Hollywood’s
first adaptation of Campbell’s “Who Goes There?” premiered in 1951, and
re-branded the story forever after as The Thing. The now-classic film was
well-reviewed at the time of its premiere, and was instantly beloved by a young
generation of sci-fi and horror fans. These fans went on to praise the film for
generations to come, often doing so, alas, by putting down John Carpenter’s far
more faithful remake.
Among
those who grew-up admiring the 1950’s film was actually John Carpenter himself,
who showed clips of The Thing in Halloween (1978), and then directed
the remake of The Thing in 1982.
Authorship
of the 1951 The Thing is also widely contested -- much as is
Poltergeist (1982), in the modern era. Some scholars have long believed
the film was directed by Howard Hawks. They note the presence of his trademark
overlapping dialogue, the jaunty esprit-de-corps
among the male characters, and the presence of a Hawksian woman (Margaret
Sheridan’s Nikki) in the mix.
Others,
meanwhile, believe that the credited director, Christian Nyby is responsible
for the film’s final shape…only with considerable input from producer Hawks. Nyby
(who died in 1993) was never shy about
the fact that, as director, he frequently solicited Hawks’ guidance, and sought
to emulate his trademark style.
Either
way, the 1951 film is whip-smart, fast-paced, and possesses at least one jump
scare that is still effective today, more than a half-century after its release.
The fifties film also ends with a classic line of warning (that seems to have
informed the denouement of John Carpenter’s The Fog [1980]): “Keep watching the skies.”
The
1950’s The Thing changes a great number of details from the Campbell
novella, and whatever its cinematic values, cannot be considered a faithful
adaptation of the literary source material. For example: the action is moved
from the South Pole to the North Pole, and the alien is no longer a
shape-shifting creature, but an “intellectual
carrot” that remains locked in humanoid form throughout the film. This shift
in the alien’s biological nature means that the famous blood test scene of the
novella is not necessary in the drama and, accordingly, omitted.
Also,
women are present for the first time in the story, in this version of The
Thing, and the literary protagonists (McReady, Copper, Blair, etc.) are
not present. Even the precipitating incident of the novella is altered
significantly in the Nyby/Hawks film. Here, the alien is melted from its ice
block by mere accident (an electric blanket is draped over it). And, the Thing has not been frozen in the ice
for long at all.
In
fact, it landed in the ice from space just a day before the action commences.
The
basic, balanced approach or philosophy of Campbell’s literary tale -- noting
both the yin and yang of the scientific mind -- is also altered significantly for
the Hawks/Nyby film, which is clearly the product of a jingoistic era in American
history. Science, as represented by Dr. Carrington (Robert Cornthwaite), is
seen in the film to be arrogant, impractical, and downright delusional. It’s a good thing, indeed, the film suggests,
that military men are on hand to make decisions that -- even if they fail to
advance knowledge -- protect the (red-blooded) American way of life.
Indeed,
this version of The Thing (1951) might be remembered, primarily for the context
from it which arose: the Cold War with
the “Red” Soviets.
Here,
the Thing is an avatar for inhuman, un-American communism. Where Hendry
(Kenneth Tobey), Nikki, and his Hendry’s men are all fast-talking, colorful
figures who clearly enjoy sex, the Thing boasts no such individuality or desire.
Instead, it is a blood-less, asexual thing that can reproduce identical clones
without sex. It is a godless, communist Thing.
In
this context, the scientists featured in the film are deluded egg-heads who,
because of their foolishness, can’t see which side of the war they should be
on.
Sadly,
the anti-communist nature of the story is joined by essentially, an anti-intellectual argument. Dr. Carrington’s point of view is made to
seem foolish, and nonsensical, in an attempt to discredit those who would seek
to communicate with beings that are unlike us. Here, communication is seen as
foolish, and science as arrogant.
You
can’t talk to commies.
Kill a commie for Christ, instead.
The
rather un-subtle presentation of such views don’t hold up particularly well,
today, and actually don’t bear that much scrutiny, even in the era of release. The
film notes, for example that scientists “split
the atom,” but let’s face it, a military man -- like the sort championed as protagonists here -- is the one who ordered
atomic bombs dropped in warfare.
There’s
plenty of blame to go around there (for tampering in God’s domain), which The
Thing, in its two-dimensional thinking, doesn’t acknowledge.
