![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjHQMr9y6_ltGH923kADt9hV9gKvol6-3FdU_ISYC7-KkmirglfzL3mlLyjgPQCh38YxTaw9zZtHBdIcdACrn9iyV1RJomwpbksHTnbJgygYJXl9_3J6ntr0RKFgnxg2bur18yMtN35hIs/s1600/Conolly's+The+Thing.png)
Anyone who has
read this blog or knows of its history knows that I am a huge fan of John
Carpenter’s The Thing. It is my
favorite horror movie of all time; I have written essays about it for class and,
in this blog’s most recent history, I’ve dedicated entire weeks to it. It
seemed only natural for me to hop on Amazon and search for the Dark Horse
comics that served as prequels to the ’82 film. In addition to finding them, I
stumbled across a book simply titled: Devil’s Advocates: The Thing. The
author is Jez Conolly (I mispronounced his name as cannoli). Having interacted
with him on Twitter, I decided to order the book and give it a spin. What lay
before me was an eye-opener. I thought I read all the critical analyses there
were on the film. As a student of filmmaking, I thought I understood all the
camera schematics and character placement. I thought I understood its themes,
both as a Cold War cautionary tale and as commentary for the AIDS epidemic. I thought I knew all this. Jez Conolly’s
book, suffice it to say, has wholly revised my opinion, and the way I will look
at my beloved film for the better. There is nothing to critique. I have no
protests. I have nothing to supplement it with, and I have no disagreements.
Instead, I will explain how it was to read this book, chapter by chapter. I
will do my best not to spoil the book.
Chapter 1: “Now I’ll Show You What I
Already Know”
This chapter primarily
serves as a brief layout for what’s to come, a sort of tantalizer, so to speak.
However, it does concern itself with the author’s first-time experience with The Thing, not in theaters in beautiful
35mm or in its video rental run, but on a BBC news broadcast about the so
called ‘video nasties.’ For any horror aficionado, the ‘video nasties’ are
quite infamous. It marks a crucial point in the history of horror cinema as
well as censorship. Perhaps the most enthralling aspect of this segment, aside
from Conolly’s own experiences, are the lesser-known stories associated with
the film: tales of killers and rapists who claim that they were influenced by
it, and a brief scuffle with the Obscene Publications Act.
Chapter 2: “I Know How This One Ends”
I will let
Conolly describe this section: “Just in case you’ve decided to buy and read
this book, and happen to have spent at least the last 100,000 years encased in
a block of ice, it might prove useful at this early juncture to offer a brief
outline of the film’s plot before we proceed.” I couldn’t have said it better. Conolly’s
synopsis of the film feels like a familiar road trip to us horror fans,
however, he offers a few unfamiliar pit stops along the way; trivial but
nevertheless interesting side points such as the font in which the first piece
of on-screen texts appears in. Conolly even provides us with a map of understanding
when he references certain incarnations of the Thing monster (i.e.
‘Kennel-Thing’ or ‘Split-Face Thing). As a Thing
fan, some of the side-points were refreshing. Even if you’ve seen the film
fifty times, it’s still fun to read the plot.
Chapter 3: “First Goddamn Week Of Winter”
Now, we get into
the bulk of things (har har har!).
This chapter indulges on many aspects, and it’s easy to become overwhelmed by
the amount of material presented here. I found myself pausing midway to take a
breather. I advise everybody to absorb this chapter slowly for it is the start
of a whole new perspective of the film.
For
the most part, the chapter is appropriately titled; the general theme is winter
and thus snow. Conolly treats us to a quick little detour about photokeratitis, which is essentially
snow blindness, and while you may scratch your heads wondering what this has to
do with The Thing, I promise you that
it correlates to the film’s production and central character. While it may not
add anything as far as a critical analysis is concerned, it does lend itself as
an interesting character/setting detail to the film’s cold, white backdrop.
Besides, it is a fascinating condition.
We
are then led to snow. Snow plays a pivotal role in The Thing especially as a juxtaposing device to contrast the
confines of Outpost 31, however, Conolly makes the bold move in comparing this
element to highly revered cinematic classics such as Gold Rush, Citizen Kane, and Doctor
Zhivago. Conolly explains that there is a “near-monochromatic bleakness”
that isn’t all that different from “The
Thing From Another World, which was shot in black and white.” Once more, I
never drew the parallels in terms of color. I admire Conolly for comparing The Thing to much more ‘sophisticated’
films because I believe Carpenter’s interpretation is much more important to
the history of American cinema (perhaps even world cinema) than most film
historians would give it credit for.
