^
I found most of the noises the creatures make just way 2 piercing. The sound design in this aspect was dire. It was overly loud and excessively piercing including in the scenes with the Edvard-Thing. I suppose that suited the stupid lumbering nature of the prequels badly CGi'd creatures though and the whole big budget approach of the film. In Short its a big, lumbering, noisy, CGI and excessive mess with no time for characterisation of its Norwegian characters or any competent build up of suspense or atmosphere. This excerpt from a review i previously read totally sums up my feelings. Original full review by Jeremy Kirk entitled 'The Thing' is a Loud Imitation That Doesn't Work'
"It doesn't matter, though, this sense that the paranoia has been lost, because the director doesn't seem concerned with that. Instead, much of The Thing, in fact, the entire back half, relies on quick editing, fast action, and noise, lots and lots of noise that bleeds into every scene, setup, and aftermath of the film. This new version of The Thing is a noisy film, and not just in regards to the piercing, audible sounds the creature makes. From the number of characters, to the layout of the set - anything but geographically identifiable, something else failed from the 1982 version - to the crutch of CGI van Heijningen rests on from beginning to end, The Thing is busy with a discordance that permeates the theater"
The sound design in Carpenters version is just one masterful aspect combined with other expertly managed components and compared to the prequel, just works. Carpenter recognized that it doesn't have to piercingly loud, short and excessive to be effective.
Last edited by Vasquez (2012-09-12 08:58:10)
