#st production

[conflictofthemind]

that’s not giving me much hope 😕

do you have any theories on what their scene could be about?

I'll go a bit off topic here since I already answered this in my last ask-

I'm a bit more concerned about where El is in the first place. The scene is presumptuously for the epilogue but that's not confirmed. She hasn't been spotted since they started filming these epilogue scenes and I have a source who says they're unsure about where she is. I'm also a bit concerned that Mike and Hopper are seemingly having a scene in front of a memorial for fallen victims right now. Then I'm thinking about Millie's surprise at El's final ending which doesn't seem to jive with the "everything goes back to completely normal" kind of thing we're getting here.

I have a theory about the scene depending on if we actually see El or not in the next few weeks. I don't think she will die in the traditional sense, but I have a feeling something supernaturally strange will happen for her ending....

[aemiron-main]

“even if you don’t see a detail, it’s there” aka “i dont ever want to hear again that i’m looking too deep into the costuming choices in ST”

“Even if you don’t see a detail, it’s there.”

This is straight from Amy Parris, the wonderful costume designer for ST, and yet, even though it’s confirmed that there’s details that we don’t even see, I’m supposed to believe that people are looking “too deep,” into the details that we DO see?

As well, take a look at what Amy had to say about Lucas’ jersey:

These decisions are intentional. There is thought put into them. Thought in terms of historical accuracy vs actors’ suggestions vs modern culture references, thought in terms of in-universe consistency and foreshadowing and character development and SO much more. Even when a piece of costuming, such as Lucas’ jersey, is technically historically inaccurate, the majority of the time, it’s still a choice to have it be inaccurate. Lucas’ jersey being historically inaccurate was not an accident/act of ignorance- it was an intentional choice. They KNOW that it’s not technically historically accurate, but chose to go the route of paying homage towards Kobe instead.

As well, regarding the title of this post, I absolutely concede that sometimes, I could totally be wrong about what the presence of certain details means from an analysis standpoint/why they chose to include those details, but I really heavily disagree with the idea that the details are just accidental/not there for any particular reason at all/that people are looking too far into it when they notice costuming details.

Like seriously, do people just think that the set design and costumes just came to life and assimilated with the actors like The Thing and are a complete accident? Or that they just grab random clothes for every single costume because they’re in a silly, goofy mood? If that’s the case, I cannot wait for Henry to show up in a juicy couture tracksuit in S5. 🙏

[onlyhereforbylerlol]

Who is Derek 😭 and why is everyone so quick to believe these leaks that don't even look reliable?

[aemiron-main]

what the fuck is up with brenner’s hair?

These pictures are supposed to, canonically, be only a few HOURS apart, on the same day (the day of the massacre), and yet, his hair is DRASTICALLY different- it’s thinner on the left, and all white and lacking the dark grey roots.

“Oh, but Em, it’s just that harsh training room lighting making it look lighter”

Well, let’s compare two different training room scenes with the same lighting:

The wig on the right has much darker, grey roots, whereas the first wig has those white roots. The one on the left is also thinner, with more scalp visible.

And if showing both hairstyles in the same lighting from the same angle wasn’t enough to convince that they’re different, then what about the fact that these are are two different wigs entirely:

We have that grey wig in the bottom middle and the 1979 white wig on top. They’re two different wigs. Theyre two different Brenners. We also have two different “good morning” scenes on the day of the massacre, something I’m still working on an analysis of, because that would track with two different Brenners/timelines.

And the fact that the middle, grey-haired wig is tilted so that we can’t see the label/date? Suspicious as fuck.

There’s also that weird as FUCK bottom left 1979 stringy/mostly bald Brenner wig that looks suspiciously familiar:

[aemiron-main]

So, does anyone want to try and tell me again that things like Henry’s changing bloodstains and the moving and changing bodies during NINA are just background stand-ins for the kids/should be written off as a production error?

They’ve got 3D scans of the kids, meaning they made 3D models of them. Meaning that it’s easy for them to change the positions/sizes of their bodies and intentionally mess with them & that the changes such as the kids turning into adults can’t be written off as using stand-ins for the kids because they have 3D models of them and therefore, no need for standins (especially not fully adult standins who dont even have their eyes gouged out, which is what makes the standin claim so absurd in the first place):

They make quite a lot of 3D models- every single vecna victim has a full 3D model that’s used during their death scene:

This is not Grace Van Dien with a bit of CGI layered onto her:

Instead, it’s is a full 3D model and hair and clothes simulation of Grace:

Even Henry is a full 3D model when he gets sent to superhell. This is NOT Jamie Bower:

It's a 3D model of him:

They’ve also got a 3D model of the rainbow room:

You’re going to tell me that they 3D modelled Henry’s fucking internal organs that we dont even SEE just so that it wouldn’t feel empty when the light ripped through him, but they’re not capable of making sure that blood doesn’t just ~appear~ on his face between shots?

