Note: The above "American Fantasy" article was published in 1987, after shooting had wrapped. The writer was the husband of Jeanne Bonansinga, one of the assistant editors on "Poltergeist III."
Sunday, July 31, 2016
AMERICAN FANTASY ARTICLE
Note: The above "American Fantasy" article was published in 1987, after shooting had wrapped. The writer was the husband of Jeanne Bonansinga, one of the assistant editors on "Poltergeist III."
BAD REVIEWS
"You know, a lot of movies
cover the 80s, but very few of them really zero in on the specific
nuances of the LATE 80’s. Nancy Allen, with her hair that looks like a
Utah rock formation and big, big outfits with tremendous shoulder-pads
and lots of wrinkles and brooches and belts, looks exactly like my best
friend in high school. But Lara’s time at
Scott’s party presents a GOLDEN CORNUCOPIA of late-80s style with all
the party peoples, including one with this hideous frizz-thing atop her
head, a guy with a ludicrous hat that surely evolved out of something
having to do with Culture Club, and the whole sense that the teens of
yesteryear were on the cutting edge while wearing a SWEATER with a shirt
collar poking out from underneath. This whole sequence is literally
breathtaking."
from
http://www.cinemademerde.com/Poltergeist_III.shtml
(the review at the above link is hilarious, btw)
OK, I get it. "Poltergeist III" is not exactly "Return of the King" in terms of being the "final chapter" of a trilogy. Even though P3 has a small and loyal following (mainly among fans of Heather O'Rourke) I will admit most people think this movie is an absolute piece of shit. So, in the spirit of being fair to all sides, and in the hopes of giving you a few good laughs, here are some of the more entertaining bad reviews regular people have given "Poltergeist III" over at the Internet Movie Database. You can add your own (or defend the movie) by going to
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095889/maindetails
*All I really remember about this one is I didn't see it in a theatre, I rented it on video. It IS pretty bad and the mirror effects are used too much. During the "exciting climax" of the movie where they take the window washer thingy up the side of the building, I actually lost patience and hit the fast-forward button for the first time in my life during a film to get to the end. I used to be a purist and would never dare do this to any movie I watched but I couldn't take it no more. Now if a movie starts to suck, I start FFing to get through it if I don't give up all together. The last time I had to do it was on Wes Craven's "Cursed".
*Strange little sequel filled with annoying characters and some horrible dialog. Poltergeist 3 is not really all that bad, it just suffers greatly from those two flaws. Story does wisely by switching the setting from the suburbs to the big city. The character Carol Anne now resides with her aunt and uncle and snobby cousin in Chicago, where they live in a high rise. Soon, ghosts start popping up again. This movie has some of the stupidest lines in it, it's often hard not to grin. O'Rourke did a good acting job in the first two films. Here, not so good. I think that may be the fault of whoever wrote the go-nowhere script. A lot of the characters lines in this seem forced or overacted. Especially the character of Dr. Seaton. The special effects are impressive though. The makers used a lot of mirror tricks that really pull the movie through it's stupider moments. However, the chopped off head of Kane scene was atrocious. I guess this movie suffered because of severe budget cuts.A lot of scenes in this movie feel a bit lame(the kid who busts up through the ice and runs into the window, the "break the mirror" scene,the kid who flips off the security camera, etc., etc.). Nancy Allen, who plays the aunt, does not look happy to be involved in this. Weaker entry in the series, but it is watchable. Seems a bit rushed. Features annoying teenagers you would find in a Friday The 13th movie. A guy rips off Lara Flynn Boyle's cheek. And whats with that growling window pane in the end? Ya gotta see it if you saw the first two. Two stars.
*It's mass hypnosis!",
Just one of many classic, horrible lines from this one. Horrible, horrible film. But it had potential. The setting, an urban cityscape and a very '80s apartment supercomplex, is a great idea, and the mirrors stuff is all great and actually unnerving at times. Even the odd bit with Lara Flynn Boyle (looking healthy for once) and MIA Scott being replaced by demon counterparts is kind of interesting. Technology and ghosts works; films like "Ringu" and "Kairo" over in Japan prove that. It's just a matter of execution. But this movie jettisons all the rest of the previous cast, and while Tom Skerritt is great and really sells it, he's not Craig T. Nelson. I mean, "Poltergeist II" was not exactly "Citizen Kane" either, but at least it had the same cast. A bigger problem is the Reverend Kane crap. Yes, I respect the decision of the filmmakers of P2 to add this character to put a "face" on the evil in the film. It's convenient in terms of narrative, okay. And of course Julian Beck was scary as hell and nobody can ever forget him after they've seen him; a classic image. But Spielberg's "Poltergeist" was much purer, and less about one clichéd monster -- it was a mass of spirits, a legion, who were just plain p***ed off. No elaborate Puritan backstory. No Jason/Freddy surrogate in Reverend Kane. Just p***ed off ghosts. And if they'd stuck with that they'd have been better off. You have to keep some mystery. As it is, though, Nathan Davis is a horrible replacement. I would've paid good money for him to stop yowling "Carol Anne!" (I really am going to have to play the drinking game to that soon.) I'm not even sure that was his voice in this one. And then there's the "'80s slasher film" ethic. It invades even these films in P3. Donna, Scott, and the teens, all needless characters, all trying to have illicit sex and nab some illicit beer. Sex, drugs, alcohol - you die. But the Poltergeist movies, even their crappy sequels, are supposed to be better than that. It's really a jarring transition from the previous films, as are the actual deaths (Tangina, Seaton, etc) -- it just seems like the ghosts are roaming the halls with a machete. I'm not saying you can't kill anybody off, but it takes something away from it to execute it in the way this film did. It was about gore and youth-skewing. Nancy Allen, terrible ham. Trish and Bruce switch personalities halfway through the film, and while I'm sure that was meant to be ironic or something, it really seemed to come out of nowhere. Zelda Rubenstein, sorry to say, was awful. "I have the knowledge - and the POWAH!" Ugh. Richard Fire, words cannot describe. Tom Skerritt and, of course, Heather O'Rourke were really the saving graces. She was absolutely committed to this piece of crap, you can tell. What a kid.
*Kryste on a Krutch, but this is a dismal sequel!, This stinks.
First of all, the family that we've come to love, is no more. Carol Anne is living with an aunt and uncle (Tom Skerritt?! and Nancy Allen!? - Carrie, 1976-Chris Hargensen). Carol Anne's cousin, Donna played by Lara Flynn Boyle (a terribly sorry replacement for Dana's character), was about as stiff and plastic as a piece of disposable silverware and Nancy Allen! should have stopped her acting career after her pitifully horrid performance in Carrie! Her acting talents -??- are highly questionable, as is her ability to deliver a single well-spoken line. Her smile is as fake as her $20 nail job. Ginger of Gilligan's Island was a better actress! While Tom Skerritt is a popular television actor, his talents are best left there. His on-screen "presence" falls far short...more, flat on its face. He isn't a bad actor. I actually LIKED him in Picket Fences. And his character is likable, as the only adult in the movie who listens to and believes Carol Anne, you really want to enjoy the performance, but alas! he just isn't fitted for the big screen. Child psychologists tend to BE smarmy and full of themselves. So while he was a detestable character, I believe the guy played him as he was intended; an arrogant, syrupy sweet, egocentric putz...however, we could have done much better without his character, period. The dialog is trite and stiffly delivered by most; as if the screenplay was written by a freshman in high school who was holding a gun on the performers. And speaking of high school, again the teenagers are portrayed by twenty-something year olds, headed to 30. WHY do they do that? And Kane. What HAPPENED??!! This guy is NOT scary. He's not Kane. He's some creepy guy, yes. But he's NOT Kane. He's a character actor of dubious talents named Nathan Davis, who has a short list of minor parts to his credit as a performer. The voice they used in an attempt to duplicate Julian Beck's voice wasn't even close. It was rather sad, how miserably they failed in the presentation of Kane. Of course, they couldn't use Beck, since he died in 1985 of cancer, but in my opinion, they could have found a much more suitable substitute than Nathan Davis. And poor Heather O'Roarke! Had she lived for the entire filming of this work, she may could have "saved" this movie, but you can tell in this concluding chapter of the Poltergeist trilogy that she is sick and her sweet little face is puffy.
In my opinion, she should have been in some sort of treatment program rather than working in her condition at her age. Just my opinion though. We would have been happier, as individuals I think, if they had been more concerned with her health and never made this movie, in the first place. The relationship between Skerritt and Allen's characters is flimsy, as though they were cut out of cardboard and then animated. Their characters are as well developed as the ingredients of an omelet (just think about it for a moment and you'll get it...aborted chicken fetuses and cheeeeeese!). While the special effects of the movie were acceptable, they were not what we got in the first or the second film. The mirror effects were nice, but they weren't all that, as the direction of this movie was simply atrocious. But you expected more from director, Gary Sherman? Why would you? The list of directing jobs credited to his name is short and not too sweet. He's done a small smattering of movies, none of which were memorable or even enjoyable, and the TV series "Poltergeist: The Legacy." Go figure. Aaaand the movie just goes downhill from there. In comparison to the first two movies, this one is lame, lame, lame. The idea of the ghosts taking over the bodies of the family with which Carol Anne now lives is a fine idea, but the effects of the whole thing, the direction and the portrayal of it was classic "B" movie material. It reeked next to the first two and took on a campy, sad, used and abused quality that you NEVER had in the first two. Kipley Wentz, who has had 3 bit parts other than his role in this movie absolutely stinks in his portrayal as Scott, Donna's love interest. His acting is not anything I would consider "talent." It's more ... unbelievable. You have to experience it for yourself to appreciate how bad it really is. We were about half-way through watching this movie when my cousin turns and asks, "They PAID these people?!" That should give you SoMe indication of the acting quality of this movie. The scene where Donna meets Scott at the elevator, after the metamorphosis...where he tears her flesh from her face? is absolutely ludicrous. They would want and need the deception to be completely intact, so why would they do that? They wouldn't. That scene was about as good an example of wretched writing as I've ever seen. Positively puerile. I have read creative writing projects produced by eighth-graders which were better thought out and more well expressed than this screenplay. The one and ONLY redeeming quality of this movie, in this Fiend's opinion, is the cameo appearance done by Zelda Rubenstein as Tangina Barrons. Love her! Without her presence this flick wouldn't even rate the sorry rating it gets. And not for her performance in this installment, either. It was brief and xyloid. Unfortunately, they failed miserably in recapturing the quality and feeling of the first movie; the second being not quite as good; and this, the third, being horrid in comparison. The only reason I own this movie is because it came FREE with the purchase of Poltergeist 2 on DVD.
