, you have come a long way. This is probably one of the scariest movies ever made and definitely the pinnacle of physical creature FX. There is nothing you cannot handle now! We are all proud of you, Cassie!
Eh.... I would like her to watch 'The Fly' first. That one and 'The Blob' are also that pinnacle of 1980s creature horror. We'll see how she holds up hahaha
I’m impressed. Cassie watches ‘Arachnophobia’ first, and gets traumatized, then she watches ‘The Thing’. Took a lot of guts to get through both of these movies back to back like she did. I did find it funny, though, when she thought it wouldn’t be so bad of a movie since it’s from 1982. 😂😂
I totally agree, sith Lord. I thought the 2011 prequel was okay just because of the CGI use. Now, I just want to make clear that I don't hate CGI unless it's not used correctly.
The entire movie is about paranoia. Even Carpenter wouldnt tell us if the thing survived, or not. He hinted that he knew, but wouldnt say. That's what makes this movie brilliant.
I think you can choose whatever ending you wish. "Lancaster's original ending had both MacReady and Childs turn into the Thing. In the spring, the characters are rescued by helicopter, greeting their saviors with "Hey, which way to a hot meal?". Carpenter thought this ending was too shallow. In total, Lancaster completed four drafts of the screenplay. The novella concludes with the humans clearly victorious, but concerned that birds they see flying toward the mainland may have been infected by the Thing. Carpenter opted to end the film with the survivors slowly freezing to death to save humanity from infection, believing this to be the ultimate heroic act. Lancaster wrote this ending, which eschews a The Twilight Zone-style twist or the destruction of the monster, as he wanted to instead have an ambiguous moment between the pair, of trust and mistrust, fear and relief.
the ending is obvious: this creature has died because it is unable to reproduce the inorganic.The director at the end showed a close-up of the earring in the actor's ear
@@MyWifeHuntress But on the other hand... Childs breath doesn't show as McReady. He accepts the whisky without hesitation and drinks it, although everyone knows they can be infected by sharing drinks or food. McReady starts laughing after Childs starts drinking realizing he's not the same. Just the theory of the believers that Childs is indeed The Thing.
Cassie really pushing herself with this particular Double Feature, and yes Kurt Russell's hat in The Thing is legendary. I also especially love The Thing because unlike so many horror movies, the characters actually behave like generally normal people/professionals doing the best they can as opposed to horny teenagers waiting to get chopped up or something.
Event Horizon does the same thing with having almost every character being competent professionals who try their best but just get overwhelmed by the evil of the ship.
I seem to recall Russell saying he had seen a chopper pilot in a remote location wear a ridiculous hat which was the inspiration, but I could be imaging that. Also living for long periods in that kind of isolation can make people eccentric, and no one bats an eye because you can't just up and leave.
@@Cheepchipsableactually the hat had already been established in the film by the time Kurt arrived on set. Kurt's flying double actually wore that hat, and John Carpenter liked it so much he worked it into the movie. And Kurt himself said "I had to learn to love it"
Congratulations Cassie! You've passed your initiation into the genre of true horror with this classic. Never thought you'd tackle this one. Nightmare fuel indeed.
I rewatched this movie last week at my friend's house, who happens to have a husky. Let me say, knowing what happens, and watching with a husky cuddled up next to you IS AN EXPERIENCE. If you want a return to goofy Kurt Russell (but still action packed, fighting creatures) I reccomend Big Trouble in Little China
Though I mentioned marveling at the special effects, if I had to be upset at anything it was to see the poor innocent dogs suffering in the film. Yeah I know that no animals were harmed but something about that gets to me even though I know it's not real.
Something a lot of people don't catch, when they are arguing about the blood bank keys Windows takes off for the guns because he knows HE is the one who lost the keys. He dropped them when he saw Bennings getting taken over. That is how the thing got the keys and opened the blood bank. There is a ton of cool stuff like that in this movie!
41 years and this is still the best version of this 85 year old story. Written in 1938 as a novella, then made into a film in 1951 with a young James Arness. Originally set in the Arctic. Then Carpenter got his hands on it in 1982 and created a masterpiece, re-set it in the Antarctic and filmed it in Alaska. Excellent film, even now
Respectfully disagree, in that both films are classics for great reasons. The first film dumped the shape shifter because they couldn't figure out how to do it justice, but otherwise the script was solid and interestingly enough for this 60s kid the dialog was adult by his understanding at that time. Even the introduction of a female character; Nikki (Margaret Sheridan), had none of the stereotypes of that decade's screamers. In short, at least for this longtime movie fan, film is timeless.
The Thing 1982 is based on the story Who Goes There. The Thing is often incorrectly seen as a remake of The Thing from Another World from 1951. Carpenter's film is and always will be a classic.
I read the original script for JC’s Thing, which was written by Actor Burt Lancaster. It was different than JC’s. Final vision but in it’s own right was quite good, It was a good blend the novella “Who Goes There” & the 50’s Thing movie.
Carpenter's film of The Thing is much closer to the original short story than the 1950s film. What sets this film a cut above most horror films is the paranoia of not knowing which of your friends might not be human any more. The film winds up the tension like a spring.
This film has, in my opinion, one of the best sound effects in film ever. When not-Bennings yells and they burn him, and the scream is like this insanely deep-voiced combo of an elephant trumpet and a chrorus of voices... that is just ABSOLUTELY inspired sound design.
@@jacobq.2204 According to John Carpenter, that scream is the Thing "scrolling" through all the voices of all the creatures it's imitated, trying to find Bennings' voice.
The 1980s belonged to John Carpenter. Even though Halloween was released in 1978, it had a huge influence on 1980s cinema. Carpenter followed that up with The Fog, Escape from New York, The Thing, Christine, Starman, Big Trouble in Little China, Prince of Darkness, and They Live.
Here's 2 reasons why I say Childs is the thing. 1) When Childs was guarding the door waiting for Blair, he was wearing a blue jacket. Then at the end of the movie, it was a light beige jacket. His blue jacket was torn to shreds when he became the thing and he had to put on another jacket. 2) At the end of the movie, MacReady was testing Childs with giving him a drink. MacReady remembered Fuchs when he said to eat out of cans and prepare their own meals because of cell activity. So if Childs knew this, he would of never drank from the bottle, but he did drink and he failed the test. This is why MacReady chuckles after. He knows Childs is the thing.
1. he's still wearing a blue jacket; it's just covered in a layer of frost and snow... he did just claim to be out in an Antarctic storm. 2. while it's logical to think like this as a viewer, things get pretty hectic in the movie, and we have 0 idea how much any of the characters know about the situation besides what we observe directly, and this info was only known by three people. MacReady, Fuchs, and Blair(whom Fuchs got the idea from).
LOL. I wouldn't go THAT far, but it's a great horror movie. (although I didn't love it when I first saw it in '82; it grew on me over the years. Still can't take Kurt Russell seriously at all in the movie, but now that I know all the actors better than I did back then - when they were just a mob of unknown actors playing a bunch of grumpy one-note characters - it's a lot more fun. I think it's hilarious they all defer to this helicopter pilot, MacReady. Great practical effects though, it was a great period for practical effects. "American Werewolf In London" and "The Howling" had come out the year before, which had blown everyone's minds, and this was the next year's version. ("Poltergeist" came out the same month and got all the box office, for a whole bunch of reasons. People were geeking out over the face ripping scene in that movie (and the clown, and the tree), it overshadowed "The Thing" at first. Late night cable is where it got it's second life, like lots of 80s classics.
@@TTM9691a masterpiece to humanity. The best horror movie. One of the only horror movies where people act real. Unlike alien =) All that stuff you said is interesting tbh
Love the original. Love both of 'em. The first one holds up great for a 50s horror film. And the two movies are so different that they don't cancel each other whatsoever, not even in the slightest way. Other than it takes place on Antarctica.
They also added some scenes from "Forbidden Planet" on the television in the background. Were they trying to fool us into thinking they were the same movie, or were they watching different channels?
The blood jump scare is amazing. It's not actually scary at all, but as the scene is put together, you really don't expect anything to happen when he touches it.
I reckon the cleverest bit is the line right before it is a misdirection. MacReady says they'll do Garry last, so you're expecting to sit in apprehension for a lot longer. Then not even a second later, bam.
@@michaelinlofi They do the same thing when Copper dies. Right before Norris' belly opens up, there are a couple shots of Clark grabbing the surgical knife off of the table, so we're all expecting an attack on MacReady instead.
I bought that CD soundtrack many years ago with it's extra tracks, very creepy music by Ennio, John carpenter was spot on in appointing him as the composer.
The Thing is my favorite horror movie of all time. Its just the perfect, "Do you really know who is standing right next to you?" Also that Scream that "Bennings" does. The most unsettling sound ever
When I started watching this channel, never in my wildest dreams did I think Cass would make it to The Thing and she did GREAT! So proud! Now…..The Exorcist? yes?😂
A lot of people ran out of the theater during the early balloon neck scene. Interesting that part also cringes me out more than the other stuff. But the whole movie still has that overall creepy feel to it. I doubt Cassie will ever watch it though and that's fine. I have yet to see Titanic and won't because I can't handle a giant sinking ship happening at night. Loved Poseidon Adventure though!
I think she’s said she will not watch horror movies based on demons or the devil for religious reasons (I feel the same way). But that’s just what I remember her saying once.
I've heard a theory that the Thing is actually alive. At the end, MaCready gives Child's a drink, which he takes. Earlier in the movie, they specifically said to not eat or drink anything from anyone else, yet he takes a swig without hesitation. This is supposed to be a hint that he isn't worried about being taken over, since he's already the Thing. MaCready even laughs in a sad sort of way as Child's drinks, as if he's resigned to the fact the Thing has won. A bit of a stretch, in my opinion. Child's could just not give a damn since their going to die from the cold in a few hours anyway, but it's a fun theory. Personally, I love how we'll never really know whether it survived or not. The entire point of the movie is showing the extremes of paranoia. It's only right that the movie leaves us with an ending we can't trust.
KURT RUSSELL is great in these movies: *Executive Decision* (1996), *Soldier* (1998), and *Vanilla Sky* (2001) opposite TOM CRUISE. Cassie could dedicate one week to Kurt Russell and love it. 😃
The absolute pinnacle of horror. Brillaint acting, amazing creature effects by Rob Botin. Claustrophobia, paranoia ..intense, a thriller, a whodunnit, a sci fi? What is ..The Thing?...a masterpiece that waa absolutely panned at the time of release. Carpenters peak. You did amazing to get through this bless you. ❤
Saw it in a theater in 1982 with some friends. We all loved it. We actually started applauding when the guys head came off and descending from the table to the floor; that's how good the special effects were. Still one of my favorites.
This is Carpenter’s masterpiece. I saw this on cinema release in 1982 and it blew my mind. Sadly at the time it bombed as everyone went to see ET instead but it’s now regarded as a true cult classic.
This bastard is a master class in suspense/horror. Set design, score, pacing, timing, acting, effects... Absolutely amazing. It's always a pleasure to see someone appreciate it for what it is.
It's absolutely insane to me that this movie bombed in theaters when it came out. It's definitely one of the finest horror films of all time and without a doubt the best remake ever.
That was a release date problem. Had this movie come out before ET, chances are that it would've done really well. But, by the time this movie was in theaters, ET mania was in full-swing, and thus The Thing suffered, because people wanted cute and cuddly aliens. I think we totally need a The Thing vs ET movie.
