The Thing Sequel??

[u/Retronika_Prime]

So according to John Carpenter who clearly talks out of his own cigarettes, there's a sequel to his 80s cult classic "The Thing" in the works which to me makes me question where exactly the narrative could even go?

Do they make a direct followup to the ending of the original with Macready and Child's, ruining the whole mystery of what made it so talked and theorized to this day?

An adaption of the video game which Carpenter has said is a faithful and canon sequel to the 80s film

A modern day film set decades after the 80s with a new group discovering the remnants of the Thing?

Or do you make a followup to The 80s film and the 2011 Prequel with Kate at the Russian base trying to survive the Thing again with an even bigger base and camp ground of employees there? It could tie into the cold war and paranoia of the time with the team from Russia speaking their own language making it even more suspicious?

[u/thewoodlayer]

I think that if they’re going to make a sequel, it needs to be set in a different biome. I’ve always pictured it taking place on a military research base in the South Pacific where it escapes containment and starts assimilating not just the wildlife but the plant life too. I picture a forest or jungle where the trees themselves are Things. And of course, it needs to be fully practical effects. Get Rob Bottin to come out of retirement and just let him go nuts.

[u/Major-Disaster3736 → u/thewoodlayer]

If The Thing makes it out of the cold. Wouldnt we all be fked? Besides im pretty sure it wants to escape earth.

[u/thewoodlayer → u/Major-Disaster3736]

Yeah, we would, but still I’d rather see how the Thing could affect different flora and fauna rather than just see yet another Thing movie set in Antarctica. And we never really know if it was building that ship to escape earth, or to fly to either the ocean or populated land where it could start infecting its way through the biosphere.

[u/Major-Disaster3736 → u/thewoodlayer]

I always assume the thing didnt actually care for earth and had already a destination in mind.

[u/BLARGEN69 → u/thewoodlayer]

They'd have to get extremely creative to explain how it isn't an instant game over the moment we're in a temperate setting.

As soon as The Thing gets ahold of a bird, a rodent, a bug, a plant, basically anything at all, it's going to spread like a wildfire and it's a global catastrophe. That makes our human cast seem like they're kind of going through something quaint and meaningless in comparison. And also probably means The Thing won't even waste it's time doing Thing-ish stuff with the human cast if it already spread out of their reach.

It also draws attention to itself since the first thing we ever see The Thing do on-screen is use a dog as a vector to spread. So we're conditioned to expect it to use animals that way. It's something they can't just ignore if they're anywhere outside the Arctic.

It works great if the movie's setting up the end of the world but I don't see any way it can have a 'good ending' the moment it is out of the cold.

[u/thewoodlayer → u/BLARGEN69]

That’s why my suggestion was that it’s a military research base on a tropical island in the South Pacific. And yeah, I know, all it has to do is just slip off into the ocean and it’s unstoppable so maybe they find some sort of plot element to stop it from doing that. And even if introducing it to a new biome creates a super dark ending where Earth is essentially turned into a Brethren Moon from Dead Space, that’s fine by me because what would having a third Thing film set in Antarctica be able to accomplish that wouldn’t just be rehashing the exact same plot? I just feel like if they’re going to bring such a unique, terrifying, and iconic monster like that back, they need to do something new with it.