*This movie's tagline really says it all.
You can only stretch a concept so far. Even in 1988 the clothes was outdated. The story doesn't exist. And what's more, the gory effects are only present, when they shouldn't be. I mean talk about bad timing. You have to laugh at such unbelievable acting and filmmaking. The goofs are obvious to everyone. The motivation of the characters is in inversely proportional to their stupidity - but the bad way around. When you think to your self: I see something bad happening near mirrors, than I don't go near them. It's what keeps our children alive in everyday traffic. Commonsense is totally missing from this peace.All in all this sequel sucks. I give it 1/10.
*The greatest achievement in this ‘film' is not just that it may well be one of the worst ever spawned by a major film company, but basically that it is so successful in making the viewer fall asleep. The only thing more praiseworthy than writing such a dull and thin plot is actually sitting through it. No scares, no thrills, no fun. Lousy setting, lousy actors playing teenagers, lousy actors playing adults and worst of all: talentless Nancy Allen, complete with run-through make-up, sobbing her way through instead of acting, only finding her equal in that lame excuse for a husband -or actor- Tom Skerritt. I am sorry for Heather O'Rourke and Zelda Rubenstein and yes, actors have to pay their bills too, but what were they doing in this stupid sequel?
*The whole movie is one big mass of confusion. One minute they'll be in the building, the next they'll be at school. Plus there are many characters that are never explained. Stupid movie, don't see it. I'm guessing the two before this were better.
*The original Poltergeist is my personal favorite movie ever made. And as though part 2 wasn't bad enough, they had to go and make this! First off, they should have gotten JoBeth williams and Craig T. Nelson back. Tom Skerritt and Nancy Allen just can't hold a candle to those two. Second: what is up with the extreme bad acting. I have never seen acting this bad in a movie that was not made-for-TV or video. Obviously, a new director was needed. No coincidence that Gary Sherman has never made a popular movie since. The only good thing about this sequel is the visual effects. The use of mirrors for most of them is certainly different from the first two movies. But even the effects are off in timing. If you look closely enough (and are not asleep after the first ten minutes) the reactions of the actors in the mirrors are either a few seconds fast or slow!
*Although the movie is not THAT bad, it still is a disappointing end to the series. Huge problem is the horrible script. I think it's not fair to blame the actors for doing a poor job, I think it's all due to the poorly written dialog and dumb situations. They also should have left the Kane character alone, after Julian Beck's death they should have come up with a new and different 'villain'. It is especially the beginning of the movie that is extremely bad and almost B-movie like with horrible dialog and 'comedy'. Nice thing is that this is Lary Flynn Boyle's first role in a movie. At the time of this film she was still looking normal and was eating her food it seemed. Richard Fire as Dr. Seaton was one of the highlights of the movie, he seemed like the only one that knew in what for a mess of a movie he got into. It made his character enjoyable and humor full.The special effect certainly aren't a disappointment in this movie and the mirror effects are great, although heavily overused throughout the entire movie. But what ever happened to the music? Jerry Goldsmith's score for the previous two Poltergeist movies was perfect. In this movie the famous Carol Anne's theme isn't even used once in any variation. Shame on you Joe Renzetti. If you still thought that "Poltergeist II: The Other Side" was watchable enough for you, than "Poltergeist III" might also be very well worth your time.
*Easily one of the worst movies ever made, and certainly the biggest botch of a movie-trilogy in the last 20 years. Young child, continually dogged by evil spirits, brings her reign of bad luck to a Chicago high-rise when she goes to live with her aunt and uncle(apparently her real parents had had enough). There was nothing in the original "Poltergeist" that suggested Heather O'Rourke's character Carol Anne was the reason the spirits were taking over that house. She was just a pawn in their plans. This movie makes it seem like Carol Anne was the sparkplug to the whole thing, when actually she's just the pawn in a new game: that of the producers hoping to squeeze more money out of the public with this obviously-inferior product. Effects, script and acting are all atrocious. NO STARS from ****
*As if Poltergeist 2 wasn't bad enough, poor Heather O'Rourke last film is the terribley weird Poltergeist lll. We are doomed to hear not only the characters scream CAROL ANNE through the movie but we are also annoyed by listening to the ever annoying two some: Tangina and Marcie! Why couldn't the two of them shut the hell up? The
Mystery of the Re-Shot Ending (3 of 3)
When working on my initial
“Gorezone” article, I was informed that their office had received a
statement from a source who worked on the film, regarding why Kip
Wentz’s character “Scott” wasn't included in the re-shoot:
"It
was an oversight stemming from the emotional and logistical turmoil
over the loss of Heather O'Rourke, in her 'iconic' role as the series'
central character; and the budget had run out at that point [after the re-shoot had taken place],
with 'Scott' not being considered essential enough to the movie for the
studio to go through the expense and complication of arranging another
re-shoot with Kip present. This
turned out to be a terrible blow to the young actor's self-esteem, and a
classically painful 'Hollywood Experience', resulting in more than a
decade of career and emotional 'free-fall' (which, reportedly, he has
fully recovered from in recent years)."
In regard to Heathers death:
"As
explained in the news reports at the time, if only they had seen a
specialist when her unusual symptoms first appeared (instead of blindly
accepting the typical HMO 'shrug and runaround' style of care they had,
even when she was healthy), she would have easily been put back to
normal, vibrant health; and most likely would be alive and well at the
present time. Though life-threatening, a bit of fairly unremarkable
surgery would have completely restored her physical condition, if caught
in time."
I’ve
also heard from a source who claimed that the original ending from
“Poltergeist III” still exists within the archives at MGM. I of course
have no way to confirm this tip, but perhaps MGM will one day shed some
light on the issue. After all, they stand to make some extra money if
they put any cut scenes on a special edition DVD, especially after all
this controversy. Here’s an interesting excerpt from the “Poltergeist
III” press kit, given to the media by MGM at the time of the film's
release (emphasis mine):
HEATHER
O'ROURKE, who died unexpectedly in February, 1988 from complications of
a congenital intestinal disorder, made her film debut at age five in
"Poltergeist," and was nine when she reprised her role as Carol Anne in
"Poltergeist II: The Other Side." Heather was just 11 when she filmed
"Poltergeist III," which was completed several months before her untimely death.
Here’s a posting that Tammy, Heather O’Rourke’s older sister, made in 2003 to the www.heatherorourke.net memorial site message board (again, emphasis mine):
Q: Hey Tammy, why did Heather like flamingos so much? About how old would you say she was when she started to like them? Thanks
Tammy:
She enjoyed the flamingos because they were so pretty. She went to Florida after filming Poltergeist 3 and that's when she fell in love with them.
Here’s
an excerpt from the interview I did with Corey Burton, the man who
provided the voice for the Rev. Kane in “Poltergeist III:”
Q: One of the things I've always wondered about is the film's re-shot ending. Did you ever do any dubs for the original ending?
Burton:
I do remember going in to record after Heather’s tragically untimely
death; and I may have recorded a little something at the first session [the PG rated cut of the film, in 1987]...
But I seem to recall that it was already established, that the ending
would be reworked, and Gary Sherman didn’t want to waste studio time
recording what would most likely not be used anyway.
Q:
One thing that always bugged me about the very end of the movie is when
lightning strikes the building just before the credits go up, and
Kane's laughter is heard, presumably leaving an open door for yet
another sequel. Did Gary/MGM ask you to do that scene with the express
purpose of a possible sequel in mind, or was it just a last ditch effort
to "punch up" the ending after Heather died, when they were forced to
come up with that abrupt ending?
Burton: Both assumptions are correct.
This is what the (very reliable) urban legend web site www.snopes.com had to say about the “Poltergeist Curse:”
"O'Rourke
appeared in all three Poltergeist movies. Poltergeist III had been
completed at the time of her death although it had yet to be released,
leading to rumors that she had expired during shooting and a double had
to be used to complete the picture. (Poltergeist III was in the can by
June 1987 but wasn't released until 10 June 1988; however,
writer-director Gary Sherman decided to
change the ending of the already-finished film after O'Rourke's death,
so a double was used to shoot the alternate ending.)"
More
"smoking gun" evidence: According to the revised shooting schedule
below, dated 6/19/87, the original ending sequences were filmed on
Tuesday, June 23rd and Wednesday, June 24th. Notice also that it says
"Completion of principal photography" by Thursday of that week.
Finally,
the key piece of evidence proving that “Poltergeist III” was finished
at the time of Heather’s death is the fact that the film was originally
rated PG in 1987, the week of November 23, 1987, to be exact. I learned
this from Joan Graves, the head of the Motion Picture Association of
America Ratings Board. According to Joan:
“We
always see the entire film before issuing a rating. There have been
times when computer graphic effects have been incomplete initially but
we see a complete version before a final rating is given.”
The re-shoot took place the week of March 14, 1988. Apparently
the planning for it began in December 1987. Doug’s notes on the new SFX
continued into January, and the re-shoot may have been initially
scheduled for February. After Heather died February 1st, the re-shoot
got pushed back to March. It was announced the week of April
25, 1988 by the MPAA that "Poltergeist III" had been “re-edited” and
was awarded a new rating of PG-13, apparently satisfying the studio
heads. The scene of Kane getting his head sliced off with the shovel was
probably the deal breaker that upped the rating from PG to PG13.
Perhaps
we'll never know exactly what really happened with "Poltergeist III"
after Heather O’Rourke’s tragic death. Maybe one day MGM will dig into
its archives to see what, if any, footage still exists. If the original
ending can be found, it would only be fair that her fans be allowed to
see it. It was confirmed to me by MGM PR in 2006
that there are over 100 boxes of footage related to the film in their
vaults...perhaps the original ending can be found there.
One
last note: I emailed this article to Mr. Sherman’s PR firm, in the
hopes he‘d provide a comment in response that I could include before I
submitted the final version to "Gorezone." I never heard anything back.