Agree with all of you.Why the critics panned this film when it came out in 1982 is beyond me,and John Carpenter was apparently hurt by the criticism.I’m just glad it’s been reappraised by modern critics who’ve now given it the praise it deserves.
A true legendary movie. The guy who worked on the creature effects worked so hard for so long without taking a break, living on candybars, that after the last day of shooting he went straight to a hospital to check himself in for a full inspection.
I refuse to give people respect who act recklessly with their health just because they work on a movie. To be clear the creature effects are amazing, but they would have been just as amazing if instead of trying to work on a tight schedule and risking your health for a bit of fame, it should have been the producers responsibilty to postpone release and not care about the extra money that costs.@@thedoneeye
This movie is peak storytelling, even after 40+ years we're still discussing and dissecting it. You're a real trooper, Cassie, for seeing it through to the end. I knew this would be a rough one for you, mostly for the reasons you stated in the video; It's more 'gross' than it is 'jump scary' (although there are some great ones in this). The gore was the main reason (along with critics panning the movie, idiots) that the movie bombed at the box office. It wasn't until years later with VHS rentals that this movie finally started to get some appreciation for the masterpiece that it is. I've loved this movie since I first saw it in my teens and it's only gotten better with age. It plays perfectly on people's sense of paranoia and fear of infection. There's even a hint of a spiritual undertone if you're into that kind of thing ("I don't know who to trust. - "Trust is a tough thing to come by these days. Tell you what, why don't you just trust in the Lord"). The source novella, 'Who Goes There', gives the idea of an evil entity 'possessing' it's victims, thinking that the person next to you is normal until you realize they're horrific inside. Maybe that's a bit of a stretch but it's still fun to think about. John Carpenter's The Thing is not just a great 'horror movie', it's a great movie period. So, was Childs human or a thing at the end? I don't really like referring to 3rd party sources (sources other than the film itself claiming to be canon), so let's look at what the film appears to tell us. After the group finds Blair/Thing's makeshift spacecraft we get an apparent POV shot of the thing inside the camp where Childs was (accompanied by music). I don't think it's an actual POV shot but rather the film showing us how the thing could've potentially gotten to Childs. We see a shot of the stairs leading down to the generator room which is where Blair/Thing would've come from if he did go after Childs, then the camera glides towards where Childs was standing earlier (only now he's gone). This shot is very similar to the earlier shot of Childs standing by the window/door when Mac tells him that they're going out to give Blair the test. Note that in that scene Childs appears to be very tired (as the camera moves towards Childs we can hear Mac's footsteps but Childs doesn't react to them, only when Mac starts talking). Something else that I only noticed recently (thanks to analysis videos) is that there's a door directly behind Childs that can be accessed by another door close to the generator room stairway. It's possible that Blair/Thing used these doors to get to Childs, taking advantage of Childs' exhausted state. Now that still didn't answer whether or not Childs was a thing at the end, just how the thing could've gotten him despite him having a flamethrower. So let's look at the end. MacReady settles down with a bottle of what appears to be liquor when Childs comes up on him still with his flamethrower. The fact that Childs simply didn't just torch Mac is seemingly a point in favor of Childs being human. However, we have to remember that the last time Childs wanted to burn Mac, he had dynamite on him. If Childs was a thing, it would've remembered this and so it may have just been playing it safe by not torching Mac. The two men have a little talk and Mac gives Childs the bottle and he drinks from it. This leads to the 'Molotov Theory', which is that the bottle doesn't contain alcohol but rather gasoline from the tractor used to make molotov cocktails which they use to destroy the camp. Mac is watching Childs closely when he offers the bottle to him and the main music theme kicks in as Childs drinks. Side note, if Mac was about to willingly drink this before Childs showed up then that tells us where Mac's mind was. One of the things that makes this movie so good is that it doesn't really matter whether or not Childs is a thing at the end, it leaves us with the movies main theme: paranoia. The fear that we can never fully trust each other.
I agree with your main points, including that the main theme is paranoia. We simply DON’T KNOW… a lot of things! (One example: When Blair smashes the radio room, is it human-Blair, who is acting to force the continued isolation of the team, to prevent the infection from spreading to the rest of the planet? Or, is it Blair-Thing, who is NOT acting to •prevent a rescue• but is acting •to prevent a warning• from reaching the outside world, thereby minimizing problems for itself in the future?) “If Mac was about to willingly drink this before Childs showed up then that tells us where Mac’s mind was.” - No. Mac was not about to drink gasoline. Rather, the bottle contained normal booze. The ‘heartbeat’ music kicks in as Childs drinks, and we immediately see Mac chuckle in response. If Childs were the Thing, he wouldn’t care about drinking a contaminated bottle of Whiskey (contaminated with a Thing-organism particle). He might well care if he were human. Would a human Childs prefer to drink from a maybe-contaminated bottle, and POSSIBLY die by assimilation, if it meant that he maybe could be instead drinking ordinary alcohol, and have the booze take the edge off the experience of Childs freezing to death? …My read of these events, is that Mac gave a test to Childs, and Childs failed it. Mac chuckled as he has proven to himself, that Childs isn’t human. There’s even a third possibility: Childs is lying to Mac about where he (Childs) was, to cover himself, but Childs is still human: Blair-Thing could have confronted Childs when Blair-Thing went to the generator room. In this scenario, Childs was so tired that he didn’t think he could take Blair, even with the flame thrower. Blair-Thing sensed an opportunity and told Childs to beat it. Childs retreated without firing, Blair-Thing stole the generator, and at the end, Childs is human, but is telling a whopper.
I was hoping Cassie wouldn't close her eyes and miss some of the effects - since those are what the movie is most known for - so she could at least have a future discussion about the spider head and stuff. But I think she caught most of it and her genuine reactions are always classic!
Well, I think the Molotov theory is bonkers. We know that the thing retains the memories of its victim - which means it knows how whisky tastes and that gasoline tastes awful. I think the bottle, the smile, the music is just a red herring, designed to make us wonder even 40 years later. Which we do. 😉
The Special Effects by Rob Bottin in 1982 for The Thing is The Best that I've seen in Scifi and Horror During That Time and Still Stands Out Phenomenal
One of the GREATEST horror/sci-fi films ever made and holds up to this day. Also need to point out how underrated Kurt Russell is as an actor. He carried this film but the true genius behind it will always be John Carpenter...
Carpenter is an absolute genius and legend!❤ The paranoia, anxiety, stress, and claustrophobia that these men have in the movie really add to the scares
I’m torn, on one hand I want innocent people like Cassie to live their whole life not seeing movies like this to maintain their pure souls. On the other, I’m very curious to see how she’ll respond to it. I will give Cassie tons of credit that she is very brave to branch out into different genres.
@@NominePatrisThe goal should not be to disturb or desensatize her. But to suggest movies she normally wouldn't watch within reason. We want her to have fun after all.
The effect of watching this in a movie theater is so much more powerful. I saw it in 1982 in a packed theater and the experience was so incredible. A shared experience I’ll never forget.
I saw it twice in empty movie theatres! I would have loved to have seen that. I bet there was a lot of popcorn flying up into the air and spilt drinks.
I saw this several times that magical summer of 82, and it's still absolutely chilling especially since I've gotten older. You can understand the grip of paranoia even more.
This came out 2 years before I was born and I didn't really watch it until like 2005 though I always saw comics or some things about it until then. After I watched it it's in my top Horror Movies. I DID get the chance 2 years ago to see it in a theater because of a special showing and it was pretty fun
@@peterbriggs6857 it was similar to when I saw ‘The Exorcist’ and ‘Alien’. For a few seconds there was stunned silence, but then you heard people murmuring.
I still remember climbing up the back of the couch when that head sprouted legs and crawled across the floor. I'm so glad to see how well that scene holds up 40 years later. Loved this. Your reaction made me remember just how terrifying this movie still is.
Saw it in a theater in 1982 with some friends. We all loved it. We actually started applauding when the guys head came off and descending from the table to the floor; that's how good the special effects were. Still one of my favorites.
Been watching your channel for 2 years now, so proud of your evolution from not being able to stomache seeing a drop of blood to actually watching a movie like THE THING. Tucker and Dale vs evil, this ones definitely one you'll love.
My buddies and I saw this in the theater when it came out in '82. We LOVED it. Far and away our favorite horror movie by which all others are measured. Lines from this movie embedded themselves within our vernacular that still appear in our conversations over 40 years later. Great job, Cassie!
John Carpenter's The Thing (1982) is a masterpiece in practical effects, suspense, Sci-fi Horror and creating fan theories. The film is meant to keep you guessing who's the thing and who does what at any given time. Even after 40+ years people are still guessing if the thing was destroyed or not, and if Childe or Mac are infected. John Carpenter made a very risky choice in leaving the ending open like that, and although it was poorly recieved in the box office, it's cult following spreads like it's been infected by the thing. A cliffhanger ending is very difficult to do well because most people want know what happens at the end of a movie, or they expect a sequel when there isn't a definitive end. The Thing is a rare example of how a cliffhanger ending can be done well.
I agree it's a perfect cliff hanger ending. At least to the older generation of viewers who grew up with the film. Though I have noted some young reacters just don't get this ending and almost feel disappointed. I admit this is surprising to me. It's like they want a clear cut ending (to know if the Thing survives and / or who is the Thing perhaps.) Well I wouldn't have it any other way. And I'm glad that Cassie is one of the few young reactors who appears to appreciate this ending and is asking the questions about who is really who around that fire as they share a bottle of booze.
Fun fact: the Norwegian chasing the Dog-Thing at the beginning who is killed by Gerry basically spoils the entire plot. He’s shouting that “it’s not a real dog, it’s a Thing” in untranslated Norwegian.
The sheer genius for practical effects on display in this movie from Rob Bottin is immensely impressive. So many effects, mostly achieved in camera, and in an era before computer effects, all on a limited budget just goes to show what can be achieved with know how and inventiveness. The effects have also stood the test of time incredibly well, as Cassie's reaction to the movie demonstrates.
The Excorcist is not at all the kind of scary you think it is and is a masterpiece anyone who loves movies must watch at some point. You cant hide from it forever Cass
Yes, the Exorcist is an acknowledged piece of cinema history, if not a "masterpiece". You can be a cinema-file without adding the Exorcist to your watch list. Your movie-watching life will be no less fulfilling. I'm constantly recommending people only watch the Exorcist if they are ready for some life-long scars, especially of you are sensitive, like Cassie.
You know what makes this channel so great? It really feels like we're just sitting with a friend, making them watch our favorite movies and seeing their reactions. It's so warm, so comforting. Really nice. It's a welcome change from YT's larger variety of absolute lunacy.
I'm so proud of you, Cassie! I never dreamed you'd watch this and now you're planning on seeing The Fly too? Listen, if you can handle The Thing AND The Fly then you're ready for The Exorcist. You can doit!
I was 10 years old when I saw this the first time. It was February, there was a blizzard outside and I had zero idea of what was coming. I was completely petrified by dread, but interestingly enough wasn't left with nightmares, just a love of horror that has lasted to this day.
Sometimes movies that are so over the top and outlandish aren't as scary or hit as close to home. So you can just appreciate the craftsmanship and creativity that went into it.
