Take the 2-minute tour ×
Movies & TV Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for movie and tv enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

At the end of The Thing (2011), Lars and his friend pursue a possibly infected dog which runs away from the facility. They chase the dog on a helicopter and Lars tries to shoot the dog from some distance. After a few shots, he can't kill it; and during the last shot, the camera shows the gun and the screen goes black.

What happens there? Could he kill it or does something happen in the helicopter?

share|improve this question
Ok but what happens to the Girl? Is she infected? Does she make it to the Russian Station? Does she setup the next movie by attempting to rescue Kurt Russell, who is left in an unknown condition at the end of 1982 version? –  user777 Feb 7 '12 at 3:07
@Ben - Welcome to Movies.SE. I have converted your answer to a comment, as yours was not an answer and this is not a forum, but a Q&A site. If you think you can improve on Verge's answer please go for it. –  iandotkelly Feb 7 '12 at 12:49
The dog survives and arrives at an American station, this is what starts the Carpenter version from 1982. The survival of Kate in the new prequel is keeping the franchise open for a sequel to the original Carpenter film (Assuming she survives and isn't infected). Kate could make it to another camp (maybe Russian) to warn people, thus leading an exploration team to eventually find Macready and Childs dead/frozen or still waiting out the fire in the first film. (Lars chasing the dog in the helicopter and arriving at the American station starts that chain of events). –  BB Stacker Dec 13 '12 at 12:36

1 Answer 1

up vote 14 down vote accepted

It is retroactively setting up the "original" The Thing (1982) for which it is a prequel. The starting scene of the 1982 movie is two Norwegians in a helicopter chasing and shooting at a sled dog that finds its way to an American camp.

share|improve this answer
Yes! I highly recommend watching the prequel and then immediately watching the original. The amount of detail they paid attention to in the prequel is pretty awesome! –  DForck42 Feb 2 '12 at 15:01
Second that. I have been a strong lover of the original after hearing about the reviews stayed away from the new one but rented it last weekend. It was pretty good! –  Judge Dredd Feb 7 '12 at 21:16
Yesterday, I watched the original. It's a 30-year-old movie, but still a very good one. –  Mehper C. Palavuzlar Feb 8 '12 at 12:10
@MehperC.Palavuzlar: You say that as if you expect newer movies to be better than old. –  mmyers May 10 '12 at 22:45
@MehperC.Palavuzlar And in fact it's effects were pretty much a milestone of its time. But unfortunately those effects were also too heavy for their time, making the critics and audience reject it and thus missing the quality and much more subtle horror of the actual story. It was only much later that this movie became the appreciation it deserves. –  Napoleon Wilson Dec 12 '12 at 17:38

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.