John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

SF: discuss futuristic sci-fi series, ideas, and crossovers.

Moderator: NecronLord

Joe Momma
Jedi Knight
Posts: 684
Joined: 2002-12-15 06:01pm

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by Joe Momma »

Skylon wrote:Troi may be helpful (I know, I know....*GASP* and *LOL*) in this situation as she could likely sense any malevolent thoughts by the Thing, and of course the crew can always count on Data not being the Thing.
I don't know how likely that is. Her telepathic powers didn't pick up the Picard imposter in Allegiance, for example. I don't recall whether she was ever around the coalescent organism in Aquiel or Admiral Quinn in Conspiracy, but if she was and failed to detect the aliens in question that would further indicate the unlikelihood of her picking up the Thing's malevolent thoughts. However, that's not to say that if she deliberately probed for such thoughts she wouldn't find them.

The only other examples I can think of would be her inability to determine whether the Romulan in The Defector was being honest or to pick up the Romulan spy in Data's Day, but that could simply indicate that people from a species with telepathic potential can be trained to block Troi andothers like her out. The Thing probably wouldn't have that advantage.

If the Thing got a hold of anyone such as LaForge or Crusher who knew of Data's off-switch, neutralizing him would be as easy as it was for the subverted Crusher in The Game.
It's okay to kiss a nun; just don't get into the habit.
User avatar
Oni Koneko Damien
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3852
Joined: 2004-03-10 07:23pm
Location: Yar Yar Hump Hump!
Contact:

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by Oni Koneko Damien »

Skylon wrote:Troi may be helpful (I know, I know....*GASP* and *LOL*) in this situation as she could likely sense any malevolent thoughts by the Thing,
The problem is that we don't know how the Thing thinks. It could be possible that the assimilation is so complete that until certain threats trigger a necessary dropping of the human facade, and the occasional opportunistic spreading of the infection, the assimilated victims still think they're the original hosts. Or even if the mindset is that of the Thing, who's to say it's necessarily malevolent? From the Thing's point of view it's only trying to do what other life is: Survive and spread. It certainly doesn't think it's evil. Depending on how well Troi can read thoughts, her impression could range anywhere from, "Hey, that person's emotions seem incredibly fucked up and not matching their actions at all" to, "You seem a little disturbed, what's up?"
Gaian Paradigm: Because not all fantasy has to be childish crap.
Ephemeral Pie: Because not all role-playing has to be shallow.
My art: Because not all DA users are talentless emo twits.
"Phant, quit abusing the He-Wench before he turns you into a caged bitch at a Ren Fair and lets the tourists toss half munched turkey legs at your backside." -Mr. Coffee
Lord of the Abyss
Village Idiot
Posts: 4046
Joined: 2005-06-15 12:21am
Location: The Abyss

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by Lord of the Abyss »

Joe Momma wrote:
Skylon wrote:Troi may be helpful (I know, I know....*GASP* and *LOL*) in this situation as she could likely sense any malevolent thoughts by the Thing, and of course the crew can always count on Data not being the Thing.
I don't know how likely that is. Her telepathic powers didn't pick up the Picard imposter in Allegiance, for example. I don't recall whether she was ever around the coalescent organism in Aquiel or Admiral Quinn in Conspiracy, but if she was and failed to detect the aliens in question that would further indicate the unlikelihood of her picking up the Thing's malevolent thoughts.
On the other hand, the Picard impostor is a modified version of a species that has no individuality due to being so telepathic that they are "all in continual contact"; it's not much of a stretch to assume that a superior telepath can fool her. And IIRC, it was a plot point that the victim of the coalescent organism wouldn't know that they were an imitation; so there wouldn't be anything to pick up. Things aren't telepaths, and clearly do know what they are once fully assimilated. So I'd give her better odds of being able to detect it. Of course, the Thing would know that once it absorbed a crewman and take steps.
Junghalli wrote:It may be that there's a certain critical mass of Thing tissue that's needed to retain intelligence, and something small just wouldn't be enough. The blood sample was still "aware" enough to move away from something hot, but that doesn't necessarily mean it was enough to be a viable Thing all on its own.
I've figured something like that was involved. Intelligence, or personality & knowledge. We know that it can transfer knowledge from one host to another because it built that flying saucer. And Things are selfish; perhaps it can assimilate others by a simple touch, but doesn't like to because the resulting new Thing lacks the memories and personality of the old. But perhaps if it can shove in a significant mass, the new Thing will have those thoughts and memories.
"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers
User avatar
Temujin
Jedi Master
Posts: 1300
Joined: 2010-03-28 07:08pm
Location: Occupying Wall Street (In Spirit)

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by Temujin »

Lord of the Abyss wrote:
Junghalli wrote:It may be that there's a certain critical mass of Thing tissue that's needed to retain intelligence, and something small just wouldn't be enough. The blood sample was still "aware" enough to move away from something hot, but that doesn't necessarily mean it was enough to be a viable Thing all on its own.
I've figured something like that was involved. Intelligence, or personality & knowledge. We know that it can transfer knowledge from one host to another because it built that flying saucer. And Things are selfish; perhaps it can assimilate others by a simple touch, but doesn't like to because the resulting new Thing lacks the memories and personality of the old. But perhaps if it can shove in a significant mass, the new Thing will have those thoughts and memories.
Outpost 31 has some discussion on that as well.
How smart is the Thing?

A: The Thing's level of intelligence is a function of its size. The larger the Thing, the more intelligent it is likely to be. The smaller the Thing, the less intelligent it will be. MacReady's blood test is directly dependent on this idea. The novel has Mac explaining his theory in greater detail than the film:
"When attacked, it looks like even a fragment of one of these things will try to survive as best it's able. Even a sample of its blood. Of course, there's no higher nervous system, no brain to suppress a natural instinct like that if it's in the best interests of the larger whole to do so. The cells have to act instinctively instead of intelligently. Protect themselves from freezing, say. Or from incineration. The kind that might be caused by a hot needle, for instance." (Alan Dean Foster, The Thing, 169)

This perhaps also accounts for why the Norris spiderhead scurried from its hiding spot when it did. Maybe its body mass was not sufficiently large enough to form an intelligent brain center. Consequently, it didn't know enough not to blow its cover when the men still presented a danger.

On the other hand, a full-sized Thing is extremely intelligent. It is theorized that it has the combined intelligences of all the organisms it has ever assimilated. This is borne out by the fact that Blair-thing, having likely been a product of either the Norwegian dog directly or one of its descendants (Norris or Palmer), has the intelligence to build a non-terrestrial ship out of helicopter and tractor parts. Blair-thing "inherited" the intelligences of its previous organisms, the knowledge being passed into the newest assimilant.
And as I commented before, the Palmer thing was the one that actually ratted out the Norris Spider Head Thing as it tried to scurry away, so they certainly look out for themselves. It's been a while, but one of the later Dark Horse comic adaptations had a bit more on this, with some Things ultimately battling each; though it did seem a bit silly and a bit of a cop out.
Image
Mr. Harley: Your impatience is quite understandable.
Klaatu: I'm impatient with stupidity. My people have learned to live without it.
Mr. Harley: I'm afraid my people haven't. I'm very sorry... I wish it were otherwise.

"I do know that for the sympathy of one living being, I would make peace with all. I have love in me the likes of which you can scarcely imagine and rage the likes of which you would not believe.
If I cannot satisfy the one, I will indulge the other." – Frankenstein's Creature on the glacier[/size]
User avatar
Oni Koneko Damien
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3852
Joined: 2004-03-10 07:23pm
Location: Yar Yar Hump Hump!
Contact:

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by Oni Koneko Damien »

That always made me curious. Exactly how does an individual incarnation of the Thing regard another? If the Thing infects two people successfully, do both of them form some sort of cohesive hivemind? Recognizing each other and, if not in some sort of telepathic contact, at least working together for the common goal of spreading the infection? Or does one Thing see another as possible competition for the remaining possible hosts? As the infection spreads and evolves, does each Thing gain its own personality and goals built partially off the memories of its hosts, resulting in an individuality it might not be willing to give up when coalescing into a larger bio-mass with another Thing? I always wondered what it would be like if the infection spread off Antartica, with thousands or more being assimilated, then sudden conflict and war breaking out as individual Things came into competition with each other for biological resources and unwillingness to submit to each other.
Gaian Paradigm: Because not all fantasy has to be childish crap.
Ephemeral Pie: Because not all role-playing has to be shallow.
My art: Because not all DA users are talentless emo twits.
"Phant, quit abusing the He-Wench before he turns you into a caged bitch at a Ren Fair and lets the tourists toss half munched turkey legs at your backside." -Mr. Coffee
Junghalli
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5001
Joined: 2004-12-21 10:06pm
Location: Berkeley, California (USA)

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by Junghalli »

I'd say that FAQ comment on the scene with the dog would seem to back up the idea that an extensive assimilation process is necessary more than the reverse. It's not conclusive but it timing its attack like that doesn't fit very well with the hypothesis that it thought it was in immediate danger and "panicked".
Temujin wrote:Having a telepath on board would definitely make things (no pun intended) interesting, as would Data being immune from assimilation.
Imagine Data being the only crewman left and having to evade a shipful of Things while trying to sabotage the ship to prevent it from reaching civilization.

