One of the enduring mysteries of John Carpenter's iconic 1982 sci-fi horror film, "The Thing," is its ambiguous ending. For the past 43 years, fans have speculated whether R.J. MacReady, portrayed by Kurt Russell, or Childs, portrayed by Keith David, transforms into the film's titular monster. Carpenter deliberately left the ending open-ended, leaving audiences without any clear hints—until a recent revelation.
At a special 4K screening of "The Thing" at the David Geffen Theater in Los Angeles on March 22, Carpenter shared with director Bong Joon Ho that there is a "giant hint" embedded in the middle of the film that indicates who turns into The Thing at the end. In a playful twist, Carpenter added that he would reveal this secret to anyone willing to send an unspecified amount of money "in an envelope to my house."
Carpenter also disclosed to the audience that the actors themselves were kept in the dark about the true identity of The Thing. "They had no clue," he said. "But they had to play it human, you see. The creature imitates perfectly. It could be one of us, it could be somebody in the audience, and there's no way of telling. So I knew, they didn't know."
Following the screening, indie director Joe Russo (not to be confused with the MCU's Joe Russo) shared his theory on X / Twitter, claiming to have discovered the hinted clue. Russo pointed out that MacReady is informed that The Thing can replicate at the cellular level, necessitating that the characters only consume food or drink they have personally handled. Despite this knowledge, MacReady shares his liquor with Childs at the film's end. Russo theorizes that this act suggests MacReady has become The Thing, as sharing the bottle could allow the creature to win by infecting Childs. "As soon as Childs drinks from the bottle, The Thing has won," Russo stated. "It's beaten its most skeptical, final threat."
The genius of Carpenter's film lies in its refusal to confirm these theories, maintaining the ambiguity. However, Russo provided additional support for his theory, citing the film's final line, "Why don't we just wait here for a little while, see what happens?" as fitting if MacReady is indeed The Thing. Russo's thread also suggests that the scene where MacReady seemingly kills The Thing could be interpreted differently: "Did you see that OR... did you watch a BETTER imitation kill a POORER imitation because it had a better chance of infiltrating society upon rescue?"
The 25 Best Horror Movies
26 Images
The fan community has been divided by Russo's theory. While some are convinced by the evidence presented, others remain convinced that Childs is the creature, citing his unexplained absence before the final scene. One fan noted, "I still think it’s Childs because we don’t know his whereabouts for a long time heading into the final scene. But Keith David will tell you he’s 100% not The Thing." Russo responded, "Carpenter said both actors don't know... Childs always felt like a red herring to me."
Regardless of which theory fans subscribe to, the discussion around Carpenter's "The Thing" continues to thrive, showcasing the filmmaker's ability to keep audiences engaged and intrigued decades after the film's release. It's a testament to Carpenter's enduring impact on the horror genre and his knack for keeping fans guessing.
