|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Upload your random pictures (part 4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 08-19-2010 01:13 PM
quote: John Wilson
Well what were they supposed to do? Film it all the way across four states?
Yes. A major Hollywood production can usually afford to shoot a movie in more than just one town or one state. At the very least they could send a 2nd unit to capture various establishment shots.
quote: John Wilson
You think The Matrix was shot in some fictional US city? NO, it was shot on the streets of Sydney.
There's nothing wrong in that example because no mention is made of what city where The Matrix takes place. When the story mentions specific places it is actually kind of necessary to properly depict the location. Texarkana, Texas is not a big city, but many people have been through there and may be familiar with certain land marks, specific highways, etc.
Geographic errors are a bigger problem when story is depicting a heavily populated, well known location or the movie uses a location in a heavily populated area (such as parts of Los Angeles) as a substitute for somewhere else. A LOT of people are going to notice the visual lie.
Live Free or Die Hard was hilariously bad with its depiction of locations around Washington, DC. There is no toll tunnel in downtown DC, much less any subterranean street that looks like lower Grand Avenue in downtown LA. DC doesn't have a port that looks like Long Beach or a cork screw approach to a bridge across that port. More than 8 million people live in the greater Baltimore-Washington metro area. Millions more visit that region every year. Do the filmmakers really think none of these people are going to notice?
How about X Files: Fight the Future. Early in the movie the two main characters are walking around on what's supposed to be the roof of a skyscraper in downtown Dallas. But the Die Hard building and other Century City high rises are visible in the background. Durp! Over 6 million people live in the DFW metroplex. Countless millions have seen Die Hard and know that building very well.
quote: Steve Guttag
Movies have historically not used the actual places...there is nothing new here and it doesn't bother me unless it is overt. Sometimes it is fun picking off these discontinuities.
Some movie productions do go to the effort of being accurate with location. Others will substitute one place for somewhere else and hope no one will notice. The productions may have been able to get away with the practice before, but it's stupid for them to keep doing it today. The general public has too many tools at its disposal to spot light the errors. The major productions have the ability to shoot in multiple locations and also have tools to digitally recreate specific locations without having to film there.
Part of the job in suspending the audiences' disbelief is portraying the setting in a believable manner.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 65 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 63 64 65
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[fu]](graemlins/fu.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic