The Making of The Thing

A producers guide to the Evolution and production of

From the blogs of:

Stuart Cohen www.theoriginalfan.blogspot.co.uk

CONTENTS INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 03 THE SCREENPLAY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 04 THE WRITERS B. C. (BEFORE CARPENTER) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 06 SAM PECKINPAH’S THE THING? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 09 ADVENTURES ON THE JUNEAU ICEFIELD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 RE-SHOOT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 THE FLIGHT FROM HELL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 FILMAKING 480 - THE BLUE BARREL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 A PIECE OF FILM YOU WILL PROBABLY NEVER SEE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 CASTING MacREADY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 CASTING BLAIR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 NAULS IN BLACK AND WHITE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 COULD THIS MAN PLAY PALMER? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 CASTING CHILDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 QUE VIVA WINDOWS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 THE NORWEGIAN PHOTO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 CASTING GARRY AND COPPER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 THE MEN AND THEIR ENVIRONMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 THE COMPUTERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 THE NORWEGIAN CAMP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 THE THREE BENNINGS DEATHS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 THE PALMER TRANSFORMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 TWO OR THREE THINGS YOU DIDN’T KNOW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 ANOTHER CAMEO APPEARANCE? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 THE SHADOW ON THE WALL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 THE CAMERA THAT ALMOST WORKED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 “THE THING” PRODUCT REEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 THE SOUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 THE ENDING YOU ALMOST SAW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 THE CAST AND CREW SCREENING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 THE MUSIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 THE FINAL DAYS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

02

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

INTRODUCTION Hi, all - I am the credited co-producer of JOHN CARPENTERS THE THING and was centrally involved in all aspects of its development, production, post-production, and release. I got the ball rolling by taking the idea of making WHO GOES THERE, which I first read at age 12 and have loved ever since, to producer David Foster in 1976. Schoolmates at U.S.C. Cinema, it was always my goal to have John make this movie. In 1980, with events reaching critical mass, I finally got my wish - and judging from the result, you were granted yours... What follows are detailed essays on the re-structuring of the film as well as the ending(s) controversy and hostile reaction when THE THING, much like the creature it portrays, crash - landed in the frigid environment of 1982. I went down the rabbit hole with John during this time, and the experience was painful and long lasting...

I am stunned by the depth and extent of the turnaround in critical and popular opinion this film has achieved, and in the amount of thoughtful scholarship available online (Outpost 31’s deleted scenes section, for instance). It’s been a long time since John and I discussed making a “thinking man’s” monster movie and THE THING’s rise from the ashes and the quality of the debate it has inspired is extremely gratifying. I’ve mostly held my own counsel over these past years, not writing or talking much about my involvement in the film but I think the time has come to share what I know - there are stories to be told, particularly in terms of the central drama always present during the films’ production, and after - the conflict between ambiguity and clarity. How John came to terms with this dynamic, which played out again and again on multiple levels both on and off camera is the Rosetta Stone of THE THINGS enduring power and integrity, and will be the overall focus of this book...

Right to left: JOHN CARPENTER, STUART COHEN, Production Manager ROBERT BROWN, Associate Producer LARRY FRANCO. The Juneau Ice Field. Location Scout April, 1981

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

03

THE WRITERS B. C. (BEFORE CARPENTER)

The original appearance of WHO GOES THERE? August, 1938

“The group tensed abruptly. An air of crushing menace entered into every man’s body. Sharply they looked at each other, more keenly than ever before - is that man next to me an inhuman monster?”

Well, this always seemed like a great premise for a movie to me, so in late 1975 I took the idea of making WHO GOES THERE? to producer David Foster, whose company, Turman-Foster Productions, had recently made an production arrangement with Universal Studios. My first reading of the novella at age 12 had provoked a number of sleepless nights - initially out of fear, but later from curiosity as I tried to figure out why I was so excited by this material (what I was reaching for at the time was the phrase Unity of Time, Place, and Action). At it’s heart a classic locked door murder mystery, it had always seemed to me that the story’s strength lay in it’s success in dramatizing the internal nature of the conflict and the resultant issues of trust and identity rather than the external threat posed by the creature (which is what happened in just about every 04

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

monster movie I had ever seen). My hope was to stay as faithful as possible to this basic idea by utilizing the shape shifting aspect central to the novella, rather than attempting any sort of straight - ahead remake of the first film...

The rights to the short story had been kicking around Hollywood for a while, usually with a very low level of interest attached (I think it was actually out of print at the time). It was sitting with the writing team of Hal Barwood and Matthew Robbins, but when they passed Universal bought the rights for us to produce. Separately, to cover all the bases, the studio also acquired the re-make rights to the original film as well as its title from a gentleman named Wilbur Stark, and is the source of his Executive Producer credit on THE THING (Mr. Stark was well known to many of us at the studio, and owned the re-make rights to much of the RKO Studio library. He would wander into your office, pull out a well-worn list and ask if you were interested in remaking OUT OF THE PAST. And if not, what about I

WALKED WITH A ZOMBIE? or GUNGA DIN?...). I initially lobbied to have the project’s first working title be WHO GOES THERE?, but at this early stage the studio felt there was some visibility, and therefore some value, in keeping things THE THING...

It was my intent to involve John at this point. I remember us first discussing the novella at the student cafeteria at USC in 1970 over mounds of french fries, and periodically since at various fast food restaurants scattered around Los Angeles (Bobs Big Boy on Vine St. in Hollywood was a particular favorite, not just with John, but with David Lynch, who claimed he did his best thinking and writing while downing their silver goblet milkshake). This was years before John was to change the landscape with HALLOWEEN, and the studio was reluctant to commit to a relatively inexperienced director. We were asked to initially consider filmmakers who were than under contract to Universal, so I decided to bide my time and work to get a script written...

Tobe Hooper and Kim Henkel had recently arrived at the Universal lot courtesy of the success of THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE and of director William Friedkin, who was loosely shepherding their initial stint at a major studio. They were looking for a project and the studio suggested THE THING, which seemed like a good idea to all involved. Their initial enthusiasm dimmed upon reading the novella, however. The issue of trust didn’t particularly interest them as an overall theme. They also worried about their ability to dramatize the mechanics of assimilation and didn’t want to be constrained by its use. Rejecting the short story’s central premise, they chose instead to try to fashion something original that, in their words, would “address the larger picture”...

Written quickly in order to avoid an impending writers strike, what I remember of the script was an attempt at an man versus monster epic set at the bottom of the world, a sort of Antarctica MOBY DICK with an Ahab-like character (I believe his name was The Captain) battling a large, but decidedly non-shape shifting creature. Seemingly written as a tone poem with a stab at a Southern, Davis Grubb-like feel the script was dense, humorless, almost impenetrable (the word John used for it when he later came on board was incomprehensible). Judged by all at the time to be something akin to a disaster, we agreed to part company...

For the record, we then had a short, exploratory meeting with director John Landis, who was in early postproduction on ANIMAL HOUSE, and who passed...

David Foster then suggested New York playwright and author David Wiltse, who had recently re-written several scripts for the studio and was thought highly of. Although agreeing to take the assignment on, David considered himself a “serious writer” (his words), and the conflict between this perception of himself and the material he was working with was something he could never reconcile.

A mis-match of historic proportions, and our fault for attempting it. The only image from the script I seem to recall was the creature as abstraction, a pyramid of blue glowing light floating out over the ice, enveloping its victim and disappearing inside...

On the strength of the success of LOGAN’S RUN Universal suggested William F. Nolan, who was familiar with the short story (he called it an “old chestnut”) and had his own take on the material. Mr. Nolan has recently published his treatment so readers may judge for themselves, but we found at the time the results disappointing, and chose not to proceed.

Common to all three of the adaptations was the rejection of the novella’s central device. Perhaps it was due to my own inexperience, but I did not understand why there was so much resistance to trying to dramatize the internal nature of the conflict and its consequences (note to self - maybe because it’s really, really hard to pull something like this off...). I certainly understood the impulse for writers to want to put their own stamp on their work and if anybody had came up with something interesting in place of the chameleon aspect we would have been open to it. As it was the scripts made many of the same mistakes (going to great lengths to establish the characters and the important work that they were doing, for instance), becoming more or less formulaic, and none were thought to be viable...

Things were then quiet for a time, the projects fortunes at a low ebb. After three tries, we had succeeded in draining any enthusiasm the studio had for making a grade A monster movie. We simply hadn’t made the case. But there was something on the horizon that could...

On the Monday following ALIEN’s opening weekend I walked into David Foster’s office and asked the following question - “Do you think they’ll understand now”?

Hollywood likes nothing more than precedent, and ALIEN’s Continued > A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

05

financial success would serve as a terrific springboard for us. David responded “I think they will”. And they did. Johns star had risen and the studio immediately agreed to re-start the project with him as director. John made it clear that his interest lay in adapting the novella’s central premise as the core of his movie - nothing else would do, and was a deal breaker if anyone tried to suggest anything else.

At the outset, John also made clear his intention not to write the screenplay himself, a first. He half-jokingly said he had earned the right to have someone else do the suffering, and his career had reached the point where he no longer had the kind of concentrated time to devote to the endeavor. The search began...

Above, right and opposite page: promotional material for HOWARD HAWKS’ The Thing from another world!

06

Richard Matheson was approached and available but turned us down cold, refusing even to meet. His agent asserting that even if we planned on using the novella as source he

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

would never be involved in something called THE THING. Nigel Kneale (QUATERMASS) was discussed. A sticking point was the need to have someone essentially Los Angeles based due to John’s schedule...

We met with Derek Washburn (THE DEER HUNTER) and Ron Koslow (LIFEGUARD and later BEAUTY AND THE BEAST) ... and a few others but no one seemed quite the right fit.

We detected a heavy note of condescension from some toward the entire project. For others, it was old hat. It struck us that we had been meeting with or discussing writers primarily much older than we - was there someone out there of our generation, with no pre-conceived ideas or baggage, who hadn’t written science fiction or horror before but might like to try his hand at it?

SAM PECKINPAH’S THE THING? The day finally came when we to receive Universal’s official “green light” to schedule THE THING for production. As the meeting began in Production President Ned Tannen’s office John revealed that he had a script of his own with another company (EMI) also targeted for production, a special effects western that had been budgeted at Twenty Five Million Dollars (I believe this was the first incarnation of EL DIABLO). Much as he wanted to direct THE THING, he said this film was set up first and took precedence - he would feel honor bound to make it next if it were to be green lit, which he felt was just around the corner.

This was news to us. The meeting turned from a celebration into something close to a wake. As eager as the studio was to make the film with John the screenplay had achieved its own level of stardom and they were not prepared to wait any longer. While agents and lawyers scrambled to figure something out, we were instructed to look into other directors.

I was stunned. I could not believe after all this time and being this close to having John make this movie things were about to fall apart. I was so used to the idea of John and this material as an ideal match that I couldn’t even think of anyone else to direct. When David Foster asked me if I had any initial thoughts, in jest and exasperation I said “What about Sam Peckinpah?”. David, who had successfully worked with Peckinpah on THE GETAWAY, paused for a second and said “Well, You Know”...

It took a week or so for the natural order of things to be restored. In that week I can’t be certain whether David made a call to Peckinpah or not. I do know he made an exploratory call to Walter Hill, who wasn’t interested (Bill Lancaster, also at a loss, suggested his BAD NEWS BEARS director Michael Ritchie). Fortunately for you and for me EL DIABLO wasn’t as far along as was previously thought, and John was finally clear to begin preparation...

