Any misconceptions you had about The Thing?
When you saw The Thing for the first time, or perhaps during your first few viewings of it, did you have any misconceptions about what was going on? I mean things that you wouldn't now consider to be debatable and that you now know for sure were simply wrong. In my case, I think there's only one: I didn't realise that, following the blood -*test*-('") scene, Blair was a Thing. Instead, I thought that he was human and that his behaviour could be attributed to his intelligence, e.g. 1) He had been studying and thinking very hard about The Thing in his hut. The knowledge he acquired enabled him to build the spaceship. 2) He also had a theory about how to kill The Thing: ram one's fingers under its skin in a very precise and specific way, i.e. Garry, whom I thought was a Thing when Blair did this. Blame the unconvincing human skin SFX. Too thin. Also, because it was a bad VHS copy, together with the lack of light, I didn't notice that the monster at the end was part Blair-imitation. But even if I had, I would probably have rationalised this as the result of a recent assimilation (e.g. his method of attempting to kill the Garry-Thing could have failed.) Well, I was only 11 years old at the time. XidiouX

Well, since I played the video game first, I originally thought that the movie's plot was the same as the game's lol Other than that, I too always believed Blair to be human, and that his actions were just a result of him flipping out earlier in the film. I also thought that the thing was merely a virus and those who were infected still had their mental human capabilities. I too was only 11 when I first saw it, on VHS as well. Quite a coincidence? lol

I also saw it at age 11 on a bad VHS copy. I didnt have an misconceptions, I was just SCARED SHITLESS and had to sleep with my parents!

I wouldn't say I was scared, but after seeing the dogtown scene I was heavily affected by it and it was the point where I was most completely drawn into the movie. I'd say the scariest scene (still to this day) would have to be the blood -*test*-('") scene. I admired the scene the moment I saw it for being so graphic and dramatic and everytime I went back to watch it I would nearly shit myself in preparation of Palmer's transformation.

I agree about the Palmer scene: pathological, in every sense. It's interesting though that the three of us first saw it at the same young age, and it would no doubt have been illegal for us to be admitted into a cinema to see it in our respective countries. Speaking for myself here, although it wouldn't surprise me at all if you feel the same way, it did me no harm whatsoever. It was frightening but it was also a profoundly epihanic experience that I would recommend to any 11 year old. If I ever have children, well, I would never force such material on them against their will. However, I would be happy to let them see such things if they wanted to. This gives rise to questions such as: what are the assumptions upon which film classification systems are based? Relatedly, who is in the best position to decide whether or not a specific child should see a film such as The Thing? XidiouX

Yes, I consider first watching The Thing to be one of the defining aspects of my life thus far (as nerdy as that sounds, I do not care.). As for the film ratings commission, I'm personally against it in every manner. Let's face it: entertainment is entertainment. Why should we sheild children from it if they have the desire to experience it? I remember one of the first ever video games I ever got into: Mortal Kombat 2 at the age of 4. It didn't scar me for life, it increased my interest in video games and I enjoyed it profoundly. The same with The Thing in movies. In short, I am strongly against rating systems in general. Having the government prohibit the sale of video games to minors is petty bullshit, and even moreso that the age limit is 17! If parents feel the need to sheild their children from that, then they should have the right to, but the government has ABSOLUTELY NO RIGHT to label violent entertainment against kids, especially those who are ready for it. I also understand that some children may not be "ready" for extreme content. I am not saying that entertainment HAS to be experienced by children, but if they want to view it, then why not? It's just entertainment. It was made to be enjoyed by individuals, regardless of the age. As long as it's being enjoyed.