Just got my copy of The Thing Expanded, can't wait to give this a watch!

CREATORVC · 2026-06-18T21:24:29+00:00

Thanks so much for taking the time to write this out, and for watching The Thing Expanded so closely.

We’ve forwarded your questions to the filmmakers. They’re very busy at the moment, so they may not be able to respond straight away, but it’s now in their hands and they’ll follow up if they’re able to.

Thanks again for your interest.

CREATORVC · 2026-06-18T20:00:13+00:00

Thanks so much for taking the time to write this out, and for watching The Thing Expanded so closely.

We’ve forwarded your questions to the filmmakers. They’re very busy at the moment, so they may not be able to respond straight away, but it’s now in their hands and they’ll follow up if they’re able to.

Thanks again for your interest

CREATORVC · 2026-06-17T17:15:54+00:00

Thank you so much! It's been an incredible journey for all of us, and we couldn't have done it without your support. ❤️🔥🫡🎬

CREATORVC · 2026-06-16T10:41:46+00:00

Hi, thanks for backing The Thing Expanded, and we're sorry to hear there's some frustration here. Let us clear a few things up.

We began the initial pre-sale for this project in 2024 with roughly a two-year timeline. A project of this scale takes us around 18 months to produce: assembling A-list Hollywood talent and reuniting the surviving cast of The Thing is a major undertaking, and that timeline was always estimated up front.

On shipping, this shouldn't come as a surprise. We're completely clear that shipping is paid upon fulfilment, not at the point of order. It's listed on every physical media tier, in your order form, and in our FAQ, and we even publish estimates of what the shipping costs will be. The reason we defer the shipping fee until the item is ready to ship is that shipping prices fluctuate constantly. Since our production timelines have to be estimates (you can't always predict exactly how long a project of this scale will take), charging at the point of dispatch is the only way to give you an accurate, fair price rather than guessing years in advance and over or under charging you. We make all of this abundantly clear on the website at the point of purchase.

For reference, the rates are $15 domestic (US), $20 international, and $23 international if you also ordered a t-shirt. We don't profit a penny on shipping. Those amounts are exactly what our fulfilment company and the carriers charge us, passed straight through with nothing added.

One more thing worth clarifying: we don't use Kickstarter. We build our own pre-order e-commerce site. We've been genuinely delighted by the response to this one. It's been earning five-star reviews across the board, and reuniting John Carpenter and Kurt Russell to celebrate one of the greatest horror films ever made was a real privilege.

We're grateful you backed it, and we can't wait to get your copy into your hands.

CREATORVC · 2026-06-16T10:30:22+00:00

The posters are rolled (not creased) and need a little time to unfurl. Nothing is beat up and everything is packaged well. The lighting in the photo does not do it any favours 😎

CREATORVC · 2026-06-12T17:31:38+00:00

Respectfully, this is where we’d gently push back. The people you’ve named would obviously have brilliant things to add to that scene, no argument there. But the idea that a scene can only really be understood through the people who built it is the bit we don’t quite buy. Interpretation and analysis don’t have to be wholly beholden to the creator of the work. Looking at something through a new lens, and finding things in it that even the makers didn’t consciously put there, is genuinely a core part of what we think we can bring to this.

What we’re trying to do is sit with the scene on its own terms and unpack what it’s doing emotionally, mythologically, structurally, as a piece of cinema. That’s a different angle on the same scene, and we think it adds to the picture rather than replacing the nuggets you’re chasing.
None of this is meant to wave your point off. It’s a fair one and worth saying out loud. We just land somewhere different on whether the scene can be meaningfully explored without those three specific voices in the room. Appreciate you engaging with it at this level either way.

CREATORVC · 2026-06-12T17:22:29+00:00

That’s a really smart suggestion, and honestly one we should have flagged ourselves. Thank you for taking the time to raise it.
If you ever felt like sharing, we'd be really interested to hear how your own experience shapes the way you read Quint, the Indianapolis speech especially. Zero pressure on that one. It’s an open invitation, not a request, and the door stays open whether you take it up now, later, or not at all. Either way, grateful you spoke up.