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

07

THE SCREENPLAY Was there someone out there of our generation who had no preconceived ideas or baggage, who hadn’t written science fiction or horror before, and might like to try his hand at this?

“I also thought it was timely, that in re-making the short story I could be true to my day making the movie, just like Hawks was true to his day when he made his.” John Carpenter - Creative Screenwriting magazine

Bill Lancaster hadn’t read WHO GOES THERE? He wasn’t sure whether or not he had seen THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD as a child - if he had, it didn’t leave much of an impression. He later told me his father, Burt Lancaster, didn’t particularly care for science fiction, calling it a “children’s playground”.

All of us participated in one initial meeting to make sure we were all on the same wavelength, using the novella as a template. It was here that we came to quick agreement on keeping the characters all male (David Foster, whose expertise on such matters we paid attention to, believed it might actually be a selling point). We knew the size of the group had to be reduced (from something like 30) but left the exact number up to Bill. We eliminated the idea of telepathy as a form of communication from the creatures arsenal, figuring Bill would have his hands full trying to effectively dramatize the assimilation aspect alone (and, boy, were we right). In hewing close to the short story we all wanted to retain the idea of Blair as the one infected early on (we liked the fact that behaving as he does throughout the story makes the creature clever).

The movie he remembered giving him nightmares as a kid was NIGHT OF THE HUNTER. He said he later figured out what had scared him so much - in Robert Mitchum’s out sized portrayal of a megalomaniac preacher (and his signature, almost inhuman wail), it was the idea of a man capable of becoming a monster...

Having been a fan of THE BAD NEWS BEARS since it’s release in 1976, the idea of having Bill in to meet was mine. Watching the film again recently I found what impressed me so much at the time. The main characters (interestingly, in this case a team of 12 boys in the process of becoming men, one aging misanthrope and his barely teen aged daughter) are drawn with economy and precision - you understand quickly who’s who. Well crafted, there is no particular emphasis on individual family back story or background, the focus for the most part is concentrated around events on the field of play. The dialogue has a natural, unfiltered air to it - you feel as if you are eavesdropping on kids talking like kids. Thirty five years on it still feels contemporary, nimble and fresh, a deserved winner of the Writers Guild award in 1977 for Best Original Screenplay (comedy).

When Bill did read WHO GOES THERE? he pronounced it “workable”, not an overly enthusiastic initial response. But he said next that what intrigued him most was the chance to be able to push the paranoia aspect to an extreme. He imagined descending levels of mistrust among the characters so profound that the line of reality became blurred - something, if he worked it correctly, so airtight that it no longer mattered whether there was a monster or not - the men became the biggest threat to themselves.

This was music to our ears, and as the conversation progressed I could see John visibly relax, maybe for the first time during this process. I know it was difficult for him to cede the writing of his movie to someone else, but with Bill an easy sort of camaraderie was forming (one that was to continue and strengthen through pre-production ). There seemed to be melding of the minds, and I could sense John thinking, Ok, you supply the story and structure, I’ll supply the monster...

08

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

We assumed a basic scenario regarding the creature’s arrival - Spaceship in trouble, crash lands on Earth, creature gets out, freezes, wakes up probably not in the best of moods, and does what it has to do to survive and get the hell out of there. A character ultimately defined by its actions, perhaps the purest distillation of the Hawks ethos. No detailed back story, no thought of personality, intent or agenda at that time (we did briefly discuss whether it was criminal in nature or not, but figured it really did not matter for the telling of this story)...

Calling it the “centerpiece” of the novella, nothing was more important to John than the inclusion of the blood test. He later told me the scene was the biggest single reason he wanted to make the movie and one he “knew how to do” (I thought of this years later as I watched John at the moviola, alone, personally editing the scene). As if all this wasn’t enough Bill was also tasked with the idea of opening the film up, taking it outside Outpost 31 and giving it a sense of scale, if possible, but not at the expense of the internal drama.

And with that, Bill and John headed up to John’s place in Inverness, California to brainstorm and drink beer for a week or so...

Six or seven weeks later, Bill ambled in with thirty pages, wanting to know if he was on the right track.Those first thirty pages were the first thirty minutes of THE THING as you see it today. The stunningly original opening scene (fulfilling brilliantly the request that the film open up before closing

back down). The characters, their interaction, and the dialogue everyone now seems to know so well were all there, and remained essentially unchanged from this draft to the finished film.Thoughtful and smart, we were all knocked out by the quality of the writing. Bill took our enthusiasm very much to heart, although he knew he was a lot of hard work away from completion...

Mindful of the difficult job still ahead, John said to Bill “see you in about a year”... ...well it wasn’t, quite, but still a very long time. There was a contractual delivery date but we didn’t pressure Bill, knowing that we were on to something very special. Bill eventually delivered his first draft three and a half months late, in the fall of 1980 (too late for the film to be made as a summer 1981 release,which was the original thought). Four copies were made, one each for John, myself, David Foster, and David’s partner Larry Turman. The reaction? First, David: “They’ll be crazy if they don’t want to make this”. Then John, who still needed to formally commit to directing the film: “This is the best script I’ve ever read”. Are you in, I asked. A pause, and then “Oh,Yeah”...

As with the initial thirty pages, the rest of this first draft resides in much of THE THING as it now exists. Only minor changes were made in terms of characters and dialogue from this point forward (name changes, for instance). The only substantial alterations made to the screenplay during pre - production were those necessitated by budget concerns (the original Bennings death on ice sequence, for example) and, most importantly, the effects sequences, which were re-conceived by John, Rob, and Bill (who actively participated in many of these meetings, and would work the ideas into subsequent drafts). This first pass compellingly made the case for this film in terms no studio could afford to ignore - and with John’s star having ascended I wondered if we at long last had managed to catch lightning in a bottle - an ideal match of director and the script he was born to make...

So excited were we by the screenplay we decided to make a big deal out its delivery. We dressed a couple of actors in parkas and snowshoes and send them shivering up the elevator to hand the script in person to Universal Motion Picture President Ned Tannen for his formal approval. My idea originally was to encase the script in a block of ice, but I had to settle for a cooler full of dry ice...

The reaction to the screenplay by the studio was everything we had hoped for. Their enthusiasm matched ours, and was such that they had no notes. No one questioned the idea of an all male cast. They expressed no concern over the ambiguity of the ending, later to be the cause of so much angst. Everyone realized the script worked, and with the euphoria the film was quickly scheduled as a release “sometime” in the summer of 1982 (at this early stage we had no inkling what Universal had in the pipeline, or what their summer lineup would eventually consist of).

Bill maintained an active presence as pre-production on THE THING advanced. In addition to being an essential participant in the effects meetings, he also sat in on a number of casting sessions as well as cast rehearsals, his opinion always welcome. This was a real tribute to John, who felt secure enough by this time to allow this interaction to occur, and a testament to the bond that had formed between them. As the movie swung into production he largely disappeared from view, a victim of his own success, to write FIRESTARTER for John and the studio...

In the short time between Universal’s acceptance of the script and its first formal publication Bill wanted someone to bounce some ideas around with and take care of a few last minute notes John and we had. John was tied up, so he asked me. This was a time where Bill was as happy as I had seen him. The early reviews were in, and they were great - he knew, we knew, he had this project licked, so we worked for the next six days or so at my home in an relaxed, expansive atmosphere. The work was minor - fine tuning scene transitions, a line here or there, debating the question of when to be clear about things (I remember: Me: “Dammit, Bill, we’ve got to get across the idea that somebody here ain’t who he appears to be”. Bill: “Then why don’t we just say it”).

We had the time and the inclination to talk through many matters. It was here we discussed the last scene (his feeling: human, but written with plenty of room for argument). He took a craftsman’s pride and pleasure in the dialogue and the way he was able to “slide stuff in” as he put it, in an offhand way (“Wakes up, probably not in the best of moods”... “I don’t know what’s in there, but it’s weird and pissed off, whatever it is”, etc.). He took delight in trying to avoid using the word “Thing” in dialogue until absolutely the right moment - when Windows blurts out “he could be one of those things” (this changed later on). He was good company and it was here that our working relationship evolved into friendship, something that I will always cherish.

A second-draft version of Bill’s screenplay for THE THING is available both at Outpost 31 and at IMDB. Given the time and care Bill took with it’s execution probably the highest compliment you could pay him would be for you to think of it as a good read...

Bill, second from left. Photograph by Peter Sorel

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

09

ADVENTURES ON THE JUNEAU ICEFIELD As spectacular a solution to our problems as Stewart was (24/7 access to the set by mining road, accommodations reasonably nearby), the one thing it didn’t offer was a concrete sense of scale - the immense ocean of ice effect that pushes man and beast alike into insignificance. Luckily, there was a place around that would fill the bill nicely. if we could figure out a way to film it...

That we were able to film the opening sequence of THE THING on the Juneau Icefield at all was entirely due to the forbearance and wisdom of Dr. Maynard Miller who, beginning in 1946, established The Juneau Icefield Research Program at the University of Idaho which allowed participants supervised access to the site (and indeed still does, to this day). John Lloyd had gotten wind of the program and learned that they maintained several small “research stations” with rudimentary accommodations, whose existence was the key to successfully putting a small filming company on the ice for several weeks. Our initial scout of the location in January, 1981 resulted in our not being able to land due to deep recent snow - we ended up just hovering above one of the shacks which was completely snowed in up to the roof line. But what we saw in those few minutes - the camp was located at the top of a rocky promontory with the Taku Glacier spread out below was enough to convince us that we had to figure out a way to make this place serve as the opening of the film...

Above top: Production designer John Lloyd and producer Stuart Cohen Above and right: Production designer John Lloyd scouting locations

In early January 1981 Production Designer John Lloyd, tasked with the idea of finding a suitable location to serve as Antarctica somewhere in the Northern Hemisphere for THE THING, had a problem. Long range weather forecasts were unanimous in predicting lighter than average snowfall in the United States. He had taken an early look at possible sites in Utah, Colorado, and Montana (including the original Glacier National Park location of THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD) but without a guarantee of adequate snow in time for filming that December it seemed useless to pursue any idea close to home. This fact lead Lloyd to pursue leads further and further north until it only made sense to land in Stewart, B.C., the snowfall capital of the world...

In mid March, 1981 John Lloyd and I spent a pleasant afternoon with Dr. Miller at his home in Idaho. After laying out what we had in mind (a small crew of Fifteen to be flown in by helicopter to film the opening and assorted tie in shots, staying at the camp for a week and a half or so), Dr. Miller agreed to the basic idea but saw a number of problems. Foremost was the weather - the only possible month for filming would be June, and even then, he promised, we needed to be prepared for storms and “whiteout” conditions that could last for days, which would hamper filming, isolate the crew, and also affect getting off the Icefield and back down to Juneau. Be sure to plan for and expect delays, he admonished. But if we were willing he was game, and would join us to advise, help negotiate the terrain and try to keep us out of trouble. An added bonus - to keep things all in the family his wife also kindly agreed to come and cook (for all of this we made sure the Millers were properly compensated, and also made a sizable donation to The Icefield Research Program at the University).

Dr. Miller would also function as the camps’ “communications officer”. This was no small thing in those pre-cellular days. Participants in the Icefield program now regularly blog and post photographs and data daily, but then our only form of communication with the outside world would be by CB radio.We planned to send the film down the mountain for processing by helicopter regularly, weather permitting, but considered it logistically impossible

10

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

to attempt to have it sent back up to us in a timely way for viewing via videocassette. Not only would we not be able to watch the dailies ourselves John would not be able to speak directly with anyone at Universal about their reaction to the rushes - for that crucial information we would be dependent on a number of ham radio operators stationed up and down the West Coast to pass what we hoped would be the good word along to us...