Possibly
the most interesting topic that Conolly discusses has to do with Who Goes
There, the novella by John Campbell in which both the Hawks/Nyby and
Carpenter films were based off. The novella was published in 1938 in Astounding
Science Fiction magazine. It may come as a surprise to you… but I have not read
the novella. I understand that it’s available online for free, but being a rare
book collector, I feel as though I must read the actual first-edition. I
digress, however. Conolly begins this discussion with the “Heroic Age of
Antarctic Exploration” that began in the late nineteenth century continuing
into the early twentieth century, up until to novella’s publication. As history
buff, I found this whole segment enthralling. Conolly proceeds to discuss Lovecraft,
and his most infamous book At the Mountains of Madness. You may be
thinking that none of this has anything to do with Carpenter, Hawks/Nyby or
Campbell, but you’d be wrong. In fact, as Conolly precisely details, it may be
more directly influential on Campbell than we be think. I will not go into
details
The
next segment deals with what may be a very overlooked, if not known, motif in
the Carpenter film as well as the 2011 prequel of the same name. Conolly
mentions magnets, and thus a magnet’s influence on metal. Campbell’s novella
subtly references this in description and in location (ex: the base is not
referred to as Outpost 31 but rather Big Magnet, situated at the very center of
the South Pole), but also as a means to establish a central character that is
an individual when compared to the rest. Furthermore, strictly speaking of
Carpenter’s film, Conolly presents various examples that acknowledge Campbell’s
theme of magnetism and its affects of his characters. I will not go into great
detail but I will mention two examples:
“The couch in the rec room twice serves
as place of restraint, first when Copper, Garry and Clark are the prime
suspects and later when MacReady conducts his hot needle blood test, and in
each case several of the men are tied together in close physical contact with
MacReady at a distance.”
They
are magnets coming together with MacReady possessing no magnetic field.
“The Palmer-Thing’s blood jumps up and
out of the Petri dish in its attempt to escape the hot needle, and then
proceeds to run off along the floor of the rec room in a direction of its own
choosing, almost as though attracted to a magnetic source.”
Chapter 4: “What Is That… Is That A Man
In There… Or Something?”
The beginning of
this chapter concerns itself with plant-based horror films of the 50’s and
60’s. Indeed, The Thing From Another
World can be honored in the great pantheon of plant-horror like Day of the Triffids, Invasion of the Body Snatchers, and Attack of the Killer Tomatoes, given
that our antagonist is pissed off vegetable. However, Carpenter’s Thing might also be honored here as
well. Conolly’s assessment of the creature design, and how there is a presence
of plant-based motifs, is rather intriguing.
But
the majority of this chapter dips into Cold War era politics. As Conolly
explains, “The 1951 and 1982 Thing films,
however, provide especially intriguing bookends to the Cold War.” Those of us
who studied film should be familiar with this segment as it deals with
Hawks/Nyby’s idea of a unified America, coming together to combat a foreign
enemy (Communism in realty). Some would argue that it was a propaganda film to
encourage patriotism, as was the case with Hawks’ Rio Bravo. Conversely, and not unknown, Carpenter’s film proceeds Vietnam,
the Watergate scandal, and was released in the wake of Reaganomics. It is understood
that Carpenter’s Thing was a
deconstruction of what Hawks/Nyby sought to portray in the 50’s.
This
is where the book, once again, becomes overwhelming. Conolly takes the
aforementioned political assessment of both films and expands on them by citing
wardrobe choices, dialogue quotes, Western motifs (my favorite involving Gerry
and his gun), prop usage and scene compositions. Some of these citations may be
more known than others, however, some come off as revelations. To explain, I
will present two examples that correlate with Vietnam. 1) The imagery of
flamethrowers, which were employed by U.S. troops. In the film, they are either
malfunctioning or they are partially successful at preventing the Thing from
assimilation. There is a deeper meaning here: the U.S. stopped using them in
1978 because of their questionable effectiveness in combat, and the PR
surrounding the horrific death they caused. 2) Body horror. I will let Conolly
explain this, “The flame-flayed Split-Face Thing found at the Norwegian base,
with its fused contortion of appendages and twisted, frozen expression of
horrific pain, is shot from angles that make it look remarkably similar to
those causalities of the war.” While you may know most of the political
ideology of both films, I guarantee there is much more at play than just
obvious plot points.
The
chapter elaborates on MacReady’s chauvinistic character, which leads into a
critique of the film’s biology, so to speak. Specifically, it uses Barbara
Creed’s book The Monstrous Feminine (one that I should read) to compare The Thing with feminine imagery, similar
to Ridley Scott’s Alien. While this
may appear to be trivial, or perhaps further baffling, there is a looming
presence of female imagery that plagues Carpenter’s all-male film.
Chapter 5: “What The Hell Are You Looking
At Me Like That For?”
