Editing The Thing (1982 film) (section)

===Performance analysis and aftermath===
In a 1999 interview, Carpenter said audiences rejected ''The Thing'' for its nihilistic, depressing viewpoint at a time when the United States was in the midst of [[Early 1980s recession|a recession]].{{sfn|Bauer|1999}} When it opened, it was competing against the critically and commercially successful ''E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial'' ($619{{spaces}}million), a family-friendly film released two weeks earlier that offered a more optimistic view of alien visitation.{{sfn|Kirk|2011}}{{sfn|Bacle|2014}}{{sfn|Nashawaty|2020}}  Carpenter described it as the complete opposite of his film.{{sfn|Beresford|2017}} ''The Thing'' opened on the same day as the [[science fiction film]] ''[[Blade Runner]]'', which debuted as the number two film that weekend with a take of $6.1{{spaces}}million and went on to earn $33.8{{spaces}}million.{{sfn|Box Office Mojo|1982}}{{sfn|BomBladeRunner|2018}} It was also regarded as a critical and commercial failure at the time.{{sfn|Lambie|2018a}} Others blamed an oversaturation of science fiction and fantasy films released that year, including ''[[Conan the Barbarian (1982 film)|Conan the Barbarian]]'' ($130{{spaces}}million), ''Poltergeist'' ($121.7{{spaces}}million), ''[[Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan]]'' ($97{{spaces}}million), ''[[Mad Max 2]]'' ($34.5{{spaces}}million), and ''[[Tron]]'' ($33{{spaces}}million). Some analysts blamed Universal's poor marketing, which did not compete with the deluge of promotion for prominent films released that summer.{{sfn|Lambie|2018a}}{{sfn|Nashawaty|2020}}{{sfn|WeissB|2022}} Another factor was the [[Motion Picture Association of America film rating system|R rating]] it was given, restricting the audience to those over the age of 17 unless accompanied by an adult. In contrast, ''Poltergeist'', another horror film, received a PG rating, allowing families and younger children to view it.{{sfn|Lambie|2018a}}

The impact on Carpenter was immediate{{snd}}he lost the job of directing the 1984 science fiction horror film ''[[Firestarter (1984 film)|Firestarter]]'' because of ''The Thing''{{'}}s poor performance.{{sfn|Leitch |Grierson |2017}} His previous success had gained him a multiple-film contract at Universal, but the studio opted to buy him out of it instead.{{sfn|Paul|2017}} He continued making films afterward but lost confidence, and did not openly talk about ''The Thing''{{'}}s failure until a 1985 interview with ''Starlog'', where he said, "I was called 'a pornographer of violence'{{spaces}}... I had no idea it would be received that way{{spaces}}... ''The Thing'' was just too strong for that time. I knew it was going to be strong, but I didn't think it would be too strong{{spaces}}... I didn't take the public's taste into consideration."{{sfn|Lambie|2018a}} Shortly after its release, Wilbur Stark sued Universal for $43{{spaces}}million for "slander, breach of contract, fraud and deceit", alleging he incurred a financial loss by Universal failing to credit him properly in its marketing and by showing his name during the end credits, a less prestigious position.{{sfn|Manna|1982|p=22}} Stark also said that he "contributed greatly to the [screenplay]".{{sfn|Foster|1982b|p=83}} David Foster responded that Stark was not involved with the film's production in any way, and received proper credit in all materials.{{sfn|Foster|1982b|p=87}} Stark later sued for a further $15{{spaces}}million over Foster's comments. The outcome of the lawsuits is unknown.{{sfn|LATMay83|1983|p=38}}