the stop motion sequence at 0:12 didn't look so bad, because it was in a dim lit shot, but the sequences at 0:44 and 0:50 look pretty silly, i think John should of kept the stop motion sequence at 0:12, but the ones after most definitely should of been cut out, either way great scene, great movie
@100mmatte That or he got blood on his forearms where the gloves didn't cover. If the cells went though the glove, then MaCready would have most likely been infected when he and the doc carried the corpse on and off the helicopter.
Taken to it's ultimate conclusion, the gloves wouldn't make any difference. This Thing can not only survive, but operate in individual cells. That's like torching a heaping, 230 pound sack of influenza virus and claim not touching it was going to prevent contraction.
The instant that vessel crash landed on the Earth, it was the end of indigenous life here; the ice served only as a slowing agent and all the human resistance is mere theatrics. The Thing is unstoppable.
Exactly. It's not like humans were the only life it benefitted from using to destroy the Earth. The take-over existed on every level life exists, and it's a safe bet microscopic life was already loosing to it. Even without humans (which actually helped it's progress) it would eventually ride the ice flow and use life indigenous to the arctic, sea life and birds to spread.
It's far and away the most devastating life-form concept ever conceived in sci-fi.
Exactly. There is no indication it's limited in absorbing and imitating every scrap of life on the Earth. It's by no means limited to "higher life forms", particularly not just humans.
@TheJediCharles the ice freezes it. it do not kill it but probably cause some damage... also fire is a good way to stop it. it do not pread in the "air" but probably the contact with it's fluid could work as "vessel". still probably there is a level of "immunity" to it...it have some sort of genetic communication because he can "remeber" and invent new dna and rna for istant "natural" defences. though it seems he is not much immortal since he tries to hide in local animal fauna
@TheJediCharles it's not transmited in air because if not there would not be any movie. all peple would become "thing". many of them becomes but in different times.
by harm I meant some kind of atrophies so he was not in a great shape when it got out. on the cotrary of what the horrible prequel showed (some sort of bad Video Game monster...)
but in any plague there are people that survive. same it could be with the thing.
Carpenter himself called his film an Apocalypse story, which is an unstoppable end of the world.
You are still assuming it cannot be blown single-cell through the air. You do not know that. When you say "there would be no movie", two problems; one, we do not see any "long term" survivors. Also, we're not watching the movie through microscopes. The Thing is by no means limited to attacking in a macro-sense. Every person on the base could have already been taken over in a partial sense.
@TheJediCharles it's the first movie of the "apocalisse trilogy" from Carpenter. the movies are not related exept some ideology though.
I bet that he could somehow nebulize itself in air somehow. and there are no sequels so we do not know if the two "survivors" are infected (the Videogame it's not canonic, right?) still we can only theorize, since the movie do not explain much (and it's a good thing that's the "horror"...) he releases huge quantity of fluids when he trasform though.
The movies don't explain everything, but they totally explain enough. Do you reject the notion that a single "Thing cell" on a person is enough to eventually take him over or not?
@TheJediCharles the term "take over" is wrong, I belive, it's not that the thing takes controll of the body. it "digest"(the correct word is "Phagocyte") and then "imitate" it's structure. so he "eat" what there is and substitute it through a mitosis. so it's just the thing reproducing someone/something and I belive that just a cell is enought since it start to reproduce itself exponentially(n1^2 i think).
i think films should not explain much... if everything is explained where is the horror?
Well, your interpretation of my usage of "takeover" is what's wrong, not the meaning I intended. By "takeover" I mean "consumption in stages." The Thing can, on a microscopic level, assume the eating and imitating cells of let's say a hand for example. The host can be convinced the hand is still it's own, receiving a perceptively non-interrupted sensation down the nerves and the being still taking the brains "commands".
This is a popular interpretation of Norris' demise.
Again with the misconstruing. Where did I ever say a film SHOULD explain much? I never said either that or suggested this film explain everything. I am like many who watch and enjoy this film series. I'm a careful observer. I see the facts we know, the ones we don't, the wiggle room of possibility, and the suggestions to build upon.
It's obvious this being functions on both the micro and macro levels toward a goal. It's stronger than mere speculation.
@TheJediCharles but why do you want to fight? I said my opinion that is similar or even the same as yours and still you talk like I said something aganist you...why?
@TheJediCharles that prequel film is hardly "canonic" since everything about the monster was wrong... the moving hands? clean monster? the thing that JUMPS AWAY from a slab of ice leaving the borders intact as opposed by the asportation of it by the norvegians how was implied by the original movie? an AMERICAN scientis in a norvegian outpost? also I suggest to look the ORIGINAL splitface and see how it was different and in no way a creature that was like a bad VG monster..
Carpenter blessed this new film's script, one degree away from actually participating in it's creation.
But, if you want to simplistically omit the prequel based on little more than your personal opinion, then there's little to discuss.
OR, you could choose to be fair. The other films are filled with imperfections and boneheaded flaws. It's sad the prequel doesn't get a fair shake from people like you because the only thing the older films have this one doesn't is nostalgia and fanboys.
@TheJediCharles this movie sepecial effect was ridicolous and the story was even more ridicolous.and then it was a shitty CG feast nothing like the great work of Rob Bottin and Stan Wilson(the kennel thing is his work) and now the monster a clean and "precise"? weak if you ask me.
and now Carpenter just sign whatever you bring him to sign...he "worked" on the story of "F.3.A.R."(fear3 a Videogame) and it was horrible.more than horrible... and still the norwegian thing is compleatly different.
I can understand you simply "not liking" the new movie, but I don't see how you can stricken it from discussion as being invalid.
Like I already said, you're not being fair, this time with your "clean" argument. Remember the Bennings attack? Remember how messy it was? When the men returned to the scene everything had been cleaned up there too?
Also, you're giving the flaws in the old special effects a pass too. You don't think the computer scene was ridiculous?
Let's save ourselves some time. Either say you will or will not consider the new film's information as valid in the exploration of the creature's abilities. Let me know now because we cannot discuss the nature of the creature if we disagree on what the evidence even is.
Also, you are wrong about the Thing's ability to (if it opts for) 'take over" human flesh. We see just this in the split-face attack. It "merged" with the human's brain and "took over" the human functions. It did not have time to have actually digested the human but was already utilizing it's body. So, even though it's not what I meant in my discussion point on "taking over", your retort is wrong in that manner as well.
I thought the CGI was very cartoony in the prequel, not scary at all. The practical FX in Carpenter's The Thing are much more creepy and realistic. Although the stop-motion was bad even for 1982, but the anamatronics are some of the best. That Dog Kennel is unrivaled. What did you think?
I don't see what was deleted. Saw The Thing on Netflix instant streaming a few weeks ago and I'm pretty sure this was in it. With the roll and the "fuck you too" included. I guess it must have been added back in now.
BTW - what in hell was going on with SO MANY GUNS there?? Was it a freakin Penal Colony? Jeeze, this was a scientific station for research (at least I'd like to think that). Just ridiculous - puuuurrrrrrrre Hollywood.
Security maybe? In real stations like this in Antactica there are a lot of people, almost enough to be considered a small town, and there is armed security in some of them.
john carpenter est un des maîtres du cinéma avec david cronenberg et david lynch. tous ses films ont un petit quelque chose qui fait son style, même invasion los angeles ( considéré comme le film le plus mauvais de carpenter) a beaucoup de style. the thing est un super film, bien angoissant.
The dog-thing coming out of the beast's belly was supposse to be a alligator/crockodile, but changed because of lack of time/money. This whole scene would be longer and better if carpenter had more money and time.
Blair was at one time, just a regular guy who was unfortunately assimilated by the Thing because he forgot to call Liberty Medical, so they couldn't help him live a better life...
This was the worst part of the film. Fantastic build-up, but they ran out of imagination and creativity for the Thing's final form. If I was designing this creature it would have had a large dog body with an evil looking blair resting on its back. Keep the snake tail and really shock the audience with large spider legs. For Blair, give him evil red eyes that pierce the darkness of the room. The Thing becomes the embodiment of chaos and evil.
I disagree, It should be asymmetrical, have no familiar organs like eyes and stuff........Blair the former human would just be a flap of skin without eyes.....like this......and I'd keep the vicious monster jaws jutting out of his head.......I would remove the tentacles though......they're kind of unnecessary.
Aye, there are many pressures to getting a film completed on budget on schedule. Although I didn't go much on the final creature, MacReady's reply of "Yeah? Well, fuck you too!" is priceless. ^_^
Special effects were so much better when they were done by hand, as this movie demonstrates, compared to CGI. I don't care how good or powerful the computers are, CGI will never replace the real-time, visceral effects of "The Thing" or other movies of its kind.
@26Deacon Honestly, the CGI looked better on Youtube than it did in theatres. Looked pretty plasticky-imo. The monsters looked "clean," instead of being all gruesome and gnarled. And there was way more animatronic footage that was to be used which didn't make the cut, allegedly.
the guy that order to delete this scene is really a jackass. un verdadero PENDEJO!!!! i think it would be much beter that the end of the movie would been this delethed scene
Apparently they were going to include a scene where MacReady saw Nauls (the cook) burst out of the floor and cry out for help as he was being assimilated by the thing. But Rob Bottin, the special fx man, was so burned out from pulling a lot of all-nighters and living on candy bars during production that Carpenter told him to go to the hospital.
Still an amazing sequence in the end product if you ask me.
Hey listen There's a new setting at the top for Edit video. New. There's a thing in there that will crank up the brightness real nice on this. I know the movie was dark but online it's real hard to see the creature. Might be worth a look.
Ok guys...Im conused about this but is that dog monster-looking Thing at 0:31...is That Nauls??? Because I thought Nauls was wearing a blue headband but that monster took something out that looks like a RED bandana?
I never even knew this deleted scene existed. I saw the pictures on the stop-motion websites (yes, I'm a stop-motion animator), but I never saw this scene. A well done scene. I also noticed an animation test at 0:45-0:48.
Considering the difficulties with stop-motion, EX: 1 minute in stop-motion time would take 150 hours to complete (unless your booking it), Randy Cook did a good job.
@holysoks1 But there wasn't much stop motion...In fact (and I admit I could be wrong here) the only stop motion left in the final cut was the Blair creature's large tentacle body exploding up through the ground. And it was only up for a brief moment. The rest was prosthetic effects shot in real-time.
@MyceliaProductions42 Actually, they aren't hand puppets. They're mechanical puppets, Like the ones Stan Winston did in Jurassic Park. The electrical wires (hidden) are connected to a controller similar to that of an RC controller.
I honestly love this scene. To me, the only truly cheesy/obviously fake part is that final shot of the creature right before MacReady yells "Fuck you, too!" The main thing is that these deleted shots focus more on the creature and show you that it is actually Blair, just more mutated. In the final version, you really can't see any resemblance to Blair in there. And I LOVE the final shot, despite how fake it looks, with the dog head slithering on the ground at the end of a long tentacle. Scary.
@kezadrone They could. CGI takes all the raw horror feel out of movies. It might have worked for Jurassic Park in an action scene, but In The Mouth Of Madness was much creepier with "the Old Ones Return". That's what Hollywood doesn't give a fuck about. The problem with this particular effect is that how do you match up the man-sized Blairmonster with the giant dinosaur thing with the jaws? I think Blairmonster was unfinished. Still looks freaky, though.
@wandererlain Honestly It could be done in After Effects now. There's a video on my channel I'll send to you showing stop-motion. I added a motion blur to it and applied to this monster here they could cut it back into the movie.
@wandererlain Yeah it does look pretty freaky, but when the dog creature makes its entrance at 0:31 just looks cheesy than most action figures. I mean they should have cut that part out and just left the stop motion animation. The blair monster itself did look spooky but kinda fake when its jaws are opening it looks like a cheap puppet.
@FunkMastaMegaFlex No way! I wouldn't have Carpenter's movie changed for the world. The dog-thing looked disgustingly real to me. The Blair monster was unfinished. That's why they didn't use it. Come on! And I bet the remake is a piece of shit. I'm not going to the cinema to see it.
@wandererlain It might suck, I heard its kinda of a prequeal or something like that. It could be really good or really bad one or the other. Like I said the stop motion animation parts which I vageuely remember from seeing it on tv were kinda cool, maybe its only in the directors cut, but most of the puppet work on this creature I thought looked pretty darn fake LOL and cheesy, but hey thats what makes these horror cheese flicks great in there own right. At least we didn't see any actors heads!
@Knezovicz from what i heard, the blair monster was gonna have a larger role in the final battle but the idea wasnt used due to limitations of stop motion animation. if only john carpenter had more limits to it, it would been one of the best final battles ever
@MrEmilian10 the stop motion sequence with the dog thing jumping out its chest is the deleted part. carpenter felt that after showing all these awesome animatronic effects it would kind of be cheating the audience by using stop motion at the last moment you see the creature. can see his point tbh, even though its still cool :)
Even if that thing is alive, it's impossible for it to sustain livability. Its form and body functions are all quite primitive - all the reason to be really frightened
Damn, I love when he said "Fuck you too" to the funny looking extraterrestrial with a mishapen dog fetus jutting out from its body. What afucking hardass.
I kinda wish they would have kept Nalls' death scene in the movie. Originally after the thing pops out of the ground, you were to see Nalls being absorbed into the side of it while still conscious, calling to Mac for help. Then he kinda just gets absorbed into the thing, with the dog part coming out soon after. Too bad the effects werent perfected at the time. that would have been soooooo cool
@obenrob its not on the DVD. It was in the script and ive seen some story boards of it online. just google "The Thing The death throes of Nauls" and you should get something. Interestingly, thats not the only idea they had for his death scene. I know they had another one were blair turns into this big blob thing and washes over him basically
@obenrob The clip in this video is only on the Blu-ray, although the stop motion stuff can be seen in the documentary "The Thing: Terror Takes Shape" which is on the DVD.
I can't believe A Prequel is being made. It's probably going to suck either way, but If this new movie coming out in November 2011 has Computer graphics, instead of puppetry, and stop motion, then the director should kill himself for trying to make a Computer graphic Prequel and John Carpenter should burn his body for desecrating a classic horror movie.
tbh it was a little dissapointing at the end when it actually turned into this huge creature and we only saw it for like 2 mins before kurt blew it up, would of like to see it a little longer chasing him or something
HAHAHA .........FUCK U 2!
mrdavide36 20 hours ago
Thats grose
loltapiapi 1 day ago
Wow, thats some bad diabeetus.
MrTriplexi 2 days ago
this thing would have been the only monster that could have been cool in cgi
Mechagodzilla34 3 weeks ago
thank for this
kibakim 3 weeks ago
Just had dog thing on the floor than going what when it sees the stick.
SunTrapped 1 month ago
Alien,The Thing and Exorcist 3 best horror movies ever MADE!
nightcrow90 1 month ago
i wish some one would make a horror movie with animatronics and old cameras so it wouldnt look weird
13littlebigpro 1 month ago 2
It was hard, but I managed to masturbate to this.
DavidIdeaMachine 1 month ago
@DavidIdeaMachine Twat
jack930411 1 month ago
@Asraelx661 Agreed. The scene when you see the monster raise up should had been kept, probably cut just before its face comes into view.
ImperialGenKlenner 1 month ago
the stop motion sequence at 0:12 didn't look so bad, because it was in a dim lit shot, but the sequences at 0:44 and 0:50 look pretty silly, i think John should of kept the stop motion sequence at 0:12, but the ones after most definitely should of been cut out, either way great scene, great movie
AzraelX661 2 months ago
I´m asking myself: How get Blair infected to the Thing...What is the Cause of his Mutation? How get the Thing to him?
Ymiriron 2 months ago
@Ymiriron he did autopsies on the thing.the cells went through the gloves and began assimilating.
100mmatte 2 months ago
@100mmatte That or he got blood on his forearms where the gloves didn't cover. If the cells went though the glove, then MaCready would have most likely been infected when he and the doc carried the corpse on and off the helicopter.
Though his gloves were thicker. Just a thought.