******************************
NOTES:
*=In
prepping my articles, I attempted to obtain statements from multiple
cast/crew members, including the PR reps for Tom Skerritt, Nancy Allen,
Lara Flynn Boyle, Nathan Davis, and Zelda Rubinstein. Nancy Allen's PR
contact refused any interview requests when I contacted them. I never
heard back from Lara Flynn Boyle's PR person. Nathan Davis sent me a
handwritten note in the mail which said "David...sorry I can't help
you." "Gorezone" did do a brief interview with Zelda via phone, but
unfortunately she claimed not to remember much about the ending, and her
interview wasn't used (the staff told me later that she seemed "rude"
on the phone when asked about the issue, as though she just didn't want
to talk about it). Tom Skerritt has always refused interview requests
about the film.
Here's the interview "Gorezone" did with Zelda:
GZ: Was the ending completed and ready to be put together before Heather's death?
Zelda: Maybe.
GZ: Do you recall the original death of Kane? Was it filmed? Was it the head explosion?
Zelda: Could have been.
GZ: Do you prefer the original ending or the re-shoot?
Zelda: Yes.
GZ:
Joe Renzetti made the following statement. Can you confirm it or deny
it? "The special FX make-up sucked, the characters were supposed to be
frozen but they looked as if they just survived an egg processing plant
explosion."
Zelda: No I cannot confirm it. NO.
GZ: Did MGM put pressure on everyone involved to take part in the re-shoot, and why was Kipley not asked back?
Zelda: No.
Zelda
also did this interview with Iconsoffright.com in October 2007, for the
promotion of the "Poltergeist" 25th Anniversary DVD. She seems to have
again offered a wishy washy response regarding the re-shoot:
Q: What about the rumors that multiple endings had been shot for "POLTERGEIST III?"
A:
The
ending that I did was what I saw on screen. If there were other endings
it must have been done because Gary Sherman wasn't happy. Gary's a good
director, and he's also remained a good friend.
Finally,
the following is what craft services man Michael Kehoe told me. He
worked on the re-shot ending in Los Angeles. He also knew the first
assistant director on the original film, who happened to share the same
last name:
David, I
have worked on so many films that most of the past is but a blur. I was
the craft service person on that picture [P3] and knew the first
assistant director. We happen to share the same last name, no
relationship. I am writing and directing now as well as keeping the
craft service biz alive while handing the torch to someone else. I do
remember the shots with the new girl and remember her being a little
larger than Heather the original actress. I also remember them being
cautious about covering her face. It was an odd shoot to say the least
but I know that Gary Sherman had a great deal of weight on his shoulders
in regards to this film. And the tragedy of the loss of two young
actresses Heather and Dominique was a shame. I wish I had more
interesting information to share but it seems that you have just about
all the info there already.
UPDATE: In
early 2010, I wrote another follow up article for "Gorezone," laying
out much of the same info presented above. The magazine and I both tried
to obtain an official statement from MGM on whether the original ending
with Heather was filmed, and if so, did the footage still exist in the
archives. Initially, this is the email that Emma Woodwood, "Gorezone's"
marketing staff member, received from MGM's PR office:
****************
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 8:48 PM
Subject: Poltergeist 3
Hi Emma,
I wanted to let you know we are working hard to find the lost scene of Poltergeist 3. I will keep you updated on our progress.
Matt-- Matt Griffin
Marketing Corporate PR & Research Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. 10250 Constellation Blvd. 12th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90067
***********************
However,
after she followed up on the phone with MGM a couple weeks later, Emma
sent me the following information in a series of emails:
*************************I
have chased MGM and they have spoken with key crew members and will get
back to me soon. They can confirm that they are under the understanding
there are two endings but cannot comment in writing.....
They
cannot comment at this stage as they haven't got a yes or a no from the
official body. They haven't checked the archives from what I understand
as of yet.....
I
spoke to MGM again yesterday. They still cannot give us an answer as of
yet. My hope has dropped as well as they have said they need to speak
with the director before anything else as he will know if it was or
wasn't filmed.....
*************************A
few days later, "Gorezone's" editor Bryn Hammond spoke on the phone
with Matt Griffin, the PR staffer who sent the first email. According to
Bryn, below is a basic summary of what was said:
Matt: "We are doing our best to locate the footage which is in the vaults. It's taking longer than we expected and we have had to contact our legal team with concerns regarding the matter."
Bryn: "Can I get this in an email today?"
Matt: "I will send you something over in the next couple of hours. Can I take your email?"
However, no email was sent that day. The next day, Emma received this email from Matt:
******************************
----- Original Message -----
From: Matt Griffin
To: Emma Woodwood
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 5:26 PM
Subject: Re: Poltergeist 3
Hi Emma,
Brian
Hammond, as I remember his name, contact our office yesterday and
wanted an official quote as to whereabouts of the missing Poltergeist 3
scenes.
Could you send me his email and contact number?
Thanks for your help,
Matt
************************
Soon
after, MGM's then Director of Corporate Publicity, Grey Munford (who no
longer works for the studio), sent this message to Bryn:
*************************
----- Original Message -----
From: "Grey Munford"
To: "Bryn Hammond"
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 7:42 PM
Subject: Poltergeist 3
Hello Bryn,
We do not have any comment but are continuing to look for information
regarding your questions.
Many thanks,
Grey Munford
******************
Bryn
then responded to Grey in a series of perplexed messages trying to get
clarification, since it was odd that Grey's assistant Matt had seemingly
admitted (on the phone) that the original ending footage was "in the
vaults," but that now only a "no comment" was being issued as an
official statement (likely because of the MGM Legal Department's sudden
involvement).
In response, Mr. Munford claimed that Bryn had
"misunderstood" Matt's reference to "vault" and only re-iterated his "No
comment at this time" statement. He did again say they were
"continuing" to look into the matter.
After Bryn forwarded me
these odd exchanges, I attempted a follow up with Mr. Munford directly
via email. Here's what I received:
"We are going to stick with 'no comment' on this situation."
(Interestingly, this time the "we're continuing to look into it" was NOT included).
Needless to say, we never got another response from MGM.
"It
was an oversight stemming from the emotional and logistical turmoil
over the loss of Heather O'Rourke, in her 'iconic' role as the series'
central character; and the budget had run out at that point [after the re-shoot had taken place],
with 'Scott' not being considered essential enough to the movie for the
studio to go through the expense and complication of arranging another
re-shoot with Kip present. This
turned out to be a terrible blow to the young actor's self-esteem, and a
classically painful 'Hollywood Experience', resulting in more than a
decade of career and emotional 'free-fall' (which, reportedly, he has
fully recovered from in recent years)."
I’ve also heard from a source who claimed that the original ending from “Poltergeist III” still exists within the archives at MGM. I of course have no way to confirm this tip, but perhaps MGM will one day shed some light on the issue. After all, they stand to make some extra money if they put any cut scenes on a special edition DVD, especially after all this controversy. Here’s an interesting excerpt from the “Poltergeist III” press kit, given to the media by MGM at the time of the film's release (emphasis mine):
In regard to Heathers death:
"As
explained in the news reports at the time, if only they had seen a
specialist when her unusual symptoms first appeared (instead of blindly
accepting the typical HMO 'shrug and runaround' style of care they had,
even when she was healthy), she would have easily been put back to
normal, vibrant health; and most likely would be alive and well at the
present time. Though life-threatening, a bit of fairly unremarkable
surgery would have completely restored her physical condition, if caught
in time."
I’ve also heard from a source who claimed that the original ending from “Poltergeist III” still exists within the archives at MGM. I of course have no way to confirm this tip, but perhaps MGM will one day shed some light on the issue. After all, they stand to make some extra money if they put any cut scenes on a special edition DVD, especially after all this controversy. Here’s an interesting excerpt from the “Poltergeist III” press kit, given to the media by MGM at the time of the film's release (emphasis mine):
HEATHER
O'ROURKE, who died unexpectedly in February, 1988 from complications of
a congenital intestinal disorder, made her film debut at age five in
"Poltergeist," and was nine when she reprised her role as Carol Anne in
"Poltergeist II: The Other Side." Heather was just 11 when she filmed
"Poltergeist III," which was completed several months before her untimely death.
Here’s a posting that Tammy, Heather O’Rourke’s older sister, made in 2003 to the www.heatherorourke.net memorial site message board (again, emphasis mine):
Q: Hey Tammy, why did Heather like flamingos so much? About how old would you say she was when she started to like them? Thanks
Tammy:
She enjoyed the flamingos because they were so pretty. She went to Florida after filming Poltergeist 3 and that's when she fell in love with them.
Tammy:
She enjoyed the flamingos because they were so pretty. She went to Florida after filming Poltergeist 3 and that's when she fell in love with them.
Here’s
an excerpt from the interview I did with Corey Burton, the man who
provided the voice for the Rev. Kane in “Poltergeist III:”
Q: One of the things I've always wondered about is the film's re-shot ending. Did you ever do any dubs for the original ending?
Burton:
I do remember going in to record after Heather’s tragically untimely
death; and I may have recorded a little something at the first session [the PG rated cut of the film, in 1987]...
But I seem to recall that it was already established, that the ending
would be reworked, and Gary Sherman didn’t want to waste studio time
recording what would most likely not be used anyway.
Q:
One thing that always bugged me about the very end of the movie is when
lightning strikes the building just before the credits go up, and
Kane's laughter is heard, presumably leaving an open door for yet
another sequel. Did Gary/MGM ask you to do that scene with the express
purpose of a possible sequel in mind, or was it just a last ditch effort
to "punch up" the ending after Heather died, when they were forced to
come up with that abrupt ending?
Burton: Both assumptions are correct.
This is what the (very reliable) urban legend web site www.snopes.com had to say about the “Poltergeist Curse:”
"O'Rourke
appeared in all three Poltergeist movies. Poltergeist III had been
completed at the time of her death although it had yet to be released,
leading to rumors that she had expired during shooting and a double had
to be used to complete the picture. (Poltergeist III was in the can by
June 1987 but wasn't released until 10 June 1988; however,
writer-director Gary Sherman decided to
change the ending of the already-finished film after O'Rourke's death,
so a double was used to shoot the alternate ending.)"
More
"smoking gun" evidence: According to the revised shooting schedule
below, dated 6/19/87, the original ending sequences were filmed on
Tuesday, June 23rd and Wednesday, June 24th. Notice also that it says
"Completion of principal photography" by Thursday of that week.
Perhaps
we'll never know exactly what really happened with "Poltergeist III"
after Heather O’Rourke’s tragic death. Maybe one day MGM will dig into
its archives to see what, if any, footage still exists. If the original
ending can be found, it would only be fair that her fans be allowed to
see it. It was confirmed to me by MGM PR in 2006
that there are over 100 boxes of footage related to the film in their
vaults...perhaps the original ending can be found there.
One
last note: I emailed this article to Mr. Sherman’s PR firm, in the
hopes he‘d provide a comment in response that I could include before I
submitted the final version to "Gorezone." I never heard anything back.
******************************
NOTES:
*=In
prepping my articles, I attempted to obtain statements from multiple
cast/crew members, including the PR reps for Tom Skerritt, Nancy Allen,
Lara Flynn Boyle, Nathan Davis, and Zelda Rubinstein. Nancy Allen's PR
contact refused any interview requests when I contacted them. I never
heard back from Lara Flynn Boyle's PR person. Nathan Davis sent me a
handwritten note in the mail which said "David...sorry I can't help
you." "Gorezone" did do a brief interview with Zelda via phone, but
unfortunately she claimed not to remember much about the ending, and her
interview wasn't used (the staff told me later that she seemed "rude"
on the phone when asked about the issue, as though she just didn't want
to talk about it). Tom Skerritt has always refused interview requests
about the film.
Here's the interview "Gorezone" did with Zelda:
GZ: Was the ending completed and ready to be put together before Heather's death?
Zelda: Maybe.
GZ: Do you recall the original death of Kane? Was it filmed? Was it the head explosion?
Zelda: Could have been.
GZ: Do you prefer the original ending or the re-shoot?
Zelda: Yes.
GZ:
Joe Renzetti made the following statement. Can you confirm it or deny
it? "The special FX make-up sucked, the characters were supposed to be
frozen but they looked as if they just survived an egg processing plant
explosion."
Zelda: No I cannot confirm it. NO.
GZ: Did MGM put pressure on everyone involved to take part in the re-shoot, and why was Kipley not asked back?
Zelda: No.
Zelda
also did this interview with Iconsoffright.com in October 2007, for the
promotion of the "Poltergeist" 25th Anniversary DVD. She seems to have
again offered a wishy washy response regarding the re-shoot:
Q: What about the rumors that multiple endings had been shot for "POLTERGEIST III?"
A:
The
ending that I did was what I saw on screen. If there were other endings
it must have been done because Gary Sherman wasn't happy. Gary's a good
director, and he's also remained a good friend.
Finally,
the following is what craft services man Michael Kehoe told me. He
worked on the re-shot ending in Los Angeles. He also knew the first
assistant director on the original film, who happened to share the same
last name:
David, I
have worked on so many films that most of the past is but a blur. I was
the craft service person on that picture [P3] and knew the first
assistant director. We happen to share the same last name, no
relationship. I am writing and directing now as well as keeping the
craft service biz alive while handing the torch to someone else. I do
remember the shots with the new girl and remember her being a little
larger than Heather the original actress. I also remember them being
cautious about covering her face. It was an odd shoot to say the least
but I know that Gary Sherman had a great deal of weight on his shoulders
in regards to this film. And the tragedy of the loss of two young
actresses Heather and Dominique was a shame. I wish I had more
interesting information to share but it seems that you have just about
all the info there already.
UPDATE: In
early 2010, I wrote another follow up article for "Gorezone," laying
out much of the same info presented above. The magazine and I both tried
to obtain an official statement from MGM on whether the original ending
with Heather was filmed, and if so, did the footage still exist in the
archives. Initially, this is the email that Emma Woodwood, "Gorezone's"
marketing staff member, received from MGM's PR office:
****************
Hi Emma,
I wanted to let you know we are working hard to find the lost scene of Poltergeist 3. I will keep you updated on our progress.
Matt-- Matt Griffin
Marketing Corporate PR & Research Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. 10250 Constellation Blvd. 12th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90067
***********************
However, after she followed up on the phone with MGM a couple weeks later, Emma sent me the following information in a series of emails:
*************************I have chased MGM and they have spoken with key crew members and will get back to me soon. They can confirm that they are under the understanding there are two endings but cannot comment in writing.....
They cannot comment at this stage as they haven't got a yes or a no from the official body. They haven't checked the archives from what I understand as of yet.....
I spoke to MGM again yesterday. They still cannot give us an answer as of yet. My hope has dropped as well as they have said they need to speak with the director before anything else as he will know if it was or wasn't filmed.....
*************************A few days later, "Gorezone's" editor Bryn Hammond spoke on the phone with Matt Griffin, the PR staffer who sent the first email. According to Bryn, below is a basic summary of what was said:
Matt: "We are doing our best to locate the footage which is in the vaults. It's taking longer than we expected and we have had to contact our legal team with concerns regarding the matter."
******************************
Hi Emma,
Brian Hammond, as I remember his name, contact our office yesterday and wanted an official quote as to whereabouts of the missing Poltergeist 3 scenes.
Could you send me his email and contact number?
Thanks for your help,
Matt
************************
Soon after, MGM's then Director of Corporate Publicity, Grey Munford (who no longer works for the studio), sent this message to Bryn:
*************************
----- Original Message -----
From: "Grey Munford"
To: "Bryn Hammond"
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 7:42 PM
Subject: Poltergeist 3
Hello Bryn,
We do not have any comment but are continuing to look for information
regarding your questions.
Many thanks,
Grey Munford
******************
Bryn then responded to Grey in a series of perplexed messages trying to get clarification, since it was odd that Grey's assistant Matt had seemingly admitted (on the phone) that the original ending footage was "in the vaults," but that now only a "no comment" was being issued as an official statement (likely because of the MGM Legal Department's sudden involvement).
In response, Mr. Munford claimed that Bryn had "misunderstood" Matt's reference to "vault" and only re-iterated his "No comment at this time" statement. He did again say they were "continuing" to look into the matter.
After Bryn forwarded me these odd exchanges, I attempted a follow up with Mr. Munford directly via email. Here's what I received:
"We are going to stick with 'no comment' on this situation."
(Interestingly, this time the "we're continuing to look into it" was NOT included).
Needless to say, we never got another response from MGM.
****************
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 8:48 PM
Subject: Poltergeist 3
Hi Emma,
I wanted to let you know we are working hard to find the lost scene of Poltergeist 3. I will keep you updated on our progress.
Matt-- Matt Griffin
Marketing Corporate PR & Research Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. 10250 Constellation Blvd. 12th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90067
***********************
However, after she followed up on the phone with MGM a couple weeks later, Emma sent me the following information in a series of emails:
*************************I have chased MGM and they have spoken with key crew members and will get back to me soon. They can confirm that they are under the understanding there are two endings but cannot comment in writing.....
They cannot comment at this stage as they haven't got a yes or a no from the official body. They haven't checked the archives from what I understand as of yet.....
I spoke to MGM again yesterday. They still cannot give us an answer as of yet. My hope has dropped as well as they have said they need to speak with the director before anything else as he will know if it was or wasn't filmed.....
*************************A few days later, "Gorezone's" editor Bryn Hammond spoke on the phone with Matt Griffin, the PR staffer who sent the first email. According to Bryn, below is a basic summary of what was said:
Matt: "We are doing our best to locate the footage which is in the vaults. It's taking longer than we expected and we have had to contact our legal team with concerns regarding the matter."
Bryn: "Can I get this in an email today?"
Matt: "I will send you something over in the next couple of hours. Can I take your email?"
However, no email was sent that day. The next day, Emma received this email from Matt:
******************************
----- Original Message -----
From: Matt Griffin
To: Emma Woodwood
To: Emma Woodwood
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 5:26 PM
Subject: Re: Poltergeist 3
Brian Hammond, as I remember his name, contact our office yesterday and wanted an official quote as to whereabouts of the missing Poltergeist 3 scenes.
Could you send me his email and contact number?
Thanks for your help,
Matt
************************
Soon after, MGM's then Director of Corporate Publicity, Grey Munford (who no longer works for the studio), sent this message to Bryn:
*************************
----- Original Message -----
From: "Grey Munford"
To: "Bryn Hammond"
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 7:42 PM
Subject: Poltergeist 3
Hello Bryn,
We do not have any comment but are continuing to look for information
regarding your questions.
Many thanks,
Grey Munford
******************
Bryn then responded to Grey in a series of perplexed messages trying to get clarification, since it was odd that Grey's assistant Matt had seemingly admitted (on the phone) that the original ending footage was "in the vaults," but that now only a "no comment" was being issued as an official statement (likely because of the MGM Legal Department's sudden involvement).
In response, Mr. Munford claimed that Bryn had "misunderstood" Matt's reference to "vault" and only re-iterated his "No comment at this time" statement. He did again say they were "continuing" to look into the matter.
After Bryn forwarded me these odd exchanges, I attempted a follow up with Mr. Munford directly via email. Here's what I received:
"We are going to stick with 'no comment' on this situation."
(Interestingly, this time the "we're continuing to look into it" was NOT included).
Needless to say, we never got another response from MGM.
Mystery of the Re-Shot Ending (2 of 3)
From "Gorezone" magazine (U.K.), February 2006. Issue #6.
From Mystery to Controversy:
The Last Word on the Poltergeist III Ending
By David Furtney
In the last issue of "Gorezone," director Gary Sherman had this to say about me:
“The
quote you mention was from an interview he [composer Joe Renzetti] did
with someone he found to be ‘annoying, stupid and pedantic…’ This
interviewer, who had been pestering everyone, including me, looking for
‘dirt’ was barraging Joe. To get him to stop, Joe gave him a bullshit
interview filled with whatever it took to stop the harassment."
The
“someone” Sherman refers to is me. First of all, I never claimed to be
an “interviewer.” I let “Poltergeist III” composer Joe Renzetti know
from the beginning that I was simply a big fan of the film. At the time,
Joe and I exchanged a series of polite emails back and forth. I sent
the first one in July 1997, right before my senior year of high school
began, and then about 3 or 4 more the next year, asking about various
details regarding his work on the film. Joe may very well have thought I
was “annoying and stupid,” (I was only 18 at the time, after all) but
he never said so to me, nor did he in any way indicate he was tired of
our correspondence. He was sarcastic, and at one point jokingly asked me
how the “book” was coming along, referring to it as “the making of Polt
3.” I actually have copies of those emails still saved. You can read
the extent of our conversations at www.poltergeistIII.com/score.html.