Although
The
Thing stacks the deck against its primary scientist character, it is
nonetheless a jaunty, fast-moving picture, and one that, even considering its
age, produces memorable imagery, and a surfeit of chills too.
“Only
science can conquer it.”
On
November 1st, a meteor changes altitude and direction upon entry
into Earth’s atmosphere and 20,000 tons of steel crash into the ice of the
North Pole.
Captain
Pat Hendry (Tobey) of the U.S. Air Force is ordered by his superior, General
Fogerty (David McMann) to proceed with his men to investigate the crash. Going
along for the ride is a reporter, Mr. Scott (Douglas Spencer), who can sniff a
good story.
Hendry
is more excited, however, to visit the North Pole base and rendezvous with
lovely Nikki Nicholson (Sheridan), than he is in contending with arrogant Dr.
Carrington (Cornthwaite) and investigating the mystery.
Out
on the ice, Hendry, his men, and the scientists uncover the wreckage of a
flying saucer in the ice. They attempt to clear it of the ice field with
Thermite charges, but end up destroying the vessel instead. After the
explosion, they find a life-form buried in the ice, and bring it back to the
camp.
There,
the creature is inadvertently thawed out when an electric blanket is placed nearby.
Once
awake, the alien things proves violent and hostile, slitting the throats of
several men, and hanging them upside down in the green house. Dr. Carrington
determines that the alien is made of vegetable matter, and can reproduce itself
by planting seeds in Earth soil…and nurturing them on human blood.
Though
Dr. Carrington feels empathy for the creature (“It’s a stranger in a strange land!”), Hendry seeks to destroy it,
fearing that the monster is the vanguard of an alien invasion.
Using
electricity, the Air Force men destroy the alien, and Mr. Scott finally has his
story of danger from above.
Keep
watching the skies!
“I
doubt very much that it can die.”
The
most fascinating aspect of the Nyby/Hawks The Thing is the manner in which it
sets up the opposition between red-blooded American men, and the no-blooded “vegetable”
matter from space.
The
mind boggles.
Pat
Hendry, our fast-talking protagonist, is depicted, without exaggeration, as a
groping lady’s man. In fact, Nikki actually ties
Hendry down in a chair, at one point, so he can’t grope her while she is
trying to talk to him. Hendry is thus the epitome of an American male of the
era: cocky, confident, sure of what he wants, and “red blooded” to the hilt. He sees what he wants, and won’t be
deterred from attempting to get it, whether consent has been given or not.
Hendry’s
leadership is based on the idea that he is “one
of the guys,” joshing and joking with his underlings, and trading quips,
constantly, with them. The overlapping dialogue suggests a club, at least of a
sort: Hendry, Nikki, Scotty, and the other men are members. They are
individuals, of course, but working towards a common purpose. Scotty talks
about Freedom of Speech, but still follows Hendry into battle. Nikki possesses
compassion for her boss, Carrington, but still sells him out to Hendry when
Carrington trends towards instability.
According
to Geert Hofstede, America is a country of individual personality, and we see
that individualism reflected in these primary heroic characters. They may have
different points of view, but they joyfully banter about those points of view,
and share a common purpose.
The
Thing is a very different animal.
Dr.
Carrington notes that its development has not been “handicapped by emotional or sexual factors.” So it desires neither
friends, nor romantic coupling. It feels “no
pain or pleasure as we know it,” Carrington suggests, with envy. And so
again, we must consider the monster a stand-in or surrogate for blood-less,
collective communism.
The
Thing even commands, after a fashion, a kind of collective: a group of maturing seeds that suck on human blood, but don’t
reproduce by sex, and which are all identical. The Thing’s team boasts no
individualism, no character, no joy or esprit-de-corps. All are the same. The
plan is to grow a horrible army, using humanity as food.
This
is an invasion.
Cleverly,
human blood is the food, and again, the Thing doesn’t possess that blood, as an
intellectual carrot. The idea underlying this physiological is that communism
is antithetical to red-blooded American men; so much so that communism wants to
feed on it, erecting a giant, faceless army, or hive body to do so.
