It appears that nearly 0 effort was made to make this look like 1988. The main dude dresses like he just walked out of macys. The house almost looks nicer than in the 2nd film. These folks are clearly from the 21st century. Took me out of it.
share[deleted]
I remember 1988.
The film's treatment of video cameras is completely anachronistic. In 1988, they were still new and expensive. Even if the stepdude had several as part of his job, he would need them for his job--he'd not leave them set up around the house, or react so casually when they fell to the ground.
His surveillance set-up and the behavior of the people on camera is anachronistic. We're desensitized to the presence of video cameras in ways that people weren't in 1988, before handheld camcorders, "America's Funniest Home Videos" (both 1989) and "The Real World" (1992). In movies from the late '80s and early '90s that feature people under constant camera coverage (as a kind of social commentary on reduced privacy and whatnot), self-consciousness in front of the camera, the pressure to perform, and the loss of privacy is always an issue. The camera didn't become a forgettable thing until it became a common thing to have.
Finally, there's no way anyone of school age in 1988 will ever mistake HD footage for VHS.
The set decorator and wardrobe may have gotten their retro right, but the heart and soul of the movie is too damn modern. They'd have been better off following in PA2's footsteps--home security cameras would have been easier to justify.
If I may (4 months later), as is pointed out in the movie info section, it would have been nearly impossible to film this movie with proper/accurate VHS filming for the simple and good reason that it would have been too hard to watch on modern theater screens, and some theaters could just not even have shown it.
And second, I may not have been of school age in 1988, but I do have a lot of footage from 1992 and I can tell you for sure that when my mom brought that camera around the house, most of the people around forgot about it after a rather short while.
Also, considering how big and well furnished the house is, I have no doubt that this guy could have had more than a couple cameras at home, especially since I was under the impression that he'd had a deal for them, am I wrong ?
I Live for Rock and Roll, And Never Look Back ! I'm a Rocker, and No One Can Take It Away !
As far as the time period and equipment etc. being realistic, I don't see an issue. In 1988 I was in my very early 20's and by coincidence I was very into video cameras. I always had at least one with me. I didn't use them for any reason except that I liked shooting video and my friends all liked watching it. First off, by '88 the 8MM tape cameras were starting to become the norm. For a decent one they ran about 1K. They were making the big VHS cameras I'd been using look like dinosaurs.. Hi 8 and Sony Digital 8 didn't really appear until the early 90's, Digi 8 mid 90's. There were also JVC mini tape cameras but he wasn't shooting with that, he was using standard tape time 6 hour 8mm cameras, I think one might have been VHS. The original 8 MM cameras easily captured the quality seen in this film and I would think they probably shot parts of this movie with original to the time cameras. They are still easy to find and the tech isn't that old, very easy to work with. The video shots were lower resolution than the rest of the movie, especially at distance. Also while video cameras weren't as common as they were even 5 years later, they were common enough. He would have had a few for work. They weren't exotic. The only thing that is questionable is the low light resolution. The Lux then were still fairly high (bad) so you needed a little more light. A high end camera could get the quality of the tape here and a guy in the business would definitely have cameras capable of the quality seen for the time.
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man....
Ok to be honest i only watched the first half hour and yea 0 effort may not be correct but there seems to have been some major costume and set flaws. Not that some of the 80s wasnt captured but from what i saw i would think it were the 2000s especially with the high qualitycameras and all. I'll keep watching maybe i'm being too harsh.
shareWhy didn't thr babysitter say anything. She sat there quiet the rest of the night. I would've called the cops fire department Feds and everyone
shareI thought the house's decor looked very '80s. The girls' outfits were fairly late '80s, too, and something about the mom made me think about the era as well, despite her clothes not being 1988-ish.
shareWhile the women looked more in line with the 80s to me Dennis and Randy looked more like 2000's era hipsters.
share[deleted]
I thought the house's decor looked very '80s. The girls' outfits were fairly late '80s, too, and something about the mom made me think about the era as well, despite her clothes not being 1988-ish.
Just because a movie is set in the 80s doesnt mean everybody has to look like they just walked off the set of a DURAN DURAN video. Hell I grew up in the 80s and I remember our living room in our house house up until my mom got a new sofa and loveseat set around 1990 looking like something right out of the 70s
shareVery true! Our living room looked pretty '70s all through the '80s, too! And one thing that irks me about movies like 13 Going on 30 and The Wedding Singer is how they tried to shovel a decade's worth of '80s styles and stereotypes into two hours. There was a frantic sense of "Look at us! We're in the '80s! Look how '80s we are!"
shareI agree for the most part. They should have watched an 80's film that featured a house and family that was made around the same period; 'Poltergeist II' for example. The other thing that bothered me was the slang they used in some of the dialogue. I was caught off guard with a couple current pop-culture references that were used.
shareI thought about this too. Using actual VHS instead of clean crisp crystal clear HD would have given the film a little more soul and believability. Also they could have at Least had one character with an 80s rounded fluff to their hair.
shareSadly my kitchen in my house has the same tiling as the kitchen in the movie and the kitchen was last re tiled in 1987!
shareMy thoughts also, at least for some of it.
Also, throw some big hair and stone washed jeans in there for anachronistic authenticity.
I didn't realize it was 1988 until the end of the movie when they got to grandma's house and it popped up. When it said 1988, that was most definitely the scariest part
share