There's no outward signs of freezing at all in this movie. They hardly cover their extremities and they act ridiculous in what's supposed to be a sub-zero setting. I have a feeling none of the people involved in the making of this movie has set foot outside of California.
shareGood point, although a quick look at everyone's birthplaces kind of debunks your theory.
shareYep, I have no idea why don't people bother researching the basic premise of their movies. Just like Hunger.
shareFirst of all, you are totally wrong. This film was shot in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. There were only a few shots done in L.A.
Second, it was cold. Really cold. It was shot in the middle of winter. All of the ducting and baffles were opened, and very cold winter air was piped on set. There was only 1 day where it was above zero on the set. Every one of the crew was wearing very heavy winter clothing. This was done in an attempt to see everyone's breath as they spoke. Unfortunately, due to the low lighting used throughout the freezer scenes, breath could only be seen in a few shots, and was not consistent. That would account for the one day above zero. That's when they realized that the "method set" was not producing the desired results.
So before you completely minimize the hard work these people put in, you should actually know what you are talking about. Several of the actors had to be undressed or covered in blood while working in below zero, freezing conditions.
And yes, I do know this for sure as I worked on the film. If you need proof, then check the credits for my name. I am a make-up artist.
Jeffcantelon, I'm not trying to discredit you, but i looked at the full cast snd crew page and I didn't see your name. To be fair, I didn't see "make-up artist". Can you tell me where it is? Just wondering, no disrespect meant.
shareCheck the end of the movie. Not on IMBD. Daily make-up artist.
shareJust watched the movie. His name is in the credits.
That's too bad that you guys went to the trouble of making the set really cold but it didn't come out the intended way in the film.
However, I don't see it as a problem. It was still a good film in my opinion, and the way I look at it is this: imagine watching this script performed live, on stage, at a theater. Obviously it wouldn't be cold enough on stage to see anyone's breath, but it doesn't have to be. That's the whole point of acting and the suspension of disbelief. The actors pretend that it's cold and the audience makes believe along with them. The cast did a fine job in this and other regards in my opinion.
http://rateyourmusic.com/~JrnlofEddieDeezenStudies
Frozen (2010), the movie about skiers stuck on a chairlift, had a similar problem. It was shot entirely on location in very cold conditions, yet there are many scenes where you can't see the actors' breath.
It's explained in the IMDb trivia section as follows:
"In the scenes where you can see the actor's breath it is early in the night and they were still relatively warm in their costumes. If you can't see their breath it means it was a scene shot much later in the night when their body temperatures had dropped substantially."