While the title
is somewhat amusing, the chapter acknowledges the true language of film, and
cites key aspects of The Thing to
further the notion that there is an art to filmmaking. Conolly’s interpretation
of The Thing’s visual theme is
probably the most enlightening, if not indulging, chapter of his book. I have
always said that The Thing has some
of the best cinematography and production design I had ever seen, and this
chapter is a testament to that statement. I will briefly touch upon my personal
favorite points of interest, but I will do my best not to spoil anything.
Firstly,
in the beginning of the chapter, Conolly briefs us on the history of the
‘Killer POV’ shot, which, unknown to most, is quite apparent in both Kubrick’s
film and Carpenter’s. We are then treated to a comparison between The Thing and The Shining, and while they both seclude their characters in a
hostile, wintery environment, they both employ the use of the “probing corridor
prowl.” The Shining infamously uses this tactic when following Danny on his
Big Wheel, while The Thing meanders
around the confines of Outpost 31, suggesting, in both films, that something
not quite human is stalking our characters. While this may not be thematically
analytical, it serves as an acknowledgment of Carpenter’s understanding of filmmaking
and how he is able to draw the audience into the film’s unnerving corridors. I
never thought of visually comparing The
Thing with The Shining, however,
in retrospect, it seems so obvious.
Secondly,
character placement in relation to the camera. There is a strategic placement
of characters that may subtly reference the theme of magnets from Campbell’s
novella. I never thought I would say this but one could consider The Thing to be an extraterrestrial
Poker match. In fact, the core concept of Poker is prevalent in this film.
Furthermore, Conolly relates a concept made famous by Hitchcock to the
residency of MacReady within the frame of the camera. I sincerely wish I can
elaborate on this but alas I cannot. I will permit myself to say is this: there
is a definite comprehension of greater filmic ideas than one would assume would
be in a horror movie of this caliber. Carpenter had a firm grasp on what he was
accomplishing.
Chapter 6: “Weird And Pissed Off Whatever
It Is”
This is one of
my favorite quotes, by the way. This chapter is interesting because it begins
with body-horror, which can almost be considered a sub-genre of horror. Conolly
gives us a brief rundown of some familiar titles, but then (curve ball)
explains the history of bodily horror, which can be rooted in the mythology of
our ancestors. Examples could be found in Greek, Mesopotamian and Babylonian
mythology. I will quote Conolly here: “For all this high-minded comparative
conjecture, it seems highly unlikely that the Special Make-up Effects Unit and
production illustrators that worked on The
Thing were terribly familiar with ancient Mesopotamian poetry, and went
looking for stone tablet depictions when researching the creature designs.” While
this is true, I did, however, find it to be ‘food for thought.’
The
bulk of this chapter deals with the make-up and special effects of The Thing, and the scathing criticism it
garnered upon the film’s release. We start with some context; Conolly
introduces EC Comics and their former CEO William M. Gaines who took over the
company and began publishing classic horror anthology titles such as The
Vault of Horror and Tales from
the Crypt. It is an interesting slice of history that pertains to American censorship,
and how Gaines actively petitioned his defense for the comic’s graphic nature.
Jump ahead a few years, Conolly elaborates on The Thing’s production difficulties. Now, to us Thing enthusiasts, we’re privy to the
issues Carpenter and his team had to face but I suppose it does need some
mentioning; the film was burdened by ambitious practical effects, it went over
its budget, Rob Bottin was hospitalized due to his work, and it ruffled the feathers
of various unions. Again, I have not spoiled anything as Conolly elaborates on
all these details, providing interesting side-stories that are informative,
especially to us film enthusiasts. The chapter concludes with the lashes the
film received by critics who were repulsed by the gory special effects wizardry
of Rob Bottin’s team. One being Roger Ebert’s famous line: “It’s a great
barf-bag of a movie.”
This
chapter isn’t analysis or critique, but I urge all filmmakers to delve into The Thing’s production history as it
makes not just for an interesting read, but provides insight into the realm of
filmmaking. In the world of CGI, we will never see ambitious effects like those
seen in Carpenter’s film. As Conolly sincerely puts it, “Some marvel at how
well they stand up and contend that their manifest surreality and palpable,
physical on-set presence compared to today’s CGI phantoms lend the film an
unnerving other-worldly quality. […] Just as they brought life to the
assemblage of inanimate materials to achieve the ground-breaking effects so
they help breathe life into the film’s reputation and reception.” I could not have said it better.
