How long had he been infected?

How long had he been infected?

Other urls found in this thread:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=TjwpIa9hVkg
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

12 minutes

Blair was not infected at this point in the film. Instead, the most plausible scenario for Blair's infection, in my view, is that the buried-Thing-stuff rejuvenated YET AGAIN, and sought out Blair as the easiest next target, during the storm. This view is consistent both with Blair/Blair-Thing's actions at all points of the film, and also explains the large biomass which comprises final-form Blair-thing-it's all those dogs-and-shit that they burned, except they didn't do as good of a job as they thought. It is the only theory which actually explains all that biomass at the end.

"Infected" is a bad word because it suggests that the target is still /alive/, when what the Thing does (when it goes successfully, from the thing's point of view anyway) by definition kills its target and totally replaces it with an imitation which is manifestly yet not the thing that had been imitated. If you are /infected/ with HIV or whatever virus you like, you're still /you/, and you're still alive.

It's autistic, but I actually prefer "kill-fection" to infection, assimilation, etc. This clumsy hyphenation still manages to convey the simple fact that a Thing'd human being, dog, etc is straight-up killed outright, yet obviously the thing behaves like a virus/disease, and so the "infection" language is yet partially valid.

What's infected is not an individual organism, but a /population/. The target /population/ still has living members which are not Things, target cells which are still left standing, by anology with the above real infections.

I glossed over it but let me perfectly clear: Blair was infected while he was alone in the shack. This also fits the Thing's M.O, to isolate and acquire targets, preferably one-at-a-time.

How long had he been infected?

Either during end-game, or not at all.

What was always more interesting to me, was: What became of Nauls?

To correct your autism, you can simply say the Thing absorbs and replicates its victims. Likely using their DNA and material matter to form itself into the clone.

So The Thing functions like The Flood (well, the other way around)? I'm having a difficult time visualizing how the thing specifically works since we never really see anyone get "infected." And the fact that you can get "partially" infected and not realize it is even more confusing.

It can assimilate in multiple ways. It can eat you, make a copy inside of itself and then spit it out. It can attack you and replace you cell by cell without eating you. It can maul you so heavily that you turn like a zombie victim. It may even be able to take you over like a normal virus through simple contamination but we never see it happen and the Thing never tries to poison their food or anything.

Better question:

Was Childs the Thing, in the end?

>The power goes out the moment Childs leaves the building, meaning the Blair Thing was already in the building and had been for a while when Childs left
>lol I went out to chase Blair

Yeah, he's the Thing.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=TjwpIa9hVkg

after all that, who would not be the thing is the correct question

Definitely

There are at least 3 options on his timeline, and it's literally impossible to prove any of them, hence why all the theories and fan-fictions. I love The Thing to death, but John sacrificed a lot of logic and narrative continuity in order to create paranoia and isolation terror. Strictly technically speaking, the film doesn't make sense from a linear standpoint, the fact no one has figured it out in 35 years and counting proves it. Bravo, John!

The explain why you find his frozen body in the canonical game, scrubs.

*crosses arms smugly*

He wasn't frozen. He was just asleep. See, he was actually Ben Carson all along.

>still no online the thing game where one player is the monster

Having to make complete sense of a narrative is autistic pleb shit anyway.

It's what makes the film in the first place. If you didn't have all the paranoia and ambiguity, there goes a lot what makes the film good.

If Friday the 13th can get one I'm sure The Thing will one day. Or at the very least, Not The Thing.

He wasn't infected in that scene.

He got infected when he was put in the shack, i.e. one of the things went to the shack and somehow infected him.

Then why are you visiting these threads? Literally every The Thing thread is trying to make sense of events.

How the fuggy mcwuggy would that even work?

Once you assimilate another player, it's not like you can control both. Does the other player just swap to the monster team? Or is there still just one monster who can swap skins?

Player swaps to the other team.

Basically a zombie/infection game type but you don't know who is the infected.

Does the other player just swap to the monster team?

I guess this would be the best option but it would be far too easy to cheat

>the Thing never tries to poison their food or anything

You don't know that. Sabotage of a communal blood bank, a vital insurance policy, the very stuff of life, is one step removed from poison. You don't seem to have taken Fuchs' good advice very seriously.

The basic mechanism is always the same, and is closely bound-up with concepts of viral transmission. Basically, you get one particle of this shit on your body, into your system, and you're done, eventually, though it might take a long painful while. This notion of a "slow burn" is explored in 2011 when poor Oleg is the fake distraction. It is further more explored in that the team's lone dog is one of the very first Earthling victims along with Griggs, and is a forgotten corpse which re-animates once it constitutes properly as thing-tissue. The point being that a long-forgotten loose end, left sufficiently warm, miraculously reconstitutes itself. This basic idea had already been well-established at every stage of the franchise's history, and is simply made more explicit in the prequel.

I wonder exactly what you had in mind with the "zombie victim" phrase.

>Dat autist with all the childs thing theory videos

No. The canonical prequel shows us that because Childs has his earring then he cannot be infected. So either MacCready was the Thing or they were both human.

It's during the scene when the noose shows up. He was going to hang himself but got infected before he could.

According to the video game sequel, (which Carpenter has stated is canon) MacReady was never infected.

I think it's Fuchs that suggests to MacReady that everyone eat from cans. There's no way to poison anyone from that point on.

Damn son, if they pulled that off and had makeup like this on Naus that scene could have been iconic and saved the ending from being kind of shit.

>caring about content outside of the original source
>implying the Thing shouldn't be smart enough to identify an earring and remove it so it can be reapplied later

How the fuck do they explain that?

How a Thing gonna put clothes on itself but not an earring?

IIRC, according to the original script, MacReady had a flamethrower hidden under his blanket in the last scene.
In the beginning of the movie, he pours whiskey in the computer and breaks it after it cheats him in chess.

I think the end scene is supposed to mirror that. He gives Childs the whiskey and chuckles because he once again has chosen not to play a rigged game. He's play the game of figuring out if Childs is human or not. He's just gonna roast him to a crisp at the first opportunity.

Would never work and be able to capture the feel of The Thing simultaneously. For example, how would voice chat work? What's to keep everyone from just staying in a group the whole time? Are the humans allowed to kill each other? What's the punishment for a human killing another human?

>Voice chat
Proximity based, so the further away someone is the quieter they get. Also muffled by howling wind or explosions. Of course Discord would ruin all that
>What's to keep everyone from just staying in a group the whole time
Multiple objectives, it'd get the party to split up. Have more as the game goes on so they potentially have to split into pairs or maybe single people. This would give the Thing a chance to sabotage lights, generators, food supply, blood testing, etc.
>Are the humans allowed to kill each other
Absolutely. Knocking out or restraining is an option as well
>What's the punishment
Paranoia meter. Killing innocents jacks it way up, causing auditory hallucinations, reduced accuracy, maybe increased hunger
This is all a pipe dream game but it theoretically could work. It's essentially Trouble in Terrorist Town but with the ability to infect

I like it

It's Nauls, you fuck

It's absolutely doable, and people have done it as mods for games like Warcraft 3 or as a game mode for Lagstation 13.

The only reason it hasn't happened is that asymmetrical multiplayer games are rare enough as is, and on top of that we're talking about a licensed horror one.

I don't know, but the end of the prequel has a dude with a stud get turned and then he's missing an earring and MEW knows he's not a Thing because of it. They're very explicit with it.

It's not canon.

How the fuck did he build a ufo out of a snowplow?

There were some really amazing starcraft maps back in the day

These are all things in the thing video game

blair gestures at the dog thing with a pencil after he dissected it.
the pencil gets very close to the corpse.
a few seconds later he raises the pencil to near his mouth.
after that he very deliberately licks his lip.

not proof he was infected at this point but its a nice touch you notice on repeat views.

When he put the pencil to his mouth.

Maybe we at war wit Norway

Blair-Thing killed him in the boiler room.