And not capable of making sure that the blood is the same on all his jumpsuits (and they’re also not just randomly going to make multiple jumpsuits??):

We also have even more confirmation of what I talked about with the makeup team having pre-set blood patterns for every single lab kid’s bloody eyes and painstakingly replicating them:

Which means that when that eye blood deviates from that pattern, it’s intentional, especially when it coincides with the children TURNING INTO ADULTS, and again, the “oh they’re just stand-ins for child actors” is such BS because they had the kids lay there already and im sure that theyre MORE than capable of replicating the eye blood on their supposed stand-ins, but they didn’t:

The production error allegations regarding the dead kids’ moving/changing bodies, Henry/Edward’s changing blood splatters, and the changing blood splatters on the walls and floors of the Rainbow Room can hopefully be laid to rest. They can EASILY and INTENTIONALLY change and move those kids and their eye blood when they have 3D models of them, and they can EASILY change the stains etc on the walls and floors when they have a 3D model of the rainbow room.

Even the cracks (which change at the same times as the bloodstains and dead kids) are VFX:

They aren't doing these things accidentally. It's all intentional. So, ✨film students✨ speak now or forever hold your peace. I've been trying to tell you guys that this stuff is intentional, and now I'm giving you even MORE evidence, and so far, all people have brought forth to refute any of my evidence is "well im a film student and I don't agree" and "idk i don't think it's that deep".

[aemiron-main]

monthly reminder that the whole “the duffers didn’t come up with henry until the later seasons/ST was meant to just be one season” thing is completely false and the “duffers didn’t come up with henry until later seasons” thing is just straight up bs with no sources to support it whereas the “st was just meant to be one season,” thing is a misconception pulled from the original ST pitch and they didn’t go straight from pitch to filming, they changed and refined things after pitching it.

Stranger Things, as we know it, the ST that we’ve watched, the story that was refined after the pitch before production began, was never intended just to be a single, standalone season.

Here’s the source.

[aemiron-main]

frame by frame: quit calling everything a production error

One day we will escape the production error allegations 🙏 I find it so funny that people are saying not to go frame by frame for details when in reality there are MASSIVE changes you can spot when looking frame by frame, changes that CANNOT be an accident, unless you expect me to believe that the same show that has the exact patterns for the eye blood on all of the lab kids kept in binders so they can replicate it every time just accidentally replaced the corpses of the children with adults, un-broke their legs, and completely changed their eyes and also moved their position entirely?

Here’s Amy L Forsyth, the head of the ST makeup dept talking about the exact patterns for the lab kids’ makeup:

Here’s a BTS pic of them adjusting small details on the lab kids’ makeup so that it’s exact:

And yet I’m supposed to believe that because these following shots are “frame by frame,” they’re just a production error? I’m supposed to believe that just because the GA wouldn’t go frame by frame, ST wouldn’t include those details and they just accidentally replaced a child with a grown man, unbroke the legs, and forgot to gouge out the eyes?

Like, sorry, but I just find it a little absurd to discount details because someone went “frame by frame,” to find them. And yes, I know there’s been posts today about frame by frame stuff but this isn’t even directed at a specific post because it’s a sentiment I’ve seen repeatedly. And it’s a sentiment that drives me absolutely insane.

People will come on here and say that production errors are sooo common in ST and yet they never provide any actual evidence or source for this, despite the fact that such claims directly contradict what actual st production members have said about the levels of detail in this show.

Amy Parris, head of costuming for ST said this:

Chris Trujillo, production designer for ST said this:

Amy L Forsythe said this about Eddie’s bat bites and how even though some of the bites were never shown on-screen, they did them anyway:

Like, what more do you guys want before you let go of the “it’s a production error/youre looking too far into it” attitude? I continuously provide BTS pictures and interviews with production themselves as evidence of the fact that it’s not a production error, and yet, I never see the same sort of evidence provided by people claiming that things are production errors. Some of you guys need to learn how to cite your sources before dismissing others’ analysis. The ACTUAL PEOPLE WORKING ON ST PRODUCTION ARE TALKING ABOUT HOW THEY PAY ATTENTION TO DETAILS THAT THE AUDIENCE NEVER EVEN SEES. And yet I’m just supposed to take your word, with no sources or evidence, that the details we DO see are just errors? Yeah, no thanks, I’ll stick with what the actual people doing the work have said about their work.

Like, the Duffers have said before that they’re not catering this show to the GA/they’re making the show that THEY want to make, so why is the bar suddenly “oh lol if the GA wouldnt notice it/wouldnt go frame by frame, its just an error,” like did you guys miss Murray’s whole speech about “behind the curtain,” or what?

[aemiron-main]

Kevin L Johnson’s Sideburns

So, I was listening to an interview on the Upside Down Podcast with Kevin L Johnson (who plays Young Victor) last night, and he talked about how, when playing Victor, after like, the first few days of filming, he shaved his face and shaved off just *slightly* too much of his sideburns.

So, what did the ST hair team do? They just ignored it, because it’s such a minor detail, right? WRONG!!!! THEY MADE HIM CUSTOM SIDEBURNS SO THAT HIS HAIR/SIDEBURNS WOULD BE IDENTICAL TO PREVIOUS SHOTS !!!!!!!!!!!!

AND ITS NOT EVEN LIKE VICTOR HAS SOME SORT OF SPECIAL FANCY SIDEBURNS??? THEYRE JUST REGULAR SIDEBURNS??? 99% of people would NOT have noticed but the ST team wasnt taking the risk 🫡🫡🫡

And so, with THAT level of attention to detail in mind re: hair in ST, are any of you guys still going to try and tell me that these two guys are the same guy at the same time?:

One of them (the one on the right) has a middle part instead of a side part ffs. It’s intentional.