It's traditional at this point to say that this a surprisingly faithful adaptation of a story called 'Who Goes There?' written in 1937 by John Campbell. One of the most influential short stories ever written and well worth reading. It was also the first mention anywhere of 'flying saucers' , as faithfully recreated in this film.
It gets cut from every reaction but I like when Blair shouts "No dog could make it a 1,000 miles to the coast. That Thing wants to be us!" I've noticed most reactions question why he's doing all this; I've always thought at this point it was to completely isolate the camp. Some speculate he's already infected but I don't think so.
I think it's pretty clear that Blair got infected at some point when he was locked in the cabin, when there was no one around to see. Locking him up was their biggest mistake...he saw the real danger well before the rest of them.
If he was already infected, then isolating everyone off from the outside would have been working against himself. If they didn't know, he could have just waited it out and left with everyone else. He did it to keep the thing from escaping and infecting the entire world. It's pretty blatantly clear that was his reasoning.
The original " The Thing " was in 1951. Then John Carpenter version is the one you're reacting to. And in 2011 is Pre - Thing. But I suggest after the Kurt Russell you do " The Fly " 🪰
The best thing about The Thing is that you can believe whatever ending you want. If you want it to be a bleak nightmare, one or both of them are The Thing. If you need a happy ending, you can believe they killed it and got rescued.
When released, it wasn’t recieved well by critics and made a little more than it cost. Arguably one of the best horror movies ever made… “It dropped out of the top 10 grossing films after three weeks, and ended its run earning a total of $19.6 million against its $15 million budget, making it only the 42nd highest-grossing film of 1982. It was not a box office failure, nor was it a hit.” I was 12 when I saw this in theaters and it definitely left a mark on me haha. The good old days.
The ending of this movie is so clever! If you look closely, McCready tests Childs by handing him the liquor bottle. They had a strict No Sharing Containers policy due to the potential cross contamination. Childs accepting the bottle showed that he had been assimilated. And Kurt Russell looks like he's thinking, "Got you, sucker!" Another tell is Childs had no steam breath. John Carpenter also revealed that either McCready or Childs was a Thing (he refuses to say who). And that people who had been assimilated were shadowed in the lighting. I think the evidence clearly shows it was Childs. It's so subtle. Yet so brilliant. I love this movie.
Childs accepting the bottle doesn't necessarily show he'd been assimilated, he might've just forgotten or he might've figured it didn't matter at that point. Even if MacReady was The Thing, he was in no shape to stop him, and vice versa. In fact, there'd be nothing to stop either of them from assimilating the other if there were only two left, so I would say it makes more sense that neither is The Thing.
I saw this movie at 12 years old. No modern-made jump scare has ever even made me flinch. Movies like this were the mental and emotional polish that shined the coping with crazy shit armor of our generation. I saw Jaws at 7 and Nightmare on Elm Street at 13. I'm not even sure a movie could scare me now, and it is all due to movies like this. Poor Cassie, we are corrupting her so.
My favourite kids cartoons when I was growing up were Fire & Ice, Plague Dogs and Watership Down. They really tried to mess kids up back then, huh? ... it was a more innocent time
I was 13 when I saw it in a small theater. What an experience. As for jump scares...the unnerving screech music that plays when a shadow figure passes Fukes in the hallway...it's technically a jumpscare but I did not then nor have I ever jumped from it. But it's so unnerving regardless because you're realizing what just happened. SOMETHING. What? Don't know, but no way that was human and there's Fukes just standing there, wtf? like we the audience are. That's how to do scares. Not just a jarring chord and 'oh, it's just a cat' like all the slashers do.
The best theory I ever heard about the ending was by Rob Ager. He said that the last moments, of Childs drinking the J&B, was reflective of the earlier scene when MacReady pours the drink in the chess machine. In short, Childs WAS the Thing and MacReady knew it by that point thus "winning" despite a perceived checkmate. That's my personal head canon.
I know Carpenter deliberately left it open booked to keep the audience guessing and has stated that it's upto interpretation as he doesn't know if Childs is infected or not and seems to want to keep it like that as he's still to this day refused to answer the question.
The practical effects and the great cast, to me is what made this classic flick so good. And with John Carpenter directing, (of Halloween fame); this is why I love movies. Good reaction Cassie, to an incredibly hard to watch at times movie.
Loved your reaction. This and Escape from New York are my favorite Kurt Russell characters. As for the ending, there are a lot of strong theories of why Childs is the thing. There's the score that pops up when he shows up on screen at the end. The lighting technician on the film said that he blacked out the eyes of anyone who was a thing throughout the film (You catch it on rewatch to figure out who was a thing when), and Childs has no light reflecting in his eyes at the end while Mac does. There's also a really awesome theory that Mac put gasoline in the bottle and handed it to Childs who has no reaction to the switch, prompting Mac's laugh after he drinks because he knows he's done for. This and They Live are my favorites from Carpenter.
Could someone be The Thing and not know it? Never quite understood how that worked. Like it's a virus that infects the person? Or The Thing has to literally eat the person?
I've never heard the gasoline thing before, unless the rationale is that it's one of the Molotovs he's been saving. I think that has to be relegated to fanfic as we don't explicitly see it, but that's a good plot point if it had been intentional and depicted.
I like to think John Carpenter would appreciate just how well the effects held up 40 years later. That they can disturb people even now. Probably equally enjoy the discussion of the movie especially the ending, who is the The Thing.
It's been debated a lot but the breath at the end really is the key. Kurt Russell's breath is very obviously in front of his face while Childs has nothing blocking his face. That's too much of a visual not to be a choice by the director. And reason two is the idea that the bottle McReady passed to Childs was full of gasoline, not whiskey - remember they spent the last 5 minutes of the movie throwing molotov cocktails. And so when Childs doesn't react to drinking gasoline McReady laughs because he knows he's the thing.
Butt if you watch closely, when Childs first approaches and you see him standing, you can clearly see his breath in the air. I agree that it was expertly and ambiguously filmed thereafter so that you can't really see his breath. But there is a time you can, so.... Just great editing to keep it ambiguous. No right answer.
@@calibre97 I'd bet good money they tried to get rid of Childs breath in that shot and either couldn't or were forced to go with it in editing. Again, the breath of McReady vs the no-breath of Childs once they settle into that scene is just too stark a contrast to not be on purpose. A director wouldn't block an actor's face like that if it wasn't for a reason.
@@UpTheDown7 incorrect; this has to do with the fidelity of the version you are watching. low def, no breath; hi def, breath. also.... Fuchs thing screams a death wail before being burned and is clearly spewing mist into the air. specifically the version that went to TV is atrocious and you can make out anything. the laser disk version, Childs is a merry steam vent as much as MacReady
the body found at the destroyed place is not the alien pilot that was in the ice chuck but one of the earlier victims. There is a 2011 prequel to this film that explains everything that happened at the Norwegian camp including how an alien got a dog to imitate a dog.
"The Thing From Another World" (1951) is also inspired by the same novella, "Who Goes There?" by John W. Campbell Jr. I really enjoy it, but it's story is quite different. So, this is sort of a remake, and sort of not a remake. Either way, John Carpenter made a bunch of awesome movies.
I would say that "It: The Thing From Another World" is closer to Alien than The Thing; less about paranoia and more about fighting an unknown entity while being trapped with it.
Story goes that Campbell loosely based this on his mother’s identical twin, who he mistook for his mother at times but got very cold responses, as his aunt did not like him. That’s where the origin of “who’s who” came from, and a young child’s alienation (no pun intended) from a mistaken loved one.
Well, although story and such are vastly different, the 1951 version is basically the original movie and John Carpenters The Thing basically a remake of it, but with closer to the book. I mean, he went with "The Thing" which is a title and name for the alien invented by the 1951 movie and even recreated the intro with the exact same effect for the movie title burning its way through the black screen.
@@Kuhmuhnistische_Partei in interviews Carpenter said he wanted to get closer to the original novella because of the dread and paranoia that was not captured by the 1951 film. The 1951 film happened during the flying saucer craze of the 40's and 50's so it tried to capitalize more on that. Which is not to say the 51 film is bad, it stands up fairly well. I think trying to actually make the thing as a shapeshifter would have been technically challenging in the 1950's although they might have pulled it off with fade shots.
Probably my favorite Horror/Thriller of all time. Also I love how anyone who watches The Thing the first time has the same reaction to the Dog. "Don't shoot the dog!" and on the second rewatch it's always, "Please kill the damned 'Dog'!" Also, the ending. Notice how Macready's breath is billowing in the cold, and Childs isn't? There's also a theory that the bottle Macready handed Childs was filled with Gasoline.
At 13:38 Bennings, after he transforms into the Thing you can see its breath and Macready is about to drink from the bottle as Childs walks up, so both of those theories don't really work. Carpenter wanted it to be a mystery.
The uncertainty is the point, you're not supposed to figure it out. The cinematographer gave the humans a glint in their eyes during the movie while the Thing(s) doesn't have it. In the last scene, it's inconsistent. You do see Child's breath and sometimes Macready doesn't have it, it depends on the lightning. Plus, if the Thing made perfect copies they'd breathe air like normal and the human body wouldn't want to drink gasoline even if they didn't know what it tasted like, which it would, since it copies the original perfectly.
@@clarkmichaels822 Not sure I agree with that. But I see your point. In HDR the only consistent breath I see is Macready's. And yes, I'm aware the linchpin is Paranoia. We're seeing things differently and that's fine. And I'm aware the cellular replication process would make them indistinguishable from a physical level from the original Host. But, thought is driven by repetitive electrical signals travelling on familiar pathways right? Would the Thing necessarily have that Data hardcoded into their brain? I don't know. Just dropping my theory, seems others don't agree so I'll slink away now. Memories themselves are also frayed and distorted by human perception just based on time. So I don't know what a new copy of existing memories would be like. It also depends on how the actors played it and how far John went into that Lore I guess? Whatever though. Enjoy the movie your way, that's the point. Edit: Granted, the Thing can drop its guise at any point and revert all cells back or make such rapid and insane changes to genetic data that the idea of it needed to breath or not is kind of a moot point. I mean, it turned into a head crawling on the floor. You're telling me that thing was filtering oxygen for movement? Unless it spawned a tiny little pair of lungs inside the head. Granted, it could just be aspirating through its skin.
I saw a video where a whole bunch of people who'd never seen this before were hurling abuse at the Norwegian, while the one guy who HAD seen it before just sat there in silence, smirking
For me it's the feeling of isolation that makes me the most terrified. Any circumstance like this away with no one around or even coming to get you, is terrifying to me. I am glad you reacted to this.
What. A. Film. Not only is it a masterful horror, but the suspense holds throughout the entire film. And this was the peak of practical effects, they still look superb today, we need to go back to this way of making films instead of overrelying on CGI. Wonderful.
Gotta do John Carpenter’s THE FOG. Not nearly as grotesque, but just as scary. A good ghost story. The actor who plays the main ghost in it is actually the visual effects specialist for this, Rob Bottin.
Love the Fog and Adrienne Barbeau. Was a favorite to watch with my GF back then. I can just chill and rewatch that one and it relaxes me because I like lighthouses.
This movie holds a very special place in my horror movie collection. It's got the absolute best monster design. No other monster creates such a gut-wrenching feeling. Just seeing it sparks dread in you. then to know when it infects you, you don't even know. At any point it can flip the switch and take full control and your just gone. Horror movies like this just aren't made nowadays. Everything has to be jump scares. Everything has a happy ending then a jump scare. This is pure hopelessness till the very end.