Brucer420 2 months ago
@Brucer420
Taken to it's ultimate conclusion, the gloves wouldn't make any difference. This Thing can not only survive, but operate in individual cells. That's like torching a heaping, 230 pound sack of influenza virus and claim not touching it was going to prevent contraction.
The instant that vessel crash landed on the Earth, it was the end of indigenous life here; the ice served only as a slowing agent and all the human resistance is mere theatrics. The Thing is unstoppable.
TheJediCharles 3 weeks ago
@TheJediCharles Then every step the Thing took, it would have left skin cells/tissue everywhere. So yeah, it's a pretty contagious creature.
Brucer420 3 weeks ago
@Brucer420
Exactly. It's not like humans were the only life it benefitted from using to destroy the Earth. The take-over existed on every level life exists, and it's a safe bet microscopic life was already loosing to it. Even without humans (which actually helped it's progress) it would eventually ride the ice flow and use life indigenous to the arctic, sea life and birds to spread.
It's far and away the most devastating life-form concept ever conceived in sci-fi.
Maybe an alien bio-weapon?
TheJediCharles 3 weeks ago
@TheJediCharles
what if it assimilated a plant?
also, it reminds me of "The Many" concept of system shock 2
UtubeH8tr 3 weeks ago
@UtubeH8tr
Exactly. There is no indication it's limited in absorbing and imitating every scrap of life on the Earth. It's by no means limited to "higher life forms", particularly not just humans.
TheJediCharles 3 weeks ago
@TheJediCharles in the original book,it couldn't assimilate plants
Mechagodzilla34 2 weeks ago
@Mechagodzilla34
That's not how I recall it.
TheJediCharles 2 weeks ago
@TheJediCharles the ice freezes it. it do not kill it but probably cause some damage... also fire is a good way to stop it. it do not pread in the "air" but probably the contact with it's fluid could work as "vessel". still probably there is a level of "immunity" to it...it have some sort of genetic communication because he can "remeber" and invent new dna and rna for istant "natural" defences. though it seems he is not much immortal since he tries to hide in local animal fauna
1r0zz 3 days ago
@1r0zz
1st of all, we don't know that it wasn't transmitted by air.
2nd, ice obviously doesn't harm it. If it did, 100,000 years would have finished it.
3rd, we can't even clear a room of influenza virus. This Thing was 100,000 times as deadly as that.
The Thing was the end of the world. Fighting it was fruitless.
TheJediCharles 3 days ago
@TheJediCharles it's not transmited in air because if not there would not be any movie. all peple would become "thing". many of them becomes but in different times.
by harm I meant some kind of atrophies so he was not in a great shape when it got out. on the cotrary of what the horrible prequel showed (some sort of bad Video Game monster...)
but in any plague there are people that survive. same it could be with the thing.
we both agree on that. even Carpenter agrees...
1r0zz 3 days ago
@1r0zz
Carpenter himself called his film an Apocalypse story, which is an unstoppable end of the world.
You are still assuming it cannot be blown single-cell through the air. You do not know that. When you say "there would be no movie", two problems; one, we do not see any "long term" survivors. Also, we're not watching the movie through microscopes. The Thing is by no means limited to attacking in a macro-sense. Every person on the base could have already been taken over in a partial sense.
TheJediCharles 2 days ago
@TheJediCharles it's the first movie of the "apocalisse trilogy" from Carpenter. the movies are not related exept some ideology though.
I bet that he could somehow nebulize itself in air somehow. and there are no sequels so we do not know if the two "survivors" are infected (the Videogame it's not canonic, right?) still we can only theorize, since the movie do not explain much (and it's a good thing that's the "horror"...) he releases huge quantity of fluids when he trasform though.
1r0zz 2 days ago
@1r0zz
The movies don't explain everything, but they totally explain enough. Do you reject the notion that a single "Thing cell" on a person is enough to eventually take him over or not?
TheJediCharles 2 days ago
@TheJediCharles the term "take over" is wrong, I belive, it's not that the thing takes controll of the body. it "digest"(the correct word is "Phagocyte") and then "imitate" it's structure. so he "eat" what there is and substitute it through a mitosis. so it's just the thing reproducing someone/something and I belive that just a cell is enought since it start to reproduce itself exponentially(n1^2 i think).
i think films should not explain much... if everything is explained where is the horror?
1r0zz 2 days ago
@1r0zz
Well, your interpretation of my usage of "takeover" is what's wrong, not the meaning I intended. By "takeover" I mean "consumption in stages." The Thing can, on a microscopic level, assume the eating and imitating cells of let's say a hand for example. The host can be convinced the hand is still it's own, receiving a perceptively non-interrupted sensation down the nerves and the being still taking the brains "commands".
This is a popular interpretation of Norris' demise.
TheJediCharles 2 days ago
@1r0zz
Again with the misconstruing. Where did I ever say a film SHOULD explain much? I never said either that or suggested this film explain everything. I am like many who watch and enjoy this film series. I'm a careful observer. I see the facts we know, the ones we don't, the wiggle room of possibility, and the suggestions to build upon.
It's obvious this being functions on both the micro and macro levels toward a goal. It's stronger than mere speculation.
TheJediCharles 2 days ago
@TheJediCharles but why do you want to fight? I said my opinion that is similar or even the same as yours and still you talk like I said something aganist you...why?
1r0zz 2 days ago
@1r0zz
It's just a discussion, not a fight. Don't take it so personal.
And, the attack in the prequel film that revealed how splitface was created is what I'm referring to.
