Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Sun May 19, 2013 8:41 am





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Movies Which Terribly Abuse/Don't Embody Their City 
Author Message
Post Re: Movies Which Terribly Abuse/Don't Embody Their City
Jeff Wilder wrote:
One that doesn't is (I hate to say it) Halloween. The movie is supposedly set in Haddonfield Illinois. But anyone who's paying attention can clearly spot that it was filmed in California, the palm tress being most obvious. Don't get me wrong. I love Halloween. But it does not embody Haddonfield Illinois at all.

They have a certain amount of license, given that the city is made up.


Sat Aug 11, 2012 12:27 pm
Post Re: Movies Which Terribly Abuse/Don't Embody Their City
Ken wrote:
Jeff Wilder wrote:
One that doesn't is (I hate to say it) Halloween. The movie is supposedly set in Haddonfield Illinois. But anyone who's paying attention can clearly spot that it was filmed in California, the palm tress being most obvious. Don't get me wrong. I love Halloween. But it does not embody Haddonfield Illinois at all.

They have a certain amount of license, given that the city is made up.


Yeah but... palm trees in Illinois?
-Jeremy


Sat Aug 11, 2012 2:22 pm
Post Re: Movies Which Terribly Abuse/Don't Embody Their City
thered47 wrote:
Ken wrote:
Jeff Wilder wrote:
One that doesn't is (I hate to say it) Halloween. The movie is supposedly set in Haddonfield Illinois. But anyone who's paying attention can clearly spot that it was filmed in California, the palm tress being most obvious. Don't get me wrong. I love Halloween. But it does not embody Haddonfield Illinois at all.

They have a certain amount of license, given that the city is made up.


Yeah but... palm trees in Illinois?
-Jeremy

That's not as glaring as when films taking place in IL have mountains. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheMountainsOfIllinois


Sat Aug 11, 2012 2:35 pm
Post Re: Movies Which Terribly Abuse/Don't Embody Their City
thered47 wrote:
Yeah but... palm trees in Illinois?
-Jeremy

Maybe their homes had whimsical contractors.

Who come back and replace the palm trees every summer after the cold months kill them off.

Be that as it may, it's still pretty funny to accuse a movie of screwing up a city that doesn't exist.


Sat Aug 11, 2012 4:34 pm
Assistant Second Unit Director

Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 5:49 pm
Posts: 168
Post Re: Movies Which Terribly Abuse/Don't Embody Their City
Threeperf35 wrote:
Just a few words about Se7en: I own a great 2-DVD edition from about 8 years ago. The director's comment track contains a comprehensible explanation regarding the city the movie takes place in. During production New York, Chicago and Seattle came up briefly. The latter ruling out Eastern US. The answer is (as many already pointed out here and elsewhere): generic decadent city in the US.


I'm not sure I understand your post. If New York, Chicago, and Seattle all came up, how does Seattle being one that came up rule out the eastern US any more than New York being one that came up rule out the western US? :?


Sat Aug 11, 2012 5:18 pm
Profile
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 5850
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Movies Which Terribly Abuse/Don't Embody Their City
Oh I'd be remiss if I forgot to mention the fucking hatchet job The Five Year Engagement did to Ann Arbor. Ann Arbor's like a mini-Portland, full of liberals and tons of restaurants and culture. In the movie it's a redneck-filled culinary backwater, and it pissed me off.

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Fri Aug 24, 2012 9:50 pm
Profile
Post Re: Movies Which Terribly Abuse/Don't Embody Their City
JamesKunz wrote:
Oh I'd be remiss if I forgot to mention the fucking hatchet job The Five Year Engagement did to Ann Arbor. Ann Arbor's like a mini-Portland, full of liberals and tons of restaurants and culture. In the movie it's a redneck-filled culinary backwater, and it pissed me off.

It has a sweet arcade, too. There, I played Capcom Vs. SNK 2 against some of the local experts, and I was subjected to abuses to which I still haven't come to terms.


Sat Aug 25, 2012 12:10 am
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 5850
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Movies Which Terribly Abuse/Don't Embody Their City
Ken wrote:
JamesKunz wrote:
Oh I'd be remiss if I forgot to mention the fucking hatchet job The Five Year Engagement did to Ann Arbor. Ann Arbor's like a mini-Portland, full of liberals and tons of restaurants and culture. In the movie it's a redneck-filled culinary backwater, and it pissed me off.

It has a sweet arcade, too. There, I played Capcom Vs. SNK 2 against some of the local experts, and I was subjected to abuses to which I still haven't come to terms.


Ahhhh Pinball Pete's! I spent some good times there

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Sat Aug 25, 2012 8:40 am
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 9:45 pm
Posts: 1677
Post Re: Movies Which Terribly Abuse/Don't Embody Their City
dps wrote:
Threeperf35 wrote:
Just a few words about Se7en: I own a great 2-DVD edition from about 8 years ago. The director's comment track contains a comprehensible explanation regarding the city the movie takes place in. During production New York, Chicago and Seattle came up briefly. The latter ruling out Eastern US. The answer is (as many already pointed out here and elsewhere): generic decadent city in the US.