Child’s is the thing, he was attacked by Blair via the tunnels underneath. When Child’s shows up at the end he asks Macreedy are “you” the only one who made it as opposed to are “we”. Macreedy somehow got a bottle filled with gasoline which Child’s took a swig of.
EVERY. SINGLE. REACTION: "What, no! Don't shoot the dog!"
At the end of the reaction: "...man, they should have shot that dog..."
Also, the fact that people get shook and disgusted is actually a hidden compliment to the brilliance and effort of the practical effects team.
I don't understand the dog thing why are people so afraid of dogs dying
@@NadeemShekh-uy9znthe majority of people are not sociopaths
@@AL-fl4jk no, they're just idiots.
If someone was going through that much trouble to kill a dog, there would have to be a really good reason.
@@AL-fl4jk sociopathy does not equal "this person doesn't care about the kind of animals i care about dying fictional deaths", chill the fuck out
I cannot believe that this unbelievably wholesome woman who BARELY made it through John Wick 1 back in the early days has become *this* brave. Legitimately inspiring.
Yeah, I don't believe it either.
Get the flamethrower, that's clearly not her!
Yeah character growth
She watched 28 Days Later. Thats when I knew she is her lol
Touche
She desensitized now! Lol
"Please don't go places alone, and without a flame thrower."
Words to live by.
That's what I told the police.
great advice for daily life too! 😅
Actually alone in this movie is a great idea
If you live in the US
Watching people have compassion for that dog will NEVER stop making me grow an evil grin on my face.
W every single reaction (except the lady who understood Norwegian)
Start: "no don't hurt the doggo"
Kennel scene: "KILL IT, kill it with fire"
My second favorite movie surprise to watch others experience for the first time. First being the genre shift in From Dusk Till Dawn after telling them it's a Tarantino-written crime road movie and saying nothing of the second half :)
@@markcarpenter6020 Who was the reactor that knew Norwegian?
@@ShawnPattonC her name is Centen or something similar to that.
For real 😂. I'm like. Aww you like the doggo? 😈. This is why you wouldn't make it to part 2 😂😂
The Thing is probably one of the scariest creature movies of all time. Not only is it really horrifying, the cold and the isolation and the sense of paranoia are intensely terrifying.
Completely agree with you.I saw it when it came out in 1982, and thought Carpenter gave us a classic.Much better than the 1951 original.Sadly the critics hammered it, calling it a load of rubbish.Thankfully it’s been reappraised by modern film critics as a classic Sci Fi horror.The same CRITICS that panned THE BLUES BROTHERS two years earlier, and that film has now got cult status.
Very true.
Well, The Thing came out the same year as E.T. too, so the contrast in portrayals of extraterrestrial life from optimistic and whimsical to nihilistic and monstrous probably swayed a few critic's opinions. But yeah, critics those days- *🙄puh* those days- nowadays, can be pretty lightweight.
The creature effects are fairly timeless as well and hold up REALLY well even while continuously upscaled into higher definitions.
Absolutely agree - the psychological horror of it is the worst part!
Not only is this one of the greatest horror movies ever, but it was filled with people that acted their arses off. Kurt, Keith David, Wilford Brimley, Don Moffat. Richard Masur. A stellar cast that made this movie what it is; a masterpiece.
I can't believe this was the first time I noticed Doc's nose ring. I musta watched this 20 times not including reactions. Considering the year this was made that is something.
@@terrylandess6072 Mandela Effect ;)
One of my top favourite movies ever! And the theme tune always gives me goosebumps.
Agreed
@@niallhughes2697 It's not one of my top 10... but it's sooooo good !... Definitely a bucket list movie ! I'd recommend "The Thing" to anybody because it's legitimately a compelling movie no matter what your tastes are (I'm not a big horror fan...). This and "Alien" for the exact same reason... old school horror at it's finest !
Guess who took 12 yr old me to the theater to see this movie? My 67 (at the time) yr old grandmother!! She was an eccentric lady who loved horror and adventure movies. Spent the whole time laughing her you know what off. 12 yrs later I took her in a wheelchair to see Jurassic Park and her mind was blown. RIP NaNa.
Your nana sounds like she was an absolute legend.
Now that's an amazing old woman. I would have loved to see her reaction to Jurassic Park... that movie blew the minds of pretty much the whole world.
If your grandma took you to The Thing, my only reaction is yeeeeeeessssssssss!
@wilsonserv OMG! That is so wild!
God Bless NaNa!
"Was Childs the thing? Was McReady the thing?" Welcome to the forty year old argument. lol
This is one of those movies that isn't scary based on jump scares, it's the paranoia and isolation that makes it scary. And it's still the best practical effects ever put on film.
The film did have a few well-placed jump-scares, but in the end, you are right: The horror from the film is not based on them. Instead, it creates a realistic paranoia among the characters resulting from an unknown lifeform that is imitating them, coupled with the isolation of Antarctica. Add the astounding practical effects, and this is among the very best horror films: It still succeeds in scaring people over 40 years after its production.
@@hellohi821yeah the jump scares were earned not cheap
It's mostly scary because you're fighting an invisible almost invincible enemy 😅
@@hellohi821 The jumpscares in The Thing work because of how well they are used after building tension. That's usually how film makers try to utilize them - the slow panning camera, and then something jumps out at you - but this movie gives them room to breathe. The tension starts building well before the scene in which the jumpscare appears.
@@ArcexeyExactly. And not only were they earned they were unexpected as well even with the dog jumping out at Clark at the beginning. We knew there was going to be a jump scare but we expected it to be The Thing jumping out not the dog, but the dogs jumping out made more sense because The Thing has trouble moving sometimes.
This movie was decades ahead of it's time. The fact that the ending is still hotly debated 41 years after it was made is a testament to is greatness. Truly one of the all time greats.
Why is it debated?
One of them is infected,John carpenter knows but has never said , apparently there are clues to whether it's mcready or child's @@ChadSimpson-ft7yz
@@ChadSimpson-ft7yz it's debated as to who was the thing, if either. there is a lot to point to Macready as he could have been exposed right after the dog showed up.
@zeusdarkgod7727 You just made if seem like the ending was controversial.
@ChadSimpson-ft7yz controversy is defined as giving rise to public disagreement.
How can something be debated if there isn't disagreement?
You asked how it was debated, I told you, your welcome.
The key indicator to Childs being the Thing at the end is the music cue that plays when he accepts a drink from MacReady. Fuchs let MacReady know that... "If a small particle of this Thing is enough to take over an entire organism, then everyone should prepare their own meals, and I suggest we only eat out of cans." In the time that Childs and MacReady were separated, both of them would be suspicious of each other. Childs asked straight away: "You're the only one who made it?" "Did you kill it?" Meaning, "Do I have any friends? Do I have anyone left who witnessed me taking the blood test?" MacReady starts to provoke him when Childs asks, "How will we make it?" And MacReady says, "Maybe we shouldn't." The Thing never thinks this way; its only objective is survival... So this makes Childs defensive, "If you're worried about me..." Then, MacReady immediately diffuses the situation... "If we got any surprises for each other, I dont think we're in much shape to do anything about it..." Then Childs relaxes, but, here's the reason why Mac doesnt believe Childs... He doesn't believe he thought he saw Blair. This is expressed in his laughter at Childs's excuse. Blair tunneled underneath the tool shed and into the camp. When we follow his POV with the camera from where he's exploring, he finds the door wide open... Childs was given strict orders to stay until they made it back with Blair... "If he makes it back here, and we're not with him, burn him..." There's not a single reason why Childs would not trust MacReady to follow this order, as they're both human. Subsequently, if Blair arrived through the floor and walked to exactly where he does in the film, where the door is open, and Childs had stayed at his post... Blair would have been burned. There's only one explanation for what happened on screen: he infected Childs, vame back to see if he was done becoming an imitation, and bee-lined back to the generator to shut the power off when he saw Childs was gone This allows Childs a way out if Blair doesnt win. When Childs undoubtedly saw the explosion and heard the howl of the The Thing, he knew it lost. So, why return? Why not just freeze and wait for the rescue team? Childs has the flamethrower... The one thing that can destroy the Thing. Now, he can overpower MacReady. The more people it imitates, the stronger it becomes. Leaving MacReady alive, and risk him surviving means the end for the Thing, because MacReady knows too much. There's no reason why Childs shouldn't allow MacReady to administer a second blood test if he trusted MacReady enough to take a sip from his bottle. Thus, this shows that Childs is indeed a Thing, and was attempting to pacify the situation with MacReady by sharing a drink. Look at the intent in MacReady's eyes when he hands him the J&B. He chuckles afterward because he realizes Childs wouldn't be stupid enough to drink it, if he was aware he could be infected by one particle. Therefore, Mac figured out his identity... the bittersweet end is that the Thing has the flamethrower. Checkmate, Checkmate? To prove my point, see how suspicious of MacReady Childs was earlier in the film, during periods of separation, that tension built up between them... Here, at the end, Childs is not the least bit suspicious of Mac being infected, yet he should be... and takes a drink anyway. That's why the music cue goes, dun dun, right when he sips it. That's the Thing's cue. Lol
Fun Fact: The "Dog-Thing" That initially brought the infection was a Siberian Husky named Jed. Jed was actually part wolf, which is why he was very stoic, quiet, and imposing. Jed was very well trained, but he was still in touch with the wild side of his lineage. The actor who played Clark specifically asked for the role so that he could work with Jed.
Damn straight!! That's correct about the dog.👍🇭🇲🦘✌️
My dad took me to see this theatrically in 1982 when I was about to turn 15. 41 years later and it’s still my favorite horror film ever. Thanks dad, R.I.P.
Yep, movies and relatives will always have a special place. I know.
RIP.
Thanks for making us feel old! Damn it! Lol
This is cool!
Only for this reason can we consider he was an excellent father.
It's a pity he's no longer here.
I saw it theatrically too, but I was at University and 20 years old...it didn't help! Still shocks me.
My late oldest sister was basically not afraid of anything. This movie freaked her out.
For me, Ennio Morricone's score freaks me out to this day. It's the minimalism of it, but it still packs a punch.
Had a manager whose dad took him and his brother to see this when he was eight. He said for about a week after he wouldn’t let his dog come up to him and would take off if he was in a room alone and the dog came in. 😂
@@sonofmoss Who the hell takes their eight your old kid to this movie? Even for the 80's this was too much for kids.
This movie is one the greatest sci-fi horror movies ever made, so I'm not surprised about her reaction. May your sister rest in peace.
@@NecramoniumVideo kids that grew up in the '70s and '80s were not wussies! Lol.
I love how movie reactors try to convince themselves it’s not going to be scary because the movie is old
Yeah, you think that after a while they'd catch on that fear has basically been the same with us since the dawn of man. What scared people then will scare people now, and in the 70s and 80s they'd really push boundaries that most modern films are scared to push.
When she said “it’s from 1982 how bad can it be” I actually lolled 😂
I think it's more grotesque than actually scary.
i thought this until the exorcist humbled my ass
That's about the same way i approach modern horror films lol. Feels like cookie cutter cheap jumpscare fests for the most part, instead of tension building
Cassie, you have come a long way. This is probably one of the scariest movies ever made and definitely the pinnacle of physical creature FX. There is nothing you cannot handle now! We are all proud of you, Cassie!
