Any citations on this? I don't believe it for a second.
shareIt's believable for a movie shot on a low budget. For a big budget major studio film, while it happens every once in a while, more often than not post-production can take a long time.
shareMissing In Action 1 and 2 were written and filmed back to back.With them being both low budget films,they are made alot quicker.
share[deleted]
It wasn't *that* low budget, especially for the time.
Even the cheapest of straight to video and TV films of today including mockbusters by The Asylum (which are *FAR* lower quality than this) have much longer periods between filming and release.
The only source of this information I have seen is IMDB, so unless I a citation from a credible source of information, I'm calling BS on this one.
[deleted]
That may be true but it still doesn't make it plausible that this could have been released so soon after filming. I've never heard of any film that's released that quickly, and this is a relatively competently made 80s action flick.
I will only believe it if I find some information from a reputable source. Anyone can submit information to IMDB and they don't need citations to prove it. There's a lot of misinformation on here.
[deleted]
Cannon Films had a history of doing stuff like this.Another example of low budget films being done rather quickly is take a look at the original Halloween in 1978.It wasn't a Cannon film but it was made in 20 days in the Spring of 1978(April I believe.The original Texas Chainsaw Massacre was done and released rather quickly also.
shareKnowing Cannon Films and the way they cranked them out, I'd buy it...
"Your mother puts license plates in your underwear? How do you sit?!"