MovieChat Forums > Below (2002) Discussion > Great movie, horrible effects...

Great movie, horrible effects...

posted 20 years ago by langstar1
8 replies | jump to latest

I watched this movie not long ago and i was very impressed. The sets were fantastic and most of the performances were noteworthy including Scott Foley suprisingly. However did anyone notice how lame the effects were? They looked like a cheap B movie. If the Weinstein's produced the film why didnt they give just a LITTLE bit more money to tone the effects. I mean the sequence with the anchors looked like a video game, and the manta rays were so cheesy looking.

Know life, No limits...

[–] Draco2-0 20 years ago

It's a shame when movies like the Mummy returns get tons of $$$ spent on their crappy effects, when rather decent movies like Below get screwed over in that department.

[–] Dufresne-3 17 years ago

I actually thought the FX were good. On their own, and keeping the budget in mind.

But perhaps they looked worse in the theatre, or maybe I've seen so many films that weren't this good that I'm being easy on it.

[–] akeja3 17 years ago

I thought the special effects were nicely done.

[–] mthuff 17 years ago

I disagree - I thought the effects were fine. Not "overboard" enough the distract from the use of sounds as the main means of creating tension.

A lot of the effects were very subtle, so that initially you - like the crew - were unsure you'd even seen 'em.

[–] roddmatsui 16 years ago

I thought the effects were great, myself.

[–] anitric2000 16 years ago

The effects look fantastic in standard def on DVD, but when it's blown up onto HD (1080p mind you), not only is it one of the worst looking blow-ups I've seen of a SD-DVD, but the effects suddenly look terrible. I highly advice never watching it blown-up on an HDTV...even if you think your up-converting DVD-player will make a difference.

"Last survivor of the Nostromo...signing off..."

[–] Sea_of_Honey 16 years ago

I thought the effects were great - subtle and effective. I particularly loved the part when Claire is in Winters' cabin towards the end and his waterlogged ghost is laying on the bunk. As she shines her flashlight on it, the ghost disappears, but reppears as the light moves off. Quietly creepy.

[–] mykungfuistrong 15 years ago

I noticed a few effects shots that were a bit obvious and cheesy, but no worse than any big budget Hollywood film like The Mummy or Van Helsing. I think this film kept the effects shots quick and used a variety of other techniques to ratchet up tension rather than just SHOWING you a lot of cheesy horror. Well done, in my opinion.