She is ready for Terrifier!
Which is funny cuz it was one of the first movies I saw as a young kid that didn't give me nightmares.
Eh.... I would like her to watch 'The Fly' first. That one and 'The Blob' are also that pinnacle of 1980s creature horror. We'll see how she holds up hahaha
@@demonofelru3214 Add a few more like Martyrs, Human Centipede 2 or Bone Tomahawk and we got a nice movie marathon for Christmas = )
Such a good movie- probably my favorite horror movie.
I’m impressed. Cassie watches ‘Arachnophobia’ first, and gets traumatized, then she watches ‘The Thing’. Took a lot of guts to get through both of these movies back to back like she did.
I did find it funny, though, when she thought it wouldn’t be so bad of a movie since it’s from 1982. 😂😂
At least Arachnophobia had a good layer of humor on top!
I can't handle arachnophobia since I suffer from it
@@DanielOrtiz-oz8wk Same here! Or at least I used to. I don't mind spiders as much as I did when I was younger, but some species still creep me out.
Couldn't be described better
@@gardener68 mine runs borderline irrational. I killed spiders by spraying them stomping and put them on fire
The practical effects in this movie are AMAZING, even looking back with today’s technology.
..infact looks better than CGI. CGI can never make for actual real models and effect.
@workonesabs honestly it seems mainstream movies are getting worse looking when they utilize CGI these days. It's lazy looking.
@@workonesabstruly well made cgi can look phenomenal. The industry just barely allows for enough time to be put into it
Rob Bottin, the sfx guy, was and is the greatest ever.
I totally agree, sith Lord. I thought the 2011 prequel was okay just because of the CGI use. Now, I just want to make clear that I don't hate CGI unless it's not used correctly.
The entire movie is about paranoia. Even Carpenter wouldnt tell us if the thing survived, or not. He hinted that he knew, but wouldnt say. That's what makes this movie brilliant.
Didn't know that. Just goes to show why Carpenter is the best.
Best part is the breath thing. He said once he did not plan it, like that. Happy accident.
I think you can choose whatever ending you wish.
"Lancaster's original ending had both MacReady and Childs turn into the Thing. In the spring, the characters are rescued by helicopter, greeting their saviors with "Hey, which way to a hot meal?". Carpenter thought this ending was too shallow. In total, Lancaster completed four drafts of the screenplay. The novella concludes with the humans clearly victorious, but concerned that birds they see flying toward the mainland may have been infected by the Thing. Carpenter opted to end the film with the survivors slowly freezing to death to save humanity from infection, believing this to be the ultimate heroic act. Lancaster wrote this ending, which eschews a The Twilight Zone-style twist or the destruction of the monster, as he wanted to instead have an ambiguous moment between the pair, of trust and mistrust, fear and relief.
the ending is obvious: this creature has died because it is unable to reproduce the inorganic.The director at the end showed a close-up of the earring in the actor's ear
@@MyWifeHuntress But on the other hand... Childs breath doesn't show as McReady. He accepts the whisky without hesitation and drinks it, although everyone knows they can be infected by sharing drinks or food. McReady starts laughing after Childs starts drinking realizing he's not the same. Just the theory of the believers that Childs is indeed The Thing.
“This is the Swedish base?” After the doc corrected Macready that they’re Norwegians like three times lol
Joking haha Great reaction!
Cassie really pushing herself with this particular Double Feature, and yes Kurt Russell's hat in The Thing is legendary. I also especially love The Thing because unlike so many horror movies, the characters actually behave like generally normal people/professionals doing the best they can as opposed to horny teenagers waiting to get chopped up or something.
Event Horizon does the same thing with having almost every character being competent professionals who try their best but just get overwhelmed by the evil of the ship.
Yes because teenagers being stupid and h0rny is super unrealistic. lol
I seem to recall Russell saying he had seen a chopper pilot in a remote location wear a ridiculous hat which was the inspiration, but I could be imaging that.
Also living for long periods in that kind of isolation can make people eccentric, and no one bats an eye because you can't just up and leave.
@@Cheepchipsableactually the hat had already been established in the film by the time Kurt arrived on set. Kurt's flying double actually wore that hat, and John Carpenter liked it so much he worked it into the movie. And Kurt himself said "I had to learn to love it"
Congratulations Cassie! You've passed your initiation into the genre of true horror with this classic. Never thought you'd tackle this one. Nightmare fuel indeed.
I think a creepy, scary movie will get her. I saw what The Shining did to her. I want her to watch Sinister.
Yes, you made it... you're one of us now. Gooba Gobba Gooba Gobba, One of Us, One of Us!
If she can watch this and not immediately nope outta there, then I'm sure she can rake on the Cronenberg classics.
@seancanova7396 Sinister is overrated in my opinion
@@GyobuTheDemonOniwa BOOOOOOO!
I rewatched this movie last week at my friend's house, who happens to have a husky. Let me say, knowing what happens, and watching with a husky cuddled up next to you IS AN EXPERIENCE.
If you want a return to goofy Kurt Russell (but still action packed, fighting creatures) I reccomend Big Trouble in Little China
BTILC. What a classic! Totally one of a kind.
@@thewalkingsaid💯!
Kurt's John Wayne impersonation.
Though I mentioned marveling at the special effects, if I had to be upset at anything it was to see the poor innocent dogs suffering in the film. Yeah I know that no animals were harmed but something about that gets to me even though I know it's not real.
as soon as the husky starts acting different, you would freak out xD
Something a lot of people don't catch, when they are arguing about the blood bank keys Windows takes off for the guns because he knows HE is the one who lost the keys. He dropped them when he saw Bennings getting taken over. That is how the thing got the keys and opened the blood bank. There is a ton of cool stuff like that in this movie!
You can hear the keys drop when he runs out of room.
LETS GO, I’ve only seen one other person point it out!
41 years and this is still the best version of this 85 year old story. Written in 1938 as a novella, then made into a film in 1951 with a young James Arness. Originally set in the Arctic. Then Carpenter got his hands on it in 1982 and created a masterpiece, re-set it in the Antarctic and filmed it in Alaska. Excellent film, even now
Respectfully disagree, in that both films are classics for great reasons. The first film dumped the shape shifter because they couldn't figure out how to do it justice, but otherwise the script was solid and interestingly enough for this 60s kid the dialog was adult by his understanding at that time. Even the introduction of a female character; Nikki (Margaret Sheridan), had none of the stereotypes of that decade's screamers. In short, at least for this longtime movie fan, film is timeless.
The Thing 1982 is based on the story Who Goes There. The Thing is often incorrectly seen as a remake of The Thing from Another World from 1951. Carpenter's film is and always will be a classic.
I read the original script for JC’s Thing, which was written by Actor Burt Lancaster. It was different than JC’s. Final vision but in it’s own right was quite good, It was a good blend the novella “Who Goes There” & the 50’s Thing movie.
Meant to say “ actor Burt Lancaster’s son. “
Carpenter's film of The Thing is much closer to the original short story than the 1950s film.
What sets this film a cut above most horror films is the paranoia of not knowing which of your friends might not be human any more. The film winds up the tension like a spring.
This film has, in my opinion, one of the best sound effects in film ever. When not-Bennings yells and they burn him, and the scream is like this insanely deep-voiced combo of an elephant trumpet and a chrorus of voices... that is just ABSOLUTELY inspired sound design.
Sounds like what a actual Demon might sound like. Terrifying sound.
@@jacobq.2204 According to John Carpenter, that scream is the Thing "scrolling" through all the voices of all the creatures it's imitated, trying to find Bennings' voice.
@@danieldickson8591..... wtf? You made this even scarier
@@danieldickson8591also, *Bennings's. Cause not plural =)
Yes! Something that's often overlooked is the movie sound design/mixing used to be SO much better.
The 1980s belonged to John Carpenter. Even though Halloween was released in 1978, it had a huge influence on 1980s cinema. Carpenter followed that up with The Fog, Escape from New York, The Thing, Christine, Starman, Big Trouble in Little China, Prince of Darkness, and They Live.
She would love Starman. I LOVE The Fog!
It was a hell of a run!
He is a genius
They Live and Prince of Darkness ❤
Before Halloween, Carpenter made "Assault on Precinct 13," (1976) an excellent remake of Hawk's "Rio Bravo."
Here's 2 reasons why I say Childs is the thing. 1) When Childs was guarding the door waiting for Blair, he was wearing a blue jacket. Then at the end of the movie, it was a light beige jacket. His blue jacket was torn to shreds when he became the thing and he had to put on another jacket. 2) At the end of the movie, MacReady was testing Childs with giving him a drink. MacReady remembered Fuchs when he said to eat out of cans and prepare their own meals because of cell activity. So if Childs knew this, he would of never drank from the bottle, but he did drink and he failed the test. This is why MacReady chuckles after. He knows Childs is the thing.
That is such great analytical skills
1. he's still wearing a blue jacket; it's just covered in a layer of frost and snow... he did just claim to be out in an Antarctic storm. 2. while it's logical to think like this as a viewer, things get pretty hectic in the movie, and we have 0 idea how much any of the characters know about the situation besides what we observe directly, and this info was only known by three people. MacReady, Fuchs, and Blair(whom Fuchs got the idea from).
Please do 'Escape From New York'! It's another John Carpenter film starring Kurt Russell. For many people, it's Kurt's most iconic role.
Absolute classic!
Snake Plissken, MacCready, Jack Burton.. man Kurt Russell was killin it in the 80s 👍
legitimately one of the best films ever made, a real credit to humanity.
LOL. I wouldn't go THAT far, but it's a great horror movie. (although I didn't love it when I first saw it in '82; it grew on me over the years. Still can't take Kurt Russell seriously at all in the movie, but now that I know all the actors better than I did back then - when they were just a mob of unknown actors playing a bunch of grumpy one-note characters - it's a lot more fun. I think it's hilarious they all defer to this helicopter pilot, MacReady. Great practical effects though, it was a great period for practical effects. "American Werewolf In London" and "The Howling" had come out the year before, which had blown everyone's minds, and this was the next year's version. ("Poltergeist" came out the same month and got all the box office, for a whole bunch of reasons. People were geeking out over the face ripping scene in that movie (and the clown, and the tree), it overshadowed "The Thing" at first. Late night cable is where it got it's second life, like lots of 80s classics.
@@TTM9691a masterpiece to humanity. The best horror movie. One of the only horror movies where people act real.
Unlike alien =)
All that stuff you said is interesting tbh
In John Carpenter's 1978 film "Halloween",
the original "The Thing" (1951) was playing on the TV in the background.
Sure was, I watched an reaction today on Halloween 78
Love the original. Love both of 'em. The first one holds up great for a 50s horror film. And the two movies are so different that they don't cancel each other whatsoever, not even in the slightest way. Other than it takes place on Antarctica.
I really need to see the original.@@TTM9691
They also added some scenes from "Forbidden Planet" on the television in the background. Were they trying to fool us into thinking they were the same movie, or were they watching different channels?
The blood jump scare is amazing.
It's not actually scary at all, but as the scene is put together, you really don't expect anything to happen when he touches it.
I reckon the cleverest bit is the line right before it is a misdirection. MacReady says they'll do Garry last, so you're expecting to sit in apprehension for a lot longer.
Then not even a second later, bam.
@@michaelinlofi They do the same thing when Copper dies. Right before Norris' belly opens up, there are a couple shots of Clark grabbing the surgical knife off of the table, so we're all expecting an attack on MacReady instead.
No, blood screaming and jumping out of a petri dish should scare you.
" SOCK BATH ! "
if you get that
reference leave a
THUMBS UP
👍👍
and a comment
Ennio Morricone and Carpenter did some of their best work with this score.
I bought that CD soundtrack many years ago with it's extra tracks, very creepy music by Ennio, John carpenter was spot on in appointing him as the composer.
The Thing is my favorite horror movie of all time. Its just the perfect, "Do you really know who is standing right next to you?"
Also that Scream that "Bennings" does. The most unsettling sound ever
Ending of Invasion of the bodysnatchers is my scream of hell
Yes and yes.
When I started watching this channel, never in my wildest dreams did I think Cass would make it to The Thing and she did GREAT! So proud! Now…..The Exorcist? yes?😂
Not yet I’m afraid. I think that’ll take too much out of her. Baby steps. Let’s hope she doesn’t wait until she’s 60 and then she has a heart attack.
How many years before Silent Hill?
or Insidious! @@ChronicUnderachiever420
A lot of people ran out of the theater during the early balloon neck scene. Interesting that part also cringes me out more than the other stuff. But the whole movie still has that overall creepy feel to it. I doubt Cassie will ever watch it though and that's fine. I have yet to see Titanic and won't because I can't handle a giant sinking ship happening at night. Loved Poseidon Adventure though!
I think she’s said she will not watch horror movies based on demons or the devil for religious reasons (I feel the same way). But that’s just what I remember her saying once.
I've heard a theory that the Thing is actually alive. At the end, MaCready gives Child's a drink, which he takes. Earlier in the movie, they specifically said to not eat or drink anything from anyone else, yet he takes a swig without hesitation. This is supposed to be a hint that he isn't worried about being taken over, since he's already the Thing. MaCready even laughs in a sad sort of way as Child's drinks, as if he's resigned to the fact the Thing has won.
A bit of a stretch, in my opinion. Child's could just not give a damn since their going to die from the cold in a few hours anyway, but it's a fun theory.
Personally, I love how we'll never really know whether it survived or not. The entire point of the movie is showing the extremes of paranoia. It's only right that the movie leaves us with an ending we can't trust.
If you like Kurt Russel, please check out his 1998 movie “Soldier.” It’s an excellent sci-fi action movie which is (my opinion) very underrated.
Russell was awesome in Soldier
Yes! Soldier is a masterpiece!
KURT RUSSELL is great in these movies: *Executive Decision* (1996), *Soldier* (1998), and *Vanilla Sky* (2001) opposite TOM CRUISE.
Cassie could dedicate one week to Kurt Russell and love it. 😃
One of my favorite! He got ripped for that movie.
She should definitely watch it considering it's a sequel to Blade Runner.
The absolute pinnacle of horror. Brillaint acting, amazing creature effects by Rob Botin. Claustrophobia, paranoia ..intense, a thriller, a whodunnit, a sci fi? What is ..The Thing?...a masterpiece that waa absolutely panned at the time of release. Carpenters peak. You did amazing to get through this bless you. ❤
Saw it in a theater in 1982 with some friends. We all loved it. We actually started applauding when the guys head came off and descending from the table to the floor; that's how good the special effects were. Still one of my favorites.
Get though it? It's a masterpiece of a film. Its a joy to "get through."
Same dude who help with the VFX of ROBOCOP.
This is Carpenter’s masterpiece. I saw this on cinema release in 1982 and it blew my mind. Sadly at the time it bombed as everyone went to see ET instead but it’s now regarded as a true cult classic.
I still say The Thing and Halloween are equal masterpieces. Especially considering what he accomplished with that Halloween micro-budget. Amazing!
@@carlgibbons5777 of course. I get it. This is just my perspective of Carpenter’s work and for me The Thing tops Halloween.
@@carlgibbons5777 and they live
@@train_go_boom2065"There's no glowing fingers on these bastards"
At the end, you could very much see Macready's breath when he spoke. But you did not see Child's breathe when he spoke.
And Childs didn't seem concerned about taking a drink from a possibly contaminated bottle.
Watch it in blu-ray quality, you'll see it
Incorrect.
In the horror and thriller genre, John Carpenteer's "The Thing" set the bar so high it has yet to be reached by anyone else.
Set The Bar High…ABSOLUTELY!
Aliens the better movie of the genre. Close tie imho, love both
@@robbrown2314 Nope.
@@robbrown2314 You're right, but outside the genre The Shining is still the best.
I still think his Halloween is better. A more straightforward gut punch. But they are pretty close.
MacReady: Exhausted, demoralized, likely terrified
Cassie: "He's so cute!"
LOVED this reaction! One of my favorite channels.
He is though
This bastard is a master class in suspense/horror. Set design, score, pacing, timing, acting, effects... Absolutely amazing. It's always a pleasure to see someone appreciate it for what it is.
It's absolutely insane to me that this movie bombed in theaters when it came out. It's definitely one of the finest horror films of all time and without a doubt the best remake ever.
That was a release date problem. Had this movie come out before ET, chances are that it would've done really well. But, by the time this movie was in theaters, ET mania was in full-swing, and thus The Thing suffered, because people wanted cute and cuddly aliens. I think we totally need a The Thing vs ET movie.
A lot of people at the time saw it as a needless remake of the Thing From Another World
Still probably the best horror movie ever. And its almost 30 to 40 years old now. no cgi too. Simply amazing.
Came out in 1982 so it's 41 years old, believe it or not.
It's still one of the greatest creature effects movies ever made. It's a testament to Rob Bottin and a metric tonne of cocaine (allegedly).
The best. ❤️
Agree with all of you.Why the critics panned this film when it came out in 1982 is beyond me,and John Carpenter was apparently hurt by the criticism.I’m just glad it’s been reappraised by modern critics who’ve now given it the praise it deserves.
@@derekharrison1582Because it came out after E.T. and a dark, claustrophobic movie about paranoias with a mean alien wasn't what people wanted.
A true legendary movie. The guy who worked on the creature effects worked so hard for so long without taking a break, living on candybars, that after the last day of shooting he went straight to a hospital to check himself in for a full inspection.
Agree 100%!! Respect for Rob Botin!!!!!!
Candy bars...and coke.
I refuse to give people respect who act recklessly with their health just because they work on a movie. To be clear the creature effects are amazing, but they would have been just as amazing if instead of trying to work on a tight schedule and risking your health for a bit of fame, it should have been the producers responsibilty to postpone release and not care about the extra money that costs.@@thedoneeye
What I have heard is that Rob Bottin was hospitalized DURING production, and Stan Winston had to step in to handle a couple of effects.
@@Johnny_Socko And Stan became the man to go to practical effects for the next few decades.
This movie is peak storytelling, even after 40+ years we're still discussing and dissecting it. You're a real trooper, Cassie, for seeing it through to the end. I knew this would be a rough one for you, mostly for the reasons you stated in the video; It's more 'gross' than it is 'jump scary' (although there are some great ones in this). The gore was the main reason (along with critics panning the movie, idiots) that the movie bombed at the box office. It wasn't until years later with VHS rentals that this movie finally started to get some appreciation for the masterpiece that it is. I've loved this movie since I first saw it in my teens and it's only gotten better with age. It plays perfectly on people's sense of paranoia and fear of infection. There's even a hint of a spiritual undertone if you're into that kind of thing ("I don't know who to trust. - "Trust is a tough thing to come by these days. Tell you what, why don't you just trust in the Lord"). The source novella, 'Who Goes There', gives the idea of an evil entity 'possessing' it's victims, thinking that the person next to you is normal until you realize they're horrific inside. Maybe that's a bit of a stretch but it's still fun to think about. John Carpenter's The Thing is not just a great 'horror movie', it's a great movie period.
So, was Childs human or a thing at the end? I don't really like referring to 3rd party sources (sources other than the film itself claiming to be canon), so let's look at what the film appears to tell us. After the group finds Blair/Thing's makeshift spacecraft we get an apparent POV shot of the thing inside the camp where Childs was (accompanied by music). I don't think it's an actual POV shot but rather the film showing us how the thing could've potentially gotten to Childs. We see a shot of the stairs leading down to the generator room which is where Blair/Thing would've come from if he did go after Childs, then the camera glides towards where Childs was standing earlier (only now he's gone). This shot is very similar to the earlier shot of Childs standing by the window/door when Mac tells him that they're going out to give Blair the test. Note that in that scene Childs appears to be very tired (as the camera moves towards Childs we can hear Mac's footsteps but Childs doesn't react to them, only when Mac starts talking). Something else that I only noticed recently (thanks to analysis videos) is that there's a door directly behind Childs that can be accessed by another door close to the generator room stairway. It's possible that Blair/Thing used these doors to get to Childs, taking advantage of Childs' exhausted state.
Now that still didn't answer whether or not Childs was a thing at the end, just how the thing could've gotten him despite him having a flamethrower. So let's look at the end. MacReady settles down with a bottle of what appears to be liquor when Childs comes up on him still with his flamethrower. The fact that Childs simply didn't just torch Mac is seemingly a point in favor of Childs being human. However, we have to remember that the last time Childs wanted to burn Mac, he had dynamite on him. If Childs was a thing, it would've remembered this and so it may have just been playing it safe by not torching Mac. The two men have a little talk and Mac gives Childs the bottle and he drinks from it. This leads to the 'Molotov Theory', which is that the bottle doesn't contain alcohol but rather gasoline from the tractor used to make molotov cocktails which they use to destroy the camp. Mac is watching Childs closely when he offers the bottle to him and the main music theme kicks in as Childs drinks. Side note, if Mac was about to willingly drink this before Childs showed up then that tells us where Mac's mind was.
One of the things that makes this movie so good is that it doesn't really matter whether or not Childs is a thing at the end, it leaves us with the movies main theme: paranoia. The fear that we can never fully trust each other.
I agree with your main points, including that the main theme is paranoia. We simply DON’T KNOW… a lot of things! (One example: When Blair smashes the radio room, is it human-Blair, who is acting to force the continued isolation of the team, to prevent the infection from spreading to the rest of the planet? Or, is it Blair-Thing, who is NOT acting to •prevent a rescue• but is acting •to prevent a warning• from reaching the outside world, thereby minimizing problems for itself in the future?)
“If Mac was about to willingly drink this before Childs showed up then that tells us where Mac’s mind was.” - No. Mac was not about to drink gasoline. Rather, the bottle contained normal booze. The ‘heartbeat’ music kicks in as Childs drinks, and we immediately see Mac chuckle in response.
If Childs were the Thing, he wouldn’t care about drinking a contaminated bottle of Whiskey (contaminated with a Thing-organism particle). He might well care if he were human. Would a human Childs prefer to drink from a maybe-contaminated bottle, and POSSIBLY die by assimilation, if it meant that he maybe could be instead drinking ordinary alcohol, and have the booze take the edge off the experience of Childs freezing to death? …My read of these events, is that Mac gave a test to Childs, and Childs failed it. Mac chuckled as he has proven to himself, that Childs isn’t human.
There’s even a third possibility: Childs is lying to Mac about where he (Childs) was, to cover himself, but Childs is still human: Blair-Thing could have confronted Childs when Blair-Thing went to the generator room. In this scenario, Childs was so tired that he didn’t think he could take Blair, even with the flame thrower. Blair-Thing sensed an opportunity and told Childs to beat it. Childs retreated without firing, Blair-Thing stole the generator, and at the end, Childs is human, but is telling a whopper.