In
the above quote, Gary claims I was “pestering everyone” involved with
the film. This could not be further from the truth. As I wrote in my
original “Gorezone” article, after Joe stated that the ending of P3 was a
re-shoot, I sent Gary Sherman one email asking what the original ending
was, since Joe didn't remember much except for the "frozen bodies." I
wasn’t trying to get “dirt” on anyone; before I contacted Joe, I had
never even considered the possibility that the film‘s original ending
was never shot, nor that a re-shoot could have taken place (since it had
always been reported that Heather finished the movie before she died); I
was simply curious as to why it ended so quickly without Carol Anne‘s
face being shown.
When
Gary wrote back that polite, detailed response claiming that Joe’s
recollection “wasn't exactly right” and that the original ending had
never been shot, it made sense to me. Mr. Sherman was, after all, the
director of the film. And the co-writer. And the executive producer. And
the visual effects designer. So, he above anyone would know what really
went on. I thanked him for his taking the time to email me back. I
followed up with a few more questions, like “Was the ‘Scott’ who comes
up out of the pool the real one?” And "why did lightning strike the high
rise at the end?” and “What was the original ending going to be? “ to
which he responded:
“1.
Tangina was going to sacrifice herself in exchange for Carol Anne. She
would have led Kane and the others ’into the light’ to the other side.
2. Re: Scott. Look closely. The Scott who comes out of the pool is a mirror image. Look at his sweatshirt.
3. The lightning was only to punch up an ending that we all hated.”
He
later told me that he was brought on board the film after JoBeth
Williams, Craig T. Nelson, and writer/producers Michael Grais and Mark
Victor had declined to do another sequel, and that the idea of doing the
story in Chicago and have Carol Anne staying with relatives was his. He
described the reason for wanting to do the SFX live on stage, saying
that with optical effects at the time, the film lost quality after each
generation was made in the optical printer, and he wanted the image to
be as clean as possible. At one point, I informed Gary of a short blurb
about him I saw in "Fangoria" magazine, in which it was reported that he
was about to start work on a new series. Gary asked me where'd I'd read
it, and then said the report wasn't true, adding "don't believe
everything you read." In the same email, he offered to mail me a copy of
the EPK (electronic press kit) for "Poltergeist III." I thanked him for
the offer, and gave him my address at the time. The tape never arrived
(though I was able to get a copy of it from someone else later).
It
wasn't until another year or so passed that I began to notice some
contradictions, mainly when I contacted actor Kipley Wentz. He insisted
that the film’s ending was a re-shoot, matching what Joe first told me.
It was at this point that I emailed Gary again, to try and get some
further clarification. This time Gary became far less helpful in
answering my questions. When I asked him about a couple of publicity
still photos I had discovered that appeared to show parts of the
original scripted ending, Gary said “the publicity stills were shot at a
different time than the actual scene. The original ending was never
shot.” That explanation seemed to make sense (although I found even more
stills later, included in this article). When I mentioned the fact that
Kip Wentz said he recalled filming the original ending (showing the
characters huddled together after "thawing out" and Carol Anne tearfully
waving goodbye to Tangina), and was surprised when he went to the
premiere and saw a totally different ending no one had told him about
nor asked him to be involved in, Gary stuck by his version of the story,
saying "well that's the way I remember it. I don't want to talk about
it anymore."
Realizing
that something wasn't adding up, I began trying to email all the other
people I could find who worked on P3, in an attempt to obtain their
recollection of what took place. I decided to stop emailing Gary, since I
figured at that point I was annoying him, but not intentionally. I
realized he wasn't going to give me any more details. I also recall
telling him that I understood how awful the tragic loss of Heather
O’Rourke must have been, and that I didn't want to make him talk about
something he didn't want to discuss. However, I was still intent on
obtaining any information I could from other cast and crew. Believe me,
if I would have received a statement from anyone corroborating what Gary
said (that “Heather died before the ending was filmed”), I would have
gladly included it in my research. It’s not my fault that everyone else
who spoke to me said “it was a re-shoot.” In other words, don't blame
the messenger. To this date, I have yet to find even one source who can
confirm Gary's account. [UPDATE: In April 2007, Nancy Allen gave
a live Fangoria radio interview in which she responded to a question
I'd sent in via email. She appeared to confirm Gary's story, but her
claim is not credible either. She said:
"Yeah
this is a question that comes up a lot...there wasn't really a re-shot
ending...we did pick up shots but it wasn't a different ending because Heather
died...it was because we really didn't get the shots when we were
there...and they had to use the double because Heather was, she had
passed away at that point."
Notice
she says they still had "pick up shots" to do when Heather died, which
even conflicts with Gary's version that they still had "17 pages of
script, most of which was to be the ending," to film. Neither can be
true because at the time of Heather's death the film had already been
rated PG. So, by definition, anything filmed after that point had to
have been either re-shoots or the filming of additional scenes.
As a recap, here's what I did find:
Producer Barry Bernardi: “I recall that Heather died before the re-shoot and that we used a double.”
Actor Kip Wentz: “I was in Los Angeles when they re-shot the ending.”
Editor
Jeanne Bonansinga: “The ending was later re-shot in LA because the
studio didn't like the original ending. We tried to cut in some shots
from the original ending to see her face, but very few were usable.”
SFX
designer Doug Drexler: “MGM shot a new climax to its Spielberg
instigated spook show carried on by director Gary Sherman, and we were
invited.” (Not to mention the title of Doug’s 1988 article: “Poltergeist
III and a half: The Re-shoot”).
In fact, here's the first page of Doug's article:
So,
even if Joe Renzetti was giving me a “bullshit interview” about the
ending being a re-shoot (a possible, but highly unlikely and ridiculous
explanation), how does Gary explain the quotes from the people above? In
addition, what about his own quote (emphasis mine), from the July, 1988 issue of “Cinefantastique” magazine: (Volume 18 No 5, page 39):
“I
became so fascinated with Tangina’s dehydrated remains that we also did
one for Bruce and Donna for the scene where Pat comes into the ice
storm at the end. She’s being chased through the storm by Kane, falls
and finds Bruce’s and Donna’s remains. Then I decided to change the ending.
Tangina actually accomplished Kane’s death so I thought we should see
Kane transformed into one of those dehydrated remains. It all became
much more complicated than what we were initially going to do, but Dick,
John, and Doug came up with something incredible.”
That
“something” apparently ended up being the sequence now in the film when
Nancy Allen slices off Kane’s head with a shovel, and then the head
decomposes on the floor. This scene was discussed in Doug’s 1988
"re-shoot" article. When Gary was asked in the previous issue of
“Gorezone” about the scene of Kane’s face exploding ("what we were
initially going to do,"), he insisted this was never filmed. I was able
to get (what I at first thought) was some confirmation of this after
speaking on the phone with legendary makeup artist Dick Smith (“The
Exorcist”). When Mr. Smith looked at the Kane photo, he said that from
his recollection, that photo was only a makeup effects test shot, and
that the full “exploding face” effect was never filmed.
However,
I think Mr. Smith may have confused the Kane "lines of light" face pic
(which was an on set publicity still taken of a prop head that Smith
created):
with
another photo of Kane with a rotting face, which WAS a makeup effects
test shot that was never filmed, at least not in the way as it was
originally planned. Three of those shots can be seen here:
Doug
Drexler said he recalled the “frozen bodies” scene being filmed during
principal photography (the bodies were created by Cal Acord’s effects
crew, not Drexler’s).
“Poltergeist
III” was rated PG in November of 1987. MGM may have wanted the film to
appeal more to the PG-13 demographic, so plans were apparently made to
re-shoot the rest of the ending with more graphic scenes. Mr. Drexler
said he recalled Gary flying out to New York City with the rough cut of
the film to discuss changes to the ending, likely in December of 1987.
In some of the notes Drexler sent me from this meeting, Doug wrote: "I
don't think Zelda should come back at the end. It's very confusing."
Another set of notes said "Ed [Edward Ledding, the production manager]
says "Budget not approved. Actors not available for shoot date. Effect
should be in hold mode."
Through
my web site, I made contact with a man named Mr. Macklin Crux. He is a
writer and performer who lived in New York City in 1987-1988. He claims
to have been invited to a “distributor’s screening” of P3 in late 1987.
The cut he saw featured scenes not in the finished film, including what
he says was an ending different from the one released theatrically:
"I can confirm what Kipley has written. I
was invited to a 'rough cut screening' of Poltergeist III. I don't
remember the dates but there was very little music and some of the FX
shots were still being worked on. During some scenes we saw sketches. It
was at the world trade center and it was only time I ever went there. We saw the movie. Months later our same group was invited to another screening and the death of Heather O'Rourke came up. The
film was eventually released on video and it was clear this was a
different ending. At the time I didn't give it much thought.
But I can verify the movie had finished shooting when O’Rourke died. It
wasn't that bad of a movie, in fact I enjoyed it but it certainly
deserved better from its producers…
This
screening was at the World Trade Center (the 9/11 one in New York
City). As I understand it, SFX and editing were being done in Brooklyn
(I could be wrong). [Actually, Crux is right-I learned that Doug Drexler's SFX makeup lab was in Brooklyn] This
was not a test screening. This was for Distributors and Industry people
only and it was more of a party atmosphere. I remember hardly being
able to watch the film because it wasn't dark, we sat near a window and
the view was better than the movie and my (ex) wife got really
plastered. There were about 30+ people and there was lots of food,
drinks and an old-fashioned Pop-corn trolley. I also seem to remember a
lot of security.
We
were also invited to rough cuts of Die Hard, Good Morning Vietnam,
Gaby, and several others. Poltergeist III (and Gaby) stand out because
of the differences. We got a free video in the mail, immediately
following the opening (we watched it July 4th with friends). So while
the rest of the country was seeing it in theatres, we had somehow got on
a list for an advanced copy. The box was the same, which makes me
think, they almost went straight to video but it was with a disclaimer
at the bottom of the entire movie and included a featurette which
presented a marketing strategy for the video release. I also remember
that the video did very well but mostly from corporate and small
business sales (for renting, not individual sales).
Please
forgive me for saying so but the version I had seen featured O'Rourke
much more than the final cut and not just the ending. The released
version is a much better cut with less O'Rourke. Many cruel things were
said at the screening about O'Rourke's acting ability. She may have been
a cute kid but was unable to carry a film despite a great support cast.
Knowing what I know now, I believe the cut had nothing to due with
O'Rourke's death and everything to due with saving a project that over
estimated O'Rourke's ability and her link to the two previous films. I
should also mention at the screening, no one was looking for advice.
[Regarding the ending]
I remember the family frozen (and it didn't
look like an egg fest), the amulet and Kane touching it (and thinking
how cheesy). I remember: Carol Anne & Tangina waving goodbye, no
dialogue and it was slowed down (slow Motion), they were both crying.
I remember a small monologue which came off pretty good at the time in which Carol Anne tells [Pat to go away before she transforms into Kane], maybe 5 or six lines...I don't remember what was said but someone did remark ‘Carol Ann's getting pissed'’ and we all laughed. [NOTE: This scene remains in the finished film, right before the ending]
I've worked in Hollywood and NY for a while. No
one orders a re-shoot during production. Re-shoot means after
Principle photography ends. You have to see the rough cut and try to
see what's salvageable. If it involves script changes (re-writes), it
takes time, money, and approval from many different sources. No
one ever shelves a project that has finished photography. Get Real. I
believe it came down to; do we release what we have or should we throw a
little more money at it and get the focus off O'Rourke. I think a lot
of these stories were concocted in order to save the reputation of a
little girl with very limited acting ability who recently died not to
mention their own collective asses. So I believe, principle photography
ended, O'Rourke died while at the same time changes were being discussed
and possibly being executed, and then a new final version was made and
released. I
also believe the re-write was written by a third party but that's just
my opinion. Rarely, a re-shoot is written by the originals involved.
Someone brought in by the studio to bring a new outlook to the project.
One detail I forgot to mention - there were no credits and the invitation was for ‘Poltergeist III: The Final Chapter.’ [or it also may have been called "We're Back...Poltergeist Continues]
It was around Christmas time and probably Dec. [Actually it was more likely in early November, right before the finished film was rated PG by the MPAA] It
wasn't snowing yet but that night I remarked that it wasn't far away. I
had just finished a musical about Monet (I really can't remember the
name) in which I had the lead and finished up with ‘Drood’ that same
year. I was an Actor but I was investing in a corporation called Media
Depot which distributed VHS, CD's & other media to stores in the
tri-state area. We
were considered a big outfit back then and were invited to a whole
bunch of different events. Today I write and edit and on rare occasions
perform."
Here's
Doug Drexler's work calender for the March, 1988 re-shoot of the
ending. He had to fly out to Los Angeles from NYC the evening of Monday,
March 14th. He worked on the SFX makeups at MGM through the end of the
week. Notice the "melting head shoots" notation on Friday March 18th.
That was the last shot of the film (Gary Sherman was quoted in Doug's
article as saying "That's a wrap!" on that day).
Here's
an excerpt from a March 21, 1988 “LA Times” article titled “MGM Ponders
Selling of ‘Poltergeist III‘” (the article was published a week after
the re-shoot quietly took place, and it's clear that the studio's PR
department either did not tell reporter Michael Cieply about the
re-shoot, or did tell him "off the record," for publicity reasons that
should become clear):
The
sudden death last month of "Poltergeist III" child star Heather
O'Rourke brings MGM face to face with one of the toughest dilemmas any
studio's movie marketers can expect to encounter.
The second
"Poltergeist" sequel was already in the can, at a cost of more than $10
million, when the 12-year-old actress died of what had seemed to be flu
symptoms, but proved to be septic shock from an unsuspected bowel
obstruction. Now MGM has to sell the picture without seeming to exploit
Heather, and without creating ghoulish confusion between screen threats
to little Carol Anne Freeling and the young actress who played her.
"We're caught in a dilemma," acknowledges MGM marketing senior vice
president Barry Lorie.
So
how will MGM catch the eye of teen terror-fiends without deeply
offending their parents? The studio hasn't firmed up marketing plans for
the June 10 release yet. But some things are clear:
–Publicity is
out: Promotional interviews are a favorite tool in selling horror films,
and O'Rourke did some publicity for the earlier films. But MGM wants
stars Tom Skerritt and Nancy Allen generally to avoid interviews, which
would inevitably lead to maudlin questions about Heather.
–Testing
is in: Before setting up an ad campaign-which might or might not feature
O'Rourke-the studio plans extensive audience-reaction screenings. The
tests might help MGM calculate how viewers take to such touches as a
proposed dedication to O'Rourke, whose "They're here" and "They're back"
lines helped sell the first two films.
David Wardlow, Heather's
agent and a close associate of her mother, says the film "will be
dedicated to Heather. There's no question about that." But Wardlow says
the survivors have no veto rights over marketing plans.
–Meanwhile,
safe is better than sorry: Scrambling to regroup after O'Rourke's death,
cautious studio executives trimmed a shot of the actress from their
initial trailer. But they left in a voice-over in which she delivers the
new kicker: "Guess who's back in town...?"
Producer
Barry Bernardi, Lorie and Wardlow all said they didn't believe the film
would need special editing to defuse any horror scenes that might seem
tasteless in light of O'Rourke's death.
[Probably
because the "special editing" (re-shoot) to defuse (remove) such
"tasteless" horror scenes-the frozen Carol Anne-had already been done!]
In
January 2006, I sent an email to Barry Lorie, who was the marketing
senior vice president for MGM back in 1988 and who was quoted in the
article excerpt above. I asked him if he could shed any more light on
how the studio handled publicity for the film after Heather's passing.
Here's what he sent me:
"It's
too long ago for me to recall any more info than you already have. MGM
wasn't too keen about the picture from the git go, and with the untimely
death of the child, it was a project that sort of fell through the
cracks. I'm sorry I can't be of more help. B. Lorie."
Article concludes here:
2. Re: Scott. Look closely. The Scott who comes out of the pool is a mirror image. Look at his sweatshirt.
3. The lightning was only to punch up an ending that we all hated.”
"Yeah this is a question that comes up a lot...there wasn't really a re-shot ending...we did pick up shots but it wasn't a different ending because Heather died...it was because we really didn't get the shots when we were there...and they had to use the double because Heather was, she had passed away at that point."
Notice she says they still had "pick up shots" to do when Heather died, which even conflicts with Gary's version that they still had "17 pages of script, most of which was to be the ending," to film. Neither can be true because at the time of Heather's death the film had already been rated PG. So, by definition, anything filmed after that point had to have been either re-shoots or the filming of additional scenes.
Actor Kip Wentz: “I was in Los Angeles when they re-shot the ending.”
Editor Jeanne Bonansinga: “The ending was later re-shot in LA because the studio didn't like the original ending. We tried to cut in some shots from the original ending to see her face, but very few were usable.”
SFX designer Doug Drexler: “MGM shot a new climax to its Spielberg instigated spook show carried on by director Gary Sherman, and we were invited.” (Not to mention the title of Doug’s 1988 article: “Poltergeist III and a half: The Re-shoot”).
In fact, here's the first page of Doug's article:
So, even if Joe Renzetti was giving me a “bullshit interview” about the ending being a re-shoot (a possible, but highly unlikely and ridiculous explanation), how does Gary explain the quotes from the people above? In addition, what about his own quote (emphasis mine), from the July, 1988 issue of “Cinefantastique” magazine: (Volume 18 No 5, page 39):
However, I think Mr. Smith may have confused the Kane "lines of light" face pic (which was an on set publicity still taken of a prop head that Smith created):
with another photo of Kane with a rotting face, which WAS a makeup effects test shot that was never filmed, at least not in the way as it was originally planned. Three of those shots can be seen here:
Doug Drexler said he recalled the “frozen bodies” scene being filmed during principal photography (the bodies were created by Cal Acord’s effects crew, not Drexler’s).
I remember the family frozen (and it didn't look like an egg fest), the amulet and Kane touching it (and thinking how cheesy). I remember: Carol Anne & Tangina waving goodbye, no dialogue and it was slowed down (slow Motion), they were both crying.
I've worked in Hollywood and NY for a while. No one orders a re-shoot during production. Re-shoot means after Principle photography ends. You have to see the rough cut and try to see what's salvageable. If it involves script changes (re-writes), it takes time, money, and approval from many different sources. No one ever shelves a project that has finished photography. Get Real. I believe it came down to; do we release what we have or should we throw a little more money at it and get the focus off O'Rourke. I think a lot of these stories were concocted in order to save the reputation of a little girl with very limited acting ability who recently died not to mention their own collective asses. So I believe, principle photography ended, O'Rourke died while at the same time changes were being discussed and possibly being executed, and then a new final version was made and released. I also believe the re-write was written by a third party but that's just my opinion. Rarely, a re-shoot is written by the originals involved. Someone brought in by the studio to bring a new outlook to the project.
It was around Christmas time and probably Dec. [Actually it was more likely in early November, right before the finished film was rated PG by the MPAA] It wasn't snowing yet but that night I remarked that it wasn't far away. I had just finished a musical about Monet (I really can't remember the name) in which I had the lead and finished up with ‘Drood’ that same year. I was an Actor but I was investing in a corporation called Media Depot which distributed VHS, CD's & other media to stores in the tri-state area. We were considered a big outfit back then and were invited to a whole bunch of different events. Today I write and edit and on rare occasions perform."
Here's Doug Drexler's work calender for the March, 1988 re-shoot of the ending. He had to fly out to Los Angeles from NYC the evening of Monday, March 14th. He worked on the SFX makeups at MGM through the end of the week. Notice the "melting head shoots" notation on Friday March 18th. That was the last shot of the film (Gary Sherman was quoted in Doug's article as saying "That's a wrap!" on that day).
Here's an excerpt from a March 21, 1988 “LA Times” article titled “MGM Ponders Selling of ‘Poltergeist III‘” (the article was published a week after the re-shoot quietly took place, and it's clear that the studio's PR department either did not tell reporter Michael Cieply about the re-shoot, or did tell him "off the record," for publicity reasons that should become clear):
The second "Poltergeist" sequel was already in the can, at a cost of more than $10 million, when the 12-year-old actress died of what had seemed to be flu symptoms, but proved to be septic shock from an unsuspected bowel obstruction. Now MGM has to sell the picture without seeming to exploit Heather, and without creating ghoulish confusion between screen threats to little Carol Anne Freeling and the young actress who played her. "We're caught in a dilemma," acknowledges MGM marketing senior vice president Barry Lorie.
–Publicity is out: Promotional interviews are a favorite tool in selling horror films, and O'Rourke did some publicity for the earlier films. But MGM wants stars Tom Skerritt and Nancy Allen generally to avoid interviews, which would inevitably lead to maudlin questions about Heather.
–Testing is in: Before setting up an ad campaign-which might or might not feature O'Rourke-the studio plans extensive audience-reaction screenings. The tests might help MGM calculate how viewers take to such touches as a proposed dedication to O'Rourke, whose "They're here" and "They're back" lines helped sell the first two films.
David Wardlow, Heather's agent and a close associate of her mother, says the film "will be dedicated to Heather. There's no question about that." But Wardlow says the survivors have no veto rights over marketing plans.
–Meanwhile, safe is better than sorry: Scrambling to regroup after O'Rourke's death, cautious studio executives trimmed a shot of the actress from their initial trailer. But they left in a voice-over in which she delivers the new kicker: "Guess who's back in town...?"
Producer Barry Bernardi, Lorie and Wardlow all said they didn't believe the film would need special editing to defuse any horror scenes that might seem tasteless in light of O'Rourke's death.
[Probably because the "special editing" (re-shoot) to defuse (remove) such "tasteless" horror scenes-the frozen Carol Anne-had already been done!]
In
January 2006, I sent an email to Barry Lorie, who was the marketing
senior vice president for MGM back in 1988 and who was quoted in the
article excerpt above. I asked him if he could shed any more light on
how the studio handled publicity for the film after Heather's passing.
Here's what he sent me:
"It's
too long ago for me to recall any more info than you already have. MGM
wasn't too keen about the picture from the git go, and with the untimely
death of the child, it was a project that sort of fell through the
cracks. I'm sorry I can't be of more help. B. Lorie."
Article concludes here:
Mystery of the Re-Shot ending (1 of 3)
Above, the original ending being filmed on the Chicago set in late June, 1987.
Below is my article that was published in the short lived British horror magazine "Gorezone." It appeared in their December 20th 2005 edition (Issue #4). Below that is a follow up interview that the magazine itself did with "Poltergeist III" director Gary Sherman in Issue #5, and then linked is my second article for "Gorezone," which was published in their February 2006 issue, #6.
NOTE: Both of the online versions of my original published articles have been updated with new and expanded quotes not found in the original published versions.
POLTERGEIST III: Mystery of the (Reshot?) Ending
By David Furtney
On Feb. 1, 1988, child star Heather O'Rourke, best known for her role as "Carol Anne Freeling" in Steven Spielberg's classic Poltergeist (1982) and Brian Gibson's mediocre Poltergeist II: The Other Side
(1986) passed away at the age of 12 from septic shock caused by an
undetected bowel obstruction. The previous year, she had spent three
months, April through June, in Chicago filming the third chapter in
MGM's profitable horror saga. Poltergeist III (or We're Back-Poltergeist Continues as it was known during shooting) was directed and co-written by Gary Sherman, best known for such films as Vice Squad and Wanted: Dead or Alive.
At the time of Heather's death, all press reports (and studio PR
statements) said that she had completed the film prior to her death.
Tabloid stories at the time ghoulishly bantered about the "Poltergeist
Curse" rumor, since on each movie at least one actor had passed away
sometime after filming. Poltergeist III was released June 10,
1988 to terrible reviews. Although it opened in the box office top five
its first weekend, ticket sales shortly thereafter plummeted, and the
film became regarded as a box office flop, earning only 14 million
dollars (the budget was about 10 million). In contrast, the first film
had earned 76 million domestically in 1982, and the second film had
pulled in 40 million.
That
June, I was 8 years old. My mom and I went to an early afternoon
Saturday matinee showing at what was then the Plaza Theatre in my
hometown of Warner Robins, Georgia. During the showing, there were only
four of us in the auditorium-me, my mom, and two teenage guys who sat in
the back and made ghost noises during much of the movie. My mother of
course ended up falling asleep halfway through it. I, on the other hand,
was totally enthralled, and quite unnerved by some scenes. At the end,
after Tangina Barrons (Zelda Rubinstein) sacrificed herself by leading
the evil Reverend Kane "into the Light," two lightning bolts struck the
high-rise on screen just as the credits started to go up. As Kane's
laughter echoed across the Chicago skyline, I thought for sure Poltergeist IV wouldn't be far behind.
Poltergeist IV
never came, although my interest in all three movies continued. During
my freshman year of college, I discovered the power of the Internet
search engine in finding web sites started by some of the people who had
worked on Poltergeist III. This was late 1998. The first
person I contacted was composer Joe Renzetti. During one of our email Q
and A sessions, I discovered a fact about the film I'd never known
before:
Q:
Also, did you score any scenes that ultimately did not end up in the
final film? For example, I've always thought the movie ended rather too
quickly. At the end, Heather O'Rourke's face is not seen after she comes
out of the mirror. Why is that?
The scene in question:
Renzetti:
No. The ending was a re-shoot and sadly Heather had died by that time.
The young girl was a "double." Very observant on your part.
This
information surprised me. After all, I thought I'd known all there was
to know about this movie. Upon further questioning, I learned a few
more details from Mr. Renzetti:
Q: So the ending was re-shot because something was wrong with the previous footage, or because the ending was actually changed?
Renzetti: The first ending just wasn't convincing, so Gary and the studio decided to redo it.
Q: Do you recall anything more about the old ending and why it was re-shot?
Renzetti:
It was a combination of elements. I don't remember the old ending but
it was very "dissatisfying" as most good American endings should not
be. The special FX make-up sucked, the characters were supposed to be
frozen but they looked as if they just survived an egg processing plant
explosion. No,
by the time Gary was finished with the movie, if he heard another
"Carrol-Ann" he probably would have [gone off the deep end].
Thanking
Joe for his information, I then sent an email to Gary Sherman telling
him what Joe had said, and asking what the original ending was (at the
time Gary had his own web site; now he has a blog where he's promoting
his newest film 39). On Jan. 3, 1999, Mr. Sherman responded to me with a detailed statement:
"Dear David,
Happy New Year. You're finally getting an answer. 1998 was more than a little crazy for me and I'm just catching up.
Joe's recollection of the 're-shoot' was not exactly right. It wasn't a re-shoot. The unfortunate fact is that Heather passed away before the end of the film was shot. We were waiting for the SFX make-up to be finished when we lost her. The film came very close to not being finished or released. This would have been my choice as well as that of the heads of the studio. The Board of MGM had a different idea. We were told to either finish it without Heather or they would bring someone else in to do it. I replaced the original 17 page finale with the shortened 3 page abrupt ending that you have seen. Personally, I hate the ending. Maybe if we had been allowed to take time to adjust to and accept Heather's death, we might have created an ending that could have been a tribute to a very wonderful little girl. Instead, a grief-sticken crew did what we had to do as quickly as possible. I'm sure you are going to ask if you can see the 17 pages. Sorry, I tossed my only set a long time ago. I felt it was morbid to keep the pages. As far as the final shooting script goes, it will not be posted on the website. My only copy was requested by, and donated to, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. It is in the permanent collection at the Academy's Margaret Herrick Library. It is hundreds of pages long and as thick as a telephone book. It contains not only the script but complete diagrams of how all the effects were achieved. It is available for viewing, you will have to contact the Academy for details.
Thanks for your interest and your patience.
Sincerely....Gary Sherman"
In the year 2000, Gary gave some additional details in an interview with the horror website www.arrowinthehead.com:
http://www.joblo.com/arrow/interview13.htm
Question: I discovered you thanks to Poltergeist 3. This has been killing me for years...was the ending re-shot? Cause we never see O'Rourke's face in the last frames. If so, what was the original ending?
Sherman: "The ending was not a re-shoot. The original ending was never shot. Heather
died a week before we were scheduled to shoot the ending. There was no
way we could (or even wanted to, for that matter) shoot the scenes
without her. There were some 17 pages left to shoot, most of which was
to be the ending, a tear jerking scene in which Tangina (Zelda
Rubinstein) offers herself as a sacrifice - that she would go over into
the light in exchange for Scott (Kip Wentz), Bruce (Tom Skerritt) and
Carol Anne (Heather) and everyone else. As Carol Anne and Tangina
passed from one side to the other, they were to say 'Good- bye' for the
last time. It was to be not only to be the end of POLTERGEIST III, but
the end of the Poltergeist Trilogy.
We
weren't even going to finish the film at all, after Heather died. I was
not interested, neither was Barry Bernardi or the studio heads, Alan
Ladd, Jr. and Jay Kanter. None of us were. We got together and decided
to shelve the project, at least for the time being. But the MGM board
didn't see it that way. They basically said, 'Look, either you finish
this or we'll get somebody to finish it for you.' Since we weren't
about to let that happen, I half-heartedly wrote that pathetic ending
where Bruce (Tom) and Patricia (Nancy) carry out a photo double, dressed
as Carol Anne, at the end. People just weren't available anymore for
it. We just didn't care about it. Scott (Kip Wentz) couldn't even show
up. He was on the east coast, that's why he's mysteriously missing. But
we just didn't care at the end of it all."
Gary
would go on to tell the E! True Hollywood Story in their "Curse of
Poltergeist" special (2002) much the same story, adding that the film
went on a four month hiatus in October of 1987 because of a "business
obligation" of Sherman's and that the ending was later shot in one day
using a double. As a result, the cast and crew "ended up with a
completely different film" than what they had intended to make.
[UPDATE: Gary Sherman later admitted
(http://www.killerfilm.com/features/read/late-night-classics-poltergeist-iii-35518)
that he only agreed to be interviewed in the E! Special if he had
"Final Cut," which possibly explains why his version of events about the
ending is the only one presented]
However,
actor/director Kipley Wentz, who played Lara Flynn Boyle's boyfriend
Scott (who mysteriously never returns at the end of the film)
eventually went on record via postings to the Internet Movie Database in
2005 as strongly differing with Gary's version of events:
Compiled from https://web.archive.org/web/20040708014605/http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095889/board/nest/2919809
"This is Kipley Wentz writing. I played Scott in the movie.
I know Gary said that in an interview a long time ago, but it's not
true. I was in Los Angeles when they reshot the ending. I was at school
at USC and was a pall bearer at Heather's funeral. Nobody even told me
they had reshot the ending until I saw it at the premiere. So... I
don't know what the thinking was on the production's part. They may
very well have told Gary that I wasn't available. I have no idea. But
for the record, I would have gladly done the reshoots if anyone asked.