I'm not sure I understand your post. If New York, Chicago, and Seattle all came up, how does Seattle being one that came up rule out the eastern US any more than New York being one that came up rule out the western US? :?


Well I was referring to an earlier comment mentioning "generic city located in the Eastern US" (very likely including New York and Chicago). Seattle rules that out. It is obvious that the movie is NOT supposed to be set in L.A. even though it has been filmed there (complete with special FX rain).


Sat Aug 25, 2012 10:39 am
Profile
Post Re: Movies Which Terribly Abuse/Don't Embody Their City
Mark III wrote:
ram1312 wrote:
Not sure it applies, but...no it doesn't apply...whatever...

Jurassic Park has the scene where inside guy Newman gets that shaving cream canister to hide the embryos or whatever. The subtitles state that they are in San Jose, Costa Rica yet it's completely obvious that they are on a beach. Guys, San Jose is located dead center of the country.

If a film is ambiguous of it's location then I'm completely fine with "inaccuracies," if that's what you want to call them, but it irks me when they take liberties to tell you exactly where they are and then completely fuck up the area.


Spielberg is INFAMOUS for this sort of thing. Take A.I., for example: ostensibly taking place in the future, it features none of the sights and sounds I experienced when I dropped a heroic dose of LSD back in college. For one, Spielberg didn't show the effects of the Pigeon Revolution that leads our feathered friends into knowledge of Hebrew and the resultant population boom that ultimately gets them elected to congress. And where were the posters of Vince Vaugn, self-appointed President For Life starting in 2023 and, thanks to pigeon-created medical advances, remaining unseated until the Rooster Coup of 2654? Ridiculous oversights, liberties that evince Spielberg hiring second-tier freakonauts for his research. Whatever. I'm hungry.


This reminds me of Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. A small part of the film is set in the city of Ica, in Peru, which happens to be where I was born. And I'm guessing Spielberg assumed that since they speak Spanish, then it must be Mexico, hence why almost everyone either has a moustache or is wearing a sombrero, and there's mariachi music played everywhere. Also, the Nazca lines are not located right next to the Machu Picchu ruins, and they're not guarded by ninjas. And it's funny how, according to the film, you'll find a Mayan-style temple if you travel up the Amazon River. Really, Steven, was it that hard to spend some time reading Wikipedia?

Actually, a lot of overtly patriotic Peruvian film fans made a huge deal out of this, even trying to boycott the film in some cases. Me, I just laughed it off as Spielberg and Lucas being geographically ignorant. Besides, you can't ask for realism from a film where a guy survives a nuclear blast inside a fridge or falls down three consecutive waterfalls without a scratch.


Sun Aug 26, 2012 7:54 pm
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 5850
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Movies Which Terribly Abuse/Don't Embody Their City
neco82 wrote:
Mark III wrote:
ram1312 wrote:
Not sure it applies, but...no it doesn't apply...whatever...

Jurassic Park has the scene where inside guy Newman gets that shaving cream canister to hide the embryos or whatever. The subtitles state that they are in San Jose, Costa Rica yet it's completely obvious that they are on a beach. Guys, San Jose is located dead center of the country.

If a film is ambiguous of it's location then I'm completely fine with "inaccuracies," if that's what you want to call them, but it irks me when they take liberties to tell you exactly where they are and then completely fuck up the area.


Spielberg is INFAMOUS for this sort of thing. Take A.I., for example: ostensibly taking place in the future, it features none of the sights and sounds I experienced when I dropped a heroic dose of LSD back in college. For one, Spielberg didn't show the effects of the Pigeon Revolution that leads our feathered friends into knowledge of Hebrew and the resultant population boom that ultimately gets them elected to congress. And where were the posters of Vince Vaugn, self-appointed President For Life starting in 2023 and, thanks to pigeon-created medical advances, remaining unseated until the Rooster Coup of 2654? Ridiculous oversights, liberties that evince Spielberg hiring second-tier freakonauts for his research. Whatever. I'm hungry.


This reminds me of Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. A small part of the film is set in the city of Ica, in Peru, which happens to be where I was born. And I'm guessing Spielberg assumed that since they speak Spanish, then it must be Mexico, hence why almost everyone either has a moustache or is wearing a sombrero, and there's mariachi music played everywhere. Also, the Nazca lines are not located right next to the Machu Picchu ruins, and they're not guarded by ninjas. And it's funny how, according to the film, you'll find a Mayan-style temple if you travel up the Amazon River. Really, Steven, was it that hard to spend some time reading Wikipedia?

Actually, a lot of overtly patriotic Peruvian film fans made a huge deal out of this, even trying to boycott the film in some cases. Me, I just laughed it off as Spielberg and Lucas being geographically ignorant. Besides, you can't ask for realism from a film where a guy survives a nuclear blast inside a fridge or falls down three consecutive waterfalls without a scratch.