It's suspense, but with a real payoff with the monster reveal.
Not really meant to be a jump scare film.
Great analysis. Though I think gasoline would taste awful. I would think that if anyone had a sip, they would spit it out immediately.
I was hoping Cassie wouldn't close her eyes and miss some of the effects - since those are what the movie is most known for - so she could at least have a future discussion about the spider head and stuff. But I think she caught most of it and her genuine reactions are always classic!
Well, I think the Molotov theory is bonkers. We know that the thing retains the memories of its victim - which means it knows how whisky tastes and that gasoline tastes awful. I think the bottle, the smile, the music is just a red herring, designed to make us wonder even 40 years later. Which we do. 😉
I watch the thing every single year around halloween. Best horror movie ever. Such a simple concept and perfectly executed.
The Special Effects by Rob Bottin in 1982 for The Thing is The Best that I've seen in Scifi and Horror During That Time and Still Stands Out Phenomenal
The cardiac paddles scene still gets me every time. It's so well made and played, and the damn head will never not be creepy.
@@mycroft16 👍
Capital, My Man...
One of the GREATEST horror/sci-fi films ever made and holds up to this day. Also need to point out how underrated Kurt Russell is as an actor. He carried this film but the true genius behind it will always be John Carpenter...
Kurt Russell is a great actor. I've always found him stellar in all works I've seen him in. He really takes his profession seriously.
I say this all the time, and without any hint of irony: Kurt Russell is the greatest actor alive.
At this stage of his life I don't think you can say Kurt Russel is underrated. His body of work is very large and includes much that's stellar.
Next John Carpenter, Kurt Russell collaboration: Escape From New York
Carpenter is an absolute genius and legend!❤ The paranoia, anxiety, stress, and claustrophobia that these men have in the movie really add to the scares
I would love to see the Thing Vs. Michael Myers 😂
err 'ghosts of mars', 'escape from l.a.'
The music in this movie is so extremely good, so iconic and perfectly sets the mood.
U are correct the music is fantastic.
The main theme is a Heartbeat. Very fitting
@@bombomos Doesn't seem likely, does it? Nothing has a heart that sounds like that.
I’m torn, on one hand I want innocent people like Cassie to live their whole life not seeing movies like this to maintain their pure souls. On the other, I’m very curious to see how she’ll respond to it. I will give Cassie tons of credit that she is very brave to branch out into different genres.
It's a social experiment, of sorts.
@@NominePatrisThe goal should not be to disturb or desensatize her. But to suggest movies she normally wouldn't watch within reason. We want her to have fun after all.
Same, honestly. Then again, she handled True Detective okay. Season 1 is built around nihilism for Pete's sake.
Welp, she's pretty contaminated at this point. Might as well bring on the torture porn. Maybe HOSTEL to work her up to something like AUDITION. 🤭
Dude it's a movie. Don't be weird.
The effect of watching this in a movie theater is so much more powerful. I saw it in 1982 in a packed theater and the experience was so incredible. A shared experience I’ll never forget.
I saw it twice in empty movie theatres! I would have loved to have seen that. I bet there was a lot of popcorn flying up into the air and spilt drinks.
I saw this several times that magical summer of 82, and it's still absolutely chilling especially since I've gotten older. You can understand the grip of paranoia even more.
A packed theater?! That would have been rare because it couldn’t compete with E.T.
This came out 2 years before I was born and I didn't really watch it until like 2005 though I always saw comics or some things about it until then. After I watched it it's in my top Horror Movies. I DID get the chance 2 years ago to see it in a theater because of a special showing and it was pretty fun
@@peterbriggs6857 it was similar to when I saw ‘The Exorcist’ and ‘Alien’. For a few seconds there was stunned silence, but then you heard people murmuring.
I still remember climbing up the back of the couch when that head sprouted legs and crawled across the floor. I'm so glad to see how well that scene holds up 40 years later. Loved this. Your reaction made me remember just how terrifying this movie still is.
Saw it in a theater in 1982 with some friends. We all loved it. We actually started applauding when the guys head came off and descending from the table to the floor; that's how good the special effects were. Still one of my favorites.
Been watching your channel for 2 years now, so proud of your evolution from not being able to stomache seeing a drop of blood to actually watching a movie like THE THING.
Tucker and Dale vs evil, this ones definitely one you'll love.
My buddies and I saw this in the theater when it came out in '82. We LOVED it. Far and away our favorite horror movie by which all others are measured. Lines from this movie embedded themselves within our vernacular that still appear in our conversations over 40 years later. Great job, Cassie!
John Carpenter's The Thing (1982) is a masterpiece in practical effects, suspense, Sci-fi Horror and creating fan theories. The film is meant to keep you guessing who's the thing and who does what at any given time. Even after 40+ years people are still guessing if the thing was destroyed or not, and if Childe or Mac are infected. John Carpenter made a very risky choice in leaving the ending open like that, and although it was poorly recieved in the box office, it's cult following spreads like it's been infected by the thing. A cliffhanger ending is very difficult to do well because most people want know what happens at the end of a movie, or they expect a sequel when there isn't a definitive end. The Thing is a rare example of how a cliffhanger ending can be done well.
I agree it's a perfect cliff hanger ending. At least to the older generation of viewers who grew up with the film. Though I have noted some young reacters just don't get this ending and almost feel disappointed. I admit this is surprising to me. It's like they want a clear cut ending (to know if the Thing survives and / or who is the Thing perhaps.) Well I wouldn't have it any other way. And I'm glad that Cassie is one of the few young reactors who appears to appreciate this ending and is asking the questions about who is really who around that fire as they share a bottle of booze.
Fun fact: the Norwegian chasing the Dog-Thing at the beginning who is killed by Gerry basically spoils the entire plot. He’s shouting that “it’s not a real dog, it’s a Thing” in untranslated Norwegian.
The sheer genius for practical effects on display in this movie from Rob Bottin is immensely impressive. So many effects, mostly achieved in camera, and in an era before computer effects, all on a limited budget just goes to show what can be achieved with know how and inventiveness. The effects have also stood the test of time incredibly well, as Cassie's reaction to the movie demonstrates.
Even more impressive bottin was barely in his 20s when he did all that
He worked so hard he was hospitalized after production ended
The Excorcist is not at all the kind of scary you think it is and is a masterpiece anyone who loves movies must watch at some point. You cant hide from it forever Cass
True, true, and true! You speak only truth!
The medical scenes were more frightening than the demon ones.
She doesn't like things involving demons so she won't watch it.
Yes, the Exorcist is an acknowledged piece of cinema history, if not a "masterpiece". You can be a cinema-file without adding the Exorcist to your watch list. Your movie-watching life will be no less fulfilling. I'm constantly recommending people only watch the Exorcist if they are ready for some life-long scars, especially of you are sensitive, like Cassie.
It’s the 50th anniversary too.
The practical effects are so great in this film, so impressive what they did with zero CGI.
I can tell you loved watching this 😂
Wonderful reaction! Any time you have to remind yourself "it's only a movie" as a defense mechanism, you're watching something special.
You know what makes this channel so great? It really feels like we're just sitting with a friend, making them watch our favorite movies and seeing their reactions. It's so warm, so comforting. Really nice. It's a welcome change from YT's larger variety of absolute lunacy.
I'm so proud of you, Cassie! I never dreamed you'd watch this and now you're planning on seeing The Fly too? Listen, if you can handle The Thing AND The Fly then you're ready for The Exorcist. You can doit!
The fly is a tough watch
I was 10 years old when I saw this the first time. It was February, there was a blizzard outside and I had zero idea of what was coming. I was completely petrified by dread, but interestingly enough wasn't left with nightmares, just a love of horror that has lasted to this day.
Sometimes movies that are so over the top and outlandish aren't as scary or hit as close to home. So you can just appreciate the craftsmanship and creativity that went into it.
Very similar to my own first viewing, except for the blizzard part :)
Generally, frightening films have never really bothered me
What bothers me in horror are scenes of cruelty
The shot at 13:50 is so primal. Fearful humans, standing in a circle around a fire fighting for survival
It's traditional at this point to say that this a surprisingly faithful adaptation of a story called 'Who Goes There?' written in 1937 by John Campbell. One of the most influential short stories ever written and well worth reading. It was also the first mention anywhere of 'flying saucers' , as faithfully recreated in this film.
I think there are atleast three adaptions made from it. The Thing from the 50s, this one, and Horror Express (whole movie is free in youtube).
Four decades later, the practical effects in this movie still deliver the scares. 10/10.
It gets cut from every reaction but I like when Blair shouts "No dog could make it a 1,000 miles to the coast. That Thing wants to be us!" I've noticed most reactions question why he's doing all this; I've always thought at this point it was to completely isolate the camp. Some speculate he's already infected but I don't think so.
Ok bot@Official_PopCornInBed
I think it's pretty clear that Blair got infected at some point when he was locked in the cabin, when there was no one around to see. Locking him up was their biggest mistake...he saw the real danger well before the rest of them.
If he was already infected, then isolating everyone off from the outside would have been working against himself. If they didn't know, he could have just waited it out and left with everyone else.
He did it to keep the thing from escaping and infecting the entire world. It's pretty blatantly clear that was his reasoning.
Over 40 years old and still so effective, Rob Bottin work is exceptional in this movie
And Stan Winston's work on the Kennel Thing. The second dog head was puppeted by Stan, himself, under the floor with his arm up the creature's neck.
This reaction was everything I wanted and then more.
Cassie +Horror movies = Pure entertainment. 😂
This will scar Cassie, 100%
One of my personal favorites though, John Carpenter made some wicked movies.
He sure did.
The original " The Thing " was in 1951. Then John Carpenter version is the one you're reacting to. And in 2011 is Pre - Thing. But I suggest after the Kurt Russell you do " The Fly " 🪰
The best thing about The Thing is that you can believe whatever ending you want. If you want it to be a bleak nightmare, one or both of them are The Thing. If you need a happy ending, you can believe they killed it and got rescued.
One of the best horror movies ever made. So happy you are finally watching it!
Just ten years prior to this,Kurt was probably a kid makin movies for Walt Disney😊
He definitely was.
He still was when this came out. He voiced Adult Copper in The Fox and the Hound released the same year as The Thing.
yep, with The Computer Wore Tennis Shoes; The World's Strongest Man; and Now You See Me, Now You Don't
All classics that I haven't seen since I was a kid.@@kingscorpion7346
@@kingscorpion7346and The Barefoot Executive. Another early Kurt Russell Disney classic!
Best thing about this movie was the practical effects. That made it even scarier. I love the ending. I think not knowing makes it even better
When released, it wasn’t recieved well by critics and made a little more than it cost. Arguably one of the best horror movies ever made…
“It dropped out of the top 10 grossing films after three weeks, and ended its run earning a total of $19.6 million against its $15 million budget, making it only the 42nd highest-grossing film of 1982. It was not a box office failure, nor was it a hit.”
I was 12 when I saw this in theaters and it definitely left a mark on me haha. The good old days.
Holy shit, it only had a 15 million dollar budget while having some of the best practical vfx? That's pretty nuts
@@landoakechi9406 Check out the making of features sometime. They'll give you a whole new appreciation for everyone who worked on the movie.