A spectacular sunny day in Juneau greeted our arrival to film in early June, 1981. Heading up to the Icefield in helicopters we anticipated a leisurely time unpacking and settling in. Not to be. Dr. Miller advised us the weather was about to change - better take advantage of what we had and head out right now...

To put it mildly, effects of filming at 5000 feet on a group of out of shape inveterate cigarette smokers fresh up from Los Angeles took their toll. Movement was hard, seemingly taking place in slow motion. For ground level shots there was no take 2. Each setup was new, requiring the camera to be constantly repositioned in order to avoid footprints across the virgin snow scape - both ours and the dog’s.

Simple tasks like the application of decals to the helicopter to determine its identity (Norwegian or American) seemed almost beyond our numbed grasp, and seemed to take forever. Oh, well. John had a good feeling about what little film he was shooting, and tomorrow, with extended daylight hours at our disposal...

We awoke the next morning to thick fog, effectively grounding us for most of the day. This would become the “new norm” for the remainder of the shoot - the weather would suddenly improve, allowing for an hour or two of hit and miss filming, and then close back down again until ?

The uncertainty of the situation, despite being forewarned, was driving everybody crazy (with the exception of Jed, who was having the time of his life). There ought to have been some romance in the notion that we were stranded in one of the most exotic locations in the world, but the cramped quarters, the idea of not being able to see five feet in front of your face, and the omnipresent stillness together felt oppressive. Parallels with the plight of our fictional counterparts in THE THING did not go unnoticed.

Someone joked to John that the extended down time would qualify as field research into the effects of isolation and boredom. John, who was frustrated by the delays and just wanted to get on with the work and get out of there, didn’t seem particularly amused. The filming proceeded piecemeal, grabbing a shot here and there when we could...

RE-SHOOT Exactly what we didn’t want to see. Dr. Miller began writing down scene numbers - 108, 108x, 109 etc, about twenty in all - virtually the complete inventory from the first two days of filming. We were thunderstruck. The problem, as relayed to us, was a spot on the lens that John’s editor, Todd Ramsay, thought was too distracting and that infected all of the ground level footage shot of Jed being pursued.

Knowing how difficult filming had been John was loathe to scrap what amounted to the first several days work without having an idea exactly how distracting the offending spot was, but, unable to view the dailies himself, was flying blind - dependent on one person’s indirect word...

We considered sending John down by helicopter to Juneau to have a conversation by phone, but the weather as usual was not co-operating. We finally decided we needed at least one other person whose judgement we respected to weigh in, so I suggested that we have Verna Fields, Universal Vice President and ace editor of JAWS and AMERICAN GRAFFITI, look at the film ASAP and render a verdict. The only question John wanted answered: was there any way we could we live with the problem? Dr. Miller relayed the word down the coast, and we waited... ...a few hours later, the considered judgment came back: Yes - no need to re-shoot. Good news this, for the weather seemed to be getting worse - Dr. Miller had gotten word about an extended storm front that he felt was capable of grounding the helicopters for a week or so and make travel off the Icefield impossible, except on foot. Best to try and finish up quickly (the object of every one’s concern was a grayish elliptical dot in the lower right third of the frame that can be faintly seen from the ground during the chase in the original release prints as well as early laser disc issues it seems to have been scrubbed clean in the film’s recent digital incarnation).

Being the most expendable member of the filming company during the next, brief break in the weather I made a run for it and escorted the largest batch of film down to Los Angeles for processing. I was able to relay word up the coast early the next morning to the company that everything looked fine (not just fine, actually - the footage was spectacular) - the signal to get off the Icefield before the next wave of storms and head home...

In a scene reminiscent of the final tableau in THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD we huddled around the CB radio to receive the verdict on the inaugural batch of dailies. We couldn’t hear what was being said - we knew information was being passed from ham radio operator to ham radio operator up the West Coast, and were hopeful that nothing got scrambled. Dr. Miller began scribbling on the pad in front of him. The first word:

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

11

THE FLIGHT FROM HELL airport runway almost directly beneath us. What’s the pilot trying to do, circle, and?... No. We drop out of the sky into a steep, nearly vertical dive, the engines screaming, like something out of a Chuck Jones cartoon. I envision the wings ripping off one-by-one as the pilot pulls out at the final second, at last touching earth...

John, his face a whiter shade of pale, exits quickly and without breaking stride makes it into the airport bar, still not speaking until the first beer was gone. And then: “Oh, My Lord...”

If you want to know what truly, deeply, strikes fear into the heart of John Carpenter sidle up to him sometime and quietly speak the two words “Grauman Goose” and watch him recoil in spasms of terror...

After scouting Stewart, B.C. one Friday afternoon, in a hurry to catch our flight in Ketchican, Alaska down the coast to Los Angeles in time for the weekend, we arranged to charter a WW II era seaplane, the famed “Grauman Goose” for the short 10 minute trip. John was seated in front with the pilot, Larry Franco and myself in the back. Taxiing out onto the open waterway we contented ourselves with thoughts of a semi-relaxing weekend when we heard a huge CRASH, the plane shuddering, turning sideways and coming to a stop...

We had collided with another seaplane. Bobbing up and down on the water, we looked out the hatch and saw one wing cutting into the other, forming a large v shaped wedge. One of the propellers seemed bent, but I guess we considered ourselves lucky that there wasn’t an explosion (I envisioned the propeller cutting through the cabin a la THE CROWDED SKY). After the two pilots spent a few minutes yelling at each other they pulled out canoe paddles and pushed the planes apart. We began to limp back to the dock. Ah, hell - with the plane obviously out of commission we were going to miss our connection, have to spend the week-end in Stewart, and...

The flight, however, did supply something of a bond between the three of us - whenever things got particularly dire on the movie, one of us would look at the other and solemnly invoke “The Goose” - a sure sign that things could be worse...

FILMAKING 480 - THE BLUE BARREL The question: how to “tie in” two disparate locations shot six months apart and make them seem as one? The answer: a single prop, one blue oil barrel taken with us to the Juneau Icefield and used by John to signal the approach of civilization...

Above: Filmed on the Juneau Ice Field June, 1981

...with a tremendous ROAR the pilot guns the engines and we begin to pick up speed - we are attempting to take off after all. John turns to look at Larry and myself, eyes wide with a “what the fuck” look, and then, saying nothing, turns back to stare straight ahead. Larry and I look at each other, and then as one out the window. The V shaped indentation is still there, and we can see the wing wildly vibrating - the engine with the bent propeller is also making some sort of a gurgling noise, and appears to be streaming oil. But up we go...

The next shot: filmed in Stewart B. C. December, 1981 ...and then followed the longest eight or nine minutes of our young lives, Not a word was spoken - we all knew we were about to die. At one point I looked down and saw the 12

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

A graceful, seamless transition from the Icefield to the friendlier confines of Outpost 31...

A PIECE OF FILM YOU WILL PROBABLY NEVER SEE ...and with good reason. The script originally called for the Norwegian helicopter to veer out of control, crash and explode with the lone survivor (the pilot) emerging to follow the dog into camp. We couldn’t responsibly figure out a way to do this practically so very early on in preproduction it was decided to try to do the crash with MINIATURES. A scale snow scape set was designed by John Lloyd and constructed on stilts on the back lot, designed to work with a very expensive remote control helicopter flown by our mechanical effects coordinator, Roy Arbogast.

The very first film shot on THE THING, John, although skeptical, directed an all - star crew that included Dean Cundey, Albert Whitlock and Bill Taylor. Despite everybody’s valiant efforts the result looked like something out of TEAM AMERICA: WORLD POLICE...

We looked at other alternatives. Several pilots connected with the production in Stewart offered to crash a helicopter for real - an offer not accepted because of the dangers involved. We gave five seconds consideration to the idea of having the helicopter simply disappear below the glacier and play the explosion off camera before we burst out

laughing - the idea was a cliche', an audience cheat...

The script was finally re-written to accommodate the action you now see, the burning chopper is a shell dragged up the mountain in Stewart and set on fire...

Above: NORBERT WEISSER as the Norweigan pilot Left: Director JOHN CARPENTER and Associate Producer LARRY FRANCO sit in the remains of the burnt out helicopter

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

13

CASTING MacREADY

Above: KURT RUSSELL as R.J. MacReady

As emblematic as Kurt Russell’s performance as MacReady in THE THING has become, his was the last role cast. Early on, there were general discussions about whether we should stay true to the idea of keeping the movie a strictly ensemble piece or lean in the direction of an established star. I think Kurt was always in the back of John’s mind but, having worked twice previously together at this stage in their careers both wanted to keep their options open. These general conversations necessarily involved the studio at this point and were only exploratory, with no commitment from either party implied. My notes from the time aren’t complete, but they show that availability was checked on the following actors: Christopher Walken, Jeff Bridges, Sam Shepard, Nick Nolte.

Bridges, Nolte and Walken were unavailable or passed without comment very early on. There was the usual initial trouble with the perception that a movie called THE THING could be anything other than a “B” grade sci -fi thriller and it wasn’t until actors and agents actually read the script that they warmed to the idea.We were intrigued with Sam Shepard, whom we were told liked the script but things didn’t progress very far and no meeting was held. My notes don’t reflect it, but I also seem to remember some early interest in Kris Kristofferson, John Heard, Ed Harris, Brian Dennehy, Tom Berenger, Jack Thompson, Scott Glenn, Fred Ward, Peter Coyote, Tom Atkins and Tim McIntyre.

These actors met with or read for us for the role of MacReady. John would begin each session with a stern warning about the physical nature of the film and the rigors of working in the cold. Tom Atkins read and was an early favorite of John’s when we were thinking solely in terms of “the group”. Others, like Scott Glenn and Ed Harris, met but passed soon thereafter. Both Peter Coyote and Tim McIntyre were openly lukewarm about appearing in a monster movie. Brian Dennehy was initially considered but became for a long while the first choice for Copper (switching like this was not unusual. Richard Masur came in originally for the role of Bennings, but expressed interest in Clark, for example).

Australian actor Jack Thompson, then currently starring in BREAKER MORANT was a surprisingly strong late contender for MacReady. The film was shown to the studio and he was flown in to read for John in his office, but in the end what seemed to be the best fit and make the most sense was staying with Kurt, a decision no one has regretted since...

John made the decision to cast Kurt on the day we left to film the initial ice field sequences above Juneau in early June, 1981. There he also shot the footage of Mac flying to the Norwegian Camp and the flying saucer (the helicopter pilot filling in), an occasion as I think he has pointed out where he filmed the costume before he filmed the actor...

14

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

15

CASTING BLAIR

From a storytelling standpoint it was our intent that Blair be infected very early on in the proceedings, and off-screen.

Here we were attempting to faithfully follow the dramatic line of the Campbell novella. We all liked the idea that his crackup was a ruse, a clever feint to isolate him(it)self from the rest of the group. It was essential on some level that the audience forget about Blair until the appropriate time, requiring an actor whose everyman persona could fade into the woodwork.

As some of you know, John was initially considering Donald Pleasence for Blair, but my notes from the time reflect a concern that he may have been too identifiable, too dominating a presence - one you were likely to miss and wonder about if he were off screen for a considerable period of time. Far from occupying his now familiar role as every one’s authentic grandfather and Quaker Oats spokesman, Wilford Brimley at the time of casting THE THING was completely unknown, a fresh face. His first film, ABSENCE OF MALICE, had yet to be released. David Foster arranged for us to see the rough cut at Warner Bros, and with a strong recommendation from director Sydney Pollack, the rest is history...