TheJediCharles 2 days ago
@TheJediCharles that prequel film is hardly "canonic" since everything about the monster was wrong... the moving hands? clean monster? the thing that JUMPS AWAY from a slab of ice leaving the borders intact as opposed by the asportation of it by the norvegians how was implied by the original movie? an AMERICAN scientis in a norvegian outpost? also I suggest to look the ORIGINAL splitface and see how it was different and in no way a creature that was like a bad VG monster..
1r0zz 1 day ago
@1r0zz
Carpenter blessed this new film's script, one degree away from actually participating in it's creation.
But, if you want to simplistically omit the prequel based on little more than your personal opinion, then there's little to discuss.
OR, you could choose to be fair. The other films are filled with imperfections and boneheaded flaws. It's sad the prequel doesn't get a fair shake from people like you because the only thing the older films have this one doesn't is nostalgia and fanboys.
TheJediCharles 1 day ago
@TheJediCharles this movie sepecial effect was ridicolous and the story was even more ridicolous.and then it was a shitty CG feast nothing like the great work of Rob Bottin and Stan Wilson(the kennel thing is his work) and now the monster a clean and "precise"? weak if you ask me.
and now Carpenter just sign whatever you bring him to sign...he "worked" on the story of "F.3.A.R."(fear3 a Videogame) and it was horrible.more than horrible... and still the norwegian thing is compleatly different.
1r0zz 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@1r0zz
I can understand you simply "not liking" the new movie, but I don't see how you can stricken it from discussion as being invalid.
Like I already said, you're not being fair, this time with your "clean" argument. Remember the Bennings attack? Remember how messy it was? When the men returned to the scene everything had been cleaned up there too?
Also, you're giving the flaws in the old special effects a pass too. You don't think the computer scene was ridiculous?
TheJediCharles 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@1r0zz
Let's save ourselves some time. Either say you will or will not consider the new film's information as valid in the exploration of the creature's abilities. Let me know now because we cannot discuss the nature of the creature if we disagree on what the evidence even is.
TheJediCharles 1 day ago
@1r0zz
Also, you are wrong about the Thing's ability to (if it opts for) 'take over" human flesh. We see just this in the split-face attack. It "merged" with the human's brain and "took over" the human functions. It did not have time to have actually digested the human but was already utilizing it's body. So, even though it's not what I meant in my discussion point on "taking over", your retort is wrong in that manner as well.
TheJediCharles 2 days ago
@TheJediCharles wait...split face? you mean the already combusted corpse outside the norvegian base?
1r0zz 2 days ago
oh that looks just damn cool
RedheadMetalC 2 months ago
How the fuck does that THING fly a spaceship? No wonder it crashed.
TheSonomaDude 2 months ago
I'm glad the stop-motion parts were cut out. Even JC said himself that the stop-motion looked fake.
TheThingKing 3 months ago
@TheThingKing
They never had high end CG at the time, but most film puppets, animal electronic, looks more realistic.
gingerbreadgirlyboy 2 months ago
@TheThingKing
What do you think of the CG in the reboot?
gingerbreadgirlyboy 2 months ago
@gingerbreadgirlyboy
I thought the CGI was very cartoony in the prequel, not scary at all. The practical FX in Carpenter's The Thing are much more creepy and realistic. Although the stop-motion was bad even for 1982, but the anamatronics are some of the best. That Dog Kennel is unrivaled. What did you think?
TheThingKing 2 months ago
some how the Stop motion Monsters are very Grotesque and so very Disturbing and Nightmarish!
unlike the CGI that is not the same
jaguar4u2012 3 months ago
The Blair Monster should have roared DIIIIIAAAABBEEEEEETUUUSSSSS"
TheShockninja 3 months ago
the prequel is better
Thejakebak 3 months ago
I don't see what was deleted. Saw The Thing on Netflix instant streaming a few weeks ago and I'm pretty sure this was in it. With the roll and the "fuck you too" included. I guess it must have been added back in now.
TheAntman217 3 months ago
@TheAntman217 The stopmotion moments of this creature are deleted in the real movie, you can see these at 0:12 and 0:44
BadSilence1 3 months ago
@BadSilence1 Oh I see it now. Thanks.
TheAntman217 3 months ago
BTW - what in hell was going on with SO MANY GUNS there?? Was it a freakin Penal Colony? Jeeze, this was a scientific station for research (at least I'd like to think that). Just ridiculous - puuuurrrrrrrre Hollywood.
cyberlarry7 3 months ago
Security maybe? In real stations like this in Antactica there are a lot of people, almost enough to be considered a small town, and there is armed security in some of them.
HoundofOdin 3 months ago
Comment removed
cyberlarry7 3 months ago
0:42 hahaha Really, Mac? was that roll necessary? You're still a bad ass in my book
CoHScrapper 3 months ago
john carpenter est un des maîtres du cinéma avec david cronenberg et david lynch. tous ses films ont un petit quelque chose qui fait son style, même invasion los angeles ( considéré comme le film le plus mauvais de carpenter) a beaucoup de style. the thing est un super film, bien angoissant.
florian656 4 months ago
The dog-thing coming out of the beast's belly was supposse to be a alligator/crockodile, but changed because of lack of time/money. This whole scene would be longer and better if carpenter had more money and time.
BadSilence1 4 months ago
stop motion Blair is better than full-cgi Sander, myself and others laughed in the theater at that stupid thing
GoatOfGandhi 4 months ago
Blair was at one time, just a regular guy who was unfortunately assimilated by the Thing because he forgot to call Liberty Medical, so they couldn't help him live a better life...
drmcnashville 4 months ago 14
@drmcnashville Little did the Thing know that by assimilating him it would get diabeetus.