It's a bit frustrating that almost 20 years later everyone seems to
think I was cut from the new ending because I was not available or
something. The 'original' ending was shot. The movie was wrapped about
seven months before Heather died. After she died, they wanted to
reshoot the ending because it obviously featured Heather prominently
and it was all very upsetting for everyone. For the record, I was at USC
in Los Angeles, not on the East Coast. Nobody even told me that they
had reshot the ending until I was sitting there at the premiere. It was a
very sad time for everyone involved, and obviously a great source of
confusion ever since. Why Gary would say I wasn't available or we
didn't shoot the ending or whatever, I don't understand, but it doesn't
really matter. And whether people believe my account of the story or
not, well... there's nothing I can do about that. I flew to New York to
work with the special effects guys. They took a cast of my head to make
the 'frozen Scott' that was seen in the original ending. We shot it.
The movie wrapped. There was a big 'wrap party'. We all celebrated
finishing the movie. The following summer, I was at the premiere in
Chicago and saw a totally different ending that nobody had told me
about. I asked the producer what happened to my character at the end,
and he made a bad joke saying, 'We're leaving you out there for
Poltergeist IV'. PLEASE don't read more into that than there is... we
were all sad and uncomfortable that evening and he was no doubt just
trying to avoid the subject. As I recall, he said that things had been
really crazy and they were just trying to deal with it as quickly as
possible.
At
this point, it's impossible to imagine the mood at that time. Everyone
loved Heather, and when she died, releasing the movie or fixing the
ending was the last thing anyone wanted to deal with. It's a sad memory
for everyone involved, and excepting those who are in some way profiting
by keeping this 'mystery' alive, I would imagine that nobody is too
anxious to talk about it. I understand that with conflicting sources it
can be confusing. But 17 years later, it's easy to examine this
logically. In the midst of tragedy, however, logic sometimes goes out
the window."
Later,
others I questioned agreed more or less with Kipley. In late May of
2005, I faxed a question about the ending to P3 producer Barry Bernardi
at his office on the MGM lot, while he was working on the new Adam
Sandler film "Click." On June 2, 2005, he responded with this statement
in a return fax: "A long time ago. I recall that Heather died before the re-shoot and that we used a double."
Jeanne Bonansinga, who served as an assistant editor on the film to main editor Ross Albert, stated:
"I
was on the editing team of 'Poltergeist III.' The original ending was
shot in Chicago as was the entire film. The ending was later re-shot in
LA because the studio didn't like the original ending. Heather was on her way to the set to film the ending when she suffered the obstruction that took her life.
[note: Jeanne is mistaken here; Heather died Feb. 1, 1988. She was
about to go to school that morning. There is no mention in any of the
press reports at the time that she was about to do any re-shoots] If
you watch the ending closely, you never see her face. We used a body
double and shot only from the back. We tried to cut in some shots from
the original ending to see her face, but very few were usable. It was
quite a challenge to shoot, and edit. Her death dictated the way the
[new] ending was written and created. There was a time when we thought
the film would be scrapped because we couldn't shoot the ending without
the main character! It certainly cast a dark shadow on the film. She
was a darling girl. What a shame. We were all just shocked."
In
addition, special effects makeup artist Doug Drexler even wrote an
article in the September 1988 issue of now defunct "Gorezone" magazine
(the one "Fangoria" used to publish) called "Poltergeist III and a half:
The Reshoot." In it, he states:
"I've
been wanting to clue you in on what's shaking with 'Poltergeist III.'
While you were gone, MGM shot a new climax to its Spielberg instigated
spook show carried on by director Gary Sherman, and we were invited.
With only 12 days of prep, it was imperative that we move quickly."
So,
what is the real story? Was the original ending in fact shot, or not?
Was there a re-shoot? The above quotes are provided for the reader to
decide. Repeated efforts to contact other people involved with the film
(as well as MGM/Sony) for comment/clarification have been unsuccessful.
Mr. Sherman clearly does not enjoy talking about the issue. It seems
that the original ending was filmed in late June 1987 and that the
re-shoot took place in March, 1988, over a month after Heather died.
Apparently the initial plan for the re-shoot was to have Kane "go into
the Light" by decomposing on camera after touching Tangina's necklace
(in the original ending, his face simply "exploded with light" after
touching the amulet, an effect that Gary Sherman was not satisfied
with). The special makeup effects crew began work on this new sequence.
However, after Heather died February 1, 1988, MGM temporarily put the
re-shoot plans on hold. A month later, it was decided to redo the
entire ending. This time, the "frozen" bodies of Bruce, Donna, Carol
Anne, and Scott were replaced with "decomposed" versions of Bruce and
Donna only. The "frozen" Carol Anne was likely left out because the
studio understandably felt such a scene could be viewed as "tasteless"
in light of Heather's death.
It's
unclear why Scott was left out of the new ending altogether. Perhaps
MGM execs felt the audience would be confused when he returned with the
family in the original version (he had been seen coming back from the
"other side" much earlier in the film, but alert viewers would have
recognized him as only a "possessed reflection"). The Kane
"decomposition" sequence was toned down and changed to Pat slicing off
his head with a shovel, after which the head then melts on the floor. To
make it more clear that Tangina actually lead him into the Light, the
"Light" is visually shown on screen, as Tangina takes Kane by the hand
and literally walks him into it. Her line to Pat "Tell Carol Anne I'll
always love her-and that her nightmare is over" seems to be a subtle
reference to the tragic passing of Heather.
One final note: in October of this year [2005],
I went to Los Angeles on vacation, and made it to the Margaret Herrick
Library in Beverly Hills that Gary had told me about six years ago. I
was able to read through his personal copy of Poltergeist III's shooting
script. It was fascinating-chock full of notes, sketches, story boards,
etc. Also there were pages of the ending that now appears in the film.
They were dated REVISED MARCH 14, 1988. As for the mysterious "17 pages"
that were supposedly never filmed-I found no trace of them. The
original ending featured in the copy of the script I purchased from
Heather O'Rourke's sister Tammy ran for about 5 pages max (from the
point where Pat falls into the frozen bedroom up through the point where
Carol Anne tearfully waves goodbye to Tangina and the camera pulls back
as the family embraces). The ending in this shooting script ran for
about the same length. If there really were "17 pages" that still needed
to be shot at the time of Heather's death, it's more likely that these
were 17 pages of re-shoots and additional scenes.
*********************************************
In the January 2006 issue of "Gorezone," they did a follow-up interview with P3 director Gary Sherman. Here's
the excerpted interview, followed by my second article, which appeared
in the Feb. 2006 issue (and which Sherman's PR guy allegedly urged
"Gorezone" not to print; to their credit, "Gorezone's" editors felt I
had written a solid rebuttal, and decided to publish anyway).**********************
Gary Sherman grants "Gorezone" a rare interview discussing the topic he least likes to talk about: "Poltergeist 3: The Final Chapter." He discusses everything from P3's ending, Heather's death, and his latest film, "39-A Film by Carroll McKane."
Q: The experience of P3 for many of the cast and crew was not a very memorable experience. Why?
A: "...not a very memorable experience"? Quite the opposite, Heather's death made it a horrid experience that we would all like to erase from our memories.
Q: How did you balance being an executive producer and creating the SFX?
A: Different jobs...different hats.
Q: What's the truth about why the original ending was left on the cutting room floor? There is a statement from Joe Renzetti that it was because "The special FX make-up sucked, the characters were supposed to be frozen but they looked as if they just survived an egg processing plant explosion."
A: First, let me tell you about Joe Renzetti, aside from being about my closet friend on the planet, he is one of the funniest, smartest and most sarcastic people you could meet. The quote you mention was from an interview he did with someone he found to be "annoying, stupid, and pedantic..." This interviewer, who had been pestering everyone, including me, looking for "dirt" was barraging Joe. To get him to stop, Joe gave him a bullshit interview filled with whatever it took to stop the harassment. The answer to the first part of your question is that there was never an original ending shot...Heather's death precluded that happening.
Q: While working on set how did you feel the film was coming along? Do you think the smoke machine FX was over used?
A: Until the tragedy that marked the end of this production, I was very happy with what we were doing...And we NEVER used a "smoke machine." The fog FX was done with liquid nitrogen. And NO...It wasn't overused.
Q: Many critics back in 1988 were very unkind about the film but looking back on it now in parts it's genuinely creepy and superbly handled, making the film feel, at times, like a modern Japanese horror like "The Ring" or "The Grudge." Do you also feel that or do you just hate the whole film?
A: There are parts I'm proud of, like many of the effects. But as a whole, it is the least favorite of my films.
Q: How was the SFX created for the scene when Heather broke her way through her bedroom door to a shocked audience of Tom and Nancy?
A: That effect, like every effect in the film, was shot live on stage. My script, the one I actually used on the set, is in the library at the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. In it are the diagrams, schematics, blueprints, and every detail of how every effect was shot.
Q: Was the following scene below ever shot and if so why was it cut?
The scene is the tear jerking scene in which Tangina (Zelda Rubinstein) offers herself as a sacrifice-that she would go over into the Light in exchange for Scott (Kip Wentz), Bruce (Tom Skerritt) and Carol Anne (Heather) and everyone else. As Carol Anne and Tangina passed from one side to the other, they were to say "Goodbye" for the last time.
A: I've already half answered this question...but to put it to rest for once and for all, just quote me as saying, "The original ending was NEVER shot!" Because the bullshit ending, shot after the tragic loss of Heather, was, by necessity, so short that the overall film was too short. And because of that, the whole film had to be stretched. There was little, if any, usable footage left out of the final cut. And, unfortunately, the overall pacing of the film was destroyed by this re-balancing.
[Gorezone's research team came across a photo of Kane's face cracking. This picture is easily found on the World Wide Web search engines for "Poltergeist 3."]
Q: Was the scene where Kane's face cracks and explodes ever shot? How was this staged? And what happened before this happened?
A: I think I've already answered the "missing scenes" question...There aren't any, and that was never shot, ever.
Q: Did you attend the rough cut screening of "Poltergeist III" or the wrap party? What was the atmosphere like if you did?
A: I believe, if I remember correctly, there was some kind of a party in Chicago before we were to move the remainder of the shoot back to LA. That was before we lost Heather, so I'm sure the mood was up and happy. After Heather's funeral, I think you can imagine what things were like.
Q: What was the original ending? Can you remember it and what SFX did you make for these scenes?
A: You seem to already know something about it, as you previously mentioned. Since it will never be shot, and I personally don't want to put myself through the pain of remembering any of this, let's just drop it...OK?
[Working on "Poltergeist 3" it was plain to "Gorezone" that for Gary it was a painful experience and something best left alone and in the past for everyone involved.]
************************
Here's my article in response, published in the Feb. 2006 issue of "Gorezone:"
www.poltergeistIII.com/mystery2.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)