Chapter 7: “It’s Not Dead Yet”
Perhaps the
greatest testament to The Thing’s
legacy is the aftermath. As Conolly vividly describes it, The Thing is much like the Thing itself, laying dormant beneath the
surface of film history, only to be unearthed (via home video) so that it could
prevail in a post 80’s market. The fans have kept this film alive, and this
chapter pays tribute to those fan-made and fan-inspired works of The Thing. These include the “Ice”
episode from The X-Files, and the South Park episode in which Cartman uses a
blood test to see who has Lice that is directly ripped from infamous
blood-testing scene in Carpenter’s film. I genuinely surprised to find that there exists a
stage-production of the film, a claymation short, and a
Sinatra-style musical skit. Perhaps the most interesting story is of Quentin
Tarantino and how he cites The Thing as
his primary influence when writing Reservoir
Dogs. For more information, I
suggest that you read the book.
This
chapter contains Conolly’s defense against condemning The Thing as a cult film, of which I fully support. Following
shortly after is a brief rundown of various formats in which The Thing was release under, one of
which is the televised where they censored out all the graphic transformations
scenes and profanity. Conolly includes some of the best lines that were
re-edited, two of which are “You buy any of this bullstuff?” and “Yeah, blast you
too!”
Perhaps
the best aspect of this chapter is Conolly’s mention of Outpost 31, a
fan-site that harbors the largest online community of Thing enthusiasts in which the site’s founders launched an
expedition to locate the film’s shooting location. They found it, and they brought back with them a salvaged blade from when they blew
up the Norwegian helicopter. Conolly merely scrapes the surface of this site, and so I urge any enthusiast to check it out for his or herself. They have everything concerning The Thing, from floor plans of the Outpost, to essays, to Thing related media coverage.
Capping
off this chapter, Conolly states his feelings toward the 2011 prequel entitled The Thing. While it is true that the
prequel seems to deconstruct Carpenter’s unique horror formula by, as Conolly
explains, “routine plotting, lacked recognizable diversity among its characters
and fallen back on the scenario of sexual tension and the near-inevitable Final
Girl resolution,” it is true that the film took great measures to set up
Carpenter’s film but also to recreate what was only briefly seen when MacReady
traversed through the remains of the Norwegian camp. My thoughts on the prequel
are this: while it was fun it was a needless prequel that I already forgot
about.
Chapter 8: “Why Don’t We Just… Wait Here
For A Little While… See What Happens…”
Just as this is
the last chapter of the book, and the quote is from the end of the movie,
Conolly explains the significance of The
Thing’s famous downbeat, cold, cynical ending, which was very bold for its
time. Carpenter’s film came out in the 80’s where the market was saturated with
cash-cow sequels and optimistic family films such as E.T., which infamously led to The
Thing’s poor box office intake. However, as Conolly expresses, The Thing isn’t all that unique in its
abysmal ending. The 70’s had One Flew
Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, the 90’s gave way towards Unforgiven and Se7en, and
even in the post-Clinton/millennial era we have The Mist, which, like The
Thing, is a product of its political era. Conolly brilliantly explains,
“ordinary people thrown into turmoil by unexpected events, running away from or
stumbling into oblivious to face an indiscriminate fate that spares them little
or no pity. The occluding and enveloping death-white fog and smoke captured in
these films drew heavily on the ashen clouds of destruction that all Americans
saw on their television screens in 2001. There ‘s a resonance to these clouds
of disarray to be found in The Thing’s
obliterating blanket of white snow, isolating conditions that pay no respect to
human social order and rob people of their identity.” Perhaps even more
revealing is Conolly’s side not involving breath and Child’s earring. While I
won’t spoil it for you, I have to admit, I am rather awe-stricken that I never
noticed or considered either of these instances.
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi2SivJAjY6uZRtRFpgNKfWn3kliCbP-PYmyr_bkd-FOEGOI0FSZUlYfav8qUe9Ge-kVvFIK7B_dVapBJvTvJ31iHYDrbhXAJEkR2g7tXJCpFG6OL6DoGyR0zOjEE2bXZTW7ktWuKJfpfU/s1600/JandB+full.jpg)
So ended my experience with Conolly’s book, and so ends this review. If
you have not noticed it now, then I will tell you; I love this book. I have
been searching for a good full-length critique of the film, just as Conolly
once did, and I am very fortunate that I stumbled across this on Amazon. Be
aware that what I have written only caresses the tip of the iceberg. I have
intentionally left out some of the best topics, like how the characters are
bookended by how they’re introduced and how they ultimately meet their fates. While
it’s very overwhelming at first, and some of the concepts may seem farfetched,
it’s nevertheless written with a degree of passion and respect that I have
never seen before. It will certainly warrant multiples readings to fully grasp
each concept and idea. I will admit that I will never be able to watch The
Thing the same way again. When I finished the book, I closed it slowly,
placed it on my nightstand and quietly sat alone to ponder what I had just
read. As it was then, just as it is now, I think Jez Conolly owes me a shot of
J&B.