All the tricks they used to make a character appear on one side but not the other, in fact considering the sheer amount of mirrors used, and the fact that the plot relied so heavily on them, it's impressive that we never got an accidental shot of a camera at any point in the film.
It must have been a logistical nightmare to shoot that film.
"Mr. Treehorn treats objects like women, man."
It was impressive. I played them all back a few times to work it all out. The ones in the bathroom and corridors were fun.
share[deleted]
Somehow doing them CGI is less interesting. As a matter of fact, if you tell me it was done CGI, not that watching it you can't tell anyway, I'm never impressed. I am a far bigger fan of hearing some crazy way something was done to achieve an effect. Computers are boring.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
Yes this movie had a lower budget than the first two but they did a good job with the practical effects, the mirror tricks were cool - Its not like the like the first 2 didn't have some shoddy looking effect work e.g that green screen ending sequence and cheesy grandma Angel in P2 that looked like a paper cutout and the obvious Carol Anne mannequin as she gets sucked into the closet, also the face ripping scene from the original
shareYes, but, were severely overused. After a while, you just came to expect something whenever you saw a mirror.
People give this movie a bad rap, but it was pretty damn good for 1988. It's the story line and acting that's lacking, but the special effects are good. Then there was the tragic loss of Heather O'Rourke while they were filming.
share