The Thing

The Thing (1982)

1 suggested correction

(10 votes)

Other mistake: When Doc uses a computer to watch/simulate dog cells being assimilated by a "thing" cell, we can see a single cell fusing with multiple dog cells to imitate them. This process would lead to the dog being digested until it remains only one cell, and not to the replacement of all of its cells by the imitators. (00:40:30 - 00:41:25)

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: The computer simulation isn't showing just one cell taking over an entire dog, but showing how the creature can get the genetic makeup of whatever it touches and replicate it perfectly.

envisaged0ne

I think it's fair to consider this a goof. John Carpenter states on the director's commentary his goal through this sequence was to demonstrate the life cycle of the Thing, and acknowledges that the visual isn't accurate for that purpose.

TonyPH

Pretty much the entire rest of the movie unfolds as though the simulation showcased the Thing spreading / multiplying: it's followed by text saying the entire human population could become "infected" after a certain amount of time; it's not until after this scene that anyone besides Blair is worried that one or more of them has been taken over. It's a valid movie mistake because the movie itself seems to assume the audience saw something different than what was actually shown.

TonyPH

Plot hole: It's never explicitly stated or shown that the Thing reproduces with each victim until the movie is nearly over (when Palmer infects Windows). Most viewers figure it out from the context, but it's unclear just when and how the characters themselves have come to this conclusion. This was an inadvertent result of an editing decision and a visual goof: there is a deleted scene in which Blair explains much more directly that the Thing multiplies according to how many victims it takes, and in its place in the final film is a scene containing a computer simulation that director John Carpenter acknowledges was a failed attempt at explaining the organism's life cycle.

TonyPH

More mistakes in The Thing

Clark: I dunno what the hell's in there, but it's weird and pissed off, whatever it is.

More quotes from The Thing

Trivia: Special Effects legend Stan Winston helped design and led the crew that operated the dog-thing, insisting that he was just assisting Rob Bottin on set.

Erik M.

More trivia for The Thing

Question: Why did Kurt Russell sound the alarm when the thing was attacking the dogs? He was nowhere near the area and could not see what was going on. Also before he pulled the alarm, the sound he would hear was too faint to think something was wrong.

lartaker1975

Answer: Remember that he'd just spent the whole day investigating how something mysterious and horrible destroyed the Norwegian camp, so he's already in a spooked state of mind. Hearing the dogs screaming at night is already unusual on its own, and also reminds him how this whole episode all started with a crazed Norwegian trying to kill a dog. Deep down he knows whatever happened to the Norwegians is now starting at their own camp.

TonyPH

Chosen answer: He sensed something was wrong and wanted as much help from the others as possible.

Answer: Having investigated the Norwegian camp, he could have conceived that the use of fire would be helpful. As such, he would need fire extinguishers after combating whatever the thing might be with the flamethrowers. It could have been foresight on his part that by ringing the fire alarms, somebody was more likely to bring fire extinguishers with them, thus allowing better control of the fire.

More questions & answers from The Thing

Join the mailing list

Separate from membership, this is to get updates about mistakes in recent releases. Addresses are not passed on to any third party, and are used solely for direct communication from this site. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Check out the mistake & trivia books, on Kindle and in paperback.