Addendum, April 7, 2012. Although I can speak authoritatively as to our intent with the Blair character, what I think is open to question is how successful we were in realizing that intent. This is one element of the film we did not plan to be ambiguous about. Concerned, John added several lines of dialogue in post production to make things clearer. Naul’s dialogue “Hey Blair - you down there?

16

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

We got something for you” and particularly Mac’s “Blair’s been busy down here all by himself ” (italics mine) were added to underline to the audience the idea that Blair was a Thing when he was locked up, and to make the direct connection between the saucer they were seeing and the creature that had built it.

NAULS IN BLACK AND WHITE Recently an eagle-eared listener at IMDB noted that John’s line regarding T.K. Carter on the commentary track of the original DVD release of THE THING - “he was constantly worried that all of us were racists” - had been removed from the recent Blu-Ray release of the film. Although I was not aware of any friction between T.K. and the cast and crew while filming (or, for that matter, with Keith), it brings to mind the fact that the issue of race did come up while casting...

I spoke to Bill Lancaster about the incident afterword.

Concerned, Bill offered to meet with whoever was cast and work out any problems (Bill intended the dialogue to be a play on the vernacular spoken by a smart guy but would tone down the idea if it was considered offensive) but John ultimately chose to leave the character and dialogue essentially unchanged...

When actor-comedian Franklyn Ajaye (CAR WASH, STIR CRAZY, as well as a recent appearance in BRIDESMAIDS) came in to read for the role he offered instead a measured fifteen minute critique on the stereotypical nature of the character, citing both the use of the vernacular in dialogue “What’s it going to do, come chasing after us?”, for example - as well as the fact that Nauls was a cook. He also took strong exception to the labelling of Nauls as black in the character descriptions in the fronts piece of the screenplay. None of this sat particularly well with John, and the meeting broke up amidst frosty silence...

COULD THIS MAN PLAY PALMER? the role and would take acting classes if need be, but as pre - production rapidly advanced it was clear to all that it was an impossible idea to pursue (I don’t recall whether Rob actually read for the role, but I remember him lobbying hard for the chance)...

It was the custom then (and, indeed, now) for studio casting departments to pay very close attention to up and coming comedians performing at nightclubs around Hollywood, with assistants dispatched nightly to monitor the proceedings at watering holes like THE IMPROVISATION. When THE THING first crossed the desks of executives at Universal they wondered whether, given the roles’ comedic potential, it would be advantageous to consider one of the best and the brightest for the role of Palmer...

Having had a taste of The Roar Of The Greasepaint by appearing as an actor in front of the camera on THE FOG, Rob Bottin initially made a concerted pitch to John Carpenter and myself to play Palmer in THE THING. We were surprised by his request (when John first mentioned it to me I thought he was kidding), and skeptical of his ability to pull it off - he already had the massive responsibility of the effects work heaped on his twenty two year old shoulders, much of which was scheduled to be shot with the principal actors.

Undaunted, he told me he was deadly serious about playing

Jay Leno met and read for us. A recent film of his, AMERICAN HOT WAX, was screened. Gary Shandling and Charles Fleisher (later to become the voice of ROGER RABBIT) also met, among others, but the concern always was whether they had the dramatic “chops” in order to pull the entire role off...

A veteran casting director, Lynn Stalmaster, had given me a great early piece of advice - “When in doubt, always go for the actor” - which is just what we did with David Clennon.

David had recently appeared in MISSING, the Costa-Gavras film for Universal, and was one of the first actors in the door - an early and enthusiastic selection by John and ourselves, and one we certainly never regretted...

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

17

CASTING CHILDS

QUE VIVA WINDOWS

Ernie Hudson, Geoffrey Holder, Carl Weathers, Isaac Hayes, Bernie Casey.

...who in the early drafts of the script was named Sanchez.

It is in memory (which can be unreliable) that Bill Lancaster was initially indicating his thought that the role be cast Hispanic, but that John didn’t want to be necessarily bound by the idea and wanted to be able to cast the role as he saw fit. The name was then changed to Sanders...

From my incomplete notes made at the time: John gave some initial consideration to Isaac Hayes, having just worked together in ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK (John also did the same with Lee Van Cleef for the role of Garry).

Geoffrey Holder’s availability was checked very early on.

Carl Weathers and Bernie Casey met and read, but it was Ernie Hudson who had the inside track until late in the process and was on the way to being cast when we met Keith...

The name Windows came out of the initial costume fitting with Thomas Waites. After wandering up to the massive wardrobe department at Universal, John had Tom try on the pair of dark glasses above, and Voila! a moniker was born. John considered it a tribute to Howard Hawks, who always had characters with nicknames in his movies (I’m surprised we didn’t change Copper’s name to Stumpy...)

THE NORWEGIAN PHOTO The identities of the six individuals featured above are, right to left, camera operator Ray Stella, production manager Robert Brown, producer David Foster, and associate producer Larry Franco. On the far left is stunt coordinator Dick Warlock. Second from left is none other than screenwriter Bill Lancaster, making a deserved cameo appearance. Shot several days before filming began by production still photographer Peter Sorel, the original idea as an “in” joke was to feature all the producers, but I was deemed too clean shaven - Bill was having lunch on the lot that day, so we shoved him in instead - I am now awfully glad that we did...

18

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

CASTING GARRY AND COPPER From my woefully incomplete notes: veteran actor William Daniels was submitted for the role but it was Brian Dennehy who came within a whisker of playing Dr. Copper - a last second, back and forth decision made by John in favor of Richard Dysart (I am somewhat surprised in retrospect that Brian didn’t end up somewhere in this movie - he was considered for a number of roles, and we both liked him a lot...)

Lee Van Cleef was an initial consideration, having just worked with John on ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK. Jerry Ohrbach was thought highly of on the strength of his recent work in PRINCE OF THE CITY. Kevin Conway came in to meet and read the part beautifully...

Richard Mulligan was a surprise submission from his agency at the time. He had gotten hold of a script and thought the role would be a great change of pace from his current work on the T.V. series SOAP (not unsurprisingly, we also gave some thought to the idea of his playing Palmer). Powers Boothe was mentioned as we kicked around the idea of playing the role younger, in an age range more contemporaneous to Macs...

Michael Ploog’s original storyboard for Garry’s death... ...and a literal definition of “hands on”. That’s Rob Bottin’s hand in the shot...

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

19

THE MEN AND THEIR ENVIRONMENT When John was asked recently what the men at Outpost 31 did in their jobs he replied “I don’t know” and this is literally the truth. Running away as fast as we could from the usual stereotype of Dedicated Scientists Engaged in Something Bigger than Themselves, it was essential that our group be bored with their garden variety activities and, more importantly, bored and on edge with each other, a process accelerated by the creature’s arrival and it’s subsequent manipulations (This as opposed to the usual dynamic of putting aside one’s differences and banding together to fight and destroy a common enemy). More caretakers really than scientists, keeping the men in the same wardrobe throughout the film serves as a physical reminder of that boredom, and also helps to re-enforce the glacial passage of time.

a question: how accurate do we want to be in our portrayal of Outpost 31 as a functioning research station? We decided early on to go to great lengths to protect the large elements that were essential to the telling of this story - the cold (sets were originally planned to be built inside abandoned ice houses in the Los Angeles area) and the sense of isolation leading to paranoia - and if we didn’t get some of the details right, well... It’s no secret flamethrowers, gun racks in hallways, dynamite in storage rooms, and a commander wandering around with a gun on his hip aren’t exactly standard operating procedure, but it is pleasing to see that the film is prized now by those who inhabit the Antarctic research community, and is screened yearly at McMurdo on Winter Solstice (great reading can be had at www.bigdeadplace.com, a special section devoted to the film from people who ought to know...)

One additional note: when John went down to the sound stage to look at the finished Outpost 31 interior several days before filming was to begin it was painted a lighter, almost antiseptic hospital green. He immediately ordered it completely repainted with the cooler grey-blue color you see now - a small change making a big cumulative difference...

“...I suggested putting ceilings on all the sets and bringing the pipes into the frame line to heighten the claustrophobia... I suggested using practical lighting to make it look realistic, so we lit whole scenes with just the flares the actors carried... We ended up using color selectively, with “The Thing” it’s most colorful object...” Dean Cundey, Starlog magazine, November, 1982 The anomaly of an all male (and indeed, mostly middle aged male) cast was surprisingly not much of an issue at the time. Once we had decided with Bill Lancaster to stay true to the intent of the original novella we were never asked to re-consider (John was prepared to use THE WILD BUNCH as an example should the issue come up, and I thought about using THE GREAT ESCAPE). I think now that probably the biggest factor in our favor was that everyone from the studio on down recognized at the outset that Bill’s script worked , the characters and their interaction worked, and why mess with something that good?

After Bill came back from the Los Angeles Public Library from doing some basic research on Antarctica he asked us 20

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

THE COMPUTERS THE THING, having been produced on the cusp of a digital universe, is a resolutely all-analog film, without a frame electronically processed. It is somehow fitting that the computers appearing in the movie are both mock ups, nonfunctioning props made out of bits and pieces, with the video display portion in both cases shot well after principal photography.

This information, written by John, was designed to lay out the stakes for the men (and the audience) in sledgehammer fashion. There is nothing coy or shaded about the message here...

Also added by John, Blair’s reach for the gun was shot on the insert stage later (with someone else’s hands) to complete the scene...

Above: McCready’s chess game screens

Originally a much shorter moment containing less specific information, with Blair at the computer John essentially created a new scene in post-production built out of inserts.

The only two pieces done during filming were those of Blair intently watching. John saw this as an opportunity to hammer home to the audience, in the simplest possible way, the idea of assimilation and it’s consequences (this became a primary concern as editing on the film advanced).

McCready’s chess game was an actual program, something designed for an Apple II computer (the only one I knew of was owned and offered up by our Production Manager Robert Brown). On set we tried to photograph it operating in the same frame with Kurt, but the results were a mess.

For photographic purposes it too was converted to 24 frame analog video, recorded onto 3/4 inch tape and played back later, which resulted in an acceptable image...

An analog endeavour, the program simulation was written

by John and animated on film by fellow USC alumnus John Wash. None of us had any idea what this ought to look like, so JC instructed John to make it as simple and familiar as possible by using video game graphics...

It was then transferred (at a special 24 frame rate in order to avoid scanning lines) to U Matic 3/4 inch tape, fed back to a monitor, and photographed.

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

21

THE NORWEGIAN CAMP AND THE POWER OF IMPRESSION When I first saw THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD on television in my living room on a hot summer afternoon in the late 1950’s, the 16mm print was greyed out, bright sunlight filled the room and I could see no detail in anything, particularly the creatures face. I realised later this lack of information allowed me to form in my mind my own idea of what THE THING looked like (a horrible sort of grinning skeleton informed by tons of EC comic books) which, together with Dimitri Tiompkin’ pulse pounding music was enough to send me out of the room, terrified...

With a nod toward Halloween the Norwegian camp as a storytelling device for us was the functional equivalent of a haunted house, a chance to give the audience the impression that the worst kind of hell had broken loose without offering much in the way of specific incident - and have their imagination take it from there...

Above: The ice block set at the Norwegian Camp

The interior portion occupied the first four days of production (to ease the company into shooting mode, with only two principal characters to contend with) on refrigerated sets in the middle of a white hot San Fernando Valley summer. As filming proceeded John, in characteristic fashion, worked to strip the scene down to its essentials - a continuing exercise in the elimination of detail...

Bill Lancaster’s early drafts had something more of a “spook alley” feel to them, involving incidents with a severed arm caught in a doorway (not filmed) and a partial body hanging upside down in a cabinet (filmed, thought redundant and not used, although you hear Copper refer to it). Additionally, Copper was to have found an audio cassette recorder and listen to a small snippet of what would have been the audiences first encounter with the creature (this was re-written to be included in the videotape review scene, but was ultimately not shot).

22

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

Continued > A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

23

After all this was stripped away, what is left to register specifically are three images - the frozen man, the ice block, and the final grotesque discovery outside. We had planned to punctuate the scene with radio static here and there but dropped even that after hearing Morricone’s music. The result is a meld of stillness, light, and sound (knitted together by an ever - present, very even wind) that is as sensual as it is eerie...

Above: The frozen man was modelled after veteran mold maker (and member of Rob Bottin’s crew) GUNNAR FERDINASEN, a Norweigan

“Here’s the thing: at that particular time I had unleashed this terrible thing about horror movies with HALLOWEEN. All those imitations came out and threw every possible cliche’ up onto the screen - the body in the closet, the thing behind the door, all of that stuff. I suppose I was just trying to get away from all that and make this film better” - John Carpenter, Creative Screenwriting magazine The Camp exterior was originally going to be built a quarter mile away from Outpost 31 (down the hill and to the left of the main set) requiring a separate road. John, who hated cold, snow, and travel declared that if he was going to be forced to take a snow cat up the mountain for two hours just to get to the location he’d be damned if he

24

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

take another snow cat down the mountain to get to the Camp... bearing that in mind we figured out a way to shoot the back of the Outpost 31 set a couple of days after we blew it up, and saved $250.000 dollars in the process (most of which went to Rob Bottin).

Above: Special makeup effects creator and designer ROB BOTTIN creating the “Split Face” character Left: The remains of the Outpost 31 set shot two days after “the Big Blow”

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

25

THE THREE BENNINGS DEATHS

Above: Actor PETER MALONEY as George Bennings

I have been repeatedly struck by the ease in which the word assimilation has found its way into casual conversation and broader popular culture today (THE THING “ASSIMILATION” MAZE at Universal Studios). Now accepted vernacular and taken for granted, when discussing this movie the debate has moved on to the when, the where, and the why, but in 1981 one of the biggest storytelling problems John faced was how to effectively communicate the idea of assimilation in terms clear enough an audience would understand and accept.

With this as preface, we turn to the variety of ways we dreamed up to kill off our friend Bennings...

OUT ON THE ICE Originally a set piece of Bill Lancaster’s first two drafts, this terrific scene had MacReady, Childs, and Bennings giving chase to infected dogs (in this draft Blair didn’t kill them all). Bennings at one point was to be pulled under the ice by the creature, quickly bobbing up in different areas in progressive states of assimilation.

Action was also to include one of the dogs leaping at MacReady while changing in mid-air. Original plans called for a large exterior ice scape set to be built on stilts on one of Universal’s largest sound stages, running half its length and continuing up the wall, creating a cul-de-sac.

The only exterior that would have been shot indoors the scene, although written for day, was switched to night to make it both more dramatic and easier to shoot. It was to be lit by the headlights on the snow cats, catching nightmarish glimpses of what we needed to see (and in the process hiding what we had to). In full operational mode, the set would have featured an army of effects people working both above and below, wind machines, snow cats, real and fake dogs, flamethrowers, explosives, a ton of goo and rubber, sophisticated hydraulics (at one point I remember a tentacle was to grab a snow cat and fling it into the night) all done in an environment cooled to 40 degrees for good measure.

Although we made some attempt to simplify the scenes workings, it became clear as we prepared the rest of the film that it was increasingly unaffordable, with a cost estimate of close to two million dollars and a month to set up and shoot (a small movie in itself).

IN THE KENNEL Conceived as a relatively simple way to dispose of a major character without involving any effects work (Rob was well underway by this time on the other sequences, and did not have the time and money to take it on) this second attempt was written by Bill Lancaster as a straight “Halloween” style murder scene. It involved just two people, with Bennings being stabbed in the back with an icepick by an unseen assailant (intended to be Blair, whom you were to never see). As you might imagine it was filmed very effectively by John, but when it came time to look at a first rough cut of the movie it felt aberrant, out of place, almost as if it belonged in a different film. But there was a bigger problem looming...

“I don’t think they (the studio) quite got the uniqueness of the imitation aspect.” John Carpenter - Creative Screenwriting magazine John’s first look at a rough cut occurred during a five week hiatus the company took between the conclusion of principal photography on stage and the resumption of work in Stewart. Although some of the film played well, an early overriding concern was the need to effectively dramatize the nature of assimilation and it’s consequences. With three already designed to be off - camera (Blair, Palmer, and Norris), the audience had only the Kennel to see the act in progress and that involved dogs, not humans. We had plenty of transitions back out once the creature was discovered, but was the essential defense the creature employs to disguise itself explained clearly enough?

26

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

Time to go on the record. It was decided to go back to the drawing board to come up with a scene that would unambiguously show Bennings in the process of being assimilated... ...but how to accomplish this ? We had completed interior filming in Los Angeles and there was no more Outpost 31.

Rob and his crew were behind schedule with the effects on his plate and couldn’t afford to be involved in any way whatever John came up with would have to be shot on location in Stewart and added to the busy schedule there, with very little preparation...

The resulting scene, written by John between the end of filming in Los Angeles and the beginning of location work in Stewart, accomplishes its goal in very simple ways. A new storeroom set and partial corridor were constructed on location inside the Outpost 31 exterior, the only interior scene shot there (one small portion of the set was used to film the tie - in where Jed sees the helicopter land). Robs’ shop sent up some miscellaneous rubber tentacles, orange dye and KY jelly as well as the same pair of slip on gloves stunt coordinator Dick Warlock wore in his “flight” to the ceiling as Palmer...

very next scene tells Garry “that was one of those things out there, trying to imitate him”...

This short scene, also written by John, was filmed at Heartland the same day the alternate McMurdo ending with Kurt was done. Its purpose was to hammer home verbally the idea of assimilation to the audience. No subtlety or shaded references here, just lay it on the line and mission accomplished (for now, but we’ll return to this theme later).

An additional note - those that picked up the fact that Windows dropped the keys off - camera as he runs to get MacReady are correct, and we did lift the sound of them hitting the floor in post production for emphasis...

A testament to his storytelling skills, John makes full use out of very little and fashions a sequence, from the foreground blanket raise to Bennings strange wobble and tortured final scream that efficiently and without elaboration does what it needs to - make the physical connection between man and monster.

And just to make sure the audience understands what has just happened and the stakes involved MacReady in the

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

27

THE PALMER TRANSFORMATION AND THE TWENTY FIVE MILLION DOLLAR FILM I think it was Orson Welles who called a motion picture studio the worlds biggest erector set and John, in this environment for the first time, was determined to take advantage of whatever Universal had to offer. From his office he could walk to one of the four sound stages housing the sets (and not just ordinary sound stages but ones that were distinguished by their huge ducting and cooling units), passing Albert Whitlocks studio along the way - walk to the projection room at lunchtime for dailies, perhaps stop by the editing suite before returning to rehearse or film. Rob’s special effects facility, Heartland, was a ten minute drive away. The large scale tools were all there, but expensive to utilize...

The original idea in the Palmer transformation was for him to break free from the sofa and run full tilt while standing up the rec room wall to his left, continue halfway across the ceiling and then drop down in front of Windows. A great unexpected idea, if it could be made to happen quickly...

Above: Special makeup effects creator and designer ROB BOTTIN and director JOHN CARPENTER with the ‘Palmer Thing’ puppet

28

Universal happened to own a camera centrifuge. It was a large drum with the set built inside that could rotate 360 degrees with the camera platform locked down (its use may be best seen in 2001 with the stewardess walking on the ceiling). The original plan was to replicate the right half of the rec room set in the drum and have a stuntman in Palmer guise do a flat out run while rapidly moving the cylinder 180 degrees, leaving the camera crew upside down but the stuntman standing upright on the ceiling...

We loved this idea and were dedicated to its execution well after it became impractical (it took a crew of 20 to operate and light the drum, plus the cost of the set, upside down hazard pay for the camera crew, etc.), I think

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

because it was a real movie moment, one you seldom get a chance to try...

With financial reality finally setting in, we met on the rec room set to map out a less expensive alternative, and what could be cheaper than a stuntman falling into frame and landing on a mattress covered with a thin layer of painted balsa wood? I proudly contributed the foot stomp that motivated Palmers leap to the ceiling, and a sequence was born...

We added “the ceiling run” as we called it, to the long and growing list of ideas we would save for what we called the Twenty Five Million Dollar version of THE THING, a list that already included the first Bennings death on the ice and a complete incarnation of the Blair Monster...

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

29

TWO OR THREE THINGS YOU DIDN’T KNOW... and white lettering that opens the film. The unsettling music underneath is John’s...

The entire opening sequence was fashioned and produced

by Peter Kuran for an even-then bargain Twenty One Thousand Dollars, model included. Peter and his model maker Susan Turner saved money by borrowing the motion control rig set up by John Dykstra for BATTLESTAR GALLATICA and shooting in the middle of the night, the only few hours it wasn’t in use. Another colleague, Jim Danforth, painted the matte used of the earth in his spare time over a weekend...

(1) THE OPENING CREDITS Our original idea was to place the credits at the back end of the movie, and open the film with the saucer crashing to earth revealing the main title. This would have been fine if the movie’s official title was THE THING, but it wasn’t - as JOHN CARPENTER’S THE THING the Directors Guild stipulated that John’s directing credit also appear upfront, and with that decision by contract the other credits moved up as well.

Rob Bottin’s credit was the subject of much discussion and negotiation with the make-up union at the time. We were warned if we used the word “effects” after make-up as well as the word “created” there would be a penalty involved.

We honestly couldn’t come up with another way to accurately phrase Rob’s contribution to the film, and as a result Universal was fined Twenty Five Thousand Dollars...

(2) WHERE’S BLAIR ? ...and why isn’t he in the official cast photograph? The simple answer is that Wilford Brimley was never on location for filming in Stewart, B.C. The only exterior shot needed, that of Blair being taken to the cabin, was filmed using a well padded double (Blair’s cabin had been shot on stage, with the exception of MacReady’s exterior closeup).

Another pressing mystery solved...

After viewing the completed main title we felt that using the traditional Universal logo at the beginning would not only conflict with the opening shot of the saucer careening toward earth, but make the sequence redundant and perhaps confusing. Before the credit situation was resolved one studio executive suggested that we fade off the “Universal” on the logo, pan the camera left to pick up the spacecraft and have it continue on its merry way to crash into the logos’ remnants. We referred to this as the ABBOTT AND COSTELLO GO TO MARS version of the opening. In the end, we had to argue our case in order to receive special dispensation from corporate management (above the motion picture division) to add the simple black

30

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

ANOTHER CAMEO APPEARANCE? Put this under the heading of informed speculation: The approach to the spaceship was shot on the Ice Field using doubles, with crew members dutifully filling in...

I am reasonably sure the Palmer figure is special effects co ordinator Roy Arbogast.The Norris figure is either prop master John Zemansky or Jed’s trainer Clint Rowe.

(3) FILM MAKING 101 When shooting the opening sequence on the Juneau Ice field John, with limited resources and a small crew, had the use of only ONE picture helicopter when filming the air to air portions which had to serve double duty as both Norwegian and American.

But when I looked at the shot recently I was struck by something very familiar in the body language and walk used by the crew member playing MacReady, and I think there is an excellent chance it’s John himself - I remember him trying the hat and jacket on in front of a mirror in the wardrobe department when in the process of deciding what to bring (Kurt had not been cast at the time), and I think he was the most natural fit for the job...

Therefore THIS helicopter

and THIS helicopter

...are the same. John Lloyd supplied us with two complete sets of decals, one Norwegian, the other American. A do it yourself affair, the idea was to be able to “change over” the helicopter completely on both sides, but we found it slow going so with both time and light a constant problem we resorted to doing one side Norwegian, the other American.

This is why in the opening shots the helicopter is primarily shown from the side flying from right to left (for the last part of the sequence when filming in Stewart six months later John DID have the luxury of using two separate helicopters, appropriately marked, allowing him to fly them around the camp at will).

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

31

THE SHADOW ON THE WALL... ...was intended to be Palmer. At the time of filming David Clennon’s silhouette was considered too distinct, a dead giveaway. Cinematographer Dean Cundey tried to soften the edges to diffuse the image, but in the end John used stunt coordinator Dick Warlock to throw everyone off the scent...

The scene as originally written ended with the shadow figure uttering a barely decipherable “Hello, Boy” and the door slamming shut from the inside. Additionally, this is the

last piece of an originally much longer sequence that had the dog weaving its way through the radio room, storeroom, kitchen and hallway, methodically surveying the scene. Beautifully shot by John, as seen in one piece it had the effect of establishing the camp geography from a dogs eye point of view. Great stuff, but John felt it slowed the story up and cut it down, with only small pieces used (The brush against Bennings underneath the rec room table, for instance)...

THE CAMERA THAT ALMOST WORKED Very early in preproduction on THE THING John was searching for unusual techniques to capture the wave motion of, lets say, tentacles and the like. He wanted to be able to vary camera speed by quickly whipping the motor back and forth over a wide range of something like 10 to 300 frames per second (fast to slow) by way of a remote box that he would control. In another example of tapping resources the studio had on offer, Universal’s camera department teamed up with the Panavision Corporation to build an experimental camera with this capability.

A special high torque motor was built that could withstand the tremendous swings, but the sticking point became the large, graduated, neutral density filter that was designed to

32

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

rotate in front of the lens as the speed changed in order to keep exposure constant and prevent telltale white flashes.

Several tests were made, and although the effect looked great in small stretches there was always an overexposed frame or two that gave the game away. Finally considered too unreliable for our use the camera was reluctantly abandoned, although I understand it had a brief shelf life in commercials...

“THE THING” PRODUCT REEL In early 1982 we received word from Universal that there was mounting curiosity among film exhibitors about the mysterious goings on surrounding THE THING. There was a self-imposed embargo in place with photographs and information on the special effects, and very little else had leaked out. With no formidable star power to speak of, exhibitors were looking for some re-assurance that we were an “A” level production capable of attracting and keeping summer audiences in their seats. David Foster and I were asked to put together a show reel of film that would emphasize action, scale, and suspense.

Above: “The Thing” 35mm production reel

The first time anyone outside of the production was to see any footage at all, this was to prove to be an expensive proposition. A separate editor (Christopher Holmes) was hired to work alongside the main unit using dupes and whatever else he could get his hands on. Of particular interest to fans and collectors is the use of a number of alternate takes, performance and otherwise, to put this together - there were also extended versions of some scenes that were currently being edited (the opening gun play, for example). True to our embargo very little special effects footage was used (John, while not having an active hand in this process, still resisted the studios request to reveal more), although we did feature the Norris chest opening (but not closing) and the petri dish blood jumping.

The reel, which ran around 20 minutes, ended with MacReady’s “Yeah, well fuck you too” and the dynamite throw, the screen exploding to reveal “THE THING” in white, with red background... this was professionally mixed, with music (pre- Morricone) tracked from Universals extensive library.

The idea was for us to take this on the road, travelling salesman style - two composite 35mm prints were made, and in mid-march 1982 David headed to New York, Boston, Chicago and Atlanta, and I to Detroit, Philadelphia, Denver and Seattle. The setup was always the same - we would host a screening of the reel late morning at some local theatre, followed by catered lunch for everyone at the hotel. Surrounding us on easels were large color blowups of stills from the movie. Reaction by and large was favorable - not unsurprising since the reel leaned heavily on action, flamethrowers, and fights, with many (exclusively) male, primarily middle-aged exhibitors going out of their way to praise the idea of an (exclusively) male, primarily middle-aged cast...

After my return I received a call from Robert Rehme, Universal’s head of distribution. He told me the studio was really counting on THE THING to pull them through the summer. They had just had their first look at E.T. THE EXTRATERRESTRIAL and considered it, in his words “soft”, a movie “aimed at children”. They thought it would be up to us to appeal to the demographic they most coveted, teenagers on up. We took this pep talk in stride, having no idea what was in store for us the next few months...

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

33

THE MUSIC In a perfect world, given unlimited time and resources, I think John would have preferred to compose the music for THE THING himself. The realities of the work yet to be done, however, combined with the need for a more expansive and layered approach to the score led us to consider other options. We initially offered the film to Jerry Goldsmith who was unavailable, doing both POLTERGEIST and TWILIGHT ZONE for Spielberg. Availability on musician John Corigliano (ALTERED STATES) was checked. The legendary Alex North read the script, had ideas, and wanted to meet but at that point I felt the only composer John would possibly entrust his film to other than himself was Ennio Morricone.

Above: Composer ENNIO MORRICONE and director JOHN CARPENTER Opposite Page: Composer ENNIO MORRICONE

34

In the process of finishing the score to WHITE DOG for director Samuel Fuller, the composer had done very little work at the time in America and was not particularly happy about the experience. He initially turned us down, flattered, but claimed he had begun early work with Sergio Leone on ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA (Morricone told me though translation that he planned to spend a full year with Leone in pre - production ). We arranged to have the script translated into Italian, and sent it along with a case of wine to his suite at The Chateau Marmont in Hollywood. This gesture, along with a kind word put in on our behalf by director Bernardo Bertolucci (whom I knew through a previous association) led him to request a screening and late one evening in early December 1981 Morricone, visibly tired, took a look at THE THING for the first time.

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

The film was far from complete or coherent - John was still filming in Stewart, so the film lacked most of the exterior scenes as well as almost all of the special effects, save the kennel . Morricone complained about the lack of continuity (normally we wouldn’t have run a film for any composer in this shape, and with the director not present, but we did not have the luxury of time - we needed to secure his commitment, and were trying to wedge ourselves in to his schedule) but agreed that if we were to come to him in Rome he would “see what he could do”.

This necessitated a two day trip to Italy in early January, 1982 to meet - conversation was done through translators which made things difficult. Matters improved slightly when John sat down at the piano and began tinkering, searching for a way of communicating the feeling of what he was after, with Morricone listening intently. This was the first time John had ceded control of the music to any of his films, and I believe the experience was extremely difficult. It was agreed that due to the shortness of time Morricone would provide the music in a series of thematic suites, with both electronic and orchestral elements present, that we would then later edit to fit - this would simplify things, save time and eliminate the need to conventionally “spot” the film. He would record the electronics in Rome, but come to Los Angeles to score the rest, as was mandated by union contracts at the time.

His fee for this was to be Forty Thousand dollars.

On the return trip home John was uneasy and wondered

whether he had communicated his thoughts successfully after all, there had been only one meeting between the two men, and there would be no more face-to-face conversation until the session in Los Angeles. The language barrier was a big problem - were there others, generational, cultural? Above all, would this work?

Doubts were definitively dispelled two months later when Morricone opened up his tattered valise and removed a reel of two inch tape containing the now-emblematic “heartbeat” theme. As we heard this for the first time in the recording booth at Universal I looked over at John, whose expression was initially one of relief, followed by something close to wonder... it seemed that Morricone had understood John perfectly. At the orchestral recording session the next day, I remember John coming in late and shyly taking a seat in the back, an observer for the first time as Morricone recorded the rest of the music for his movie. Having been recorded in large brushstrokes of sound, there was still the need for more specific transition

and suspense cues which John, along with his partner, Alan Howarth, then supplied.

Morricone was not pleased with the music mix at Universal, by the way - we took the masters to our dubbing stage at Goldwyn sound and mixed them directly into the film. As was the custom at the time, the Universal mix was used for the LP and cassette release, so there are large differences in tone and balance between the three formats. SUPERSTITION was only purchased by Universal for the initial theatrical run of the film - early tape, laserdisc, and cable versions feature ONE CHAIN DON’T MAKE NO PRISON, a track the studio already owned...

Above: Alternative soundtrack cover

One last musical note - we returned from Rome in time to attend THE THING wrap party, held at the Roxy on Sunset Blvd. The band asked to play that night was the legendary Flamin’ Groovies.

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

35

THE SOUND

THE THING began it’s final sound mix at what was then the best facility in Hollywood, Samuel Goldwyn Studio’s Stage A. Having won the most recent Academy Award for RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK the room was constantly in demand, the chief reason being the talent being brought to the table by the late Bill Varney and his capable associates Steve Maslow and Gregg Landaker.

John had previously mixed ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK with the men and thoroughly enjoyed the experience. We were scheduled for a full six weeks (time was needed to make six track stereo masters for the 70mm prints, two track Dolby stereo masters for regular release as well as separate monaural masters for theatres not equipped for stereo, as was the custom then) after the crew completed work on POLTERGEIST (which, as it happened, was of interest to us - we held hopes that the audience that went to see POLTERGEIST might come to see THE THING a month later).

Initially Universal made a concerted pitch to have us stay at the studio (having recently upgraded their facilities and built the brand new Alfred Hitchcock Theatre), and have the film mixed in something called “Ultra-Stereo” as they planned to do with one of their other signature summer attractions, THE BEST LITTLE WHOREHOUSE IN TEXAS. It certainly would have been easier to stay on the lot with all that was going on (Rob’s effects work was still in full swing, his operation a few minutes away), but we made the case that it wasn’t the equipment that made the difference, it was the skill and the instinct of the men who were utilizing it...

36

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

Our approach to monster sound making was essentially the same as the method pioneered by the legendary sound engineer Murray Spivak on KING KONG - combining organic (animal) sounds, changing pitch, slowing them down, speeding them up, thinning, sharpening, running them backwards and anything else we could think of until we ended up with something we liked and seemed to fit really, a process of sound shaping, of trial and error...

Work on this aspect began just after principal photography commenced, shepherded by David Lewis Yewdall and Colin Mouat. Originally the search was on for a signature sound for the monster, one you would have heard initially on the audiotape recording Copper finds at the Norwegian Camp, and again later. This concept was abandoned as we moved from the notion of the creature as one final form entity to the deconstructionist idea it could be anything, which certainly opened up avenues for audio experimentation. As John began editing the film these experiments were salted in to see if we were headed in the right direction, and were fully fleshed out on the mixing stage, with it’s array of sophisticated processing equipment (all analog), some eight months later...

I wish I could recount with specificity exactly what went into, and in what proportion, the making of each individual sequence, but the fact is memory fails me. I do know that we were looking for a sort of high pitched, painful, shrill sound for the introduction of the dog - thing which called for the extensive use of bird calls and and a pig squeal, all heavily processed. In the Blair Monster we were looking for a large, definitive, square sound and you certainly hear a great deal of lion (and for those of you who find some similarity with KING KONG’s final roar, you are correct - it was our tip of the hat).

Benning’s roar was created by custom recording human screams and then have them individually synthesized by a gentleman named Craig Harris. These were later combined on the mixing stage with other, non human sounds and additionally processed to give you that haunting, forever lost in hell effect. You also hear the result of this particular processing in the off-stage, human sounding screams at the beginning of the kennel sequence, as well as during the Norris transformation.

Wherever possible, a special effort was made to custom record background tracks on location during breaks in filming. Many of the wind tracks heard (including the steady state wind always present at the Norwegian camp) were made this way. Also specific sounds indigenous to the location - helicopter start-ups, tractor engines idling, flamethrower whooshes etc. Despite the rigors of location filming there was very little dialogue replacement done less a dozen lines in all, a tribute to our production sound mixer, Thomas Causey.

When we played back the completed kennel sequence for the first time we looked at each other and shrugged. There was something missing - despite all the meticulous work the scene fell flat. Our salvation lay in a track our music editor, Clif Kholweck, found at the last minute. The low drone sound that begins as MacReady and Co. slowly approach is a sound effect, actually background air conditioner hum sharpened, shaped, and eventually pushed to absurd levels (the reveal of the dog - thing) before being taken out on the first shotgun blast. But what the hell, it worked, and the scene came alive.

This sound proved to be so effective we went back and added it to Clark’s initial approach and confrontation to the kennel... ...as well as MacReady’s final confrontation with the Blair monster (the sound begins as Mac drops the dynamite and is woven in and out until the first explosion). Astute listeners will also hear part of Morricone’s plucked-string cue “Contamination” thrown in for good measure.

My favorite sound effects story from THE THING is as follows... I asked one of the sound editors, Colin Mouat, how they came up with the ultra - realistic background sounds of the dogs howling in the kennel. He replied that he had his children gather together the neighborhood dogs on a Saturday morning, put them inside his house, turned on the recorder, left, and donned a hat and full trench coat. Pulling up the collar to hide his face, he then proceeded to furtively move around the house, tapping on windows and rattling doorknobs. The resultant hysteria is what you now hear (I was assured the dogs were amply rewarded with waiting treats)...

THE THING never sounded better than in Stage A, and it was for that reason we chose to have the first screening of the completed film there for Universal’s President Ned Tannen. A crucial event, we invited a few close friends and relatives to help fill out the space. Ned was shown to the center seat in front of the mixing console, the sonic “sweet spot”. The memory I will always carry with me was Bill Varney sitting at the controls, watching the production executive sitting directly in front of him, and constantly making minute level changes in reaction to Ned’s body language throughout the movie - in essence providing him with his own custom mix in an effort to put our absolute best foot forward, the very definition of a professional at work.

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

37

THE ENDING YOU ALMOST SAW we didn’t bother to paint it, and after spending the entire film carefully crafting the use of color this didn’t look like the sort of image John would want to end on... Never tested or screened, I last saw this piece of film sitting off by itself at the end of an editing room bench...

(3) Childs disappearing forever into the snowy night, leaving MacReady alone.

John has alluded to this version on his DVD commentary, but I don’t think its generally known that this ending was approved and was going to be the way you would have seen THE THING in its initial theatrical release, and perhaps beyond. Here’s how it happened...

There were three endings shot and / or edited for THE THING. They are: (1) The ending as it now exists, little changed from Bill Lancaster’s first draft...

(2) MacReady awaiting a final blood test at McMurdo Station.

This was actually one long shot filmed at Rob’s special effects facility, Heartland, on a day sometime after principal photography when Kurt was available (we also did two additional scenes with him that day, but that’s another story). I was there when John filmed it, and what I remember was a very deliberate camera dolly down a deserted industrial hallway, slowing panning left and eventually coming to a stop at an open doorway to reveal MacReady alive, alone, and shivering seated on a gurney at the far end of the room. I think he was dressed as he was in the final scene, with the same blanket wrapped around his shoulders. No Childs, and no other actors or extras.

My impression at the time is that this was an honest but half-hearted attempt to provide closure (and clarity) for those who were clamoring for it (see below), and John was never serious about using it. For one thing, the corridor used at Heartland had a sort of harsh tech whiteness to it 38

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

The first preview of THE THING was held on a Friday night in late May 1982 at the Red Rock theatre in Las Vegas, Nevada with CONAN THE BARBARIAN (I wonder if the prequel was previewed with the remake of CONAN - the more things change, the more they stay the same...). The day began promisingly enough - we received word that we had received an “R” rating, which meant no recutting (we were worried about an X). I flew up early with the tech crews to check both sound and picture. My seatmate was Rob Bottin, who was in the process of decompressing and wanted to see how the movie played with an audience for the first time. Arriving at the theatre, I was dismayed to see that the arc-driven projectors were producing way too dim an image - potentially disastrous, since the studio executives would also be arriving by private jet for their first look at the film - we were able to get a barely acceptable picture only by removing the glass ports separating the projectors from the auditorium, at the expense of hearing their racket throughout the screening.

There had been some advertising in the local papers and on radio, but come showtime at 8:00 P.M. the theatre was not filled, a very bad sign for a Friday night As the film began John took a seat on the aisle in the back and was handed a box with the master volume control for the theatre (a little like handing a match to a pyromaniac).

Modest applause for John’s name and the title, and then... silence. The first notable rise was on the insert of the needle in arm - John serving early notice that this movie was not to be trusted. The kennel sequence received loud, sustained applause, the most we were to receive that night - I looked over at Rob and caught him smiling... then followed a large crack! which made the crowd jump and sounded like a rifle shot but was actually Blair breaking off a piece of the creature - I looked over at John who was laughing, having goosed the sound (he was particularly good at getting the audience to jump by raising the “sting” when the hallway shadow passes Fuchs - this is probably about the only fun you can have at a preview). It was during Blair’s autopsy that the cumulative effect of what Kurt Russell described as the “ick” factor began to show itself as there were a number of walkouts - this would be repeated at the preview the next night in Denver. The

audience quieted down after that, and slipped into an uneasy silence for the rest of the movie, broken only by applause (and some nervous laughter) at the conclusion of the major effects sequences (Rob was a very happy camper that night). Light scattered applause at the end, with nearly everybody up and out of their seats while the credits were rolling. In the lobby afterward, it was clear that something about this film made the audience deeply uncomfortable, not what Universal, currently basking in the glow of E.T.s bright light, was expecting.

We convened in a small conference room in the bowels of Caesar’s Palace hotel after the screening for the post mortem. There were a few cards marked “excellent”, a larger number good or very good, but the majority fell into the average or “fair” category. Although there was almost unanimous praise for the effects, many were offended by the amount of violence and gore perceived to be inherent in their execution (a number of people spoke of the Norris transformation as a slow-motion human decapitation).

John was asked politely whether he would consider editing these scenes. He responded just as politely that the effects had to be that strong in order for the movie to work - and that was the last we heard from the studio on that particular topic.

But the largest block of criticism was reserved for the ambiguity inherent in the film, which seemed to have taken a mounting toll on people and deposited itself squarely on the doorstep of the final scene. Many were confused, and seemed really angry at their confusion, which took us all aback. Did the two men prevail over the monster or did they not? Was it really dead ? Who was who? What about this Mexican stand-off? Were we deliberately keeping things open ended because we were planning a sequel? Or, to put more succinctly by a frustrated studio executive, does anybody in this movie win? Well no, actually, but this would have been the wrong debate at the wrong time so a

promise was made to continue working to see if we could find a way to provide a more affirmative, satisfactory conclusion to the film. We continued on to Denver the next night with essentially the same results, although at least the theatre was full...

At the studio on Monday amid a steady trickle of downbeat news (it was clear Universal was disappointed in the preview results) the ending was scrutinised again. A version was tried that eliminated most of the early part of the scene (Childs’ evasive answers to MacReady's questions), in an attempt to make him seem less suspicious. Alternate takes were parsed for more affirmative line readings - with John’s permission, Universal’s Verna Fields headed to the editing room to give it a try at the behest of the studio (this is not as odorous as it sounds. Verna was the editor on AMERICAN GRAFFITI and JAWS, and her opinion was respected by all). These were all attempts to provide clarity and resolution to a scene that really wasn’t supposed to have any, so the idea came to create what is in essence a new scene - eliminate the final confrontation entirely by having Childs disappear completely, leaving MacReady alone to ponder his fate.

This ending was tested on the Universal lot that Friday night to a recruited audience - Two small screening rooms were used, one showing the film with the ending intact and the other the new version. This screening was all about the ending - everything else had been fought through and decided. The lab had to begin making prints on Tuesday to make the release date, so time was short. Only two questions were on the cards: (1) do you like / dislike the ending ? (2) Do you like / dislike this film?

Gathering in John’s office afterward were Universal Motion Picture President Ned Tanen, our production executive Helena Hacker, David Foster, John, myself, and the editor, Continued >

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

39

Todd Ramsay. The cards indicated a slight preference, by three or four percent, for the new ending, enough of an edge it seemed at the time to convince a studio very eager for an uptick in positive news to want to try it, so we all reluctantly signed off on this decision...

In trying to convey an accurate sense of the environment we were in I realise now that there was a movie being made at the same time a half mile to our East with ending problems of its own, and for some of the same reasons BLADE RUNNER. Ridley Scott felt pressured to end his film on an artificially optimistic note, which marred its initial release. In any case, as the meeting broke up that night it had been decided to release THE THING with this ending.

Over the weekend, none of us could sleep - the ending was flat, a betrayal of everything the movie stood for. On Monday morning I spoke to Helena Hacker, our Universal executive (and friend of the film) who was having the same feelings herself. She promptly set up a meeting with Ned Tanen, and we arranged for John to be available by phone from North Carolina (he was there beginning to prepare what was to be his next film for the studio, FIRESTARTER) In Ned’s office late that morning we made the case that there wasn’t that much difference in the preview numbers and that we felt strongly that we would rather leave the audience with a question than with nothing at all. After taking a moment to confer with John and grumbling that it was probably best way out of a ditch with two bad options, he gave his approval to restore the original ending, some 10 hours before release printing was to

40

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

begin. As a last request, we added the scream heard over the exterior of the final camp explosion to resolve the monsters death for those “who choose to believe it” as Tannen put it.

I think now that if THE THING had been released with the new ending several things would have happened. First, it probably have made almost no difference in box-office revenue. Second, within a year or two with the films release on cable and tape there would have been rumors of the famous unused ending, and a groundswell would develop to restore things as they were, a la BLADE RUNNER if the film could be found.

Well, enough boilerplate. Most of you want to know who was who in the final scene. Unsurprisingly, there is no definitive answer but I can tell you what Bill Lancaster thought when he wrote it - he believed both men were human. He felt this was the most poetic way to end things - two individuals moved beyond exhaustion, framed in a tableau of fire and ice, having a last drink in the Antarctica night before freezing to death. I subscribe to this view. I can not, however with 100% certainty tell you that John agrees with this - what I can say is that given the fact this scene still bears the remnants of this massive re-working with many hands it is counterintuitive for me to think that there exists a hidden level of meaning that offers clues to identity (The J&B bottle being passed back and forth, Childs lack of breath in several cuts, etc.). Believe me, all we were trying to do was keep the scene in the movie...

THE CAST AND CREW SCREENING stars of the evening, the execution of the effects universally praised by everyone. Ditto, acclaim for the sound effects team and their impeccable performance.