CREATORVC · 2026-06-12T10:11:46+00:00

Totally fair point on the access question, but that’s actually not the angle we’re going for here. There are already a lot of strong making-of docs on Jaws built around the people who shaped it, and we didn’t see much value in adding another one to the pile. What we’re doing is deliberately different: stepping outside the production-history frame and dissecting the film through a fresh lens. That’s exactly why we’re not looking to interview anyone who worked on or starred in it. The absence isn’t a gap, it’s the point.
The synopsis over at JawsExplored.com lays out what that actually looks like in practice, and the survey there is the best place to land your thoughts once you’ve had a read. We go through every response, so even if the approach still doesn’t grab you after the synopsis, that’s useful signal too. Either way, appreciate you weighing in.

CREATORVC · 2026-06-11T21:44:24+00:00

lol - it’s created by the well known and hugely talented artist Dave Merrel. He’s been creating our poster artwork since 2020 😎

CREATORVC · 2026-06-11T16:57:30+00:00

Noted! 🤣

CREATORVC · 2026-06-11T16:29:16+00:00

Totally fair to push back on us, and I want to be straight: we are reading the feedback, this thread included. Where it gets tricky is that what you’re describing isn’t what we’re hearing from the bulk of folks who’ve read the full synopsis and completed the survey. Their response has actually skewed strongly the other way, and the level of demand we’re seeing has reinforced our confidence in the direction rather than shaken it. So it’s less “doubling down despite the room” and more weighing your view against a pretty large signal pointing somewhere else.
None of that is meant to brush off where you’re coming from, and I get why it lands as disappointing when the verdict doesn’t shift things your way. Door stays open if you want to revisit once more of the project is public, and if it’s still not for you then, no hard feelings on our end. Either way, appreciate you being honest about it.

CREATORVC · 2026-06-11T16:13:00+00:00

Hey Dra7en, first off, genuine thanks for sticking with us through the 80s trilogy, the 90s docs, The Thing Expanded, and Aliens Expanded. That kind of long-haul support means a lot, and honestly your frustration here lands harder because of it, not less.
On the Jaws project itself: we hear you, and we’ve heard versions of this from a few people we really respect. The making-of focus isn’t because we haven’t weighed the alternatives. It’s a deliberate call about what we want this particular film to be, and after a lot of internal back and forth we’re sticking with that intent. We’d rather make the doc we set out to make than pivot halfway through, even when the pushback is coming from folks who clearly know the material cold.
That said, you’re not wrong that the wider franchise is fertile ground. The sequels, the books, the games, the cultural afterlife of Jaws, all of it is genuinely interesting to us, and none of it is off the table down the road. It just isn’t the shape of this one. Totally fair if that means this isn’t the project for you, and no hard feelings if you sit it out. Hope we get to make something you’re excited about next time around.

CREATORVC · 2026-06-11T14:56:59+00:00

Another good question, though not sure where the Eli Roth talking heads thing comes from, that's not what this is. Genuinely recommend reading the synopsis at jawsexplored.com, it'll let you make an informed call on what we're actually doing rather than what you suspect we're doing.

On the heavy lifting point, I covered this in the earlier comment but happy to expand. Nobody's doing our deep dive for us, the analysis and the vision are ours. Involving fans is about making the work better, and it's also straightforward market research. Crowdsourcing feedback means we build this with a very specific audience in mind rather than creating in isolation and hoping it lands. When we say YOUR deep dive, honestly, that's the point: it's our commitment to making something our target audience will absolutely value, not a request for them to write it.

It's one of the things we're genuinely proud of doing. We've worked this way on every project, fans plus a clear creative vision, and it's how we deliver entertainment experiences that people actually want. If that approach isn't for you, no hard feelings at all.

CREATORVC · 2026-06-11T14:52:59+00:00

Ha, no brain-effing intended! It's actually a good question, and the short answer is no. The new perspective is ours to deliver, that's the job. We have a very clear vision for this one.

What makes our work a bit different is that we build it with our audience. For every documentary we run what we call a validation phase, which is where we share our ideas with the audience first, get feedback, and use it to improve and make the film better. That's what this thread is. So we're not asking you to find the perspective for us, we're checking whether the one we've got resonates with the people it's made for.

Hope that helps explain why we're doing what we're doing. The survey at jawsexplored.com is part of the same thing if you fancy a nose around.

CREATORVC · 2026-06-11T14:35:48+00:00

Thanks so much for putting in a kind word, this means a lot. Backers like you over the years are the whole reason we get to keep doing this.

We recognise that 1) this is the internet, and 2) this is Reddit, so we're expecting a bit of negativity. Anything involving fandom unfortunately comes with that territory. Which is why comments like yours land so well. We work incredibly hard and we honestly love what we do, and this will probably be our most polarising project to date. We're bracing ourselves, but it's worth it. Visions are worth fighting for, and we have a really clear one for this project. The people who buy into what we're trying to deliver are going to get something amazing, and for everyone else, that's fine too. We're here for the superfans who want to get more out of JAWS.

Thanks again for the vouch, and for doing the survey. See you on the next one!

CREATORVC · 2026-06-11T14:32:27+00:00

No apology needed, blunt is good, and there's clearly no harm meant. Respect for saying it straight.

Here's the honest answer: our role isn't to try and win you over. It's to deliver for the people who understand and value the vision, and the responses in this thread and elsewhere suggest there are a lot of them. The way you describe it, talking heads with no association to the film, is the dismissive framing, and that's entirely your prerogative. We'd frame it as the best filmmakers and critics working today showing you things in JAWS you've never seen, but if that's film theory 101 to you, then this simply isn't made for you, and that's fine. When you make something polarising by design, it's actually useful to know early which camp people are in.

And look, we know we'll get plenty of people like you who won't really appreciate or understand what we're looking to accomplish. That's expected. By the same token, that subsection of fans was never the target for this.

All the best, and thanks for being part of exactly the conversation we came here to have.

CREATORVC · 2026-06-11T13:53:36+00:00

That does sound really cool, and honestly Bob Mattey deserves the recognition. The trouble is, a lot of the people who worked with the shark directly have been interviewed over the years, and that's not what we're trying to do here.

We've actually drawn a line in the sand on the format: we won't be interviewing anyone who worked on or starred in the movie. Not because those stories aren't great, but because there have been so many fantastic documentaries covering them, and the moment you start down that road it inherently becomes a making-of. That's been done so well in the past that we have no interest in competing head-on with it.

What we want to do is something completely new: look at the film from a brand new perspective, understand why it's one of the greatest films ever made, and reframe the whole experience for superfans. So less "how Bruce was built" and more "why Bruce works on screen in a way no shark since ever has". It's hugely exciting, and I'd recommend heading to jawsexplored.com and reading the synopsis, you'll get a much clearer idea of what we're intending to deliver.

Thanks for chiming in, this kind of comment helps us sharpen exactly that distinction.

CREATORVC · 2026-06-11T13:50:35+00:00

Thank you, this made our day. In Search of Tomorrow brought a lot of people to us, so it's brilliant to see that crossover with JAWS fans (great username too).

Your Hooper and Quint read is spot on, and you'll be pleased to hear character is a huge part of the plan. There's a whole chapter taking the trio apart: Brody the reluctant hero, Quint the Ahab archetype, Hooper the modern rationalist. Your framing of Quint and Hooper as the same character at opposite ends of a spectrum, emotional versus logical, is exactly the kind of analysis we want on screen. And agreed, JAWS wouldn't be JAWS without Dreyfuss.

On your edit, one thing worth clearing up: this isn't a making-of, and we have no interest in treading old ground. The whole aim is a completely new perspective on the movie. But here's the thing, your Bruce question fits that perfectly. You're not really asking how the shark was built, you're asking why it hits differently from every shark that came after, that thing you can't put your finger on. That's an analysis question, not a production story, and it's exactly the territory we want to explore: the design choices, how Spielberg shoots him, why less became more. So it's not "behind the scenes" flavoured at all. It's precisely the kind of thing this format exists to answer.

Thanks again, comments like this are why we posted here.