Good stuff Neco. I didn't know you were born in Peru

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Sun Aug 26, 2012 10:29 pm
Profile
Post Re: Movies Which Terribly Abuse/Don't Embody Their City
neco82 wrote:
This reminds me of Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. A small part of the film is set in the city of Ica, in Peru, which happens to be where I was born. And I'm guessing Spielberg assumed that since they speak Spanish, then it must be Mexico, hence why almost everyone either has a moustache or is wearing a sombrero, and there's mariachi music played everywhere. Also, the Nazca lines are not located right next to the Machu Picchu ruins, and they're not guarded by ninjas. And it's funny how, according to the film, you'll find a Mayan-style temple if you travel up the Amazon River. Really, Steven, was it that hard to spend some time reading Wikipedia?

Actually, a lot of overtly patriotic Peruvian film fans made a huge deal out of this, even trying to boycott the film in some cases. Me, I just laughed it off as Spielberg and Lucas being geographically ignorant. Besides, you can't ask for realism from a film where a guy survives a nuclear blast inside a fridge or falls down three consecutive waterfalls without a scratch.

I would venture a guess that this is a matter of being faithful to the movies they're trying to emulate, which--among other things--tended to mash together different historical culture under the vague heading of "exotic".


Sun Aug 26, 2012 11:14 pm
Post Re: Movies Which Terribly Abuse/Don't Embody Their City
Ken wrote:
neco82 wrote:
This reminds me of Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. A small part of the film is set in the city of Ica, in Peru, which happens to be where I was born. And I'm guessing Spielberg assumed that since they speak Spanish, then it must be Mexico, hence why almost everyone either has a moustache or is wearing a sombrero, and there's mariachi music played everywhere. Also, the Nazca lines are not located right next to the Machu Picchu ruins, and they're not guarded by ninjas. And it's funny how, according to the film, you'll find a Mayan-style temple if you travel up the Amazon River. Really, Steven, was it that hard to spend some time reading Wikipedia?

Actually, a lot of overtly patriotic Peruvian film fans made a huge deal out of this, even trying to boycott the film in some cases. Me, I just laughed it off as Spielberg and Lucas being geographically ignorant. Besides, you can't ask for realism from a film where a guy survives a nuclear blast inside a fridge or falls down three consecutive waterfalls without a scratch.

I would venture a guess that this is a matter of being faithful to the movies they're trying to emulate, which--among other things--tended to mash together different historical culture under the vague heading of "exotic".


That actually makes sense. That's probably why I brushed it off and just laughed my way through the entire scene. But some people did get offended by it... probably people with nothing better to do.

There was also an outcry about a bit of dialogue in that same scene, when Indy claims he learned to speak quechua (a local dialect) from Pancho Villa and his men. Of course, Peruvian audiences made a huge fuss about that and called it an insult... and I bet no one took the time to find out that it's actually a reference to the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles TV show.


Sun Aug 26, 2012 11:41 pm
Post Re: Movies Which Terribly Abuse/Don't Embody Their City
neco82 wrote:
Ken wrote:
neco82 wrote:
This reminds me of Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. A small part of the film is set in the city of Ica, in Peru, which happens to be where I was born. And I'm guessing Spielberg assumed that since they speak Spanish, then it must be Mexico, hence why almost everyone either has a moustache or is wearing a sombrero, and there's mariachi music played everywhere. Also, the Nazca lines are not located right next to the Machu Picchu ruins, and they're not guarded by ninjas. And it's funny how, according to the film, you'll find a Mayan-style temple if you travel up the Amazon River. Really, Steven, was it that hard to spend some time reading Wikipedia?

Actually, a lot of overtly patriotic Peruvian film fans made a huge deal out of this, even trying to boycott the film in some cases. Me, I just laughed it off as Spielberg and Lucas being geographically ignorant. Besides, you can't ask for realism from a film where a guy survives a nuclear blast inside a fridge or falls down three consecutive waterfalls without a scratch.

I would venture a guess that this is a matter of being faithful to the movies they're trying to emulate, which--among other things--tended to mash together different historical culture under the vague heading of "exotic".


That actually makes sense. That's probably why I brushed it off and just laughed my way through the entire scene. But some people did get offended by it... probably people with nothing better to do.

There was also an outcry about a bit of dialogue in that same scene, when Indy claims he learned to speak quechua (a local dialect) from Pancho Villa and his men. Of course, Peruvian audiences made a huge fuss about that and called it an insult... and I bet no one took the time to find out that it's actually a reference to the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles TV show.

Temple Of Doom actually got banned in India over the dinner scene with Indy being served things like chilled monkey brains(monkeys are considered sacred in India)


Sun Aug 26, 2012 11:52 pm
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CasualDad, Google [Bot], Sexual Chocolate and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr