MovieChat Forums > The Thing from Another World (1951) Discussion > Plot Holes

Plot Holes

posted 10 years ago by Elkabong1940
8 replies | jump to latest

A great movie even if somethings make no sense. I first saw this movie when I was 10 and it scared me *beep*

1. The task to free the spacecraft from the ice would never be entrusted to a captain and a bunch of civilians. I was a captain in the service and I would have refused to do it without more backup and support.

2. How did they move that block of ice? It would take a crane or forklift.

3. Once the block of ice was on the plane, shouldn't they have just taken it to Anchorage? What good was to have it at the arctic station?

[–] danabooth-11397 10 years ago

I also saw no point in moving the block of ice into a room where the first thing they do is knock out a window so it stays cold.

[–] PreachCaleb 9 years ago

Those aren't plot holes.

Can't stop the signal.

[–] Soodinum 9 years ago

^ this

[–] silentxerox 9 years ago

They moved the block of ice (containing "The Thing") with a bobsled and sled dogs (it's shown in the scene before they bring it in the room at the 26/27 minute mark on the DvD). The rest is just speculation but I don't think that they are really plot holes. Hope that helps.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that no one shall perish...

[–] nycmale99 9 years ago

Never having been in the Military I can't comment on question 1

2. Yes by themselves with just man power there was no way that they could have cut the block of ice out, lifted it up and transported it back to the plane. It would have weighted too much. If the block of ice was 9'x3'x3' with a cubic foot of ice weighing about 57.2lbs the block would have weighed approx 4633.2 lbs. Could their plane even have taken off with so much added weight?

3. There was a storm coming so going directly to Anchorage would have been very dangerous especially with civilians and a precious cargo on board. So it was safer to go back to base and wait out the storm and get a much larger Cargo plane to carry the block back to Anchorage.

[–] Carycomic 9 years ago

The only plot holes I've ever noticed (but am always willing to suspend my disbelief over) are the botanical "facts" spouted by Carrington when he's trying to give Ned Scott an example of "thinking" plants on Earth.

1. "Acanthus" is NOT the scientific name for the century plant family.

2. Century plants are NOT meat-eaters. Just pitcher plants, sundews, and Venus fly-traps.

3. There is no such thing as a telegraph VINE! Just a telegraph plant, which derives its name from the way its leaves move with the pattern of the sun (similar to the adjustable flagpoles used by 18th-century semaphore telegraphs).

[–] Carycomic 9 years ago

That being said, I still enjoy watching this movie every time it's on. Just for the deservedly hallowed place it holds as one of the first two s.f. movies of the Cold War era. Thereby launching the cinematic subgenre that gave us such (slightly more recent) classics as STAR WARS and ALIEN!

[–] Soujurn 9 years ago

Everyone in this movie shows poor judgement. I blame the writers. :-)

"Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government."
-Dennis