I see fanfic potential.
Oni Koneko Damien wrote:Or even if the mindset is that of the Thing, who's to say it's necessarily malevolent? From the Thing's point of view it's only trying to do what other life is: Survive and spread. It certainly doesn't think it's evil.
That reminds me of Peter Watts's interpretation of it in his story The Things.
User avatar
Molyneux
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7186
Joined: 2005-03-04 08:47am
Location: Long Island

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by Molyneux »

Temujin wrote:
Lord of the Abyss wrote:
Junghalli wrote:It may be that there's a certain critical mass of Thing tissue that's needed to retain intelligence, and something small just wouldn't be enough. The blood sample was still "aware" enough to move away from something hot, but that doesn't necessarily mean it was enough to be a viable Thing all on its own.
I've figured something like that was involved. Intelligence, or personality & knowledge. We know that it can transfer knowledge from one host to another because it built that flying saucer. And Things are selfish; perhaps it can assimilate others by a simple touch, but doesn't like to because the resulting new Thing lacks the memories and personality of the old. But perhaps if it can shove in a significant mass, the new Thing will have those thoughts and memories.
*snip quote*

And as I commented before, the Palmer thing was the one that actually ratted out the Norris Spider Head Thing as it tried to scurry away, so they certainly look out for themselves. It's been a while, but one of the later Dark Horse comic adaptations had a bit more on this, with some Things ultimately battling each; though it did seem a bit silly and a bit of a cop out.
The scary thing to me about the Thing scenario is the possibility of being infected and not realizing it - it looked to me like that was what happened with Palmer. His human mind was still functioning, complete with memories and personality...until the cover was blown, at least.
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
User avatar
Temujin
Jedi Master
Posts: 1300
Joined: 2010-03-28 07:08pm
Location: Occupying Wall Street (In Spirit)

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by Temujin »

Junghalli wrote:That reminds me of Peter Watts's interpretation of it in his story The Things.
Thanks for linking that, it was pretty interesting.
Image
Mr. Harley: Your impatience is quite understandable.
Klaatu: I'm impatient with stupidity. My people have learned to live without it.
Mr. Harley: I'm afraid my people haven't. I'm very sorry... I wish it were otherwise.

"I do know that for the sympathy of one living being, I would make peace with all. I have love in me the likes of which you can scarcely imagine and rage the likes of which you would not believe.
If I cannot satisfy the one, I will indulge the other." – Frankenstein's Creature on the glacier[/size]
Junghalli
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5001
Joined: 2004-12-21 10:06pm
Location: Berkeley, California (USA)

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by Junghalli »

Temujin wrote:Thanks for linking that, it was pretty interesting.
You're welcome. :)
User avatar
Skylon
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1657
Joined: 2005-01-12 04:55pm
Location: New York
Contact:

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by Skylon »

To switch gears, what happens if the Thing is loose aboard Voyager or the Defiant?

On Voyager....I have almost zero faith in their survival. The EMH isn't as sturdy as say, Data. If he's using the mobile emitter he's one slap in the arm away from being switched off...if not, he's confined to sick-bay and not a ton of help. I don't know if Seven of Nine could be mimicked as she has some of the old Borg implants left, but it may be able to get by all that.

The Defiant's trickier. It's got a small crew usually, and I could easily imagine the crew electing to self-destruct the ship rather than risk it getting aboard DS9 if the situation went south. If Odo's aboard, he's the x-factor with that crew, as I'd be shocked if the Thing could mimic him.
-A.L.
"Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence...Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'press on' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race." - Calvin Coolidge

"If you're falling off a cliff you may as well try to fly, you've got nothing to lose." - John Sheridan (Babylon 5)

"Sometimes you got to roll the hard six." - William Adama (Battlestar Galactica)
User avatar
Temujin
Jedi Master
Posts: 1300
Joined: 2010-03-28 07:08pm
Location: Occupying Wall Street (In Spirit)

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by Temujin »

Well with Voyager at least we can be certain the Kitchen Rat will meet a horrible end, whether he's infected or not. :twisted:

I think with Seven of Nine, the degree of implants might be a factor. A small number might not be a problem, but if roughly half of the individual is cybernetics it may pose a problem.