The ending of this movie is so clever! If you look closely, McCready tests Childs by handing him the liquor bottle. They had a strict No Sharing Containers policy due to the potential cross contamination. Childs accepting the bottle showed that he had been assimilated. And Kurt Russell looks like he's thinking, "Got you, sucker!" Another tell is Childs had no steam breath. John Carpenter also revealed that either McCready or Childs was a Thing (he refuses to say who). And that people who had been assimilated were shadowed in the lighting. I think the evidence clearly shows it was Childs. It's so subtle. Yet so brilliant. I love this movie.
According to The Thing (2002), neither were.
Childs does have steam breath though. It's harder to see, but it is there.
@artofalmost9479 Interesting. I'll have to look harder. I still think he was the Thing in the end. Just my opinion.
Childs accepting the bottle doesn't necessarily show he'd been assimilated, he might've just forgotten or he might've figured it didn't matter at that point. Even if MacReady was The Thing, he was in no shape to stop him, and vice versa. In fact, there'd be nothing to stop either of them from assimilating the other if there were only two left, so I would say it makes more sense that neither is The Thing.
@@LastRenegadeI agree Child’s taking the bottle was him as a human realizing they’ll both be dead soon that none of it matters anymore.
Wow, I'm impressed. I didn't think you would make it through this film. Hope you weren't too traumatized. Great job Cassie!
I saw this movie at 12 years old.
No modern-made jump scare has ever even made me flinch. Movies like this were the mental and emotional polish that shined the coping with crazy shit armor of our generation. I saw Jaws at 7 and Nightmare on Elm Street at 13. I'm not even sure a movie could scare me now, and it is all due to movies like this.
Poor Cassie, we are corrupting her so.
My favourite kids cartoons when I was growing up were Fire & Ice, Plague Dogs and Watership Down.
They really tried to mess kids up back then, huh? ... it was a more innocent time
I was 13 when I saw it in a small theater. What an experience. As for jump scares...the unnerving screech music that plays when a shadow figure passes Fukes in the hallway...it's technically a jumpscare but I did not then nor have I ever jumped from it. But it's so unnerving regardless because you're realizing what just happened. SOMETHING. What? Don't know, but no way that was human and there's Fukes just standing there, wtf? like we the audience are. That's how to do scares. Not just a jarring chord and 'oh, it's just a cat' like all the slashers do.
@5:14 "Please don't be a bad puppy" lol... that's no puppy.
Literally one of my favorite films ever made.
The best theory I ever heard about the ending was by Rob Ager. He said that the last moments, of Childs drinking the J&B, was reflective of the earlier scene when MacReady pours the drink in the chess machine. In short, Childs WAS the Thing and MacReady knew it by that point thus "winning" despite a perceived checkmate. That's my personal head canon.
I know Carpenter deliberately left it open booked to keep the audience guessing and has stated that it's upto interpretation as he doesn't know if Childs is infected or not and seems to want to keep it like that as he's still to this day refused to answer the question.
The practical effects and the great cast, to me is what made this classic flick so good. And with John Carpenter directing, (of Halloween fame); this is why I love movies. Good reaction Cassie, to an incredibly hard to watch at times movie.
2 Thing's they said would never happen:
2023
1. Road to the Super Bowl runs through Detroit (Lions)
2. Cassie of Popcorn in Bed watches The Thing.
😉
Loved your reaction. This and Escape from New York are my favorite Kurt Russell characters. As for the ending, there are a lot of strong theories of why Childs is the thing. There's the score that pops up when he shows up on screen at the end. The lighting technician on the film said that he blacked out the eyes of anyone who was a thing throughout the film (You catch it on rewatch to figure out who was a thing when), and Childs has no light reflecting in his eyes at the end while Mac does. There's also a really awesome theory that Mac put gasoline in the bottle and handed it to Childs who has no reaction to the switch, prompting Mac's laugh after he drinks because he knows he's done for. This and They Live are my favorites from Carpenter.
Could someone be The Thing and not know it? Never quite understood how that worked. Like it's a virus that infects the person? Or The Thing has to literally eat the person?
I've never heard the gasoline thing before, unless the rationale is that it's one of the Molotovs he's been saving. I think that has to be relegated to fanfic as we don't explicitly see it, but that's a good plot point if it had been intentional and depicted.
There is also no condensation (breath fog) coming from Childs, but there is from MacReady
I like to think John Carpenter would appreciate just how well the effects held up 40 years later. That they can disturb people even now. Probably equally enjoy the discussion of the movie especially the ending, who is the The Thing.
It's been debated a lot but the breath at the end really is the key. Kurt Russell's breath is very obviously in front of his face while Childs has nothing blocking his face. That's too much of a visual not to be a choice by the director. And reason two is the idea that the bottle McReady passed to Childs was full of gasoline, not whiskey - remember they spent the last 5 minutes of the movie throwing molotov cocktails. And so when Childs doesn't react to drinking gasoline McReady laughs because he knows he's the thing.
😮
Butt if you watch closely, when Childs first approaches and you see him standing, you can clearly see his breath in the air. I agree that it was expertly and ambiguously filmed thereafter so that you can't really see his breath. But there is a time you can, so....
Just great editing to keep it ambiguous. No right answer.
@@calibre97 I'd bet good money they tried to get rid of Childs breath in that shot and either couldn't or were forced to go with it in editing. Again, the breath of McReady vs the no-breath of Childs once they settle into that scene is just too stark a contrast to not be on purpose. A director wouldn't block an actor's face like that if it wasn't for a reason.
@@UpTheDown7 incorrect; this has to do with the fidelity of the version you are watching. low def, no breath; hi def, breath. also.... Fuchs thing screams a death wail before being burned and is clearly spewing mist into the air. specifically the version that went to TV is atrocious and you can make out anything. the laser disk version, Childs is a merry steam vent as much as MacReady
the body found at the destroyed place is not the alien pilot that was in the ice chuck but one of the earlier victims. There is a 2011 prequel to this film that explains everything that happened at the Norwegian camp including how an alien got a dog to imitate a dog.
"The Thing From Another World" (1951) is also inspired by the same novella, "Who Goes There?" by John W. Campbell Jr.
I really enjoy it, but it's story is quite different. So, this is sort of a remake, and sort of not a remake.
Either way, John Carpenter made a bunch of awesome movies.
I would say that "It: The Thing From Another World" is closer to Alien than The Thing; less about paranoia and more about fighting an unknown entity while being trapped with it.
John Carpenter's rendition is much truer to the original novella than the 1951 movie was.
Story goes that Campbell loosely based this on his mother’s identical twin, who he mistook for his mother at times but got very cold responses, as his aunt did not like him.
That’s where the origin of “who’s who” came from, and a young child’s alienation (no pun intended) from a mistaken loved one.
Well, although story and such are vastly different, the 1951 version is basically the original movie and John Carpenters The Thing basically a remake of it, but with closer to the book. I mean, he went with "The Thing" which is a title and name for the alien invented by the 1951 movie and even recreated the intro with the exact same effect for the movie title burning its way through the black screen.
@@Kuhmuhnistische_Partei in interviews Carpenter said he wanted to get closer to the original novella because of the dread and paranoia that was not captured by the 1951 film. The 1951 film happened during the flying saucer craze of the 40's and 50's so it tried to capitalize more on that.
Which is not to say the 51 film is bad, it stands up fairly well. I think trying to actually make the thing as a shapeshifter would have been technically challenging in the 1950's although they might have pulled it off with fade shots.
Probably my favorite Horror/Thriller of all time. Also I love how anyone who watches The Thing the first time has the same reaction to the Dog. "Don't shoot the dog!" and on the second rewatch it's always, "Please kill the damned 'Dog'!" Also, the ending. Notice how Macready's breath is billowing in the cold, and Childs isn't? There's also a theory that the bottle Macready handed Childs was filled with Gasoline.
At 13:38 Bennings, after he transforms into the Thing you can see its breath and Macready is about to drink from the bottle as Childs walks up, so both of those theories don't really work. Carpenter wanted it to be a mystery.
Even after seeing it so many times I still say don’t kill the dog even knowing what it is. I can watch this movie like it’s the first time every time.
The uncertainty is the point, you're not supposed to figure it out.
The cinematographer gave the humans a glint in their eyes during the movie while the Thing(s) doesn't have it. In the last scene, it's inconsistent. You do see Child's breath and sometimes Macready doesn't have it, it depends on the lightning. Plus, if the Thing made perfect copies they'd breathe air like normal and the human body wouldn't want to drink gasoline even if they didn't know what it tasted like, which it would, since it copies the original perfectly.
@@clarkmichaels822 Not sure I agree with that. But I see your point. In HDR the only consistent breath I see is Macready's. And yes, I'm aware the linchpin is Paranoia. We're seeing things differently and that's fine. And I'm aware the cellular replication process would make them indistinguishable from a physical level from the original Host. But, thought is driven by repetitive electrical signals travelling on familiar pathways right? Would the Thing necessarily have that Data hardcoded into their brain? I don't know. Just dropping my theory, seems others don't agree so I'll slink away now. Memories themselves are also frayed and distorted by human perception just based on time. So I don't know what a new copy of existing memories would be like. It also depends on how the actors played it and how far John went into that Lore I guess? Whatever though. Enjoy the movie your way, that's the point.
Edit: Granted, the Thing can drop its guise at any point and revert all cells back or make such rapid and insane changes to genetic data that the idea of it needed to breath or not is kind of a moot point. I mean, it turned into a head crawling on the floor. You're telling me that thing was filtering oxygen for movement? Unless it spawned a tiny little pair of lungs inside the head. Granted, it could just be aspirating through its skin.
I saw a video where a whole bunch of people who'd never seen this before were hurling abuse at the Norwegian, while the one guy who HAD seen it before just sat there in silence, smirking
For me it's the feeling of isolation that makes me the most terrified. Any circumstance like this away with no one around or even coming to get you, is terrifying to me. I am glad you reacted to this.
Great movie in every respect but a special shout out to this stellar cast of actors
What. A. Film. Not only is it a masterful horror, but the suspense holds throughout the entire film. And this was the peak of practical effects, they still look superb today, we need to go back to this way of making films instead of overrelying on CGI. Wonderful.
Gotta do John Carpenter’s THE FOG. Not nearly as grotesque, but just as scary. A good ghost story. The actor who plays the main ghost in it is actually the visual effects specialist for this, Rob Bottin.
I agree, it's much easier to take than The Thing, but a great movie nonetheless!
I thought The Fog was awfully dated and quite boring but that’s why it’s called personal taste.
Love the Fog and Adrienne Barbeau. Was a favorite to watch with my GF back then. I can just chill and rewatch that one and it relaxes me because I like lighthouses.
This movie holds a very special place in my horror movie collection. It's got the absolute best monster design. No other monster creates such a gut-wrenching feeling. Just seeing it sparks dread in you. then to know when it infects you, you don't even know. At any point it can flip the switch and take full control and your just gone. Horror movies like this just aren't made nowadays. Everything has to be jump scares. Everything has a happy ending then a jump scare. This is pure hopelessness till the very end.
Child’s is the thing, he was attacked by Blair via the tunnels underneath. When Child’s shows up at the end he asks Macreedy are “you” the only one who made it as opposed to are “we”. Macreedy somehow got a bottle filled with gasoline which Child’s took a swig of.