THE THING cast and crew screening was held thirty years ago tonight on the evening of June 11, 1982. We had some trouble finalising the date. Universal’s largest showcase, the Alfred Hitchcock Theatre, was then in nightly use trying to accommodate the turn away throngs of invited guests to E.T. THE EXTRATERRESTRIAL (which also opened theatrically this night amid reports of record-breaking box office), but for one evening they agreed to relinquish their hold and moved to three smaller screening rooms nearby (the same rooms where we had tested the alternate ending for THE THING several weeks earlier).

John, in Tennessee for pre-production on FIRESTARTER, could not attend. Many of our mutual friends and colleagues did, as well as large contingents of Rob’s special effects crew and David Yewdall’s sound effects team. One of the six 70mm prints made for release was pressed into service for the first time...

While the screening was taking place I did what producers are supposed to do, pace the lobby and walk aimlessly around the studio - this night it was easy to sense an electricity in the air, some sort of palpable energy, but it was not directed at us - the buzz on the lot among the night shift, the studio gate guards, our own assistants, the publicity people assigned to work our screening was all about E.T. and the expectation that it would become the highest grossing film of all time.

Word had spread that wherever it was playing showings of the film were sold out for the entire day - an unheard of proposition in an era before online ticket ordering and reservations - and that people were standing in massive lines for five or six hours. In this giddy, increasingly celebratory atmosphere it was almost as if THE THING was an afterthought, the screening taking place in a near vacuum of anonymity, something already discounted and consigned to oblivion. I smiled as I thought of the film in terms of a poor relation.

The most enthusiastic response to the film that night came from the loyalists - Rob Bottin’s gang loved it, as well they should, and thought it fairly represented the year of punishing work they had put into it. They were the rock

The reaction elsewhere was decidedly mixed - strong differences of opinion seemed to break down along generational lines. I was confronted in the lobby afterward by a visibly angry Albert Whitlock, who thought the film was unnecessarily weighted toward gore and violence at the expense of almost everything else - he said his wife had to leave the theatre during the kennel scene and chose not to return. He found much of the film offensive, the first time I had heard this word used by someone closely connected with us to describe this movie...

Kurt Russell had seen THE THING several weeks earlier. I was the first person he spoke to when he left the screening (John was in Tennessee). His initial reaction was not positive, believing that much of the hard work, the relationship work done by the actors from rehearsal on was left on the cutting room floor in favor of what he called the “ick” factor.

I think it is fair to say that most of the cast who saw the film this night felt the same way. There was general agreement that Rob’s work was superb but maybe too good in that it overwhelmed the film and reduced them all to “pawns” as one put it (I think thirty years intervening time has notably changed and softened their view as it has at the same time increasingly validated John’s decisionmaking).

The reaction among friends was more positive, but scarcely the ringing endorsement we had hoped for. Most thought the film powerful, but at the same time too dark and depressing - as one put it, John “had taken things one step too far”.

Above: The original program given to invited guests on June 11, 1982 Left: The cast and crew screening ticket

Several said the THE THING was unpleasant to sit through, something to be endured rather than watched, not words one cares to hear describe the film two weeks before release. But the dominant storyline of the night was typified by the reaction of a close professional colleague, a producer of note, who came up to me with a “what can you do” expression on his face, shrugged with his palms up and said “Well, it isn’t E.T.” As if on cue, the three smaller screening rooms to our left opened up, ejecting a small sea of smiling, happy people, standing in marked contrast to our rapidly diminishing group of supporters. I was envious - it seemed we were caught in the wake of a phenomenon we hadn’t counted on and were faring the poorer for it. Oh well, the great majority of reviews (mostly print) were yet to come maybe they would see the light and help turn the tide.

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

41

THE FINAL DAYS “We’re Dead” remarked producer David Foster. The occasion was his return from the Cinerama Dome in Hollywood and the premiere engagement of E.T. THE EXTRATERRESTRIAL, where the trailer for THE THING also happened to be playing. The icy silence of the matinee audience of grandmothers escorting their grandchildren (and vice versa) was enough to elicit his precise statement of our predicament.

what I thought was the best tag line ever for ALIEN - “In Space, No One Can Hear You Scream”. He was hired early on and his company also created the earliest teaser with the ice block. The “Alien Terror” tagline was concocted by a studio suddenly desperate to display the word “Alien” above the title). Both, I thought represented a last minute demotion to “B” film status, something we had fought for years, and evidence that Universal was effectively throwing in the towel in trying to reach a broader, more mainstream audience.

At least the sniping over the ending was finally over - the studio recognizing, in the words of head of distribution Robert Rehme that “the movie they had was the movie they had, and it was time to get it out there”. Universal approved the making of six 70mm stereo prints, two of which we planned to use for the critics screenings on both coasts in an effort to put our best foot forward...

Above: Early poster concept for THE THING Left: The original promotional materials before the tag line change.

The ground had been shifting underneath our feet ever since the public previews, one executive confiding to me that the studio considered the movie a “missed opportunity”, a product of failed expectations. The advertising campaign had changed overnight - the somber, predominately black and white imagery (which we had been consulted on) replaced overnight with the now familiar “glow face” (which we hadn’t), the tag line “Man Is The Warmest Place To Hide” dumped for “The Ultimate In Alien Terror”, which I abhorred (“Man” was written by a publicist named Stephen Frankfort, who also came up with

“a foolish, depressing, over-produced movie... aspiring to be the quintessential moron movie of the 1980’s” Vincent Canby, The New York Times ...a lot of good this did. The reviews, primarily from print sources at that time (newspapers and weekly magazines) were delivered to us in packets assembled by the studio’s publicity department. Either one paragraph dismissive or openly hostile, the general line labelled the film as an exercise in unrelenting gore at the expense of story, character development, and tension. “the structure of the piece reminds unpleasantly of porno films...” Daily Variety We were not prepared for the amount of anger unleashed on the film in general, or on John in particular (the gore pornographer charges that were made in some quarters were outrageous and particularly stung).

42

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

I spent opening weekend visiting a dozen or so theaters in the Los Angeles area. First up were the 70mm venues (The Hollywood Pacific and the Crest in Westwood) followed by a host of smaller theatres in the San Fernando Valley and vicinity (most of which were still not equipped for Dolby stereo and played the film in mono). Crowd size seemed to be pretty much the same wherever I went. Theatres were not filled for the 8 O’clock showing on opening Friday, maybe at most half-to three quarters full. GREASE II, also opening, was drawing consistently larger crowds in the multiplexes where both films were playing. There was no line for tickets for the 10 O’clock, with only a small group waiting to be let in...

The reaction of those attending those first showings?

Muted, at best. Not for the first time I sensed that the film made a large portion of the audience feel uneasy, and that as captives they were neither happy or comfortable with that fact...

Above and top left: ELVIRA hosts THE THING premier at the Hollywood Pacific Theatre, on Friday, June 25th, 1982

I’d be delighted to report that I had some advance sense that the film was having an impact on future generations of critics and film goers that first weekend but the truth was I saw no evidence of any groundswell. My impression was that a very large portion of those that came were unprepared for what awaited them. In theatre lobbies afterward the most positive reaction I could elicit was an ambivalent sort of “its okay”. No excited overheard conversation, just quiet (I suppose you could say they were stunned into submission but I think that’s putting too kind a face on matters...).

“this movie is more disgusting than frightening, and most of it is just boring.” David Denby “It has no pace, sloppy continuity, bland characters... It’s my contention that John Carpenter was never meant to direct science fiction horror movies. Here are some things he’d be better suited to direct: Traffic accidents, train wrecks and public floggings...” Alan Spencer, Starlog magazine November, 1982 THE THING had no official premiere as such, just a lame attempt at a opening day screening at the Hollywood Pacific theatre presided over by Elvira, where free admission was given if you came dressed as your favorite monster. After the film started I walked around the corner to the Cahuenga Newsstand to pick up the new issue of STARLOG, whose review promised to be more sympathetic to the cause. No such luck - a pan, where it seemed to me that even the fan base had deserted us... “because this material has been done before, and better, especially in the original THE THING and ALIEN, there’s no need to see this version”... Roger Ebert - The Chicago-Sun Times

“It Didn’t Open” were the three words that greeted me on the phone Sunday morning, spoken by Universal V.P. Helena Hacker. The film was projected to earn under Three Million Dollars for the weekend, well below studio estimates. It would go on to lose close to 50% of its theatres by the middle of its second week of release and, in a yardstick measured closely by exhibitors in the age of Lucas and Spielberg, generate virtually no repeat business.

Early the next week I went to see John at his home. When he opened the door he looked stricken, as if he had physically been punched in the gut.The financial failure of the film was one thing, but another was the amount of vitriolic slop that was thrown in his face for good measure.

It was if he had crossed a moral boundary of some sort and, as seriously as we both took our roles in the production of the film we both still knew it was only a movie...

The immediate consequences for John were severe. In advanced preparation of Stephen King’s FIRESTARTER as his next film for Universal, the project was abruptly cancelled (FIRESTARTER, with an initial draft written by Bill Lancaster, had sailed though development in something under a year and was, up until the day of THE THING’s release, a testament to the studios continued faith in John).

I was in the process of setting up a re-make of ONLY Continued > A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

43

ANGELS HAVE WINGS with John (to have taken place along the Alaskan Pipeline with helicopters) at another studio, but this went down in flames as well...

Although the simultaneous release of E.T. by the same studio is often mentioned as a conditional reason for THE THING’S failure, I think it more the case that the film was simply out of sync with the tone and tenor of the 1980’s. At a time when people were seeking re-assurance THE THING was offering up very little. To be certain E.T. had sucked all the oxygen out of Universal’s publicity and distribution departments, but I doubt that a release date later that year would have made much difference (and exhibitors at the time had the quaint axiom that “snow” pictures didn’t play well in Winter). Perhaps the title of the film was an issue.

John himself made a late plea for a title change (back to WHO GOES THERE?), worried about the surfeit of horror and fantasy films in the pipeline as well as the release later that summer of SWAMP THING...

Thirty years later, it seems to me that THE THING plays right into the wheelhouse of contemporary culture. In an Internet age where questions of identity are now commonplace (the accepted use of assumed names at online forums, for instance) it is becoming increasingly easy to make the case that almost no one is who he appears to be - a validation of the film’s theme that trust, always a fragile commodity, is a hard thing to come by...

Several weeks after the film opened I was approached in a bar by writer - actor Buck Henry (creator of GET SMART, writer of THE GRADUATE, one of the stars of THE MAN WHO FELL TO EARTH) who told me THE THING was “twenty five years ahead of it’s time”. Alone in his sentiments then, it now seems he was pretty much on the money...

THE NOVELIZATION The novelization of THE THING was considered a publicity tool - Alan Dean Foster was hired by Universal’s publicity department, as was the custom at that time, early in pre production and it was they he reported to. He was given the latest copy of the script and sent off on his own. It was finished months before the film was, and therefore does not, understandably, reflect many of the changes that were made.

We played no role in its production, nor did we expect to. I don’t believe any of us ever met or had any contact with Mr. Foster. None of us were aware of the finished product until it was published (in time for copies to be sent to exhibitors in early April). I don’t mean to cast any aspersions on the quality of the writing, but to point out how things were done then - we were simply out of the loop. Any embellishments in the novel that are not directly taken from an early script are Mr. Foster’s, and Mr. Foster’s alone.

44

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

Above: Yugoslavian one sheet Left: German one sheet and Japanese one sheet Below left: US lobby cards

A PRODUCERS GUIDE TO THE EVOLUTION AND PRODUCTION OF THE THING

45

All photos and artwork - Copyright Universal Pictures Design and Layout - Pineapples101 pineapples101@gmail.com