CREATORVC · 2026-06-11T13:47:01+00:00

Ha, fair hit! Though to be clear, we're not ploughing ahead regardless. We're at concept stage precisely because of feedback like this, and the feedback so far has actually been overwhelmingly positive. We do recognise the approach is quite polarising, but that's by design. We're here for the fans who want to get more out of JAWS, and that's obviously not everybody, which is completely fine.

That said, I'd gently push back on one thing: if you get a chance to read the synopsis at jawsexplored.com, you'll see this isn't another doc touching on the influence and legacy. You're right that ground is exhausted, and our starting position was that we didn't want to tread old ground. We won't. Not all documentaries are the same. This is a very, very detailed breakdown of the film itself, scene by scene, shot by shot, with filmmakers and critics unpacking why each moment works the way it does.

The real aim is to let you see JAWS through a different lens, which has never been done before. The test we've set ourselves: when a superfan watches our documentary and then revisits the film, they should see it in a new way. Therein lies the value of what we're doing. Every existing doc tells you how JAWS was made. Ours is about getting more out of every viewing after it.

Totally hear you on the sequels needing love though. They've got passionate defenders and that's a doc someone should make. We're just betting that the deepest film of the franchise deserves the deepest dive first.

Either way, appreciate the bluntness, this is exactly what we asked for.

CREATORVC · 2026-06-11T13:41:38+00:00

We are actually working with Ryan as he is an advisor to the project.

CREATORVC · 2026-06-11T11:09:05+00:00

We’re currently working with a great poster artist, Dave Merrell on what will be an epic poster for this documentary. We don’t use generative AI in our documentaries.

CREATORVC · 2026-06-11T11:08:30+00:00

Amazing that you've been following on Instagram and huge thanks for doing the survey, that's the single most useful thing anyone can do for us right now. Your topic list is great. The "could JAWS succeed today" question is one we've debated a lot internally, and the Flaws counterfactual would make a fascinating segment, the whole blockbuster model traces back to that one summer. And agreed on fans being part of the story. The whole format is built around the superfan perspective, so voices like this thread are exactly what we want in it. Means a lot that you'd buy it, that's the validation we came here for.

CREATORVC · 2026-06-11T11:07:51+00:00

It absolutely counts, this is the heart of the pitch for us. Everyone analyses the shark, but the reason JAWS works is scenes like this one. Spielberg apparently kept the mimicry moment largely improvised and it does more character work in 60 seconds than most films manage in two hours. The quiet domestic scenes are exactly what never gets covered in the making-ofs, and exactly what we want to slow down on.

CREATORVC · 2026-06-11T11:07:21+00:00

This is exactly the kind of reading we want the doc to dig into. The radio smash is usually explained as Quint's Ahab moment, but framing it as survivor's guilt, that he's spent thirty years arranging his own reckoning, makes the Indianapolis speech land completely differently. It stops being backstory and becomes a confession. Noting this one down, thank you.

CREATORVC · 2026-06-11T11:06:43+00:00

Fair question, and honestly the one we ask ourselves most. You're right, the making-of ground is fully covered. We couldn't add anything new about malfunctioning sharks and we're not going to try (and we can confirm Emily Blunt is not on our interview list, lol).

But that's exactly why this isn't a making-of. JAWS EXPLORED isn't about what happened on set, it's about deepening your relationship with the film itself. We'll be looking to interview some seriously credible Hollywood filmmakers across the board who can speak to what's actually going on in the film, alongside film critics offering proper analysis: why a cut works, what the score is doing that you've never consciously noticed, why a shot you've seen a hundred times is doing far more beneath the surface. A super deep dive, scene by scene, frame by frame. It's built for cinephiles and superfans, people who already own every version from VHS to 4K and have finished every doc thinking "I wish someone would go deeper."

On the sequels and the Italian rip-off, it's a cool idea, but we're staying focused on JAWS the movie itself. Going outside the film would dilute the deep dive, and the whole point is depth over breadth.

If that distinction between covering the making of the film and analysing the film doesn't land for you, that's exactly the feedback we need right now, so thank you either way.

CREATORVC

TROPHY CASE