Universally,
films reflect the era in which they were made, so the anti-communist sub-text
of The
Thing is a product of the film’s historical context and Zeitgeist. The
film functions as a brand of propaganda in the early Cold War Era, reminded
Americans that they are colorful, romantic, individuals fighting a belief
system that doesn’t value any of those qualities, and wishes to destroy them.
The
anti-intellectualism in The Thing is more difficult to
rationalize by today’s standards. Dr. Carrington is unable to detect the danger
of the “monster” and believes wholeheartedly in its superiority (“It’s wiser than we are. I’m sure of it!”)
He
believes he is superior to the military men, noting “only science can conquer” the Thing. Carrington also notes,
similarly, that the creature is immortal (“I
doubt very much that it can die”) and that it has evolved beyond “pleasure as we know it.” He rationalizes
its violent nature as a result of the fact that it is a stranger in a strange
land.
And
what does he get for his hero worship of the Thing? Well, he gets batted away,
without a thought, like an insect to be squashed.
Foolish
scientist! Stand back and let the military handle this!
Carrington
actually says some things that we might reasonably accept as virtues, if only
his thoughts were spoken by someone who isn’t an egg-headed idiot. Carrington notes
the importance of knowledge, and the concept of sacrifice, for instance, for
the advancement of knowledge. He believes that empathy is a virtue, and that communication
is something that should be attempted, at least, before lives are lost.
Hendry
dismisses all these ideas. As an American military man, he knows the only good
communist is a dead one.
What
do you do with a vegetable? You boil it.
Or you burn it. And that’s exactly what
happens.
The
film goes out of its way to validate Hendry’s position and make Carrington look
like an utter fool, and it’s not a fair or nuanced depiction, in either case.
Both characters are presented in two-dimensional terms: Hendry as a romantic
hero (despite his Harvey Weinstein-like approach to relationships with women…),
and Carrington as a deluded egghead who may have “book smarts,” but who has
never fought and won a war.
The
jingoistic, two-dimensional, take-no-prisoners aspect of the film renders it a
product of its time, but makes it, by today’s standards, a kind a piece of propaganda, a thinly-veiled polemic regarding 1950’s anti-communist values.
In the light of day,
now, the film seems paranoid and stereotyped.
This
is a shame, because in other ways, The Thing holds up remarkably well.
There is a scene, in mid-film, wherein Hendry and his men go to open a door to
the green house. They can’t stop talking, however, and so get distracted talking
while preparing to open that door. When they do open it, the Thing is standing
right there waiting, and attempts to smash them, before Hendry slams the door
shut.
The presence of the Thing -- right there -- is a surprise, and still
quite the effective shock.
At
other times, the Thing’s strength is well-visualized. We see it, in glacial
long shot, throwing and murdering sled dogs, on the ice. It towers over them,
and flees (leaving a severed arm) but seems wholly alien.
And
the scenes involving Carrington’s “thing” garden are among the creepiest in the
whole film. One of the scientists listens to one of the pulsating Thing pods in
the garden and notes that it makes a sound “almost
like the wail of a newborn that’s hungry.”
What’s
it hungry for?
Human blood.
In
moments such as these, The Thing generates an atmosphere of
genuine terror and eeriness. Nut today, some of the horror falls flat, in part
because the heroes -- who never stop talking -- don’t really evidence terror
about the ultimate alien horror they confront.
It’s as if they already know, in their hearts, that nothing can beat
good old fashioned, red-blooded American pragmatism and know-how. They dismiss
science. They dismiss any sense of intercultural communication, out of hand. They just set out to kill
that which is unlike them, which -- given how the story plays out -- is the only answer.
The
movie would play more effectively today, if the protagonist weren’t so certain
of their virtue, and the alien’s lack of same.
The movie's treatment of Dr. Carrington spoils it for me. I'd have a much higher opinion if it was more balanced.
ReplyDeleteAnd just where the heck would alien offspring in space or on another planet get human blood?
ReplyDeleteFor me the only thing that has not aged well is the wise cracking reporter. I swear, at times now I wish the other characters just hauled off an hit him. I so love the scene where the group debates what to with the Thing, thaw or not, and the debate as to whether it may carry germs harmful to humans, or Earthly germs would be harmful to it. Intelligence you don't see in Science Fiction cinema anymore. And the scene where it gets set on fire is one hell of a stunt scene masterpiece.
ReplyDelete