Plot hole: It's never explicitly stated or shown that the Thing reproduces with each victim until the movie is nearly over (when Palmer infects Windows). Most viewers figure it out from the context, but it's unclear just when and how the characters themselves have come to this conclusion. This was an inadvertent result of an editing decision and a visual goof: there is a deleted scene in which Blair explains much more directly that the Thing multiplies according to how many victims it takes, and in its place in the final film is a scene containing a computer simulation that director John Carpenter acknowledges was a failed attempt at explaining the organism's life cycle.
TonyPH
15th Dec 2020
The Thing (1982)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This isn't a plot hole. It's explained in the computer scene that the entire world population would be infected 27,000 hours from first contact. That only makes sense if the organism reproduces. Even without that explanation, there's no plot hole. The plot still works. The characters come to a conclusion. They might have worked it out, guessed, or simply be wrong. Just because that's what they believe it doesn't make them correct.
True, it has "the effect" of a plot hole more than it literally is one in itself, but it's the closest category for a pretty unique expository failure for a major studio film; one confirmed to have been a total goof in the production. All we have for most of the film is the implication of the word "infect" going up against VERY clear and misleading exposition of the Thing's nature. I'll consider changing the type to "Other," but I feel strongly it should be represented.
14th Nov 2002
The Thing (1982)
Corrected entry: When Norris and MacReady are climbing down into the crater that has the spaceship in it, you can see in the right corner of the screen a crewmember climb up, then look startled and drop back down behind the ship. Only visible in the widescreen version. (00:37:30)
Correction: I've looked all over this sequence and can't find the mistake. Does anybody have a screencap or can otherwise confirm?
19th Jan 2014
The Thing (1982)
Other mistake: When Doc uses a computer to watch/simulate dog cells being assimilated by a "thing" cell, we can see a single cell fusing with multiple dog cells to imitate them. This process would lead to the dog being digested until it remains only one cell, and not to the replacement of all of its cells by the imitators. (00:40:30 - 00:41:25)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The computer simulation isn't showing just one cell taking over an entire dog, but showing how the creature can get the genetic makeup of whatever it touches and replicate it perfectly.
I think it's fair to consider this a goof. John Carpenter states on the director's commentary his goal through this sequence was to demonstrate the life cycle of the Thing, and acknowledges that the visual isn't accurate for that purpose.
Pretty much the entire rest of the movie unfolds as though the simulation showcased the Thing spreading / multiplying: it's followed by text saying the entire human population could become "infected" after a certain amount of time; it's not until after this scene that anyone besides Blair is worried that one or more of them has been taken over. It's a valid movie mistake because the movie itself seems to assume the audience saw something different than what was actually shown.
10th Nov 2003
The Thing (1982)
Corrected entry: "There is still cellular activity in these burned remains - they are not dead yet." This hypothesis of Blair turns out to be the horrid truth (when Bennings is the first of the team to be caught by the "Thing"). So, if incineration is no solution, why do the crew members, although being aware of this, keep on torching their "infected" mates? MacReady even blows up Palmer and the final "boss creature" with explosives. Wouldn't this just spread the infection instead of keeping it contained?
Correction: It's not so much that burning doesn't work at all, but you have to be thorough about it. Even if the larger organism has stopped moving and appears to be dead, you still have to make sure all the internals are destroyed in the fire because even small parts of the Thing are deadly and can even function independently. Note that they burn all the Thing carcasses together a second time, and this time they are not in any hurry to put the flame out.
Correction: Burning was the best they could do. Guns, knives and clubs would be useless. Most likely they planned to burn every bit of the Things after finding out who was who, but events got out of control with Blair being a Thing. And when the big creature at the end showed up, MacReady did the only thing he could.
Join the mailing list
Separate from membership, this is to get updates about mistakes in recent releases. Addresses are not passed on to any third party, and are used solely for direct communication from this site. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Check out the mistake & trivia books, on Kindle and in paperback.