With Odo, well shape shifter biology is pretty bizarre the way they seem to shift mass in and out of, well where ever the hell they shift it to (subspace?). Their biology not only rapes biology and chemistry, it actually rapes physics as well.
Image
Mr. Harley: Your impatience is quite understandable.
Klaatu: I'm impatient with stupidity. My people have learned to live without it.
Mr. Harley: I'm afraid my people haven't. I'm very sorry... I wish it were otherwise.

"I do know that for the sympathy of one living being, I would make peace with all. I have love in me the likes of which you can scarcely imagine and rage the likes of which you would not believe.
If I cannot satisfy the one, I will indulge the other." – Frankenstein's Creature on the glacier[/size]
Junghalli
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5001
Joined: 2004-12-21 10:06pm
Location: Berkeley, California (USA)

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by Junghalli »

Temujin wrote:I think with Seven of Nine, the degree of implants might be a factor. A small number might not be a problem, but if roughly half of the individual is cybernetics it may pose a problem.
I think the more significant issue is the way the implants interact with the rest of body. If they just take commands from the organic nervous system then the Thing should be able to command them just as easily. On the other hand if Seven's mind is actually at least partly running on the cybernetics, or if the implants include nanotech that perform a number of functions at the cellular level (reasonably plausible given the whole Borg nanoprobe concept) things might get more interesting for the Thing.
With Odo, well shape shifter biology is pretty bizarre the way they seem to shift mass in and out of, well where ever the hell they shift it to (subspace?). Their biology not only rapes biology and chemistry, it actually rapes physics as well.
Proposals for utility fog call for the foglets to have retractable arms so the stuff could potentially vary its density considerably, making itself mostly air or relatively solid depending on how far the arms were extended. Odo might be like that, having an actually pretty small mass and being mostly air by volume when he wants to assume a larger shape. I don't know, has it ever been established how heavy he is?
User avatar
Temujin
Jedi Master
Posts: 1300
Joined: 2010-03-28 07:08pm
Location: Occupying Wall Street (In Spirit)

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by Temujin »

Junghalli wrote:
With Odo, well shape shifter biology is pretty bizarre the way they seem to shift mass in and out of, well where ever the hell they shift it to (subspace?). Their biology not only rapes biology and chemistry, it actually rapes physics as well.
Proposals for utility fog call for the foglets to have retractable arms so the stuff could potentially vary its density considerably, making itself mostly air or relatively solid depending on how far the arms were extended. Odo might be like that, having an actually pretty small mass and being mostly air by volume when he wants to assume a larger shape. I don't know, has it ever been established how heavy he is?
Well that sounds like a good explanation, and far better than the official Trek explanation:
Memory Alpha wrote:A morphogenic matrix is the cellular and quantum structure of a changeling, which allows them to assume various shapes or forms. It also allows Changelings to shunt some of their mass into another dimension, thereby allowing them to morph into objects with a much smaller mass than themselves.
As usual, it's because of quantum! :roll: :wink:
Image
Mr. Harley: Your impatience is quite understandable.
Klaatu: I'm impatient with stupidity. My people have learned to live without it.
Mr. Harley: I'm afraid my people haven't. I'm very sorry... I wish it were otherwise.

"I do know that for the sympathy of one living being, I would make peace with all. I have love in me the likes of which you can scarcely imagine and rage the likes of which you would not believe.
If I cannot satisfy the one, I will indulge the other." – Frankenstein's Creature on the glacier[/size]
LionElJonson
Padawan Learner
Posts: 287
Joined: 2010-07-14 10:55pm

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by LionElJonson »

Yeah, well, I doubt that the Thing could assimilate him if he shapeshifted into, say, a sentient mass of fire. It's good, but not quite that good. ;)
Swindle1984
Jedi Master
Posts: 1049
Joined: 2008-03-23 02:46pm
Location: Texas

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by Swindle1984 »

Oni Koneko Damien wrote:That always made me curious. Exactly how does an individual incarnation of the Thing regard another? If the Thing infects two people successfully, do both of them form some sort of cohesive hivemind? Recognizing each other and, if not in some sort of telepathic contact, at least working together for the common goal of spreading the infection? Or does one Thing see another as possible competition for the remaining possible hosts? As the infection spreads and evolves, does each Thing gain its own personality and goals built partially off the memories of its hosts, resulting in an individuality it might not be willing to give up when coalescing into a larger bio-mass with another Thing? I always wondered what it would be like if the infection spread off Antartica, with thousands or more being assimilated, then sudden conflict and war breaking out as individual Things came into competition with each other for biological resources and unwillingness to submit to each other.
Do we know that the individual Things are really selfish, or do they merely behave as such to the extent needed to both maintain their cover and ensure the survival of the Thing overall?




It's been years since I read the story, but didn't several of the Americans have disturbing dreams that they theorized was some sort of telepathic contact with the Thing while it was frozen? And wasn't it vaguely humanoid when they discovered it? It's possible that the space craft they found didn't originally belong to the Thing, it belonged to some aliens who got infected by the Thing.

I'm not sure how much this relates to the film (John Carpenter's, not the earlier one that nobody is discussing.). Certainly the possibility stil remains that the craft was stolen by the Thing when its crew was infected, but we don't see any evidence of telepathy (or a hive-mind) in the film, nor what it looked like when it was first discovered/thawed.

What happened to the original spacecraft, anyway?
Your ad here.
Junghalli
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5001
Joined: 2004-12-21 10:06pm
Location: Berkeley, California (USA)

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by Junghalli »

Swindle1984 wrote:I'm not sure how much this relates to the film (John Carpenter's, not the earlier one that nobody is discussing.). Certainly the possibility stil remains that the craft was stolen by the Thing when its crew was infected, but we don't see any evidence of telepathy (or a hive-mind) in the film, nor what it looked like when it was first discovered/thawed.
It does seem like one hell of a coincidence to me that of all the places the ship might have crashed it crashed in one of the few parts of the Earth where the Thing couldn't survive and spread to the rest of the biosphere. I mean Antarctica is less than 3% of the Earth's surface area and the fact that it crashed there is probably what saved humanity and everything else on Earth from being eaten by the Thing 100K years ago and that was just a coincidence?

It makes me think that maybe the Thing and the alien crew were fighting over the ship. Maybe the crew sabotaged the ship to keep it from reaching civilization, but the Thing managed to repair it enough to limp to a system known to have a living world with a biosphere and a primitive intelligent species it could Thingify and then build more ships. The crew, realizing what it was doing, managed to storm the cockpit (or something) and get just enough control over the ship to crash it into a part of the planet where the Thing couldn't survive, thus saving all our asses with their heroic sacrifice.

Sometimes I feel like writing a fanfic about that. I love the idea of the aliens seeing the Thing about to land the ship on Earth and storming the cockpit in a heroic suicide mission to crash the ship into Antarctica. Maybe the last alien would heroically cling to the steering column to the very end, guiding the ship in a fatal plunge toward the frozen Antarctic wasteland, even as the Thing was starting to rape all his orifices with its tentacles. Or something similarly hammy.
Swindle1984
Jedi Master
Posts: 1049
Joined: 2008-03-23 02:46pm
Location: Texas

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by Swindle1984 »

Junghalli wrote:
Swindle1984 wrote:I'm not sure how much this relates to the film (John Carpenter's, not the earlier one that nobody is discussing.). Certainly the possibility stil remains that the craft was stolen by the Thing when its crew was infected, but we don't see any evidence of telepathy (or a hive-mind) in the film, nor what it looked like when it was first discovered/thawed.
It does seem like one hell of a coincidence to me that of all the places the ship might have crashed it crashed in one of the few parts of the Earth where the Thing couldn't survive and spread to the rest of the biosphere. I mean Antarctica is less than 3% of the Earth's surface area and the fact that it crashed there is probably what saved humanity and everything else on Earth from being eaten by the Thing 100K years ago and that was just a coincidence?

It makes me think that maybe the Thing and the alien crew were fighting over the ship. Maybe the crew sabotaged the ship to keep it from reaching civilization, but the Thing managed to repair it enough to limp to a system known to have a living world with a biosphere and a primitive intelligent species it could Thingify and then build more ships. The crew, realizing what it was doing, managed to storm the cockpit (or something) and get just enough control over the ship to crash it into a part of the planet where the Thing couldn't survive, thus saving all our asses with their heroic sacrifice.

Sometimes I feel like writing a fanfic about that. I love the idea of the aliens seeing the Thing about to land the ship on Earth and storming the cockpit in a heroic suicide mission to crash the ship into Antarctica. Maybe the last alien would heroically cling to the steering column to the very end, guiding the ship in a fatal plunge toward the frozen Antarctic wasteland, even as the Thing was starting to rape all his orifices with its tentacles. Or something similarly hammy.
If you went for ham, you'd definitely have to end it on a witty one-liner.
Your ad here.
ThomasP
Padawan Learner
Posts: 370
Joined: 2009-07-06 05:02am

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by ThomasP »

Swindle1984 wrote:And wasn't it vaguely humanoid when they discovered it? It's possible that the space craft they found didn't originally belong to the Thing, it belonged to some aliens who got infected by the Thing.
Don't worry, come April you'll know for sure.
What happened to the original spacecraft, anyway?
It's probably still there where they left it. As of the movie's end, nothing else had happened to it.
Junghalli wrote:It does seem like one hell of a coincidence to me that of all the places the ship might have crashed it crashed in one of the few parts of the Earth where the Thing couldn't survive and spread to the rest of the biosphere. I mean Antarctica is less than 3% of the Earth's surface area and the fact that it crashed there is probably what saved humanity and everything else on Earth from being eaten by the Thing 100K years ago and that was just a coincidence?
There's a script floating around somewhere online that was for a Sci-Fi Channel miniseries that would have been a sequel, and it went in to some of the projected back-story for the Thing which was not too different from this-- it had eaten or was eating some aliens that then crashed the ship to spite it.
All those moments will be lost in time... like tears in rain...
Swindle1984
Jedi Master
Posts: 1049
Joined: 2008-03-23 02:46pm
Location: Texas

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by Swindle1984 »

The ultimate question, of course, is whether or not Childs was the Thing, and it therefore survived. If he was, and his frozen remains were retrieved by whoever came to investigate the loss of communication with the outpost...

Hopefully they don't set the prequel in modern times. That'd just be weird.
Your ad here.
ThomasP
Padawan Learner
Posts: 370
Joined: 2009-07-06 05:02am

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by ThomasP »

The prequel is about what happened in the Norwegian camp, so it's set in the early 80s.
All those moments will be lost in time... like tears in rain...
User avatar
Temujin
Jedi Master
Posts: 1300
Joined: 2010-03-28 07:08pm
Location: Occupying Wall Street (In Spirit)

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by Temujin »

ThomasP wrote:
What happened to the original spacecraft, anyway?
It's probably still there where they left it. As of the movie's end, nothing else had happened to it.
Well the ship is a burned out wreck from the crash and was buried in glacier ice for thousands of years, so it's really nothing more than just junk at this point. It's still sitting there slowly getting covered up by ice and snow. That is until someone comes to investigate and stumbles upon it.
Swindle1984 wrote:The ultimate question, of course, is whether or not Childs was the Thing, and it therefore survived. If he was, and his frozen remains were retrieved by whoever came to investigate the loss of communication with the outpost...
The PC game is supposed to follow the story of a SF team that comes to investigate what happened at the camp, though I'm not familiar with the details. It sounds like they based it partially off of the Dark Horse Comic adaptations from the 90s. In that, Childs ultimately is a thing, but I don't recall if he was supposed to be one at the end of the movie. I think he got assimilated later. Oh, and while the comics start off good, they get rather ham-fisted later as they move out of Antarctica, try to keep the horror of the Thing, while simultaneously trying to make excuses as to why it's still relatively contained. :roll:

Luckily Dark Horse didn't milk the franchise as badly as they did with both Aliens and Predator.
Image
Mr. Harley: Your impatience is quite understandable.
Klaatu: I'm impatient with stupidity. My people have learned to live without it.
Mr. Harley: I'm afraid my people haven't. I'm very sorry... I wish it were otherwise.

"I do know that for the sympathy of one living being, I would make peace with all. I have love in me the likes of which you can scarcely imagine and rage the likes of which you would not believe.
If I cannot satisfy the one, I will indulge the other." – Frankenstein's Creature on the glacier[/size]
User avatar
dragon
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4151
Joined: 2004-09-23 04:42pm

Re: John Carpenter's The Thing in Star Trek

Post by dragon »

Temujin wrote:Forgot about that episode, but that's another good example that demonstrates lax Federation procedures in the face of unknown phenomena.
Well they do get better once they start having to deal with the changelings.
"There are very few problems that cannot be solved by the suitable application of photon torpedoes
Post Reply