MovieChat Forums > Old Joy (2007) Discussion > Why do filmmakers screw with locations?

Why do filmmakers screw with locations?

posted 16 years ago by tpupkin
4 replies | jump to latest

I know, they like the look of different locations and so use them w/o regard to spatial continuity but it always bugs me anyway when I know a place.

Here they are in inner NE Portland (you see the Franz bread sign in the BG), heading to Estacada/Bagby, which is maybe an 1.5-2 hours SE of the greater Portland area.

Then we see them inexplicably driving pretty far in exactly the opposite direction, up St. Helens Road, which is NW. Somehow this lands them in Colton, south of Estacada! So they drive around for a while, get lost, camp out. The next morning they have breakfast in a diner in Linnton -- back in NW Portland up St. Helens Road, and waitress tells them Bagby is about 12 miles away? The map on my phone tells me it's more like 83 miles away. Close enough! No wonder they got lost. Their map apparently contains a few portals.

I know, big deal. It happens in every movie, and certainly nearly every movie shot in Portland. Still, would it really kill a director to pay attention to the details of real places?

[–] morley-17 16 years ago

Spatial continuity in regards to film making usually only pertains to orientating the viewer within the scene, not the entire world. Huge narrative choices would have to be omitted if it were otherwise. It's not as if you can walk into any restaurant in the world and say... "Right, we're shooting here today, everybody piss off!". You arrange to shoot where you can. The film maker isn't lazy or trying to pull a fast one. Believe me, if they could have all their locations all tightly lined up or all sitting right next to each other each one having exactly what's needed for they story, then that's how they'd shoot it.

But or the purposes of movies, spatial continuity really only has to make sense to the story. Undoubtedly some people will notice, but there isn't a lot you can do about that. You just have to rely on you suspension of disbelief.

[–] ecbush 15 years ago

I can understand the restaurant choice being up to who allows filming. Since this was before Twilight, I guess they could've nabbed the Carver Inn. But the real question is why the St. John's Bridge and not Oregon City and Willamette Falls, which would be going in the right direction?
Too bad these sorts of things weren't mentioned in the very sparse commentary.

[–] emptyjuicebox 16 years ago

I know what you mean, man. How am I supposed to go tearing around the streets of San Francisco in my 1968 Mustang Fastback like Bullitt when the car chase wasn't even a continuous route?

[–] jac91604 15 years ago

Having lived in LA many years it is very obvious when the characters are somewhere else than where they say they are.

Has to do with budget and getting permits for location shooting. While I agree with the OP at least they filmed in Oregon.

NY is usually Toronto these days in many films.

This film is on Sundance today. Sounds interesting.