Xbalanque84 4 months ago 9
This was the worst part of the film. Fantastic build-up, but they ran out of imagination and creativity for the Thing's final form. If I was designing this creature it would have had a large dog body with an evil looking blair resting on its back. Keep the snake tail and really shock the audience with large spider legs. For Blair, give him evil red eyes that pierce the darkness of the room. The Thing becomes the embodiment of chaos and evil.
SamusDrake 4 months ago
@SamusDrake
I disagree, It should be asymmetrical, have no familiar organs like eyes and stuff........Blair the former human would just be a flap of skin without eyes.....like this......and I'd keep the vicious monster jaws jutting out of his head.......I would remove the tentacles though......they're kind of unnecessary.
AceofDlamonds 4 months ago
@SamusDrake While I agree with you, arguably, along with imagination, they probably ran out of money as well.
shockedthemonkey 4 months ago
@shockedthemonkey
Aye, there are many pressures to getting a film completed on budget on schedule. Although I didn't go much on the final creature, MacReady's reply of "Yeah? Well, fuck you too!" is priceless. ^_^
SamusDrake 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
That movie is fucking awesome. An absolute classic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
JasonTate08 4 months ago
dieabeetus
dangerrat456 4 months ago
Who cares if they think its crappy. The special Effects is way stunning than the prequel.
nightmuffin937 4 months ago
I like how the thing just show up but do nothing to Mac XDD
dinokaki 4 months ago
Special effects were so much better when they were done by hand, as this movie demonstrates, compared to CGI. I don't care how good or powerful the computers are, CGI will never replace the real-time, visceral effects of "The Thing" or other movies of its kind.
Beergut222 4 months ago
@Beergut222 yeah but i saw The Thing prequel last night & the CGI wasnt that bad. plus there was a little of animatronics in there too.
26Deacon 4 months ago
@26Deacon Honestly, the CGI looked better on Youtube than it did in theatres. Looked pretty plasticky-imo. The monsters looked "clean," instead of being all gruesome and gnarled. And there was way more animatronic footage that was to be used which didn't make the cut, allegedly.
RednessAlpha 4 months ago
@RednessAlpha yeah i feel what you're saying but the Thing prequel to me is still the best horror movie of the year.
26Deacon 4 months ago
Holy shit I didn't see this
MsDanny707 4 months ago
Kinda looks like Evil dead 2! Ill swallow your soul!!
StanAlter 4 months ago
the guy that order to delete this scene is really a jackass. un verdadero PENDEJO!!!! i think it would be much beter that the end of the movie would been this delethed scene
mitoxrocket 4 months ago
Aw I feel like I'm gonna throw up after watching all these thing scenes
Megasaw16 4 months ago
nothing bfg 9000 couldn't take care of
baca262 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
YEA FUCK YOU TOO!!!
teecee2468 5 months ago
god if it was me i would have killed my self at the first enconter of this thing
masterofdarkness144 5 months ago
Apparently they were going to include a scene where MacReady saw Nauls (the cook) burst out of the floor and cry out for help as he was being assimilated by the thing. But Rob Bottin, the special fx man, was so burned out from pulling a lot of all-nighters and living on candy bars during production that Carpenter told him to go to the hospital.
Still an amazing sequence in the end product if you ask me.
CaptMARNEY 5 months ago
Everything looks awesome. What are you guys smoking? it's the god-awful cheesy CGI of today's movies that looks bad.
hitthecasino 5 months ago
these aliens need to calm the fuck down.......
johnTRAN93 5 months ago
I saw this on the Netflix DVD I got. You sure it's deleted?
chitoryu12 5 months ago
best sci-fi horror ever plus this scene isnt deleted i saw it when i watched it
wererapterps3 5 months ago
Hey listen There's a new setting at the top for Edit video. New. There's a thing in there that will crank up the brightness real nice on this. I know the movie was dark but online it's real hard to see the creature. Might be worth a look.
kezadrone 5 months ago
Glad it was removed looked like Clash of the Titans effects, poor!
WillHayFan 6 months ago
"Fuck you too!" LMAO
matthewakian2 6 months ago
oh that's NAAAAAAAAAYSTAY.
StreakyTheFurry 6 months ago
Hey, Blair! You down there? Got something for you! YAAAGGGHHH! BOOOM!
wandererlain 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Watched this masterpiece on tv a few days ago and this scene was included
nEwSoMe93 6 months ago
Ok guys...Im conused about this but is that dog monster-looking Thing at 0:31...is That Nauls??? Because I thought Nauls was wearing a blue headband but that monster took something out that looks like a RED bandana?
nightmuffin937 6 months ago
@nightmuffin937
Interesting observation. That red bandanna looks like a string of guts to me.
StopmoDave 6 months ago
@nightmuffin937 Guess it spat that bandana out because it wasn't a RAMBO fan.
wandererlain 6 months ago
I never even knew this deleted scene existed. I saw the pictures on the stop-motion websites (yes, I'm a stop-motion animator), but I never saw this scene. A well done scene. I also noticed an animation test at 0:45-0:48.
Considering the difficulties with stop-motion, EX: 1 minute in stop-motion time would take 150 hours to complete (unless your booking it), Randy Cook did a good job.
StopmoDave 6 months ago
considering it was 1982 this was disturbing as fuck. Carpenter is so good Ill even forgive him for "the fog" after this
Rockvoxxx 6 months ago
@Rockvoxxx I thought the fog rocked, although I had a head full of ketamine when I saw it...
jimmyshitbags 6 months ago
ehh Fuck you two!
karmacharger100 6 months ago
w w w clarkesworldmagazine . com /watts_01_10/
This story was written from "The Thing's" point of view and offers amazing insight into the story!
holysoks1 7 months ago
Stop motion just didn't work for this film. I'm glad we can witness the scene, but I'm also glad it wasn't put in the final film.
MyceliaProductions42 7 months ago
@MyceliaProductions42 Stop motion made this movie amazing.
holysoks1 7 months ago
@holysoks1 But there wasn't much stop motion...In fact (and I admit I could be wrong here) the only stop motion left in the final cut was the Blair creature's large tentacle body exploding up through the ground. And it was only up for a brief moment. The rest was prosthetic effects shot in real-time.
MyceliaProductions42 7 months ago
@MyceliaProductions42 The dog scene was stop-motion wasn't it?
holysoks1 7 months ago
@holysoks1 Nope. It was prosthetic effects (hands in puppets, the whole deal)...and mighty good, I might add.
MyceliaProductions42 7 months ago
Comment removed
StopmoDave 6 months ago
@MyceliaProductions42 Actually, they aren't hand puppets. They're mechanical puppets, Like the ones Stan Winston did in Jurassic Park. The electrical wires (hidden) are connected to a controller similar to that of an RC controller.
StopmoDave 6 months ago
@StopmoDave Thanks, man. I'd forgotten about that.
MyceliaProductions42 6 months ago
I honestly love this scene. To me, the only truly cheesy/obviously fake part is that final shot of the creature right before MacReady yells "Fuck you, too!" The main thing is that these deleted shots focus more on the creature and show you that it is actually Blair, just more mutated. In the final version, you really can't see any resemblance to Blair in there. And I LOVE the final shot, despite how fake it looks, with the dog head slithering on the ground at the end of a long tentacle. Scary.
BuildersBlockStudios 7 months ago
@BuildersBlockStudios That's why it was deleted. Didn't look right.
wandererlain 6 months ago
@wandererlain They could real smart motion blur that in Afetr effects now and it would look better than CGI.
kezadrone 5 months ago
@kezadrone They could. CGI takes all the raw horror feel out of movies. It might have worked for Jurassic Park in an action scene, but In The Mouth Of Madness was much creepier with "the Old Ones Return". That's what Hollywood doesn't give a fuck about. The problem with this particular effect is that how do you match up the man-sized Blairmonster with the giant dinosaur thing with the jaws? I think Blairmonster was unfinished. Still looks freaky, though.
wandererlain 5 months ago
@wandererlain Honestly It could be done in After Effects now. There's a video on my channel I'll send to you showing stop-motion. I added a motion blur to it and applied to this monster here they could cut it back into the movie.
kezadrone 5 months ago
@wandererlain Yeah it does look pretty freaky, but when the dog creature makes its entrance at 0:31 just looks cheesy than most action figures. I mean they should have cut that part out and just left the stop motion animation. The blair monster itself did look spooky but kinda fake when its jaws are opening it looks like a cheap puppet.
FunkMastaMegaFlex 5 months ago
@FunkMastaMegaFlex No way! I wouldn't have Carpenter's movie changed for the world. The dog-thing looked disgustingly real to me. The Blair monster was unfinished. That's why they didn't use it. Come on! And I bet the remake is a piece of shit. I'm not going to the cinema to see it.
wandererlain 5 months ago
@wandererlain It might suck, I heard its kinda of a prequeal or something like that. It could be really good or really bad one or the other. Like I said the stop motion animation parts which I vageuely remember from seeing it on tv were kinda cool, maybe its only in the directors cut, but most of the puppet work on this creature I thought looked pretty darn fake LOL and cheesy, but hey thats what makes these horror cheese flicks great in there own right. At least we didn't see any actors heads!
FunkMastaMegaFlex 5 months ago
so what's deleted?
B0bSag3tt 7 months ago
@B0bSag3tt The claymation scenes, such as when the dog leaps out after Macready.
Danzilla1996 7 months ago
@Danzilla1996
Correction, Stop-motion. Not clay-mation, because these characters are Foam-Latex.
StopmoDave 6 months ago
@StopmoDave Ah. Okay.
Danzilla1996 6 months ago
BEST SCI-FI HORROR MOVIE EVER! dot
everson444666 7 months ago 35
Hmm, I dunno, it didn't look all that bad even for stop motion.
jjobie 7 months ago
.......ew
ActionMovieBuff 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
that movie was seriously 2011 grade creepy. it wasnt that terrifying but it was creepy beyond words...
MrMatiasman 8 months ago
Comment removed
MrMatiasman 8 months ago
WHY DID THEY DELETED THIS?!
Knezovicz 8 months ago
@Knezovicz from what i heard, the blair monster was gonna have a larger role in the final battle but the idea wasnt used due to limitations of stop motion animation. if only john carpenter had more limits to it, it would been one of the best final battles ever
WerewolfVampire625 7 months ago
This is not the deleted sence its the actual ending off the film
MrEmilian10 8 months ago
@MrEmilian10 the stop motion sequence with the dog thing jumping out its chest is the deleted part. carpenter felt that after showing all these awesome animatronic effects it would kind of be cheating the audience by using stop motion at the last moment you see the creature. can see his point tbh, even though its still cool :)
ScotsIrishPunx09 8 months ago
@MrEmilian10 yeah, ive seen this like three times!
facecheek 7 months ago
@MrEmilian10 yes i did see this scene in the movie too
Nagasuku 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I love this movie!
julsglowacki8 8 months ago
Best Horror movie there is!
StealthTroops 8 months ago
somewhere on that monster is a free glucose meter from liberty medical so it can check its sugar and check it often.
TheBruceReedy 8 months ago 9
The thing sounds alot like the 1933 Kong. :P
Spootchies 8 months ago
@Spootchies
THANK YOU!! I've been saying that for years!!! The roar of this Blair-Thing is exactly the same roar as King Kong (1933) roar!
TheThingKing 3 months ago
I've seen this scene countless times. It's not a deleted scene. And they don't make 'em like this anymore, not with CGI so cheap.
OroborusFMA 8 months ago
There's a creature with the same look/design in "in the mouth of madness"
nobunagass 8 months ago
Isnt this the ending scene, not a deleted one?
MrPayneful 9 months ago
Even if that thing is alive, it's impossible for it to sustain livability. Its form and body functions are all quite primitive - all the reason to be really frightened
665885 9 months ago
"Yeah, and fuck you too"!
dino312989 9 months ago
F*** You Too!! I saw thid
s for the first time 20 minutes ago... first i was like 0_0 then i
:0 lol'd
themaninthemoonremix 9 months ago
The Men In Black Stopped this scene from airing because it was filmed by security cameras in the actual base and stolen by the director.
They let it become a deleted scene after exterminating the entirity of the creature's race on its home planet.
RikiOhRed 9 months ago
THING-FEST 2011!
THINGVISION 9 months ago
When was this scene deleted? I remember the giant monster being in there, or was that brief stop motion moment the part you were talking about.
Pixelrelated 9 months ago
I always laugh and say that Wilford Brimley ate a dog and that's why it came out of his stomach haha
crimewriter95 9 months ago
@samusphazonsuit23567
i love it
mebossyounothing 9 months ago
Damn, I love when he said "Fuck you too" to the funny looking extraterrestrial with a mishapen dog fetus jutting out from its body. What afucking hardass.
Spootchies 10 months ago
I'M WILFORD BRIMLEY.....AND THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WITH UNTREATED DIABEETUS!
TheGreaterGood80 10 months ago 3
who could come up with this shit
S1ick10292 10 months ago
@S1ick10292 people on lsd
Django5198 10 months ago
@S1ick10292 horror movie making geniuses duh.
Cyclonus21 10 months ago
I kinda wish they would have kept Nalls' death scene in the movie. Originally after the thing pops out of the ground, you were to see Nalls being absorbed into the side of it while still conscious, calling to Mac for help. Then he kinda just gets absorbed into the thing, with the dog part coming out soon after. Too bad the effects werent perfected at the time. that would have been soooooo cool
bluereaper75 11 months ago
@bluereaper75 were can i find that clip on the dvd?
obenrob 11 months ago
@obenrob its not on the DVD. It was in the script and ive seen some story boards of it online. just google "The Thing The death throes of Nauls" and you should get something. Interestingly, thats not the only idea they had for his death scene. I know they had another one were blair turns into this big blob thing and washes over him basically
bluereaper75 11 months ago
@obenrob The clip in this video is only on the Blu-ray, although the stop motion stuff can be seen in the documentary "The Thing: Terror Takes Shape" which is on the DVD.
BinaltechGinrai 11 months ago
I can't believe A Prequel is being made. It's probably going to suck either way, but If this new movie coming out in November 2011 has Computer graphics, instead of puppetry, and stop motion, then the director should kill himself for trying to make a Computer graphic Prequel and John Carpenter should burn his body for desecrating a classic horror movie.
immolation987 11 months ago
@immolation987 but, on the bright side, it will explain how that dog got away in the first place, causing all this to happen.
KODfreak 10 months ago
Rises up out of the ground: "I'm Wilford Brimley, and I'd like to talk to you for a few minutes about diabeetus."
Zwingli10 11 months ago 91
@Zwingli10
LMFAO!
"Complications of diabeetus may include- loss of consciousness, beast jaws growing out of the temples, and.....severe dry skin"
ehehe
AceofDlamonds 11 months ago
@AceofDlamonds Has your skin ever been so dry that a long, slender dog bursts out of it? I hate it when that happens.
Zwingli10 11 months ago
@Zwingli10
lol random compilations of whatever processes go on in ma tummy....
AceofDlamonds 11 months ago
@Zwingli10 I have exactly what you are looking for on my channel.
ThingImitation 5 months ago
@Zwingli10 "FUCK YOU TOO"
CaptainPengu 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I wish they had shown Nauls being attacked by Blair on top of the crates, as a deleted scenes as well. I'm very curious to how that looked on film.
TheWuCepticon81 11 months ago
I wish they had shown Nauls being attacked my Blair on top of the crates, as a deleted scenes as well. I'm very curious to how that looked on film.
TheWuCepticon81 11 months ago
I don't think they should of made this a deleted scene.
godzillafilms5 1 year ago
Reminds me a bit of an old gf.
washcloud 1 year ago
@washcloud, XD WIN
Plummlets 11 months ago
tbh it was a little dissapointing at the end when it actually turned into this huge creature and we only saw it for like 2 mins before kurt blew it up, would of like to see it a little longer chasing him or something
msparkyb 1 year ago