Posted on 06/06/2015 6:57:30 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
He's from northern France. Waaaay up north...(8^D)
the official sequel to Carpenter’s The Thing was a videogame. it continued the story after the closing scene of the movie.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_%28video_game%29
however, if you look carefully at the ending of the movie, some think you can see the answer for yourself. here’s a hint... what does human breath look like in cold weather? ;)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GA4Ozqt7338
other theories here:
http://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/267cx8/the_thing_1982_ending_mystery_potentially_solved/
Bravo! I guess I’ll order that Tempest DVD of his for my Shakespeare collection.
Just watched the ending again from your link. It’s hard to see, but Child’s breath is visible near the end before he drinks from the bottle. I think the lighting hides his breath before then.
I do think the bottle that Child’s drank from contained gas. In that moment MacReady knew that Child’s was the Thing, and he let out a quiet chuckle.
The French Taunter scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail should help explain everything....look for the scene where Arthur asks “what are the French doing in England”(answer” mahhhnd yer ownnnn bizzznesssa!”). I;m sure the Picard language conundrum eminates from that episode!
I believe some fan fiction conjectured that the U.K. reconquered Normandy (which it hadn’t controlled any part of since the Hundred Years’ War)
I identify him as Saturday Night Live, Star Trek, and Dune (1984 film adaptation).
Well, the reality is that there is no test for what one is, often bisexual individuals change from having a relationship with the same gender to one with opposite gender, such as was the case with Anthony Perkins or Robert Oscar Lopez. It kind of offends the idea of people being exclusively homosexual or heterosexual.
i agree. it’s just a fan theory (not mine). in the videogame, you find Childs’ frozen body. it was a fun game to play when it came out for the original Xbox (it included an early “trust/mistrust” system which harkened back to the movie), although of course the graphics look dated now. you can follow the “official” story by watching the walkthrough videos on youtube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R62qyeNsIAM
” “Same-sex marriage is inextricably linked to sexual relations between same-sex couples, which is a union of persons having a particular sexual orientation.””
Orientation has nothing to do with marriage there are quite a lot of men and women married to each other holding not attraction or even affection for one anther.
Where does England get crusading morons like this ‘judge’?
The English ‘judge’ further said:
“The plaintiff did not share the particular religious and political opinion which confines marriage to heterosexual orientation…”
Who said we care what our clients believe?
Then the English ‘judge’ said the one true thing:
“The defendants are not a religious organisation. They are conducting a business for profit”
Yes and that business apparently doesn’t offer cakes with words which the owners find offensive written on it. If the buyer wants to add that to the product after market with its their’s that’s fine but its not offered before market that way.
There is nothing wrong with not offering offensive or dis-tasteful service. Indeed I would say that is a vital business practice.
There is no test at all beyond ones word what ideas and thoughts go thou ones head.
The concept therefore that people can be categorized differently than physical evidence would suggest based simply upon what they say or observably do is forever subject to abuse, as well as change.
The human mind after all is built to change and adapt unlike the body which has only limited adaption capabilities by comparison.
There is as there must be a very clear difference between behavior and physical form in humans. Otherwise there could be no presumption of humanity. Just because someone says their gay and will take no advantage of privileged access to the other sex does not mean they should be given such access over anyone else who simply claims they won’t take advantage.
The presumption is they can and the precaution is they shouldn’t be allowed the opportunity they don’t need to be given. If you got man parts you should not be in the lady’s bathroom.
I don’t care what you say you think inside your head. We have no way to prove either your thoughts nor that you won’t change your thoughts even if we could prove such thoughts to be genuine. All we know is that people can change their thoughts as easily as they can lie to us about their thoughts. We know this because we ourselves can do it, and presuming them equal to us in capability they must be able to do it as well.
This ultimately is why any ‘judge’ who makes a claim on the foundation of someone’s supposed thoughts or feelings as opposed to the physical reality is in fact always on unprovable ground.
It cannot be proven or dis-proven that the plaintiff are ‘gay’ nor can it be proven that the defendant was in any way effected by that fact. All that can be proven here is that the defendant doesn’t offer a service the plaintiff wanted on the grounds that it is offensive to them.
Perhaps you should ask Ford to produce a line of cars adored with racist remarks. Would the government condemn ford for failure to offer that product as well? The fact that it took the plaintiff a few days to recognize the offence is of no consequence, as it would no doubt take ford several day before their management realized what was going on as well.
OK, I;’m going on a limb here. So basically Chiles was the alien due to the continuous breath that McReady produced on the final scene?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SppG-I_Dhxw
i find some of the analyses about the film to be very interesting. for example, it never occurred to me that "chess" was used as a metaphor for the game being played between the thing and the humans. as you'll recall, MacReady begins the movie playing a game of chess against a computer, which he loses, so he pours alcohol onto the motherboard. at the end of the film, MacReady offering alcohol to Childs also plays a role. coincidence? maybe.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.