John Carpenter's 1982 horror classic The Thing is one of the most influential sci-fi horror films ever made, and its ending has been prompting discussion for decades. The Thing is unmistakably a landmark piece of cinema that remains culturally relevant even four decades after its release. The film's excellently realized practical effects have ensured that its grotesque horror remains every bit as powerful, with the impact of The Thing still being felt many years on.
✕ Remove Ads
The Thing's relentless claustrophobic tension and unsettling atmosphere of general distrust proved pivotal for the horror genre, but it has also inspired a slew of other films across a number of genres. Built around the sci-fi premise of a horrifying alien creature that can kill, assimilate, and perfectly mimic other lifeforms, its plot follows helicopter pilot R.J. MacReady (played by regular John Carpenter collaborator Kurt Russell), who fights off the creature as it attempts to spread throughout the members of an Antarctic research team.
Related: Why The Thing Prequel Replaced Awesome Practical Effects With Bad CGI
The Thing's premise makes the true nature of its characters somewhat hard to discern, particularly as the events of the film run their course. However, The Thing's ending, in particular, has been the cause of much debate over the years, as it continues to be subjected to regular examination and new fan theories. Though The Thing's ending is deliberately ambiguous, there's still a lot it does say about the film and its story.
✕ Remove Ads
What Happens In The Thing's Ending
After realizing the Thing's capabilities, the men at the research base begin to slowly turn on one another. One of the first to break is Wilford Brimley's Blair, who sabotages their transport in an apparent attempt to isolate the Thing. As the creature continues to kill and assimilate the men on the base, their distrust of one another grows. Once MacReady devises a clever test using hot needles and blood samples to work out who is infected, the remaining survivors are thinned out until only MacReady, Childs (Keith David), Garry (Donald Moffat), Nauls (T.K. Carter), and Blair remain.
✕ Remove Ads
Realizing too late that Blair is infected, the remaining men attempt to destroy the camp, only for Garry and Nauls to be killed. MacReady is able to kill the Blair-Thing and stumbles out into the cold, where he meets Childs. The two men sit and watch the camp burn, waiting for the cold to kill them, knowing that there's no way of trusting the other. It's not clear if Childs is human or the Thing, and though the audience knows that MacReady is almost certainly not infected, Childs has no reason to trust him either, leaving The Thing's ending decidedly open.
The Nature Of The Thing Makes It Impossible To Contain
✕ Remove Ads
Though The Thing's ending is far from clear, the film does offer very specific insight into how the titular creature operates. MacReady comes up with the theory that a single cell is enough to infect an entire organism, and each individual cell being an individual Thing seems to prove true during his test. This appears to allow MacReady to identify those men who are infected and those who are not, but it also goes a long way toward describing just how hopeless the situation truly is.
Related: Tobe Hooper's The Thing Plan Was A Sci-Fi Moby Dick
If MacReady's hypothesis is correct, then the multiple deaths caused by the Thing only increase the chances that it will escape somehow. If indeed every drop of blood has the potential to escape and infect others, then the blood spilled all around the base could potentially continue to spread to the outside world. The Thing is also sentient enough to avoid harm, and therefore it's not likely that it will be consumed by the flames. The seemingly concrete facts of the Thing's existence prove that regardless of the film's ambiguous ending, the Thing will undoubtedly survive.
✕ Remove Ads
Is Childs Or MacReady Infected With The Thing?
The most debated aspect of The Thing concerns its two survivors, MacReady and Childs. The events of the film see every other person in Antarctic Outpost 31 killed, and the horror movie's final survivors are left in the impossible — but practically inevitable — situation where neither man knows if the other is infected. There are many theories regarding which of the two men could be infected, and there are four potential outcomes: either MacReady or Childs alone is infected, both men are, or neither. However, the nature of the preceding events means that neither can be sure that the other is safe.
✕ Remove Ads
As The Thing follows MacReady's perspective, it's not likely that he was secretly assimilated. Of the two, Childs is far more likely to have been infected, but the nature of the Thing makes it impossible for either man to trust the other. However, the most likely eventuality is that neither man is infected. The science-fiction element of the horror movie details the Thing's abilities: it can assimilate quickly but prefers to do so without witnesses so as to remain concealed. If either Childs or MacReady wished to infect the other, it would be relatively simple, and there would then be no witness to denounce them as imposters, making it likely — but not certain — that neither man was infected. Regardless, that uncertainty leading to distrust is exactly the point of The Thing's final scene.
✕ Remove Ads
The Thing Is About Trust And Paranoia
Ultimately, The Thing's main themes concern paranoia and mistrust. The Thing infiltrating the men's ranks is enough to sow the seeds of conflict among them, and once they turn on one another, the creature feeds off of the resulting distrust. As soon as the Dog-Thing reveals itself, the Thing cements its hold on the Antarctic researchers, because as they begin to understand their situation, they become hostile. The paranoia that this causes spreads far faster than the Thing can infect the men, but ultimately that paranoia is what isolates them and allows the Thing to pick them off one by one.
Related: The Role Jay Leno Almost Played In John Carpenter's The Thing
✕ Remove Ads
Trust also plays a major part in The Thing's story. It's all down to trust, or the lack thereof, that MacReady and Childs are both left to die in the cold. Trust is what the Thing most seeks to gain from the uninfected, as it allows the creature to assimilate its unassuming victims. MacReady and Childs's distrust for one another is ultimately what keeps them alive throughout the film, even if it's also what will be responsible for their death.
The Real Meaning Of The Thing's Ending
✕ Remove Ads
The ending of John Carpenter's The Thing is famous for how ambiguous it is, but that's exactly the point. The fact that it's impossible to distinguish man from Thing is central to the film's plot, and the ending challenges the audience to put themselves into MacReady and Childs's situation. Though the likelihood of either one being infected can be weighed and measured, the ultimate answer is that it's impossible to know, and that's exactly what's going through MacReady and Childs's minds. As neither can fully trust the other, they accept that the only way to resolve the situation is to "wait and see," knowing that it will mean them both freezing to death.
Therein lies the other meaning of The Thing's ending. Regardless of whether either of Keith David or Kurt Russell's characters is actually infected, the point is that the Thing wins. When it comes down to the final test, neither man is able to commit to a specific stance, and the only logical course of action is to allow the cold to claim them both. This means that if either man is infected, or if the Blood-Thing or other cells survived, the alien organism will be frozen and survive to spread at a later date. Ultimately, MacReady's fight was entirely futile, as The Thing's ending proves that the creature won.
✕ Remove Ads
Next: