I think the entertainment world is always potraying locomotives the wrong way, especially when the show is animated. For example, I saw this one “King of the Hill” episode where Hank’s pickup truck broke down on a grade crossing. A freoght comes, and motive power seemed to be provided by a gray, exaggerated looking EMD F40PH. All railfans know that F40PHS were not used for freight. Who else has noticed these kinds of portrayles? They can be from any show or commercial.
Simpsons, a GP7/9 is pulling a passenger train…
Yes, I know some RR’s geared Geeps for passenger service, but not Amtrak…
The average person doesn’t know anything about railways or the way they operate.
I swear, if you asked 100 people half wouldn’t know that most road trains are manned by two people, and I bet less than 15 could tell you the names of the two positions.
It’s amazing how little people can know about something, of course I know next to nothing about cars and I drive one everyday, so I suppose we pick and choose what we want to know about.
It’s everywhere…
LC
So what, it’s a film/ cartoon, not a documentry
“Simpsons” also did an episode where Homer needed some wood, and he and Bart went to the nearby rail line and started pulling ties up. Homer says,“This line has been abandoned for years”…just as a passenger train (led by an F-unit)comes along, hits the upturned rail, and does a barrel roll over Homer and Bart, and lands back on the rails.[:p]
Then Homer says something like, “You don’t see something like that every day…”[}:)]
I can’t tell u how many times ive complaind about things like that. what is allways worse is when the train dosn’t look like anything that ever existed. I also hate when (9 times out of 10) they use a diesel horn for a steamer, or vice versa.
A cartoon show does not have to convay any sort of reality otherwise why make it into a cartoon? Look at Thomas the Tank Engine and Bugs Bunny, if a train can talk why doesn’t its lips move? and when is the last time you saw a rabbit talk in reality?
Amrak did own GP9 so consievably it might pull a passenger train, to me that is already too realistic for a cartoon.
Ever see that early well done cartoon where Daffy Duck stops the steam train? the train was very well rendered and Daffy plowed up alot of railroad ties stopping this train. hehehe
…And out of the above 100 people, more than half would not be aware there are any trains hauling freight anymore…Probably have no idea why they see one cross a highway crossing occasionally. Probably give it no thought why they are there.
I have a sister-in-law that really believes that trains are a government funded mobile traffic control device. She doesn’t believe that there is actually anything in any of the cars.[
][][][][banghead]
So True. [X-)]
Or when they use European prototypes (at least they got something close enough to be able to tell…) in a North American story…
They do the same thing to the fire service. I’ve got kids books with some pretty outlandish fire engines - same with toys.
There is one thing I have learned about prototypical operations in over fifty years of observing railroad practices: there are no rules. From consists that defy all reasonable description, to re-shops that can yield two different types of trucks on the same car, to the tinplate sort of rail sections used on Ireland’s railroads; there is always a precedent to be found somewhere for rationalizing the most astonishing and bazaar types of operations. Your point is well taken that producers seldom take pains for researching their “props” for any depth of accuracy. Every producer isn’t a Darrell F. Zanuck.
THIS COUNTRY IS SO…BLIND!
BNSFfan.
Ever noticed when a train hits a car in cartoons the train doesnt stop or slow down? Just like on “king of the hill” when the train hits his truck or on the “simpsons” when Homers car is stuck to the front of the train.
Simpsons again;
Lisa goes out to do a report on the abndoned railline…
She says " The onld Union Pacific doesnt run by here anymore…"
She gets cut off, and a Big yellow “thing” come rumbling by With big red letters on every car/loco “Union Pacific”
Movie producers can call on specialists for advice and stock footage on many things; guns, ships, period costumes etc. but trains don’t seem to have anyone a movie producer can call. Does UP have professional film of the Challenger and 844? How about an IMAX with close ups and surround sound of modern freight and super power steam? Early motion pictures used a lot of great footage, non-train nuts don’t know the drama of well filmed trains.
Bing Crosby & Danny Kaye took the Santa Fe to Vermont in ‘White Christmas.’ It was no big deal & I got over it pretty quickly. My daughters didn’t even notice that something was terribly amiss.
These types of mistakes are common in movies & art involving all sorts of technical & historical inaccuracies. The fort built for the film ‘Last of the Mohicans’ was clearly built of logs cut with modern saws.
Cartoons and movies are for entertainment, not to document railroad history. Sheesh!
Wayne
True, but we can nitpick…
A director would never show the skyline of Vancouver (a popular shooting location) and expect viewers to accept it as the skyline of NYC. They go to great lengths to dress their sets so they represent the locale portrayed in the movie. Then they bring a Santa Fe train into “Grand Central”. Granted, a lot of folks won’t notice, but a bunch will, and the credibility of the settting of the story takes a dive. Even the Hooterville Cannonball (a Sierra loco) was suitably dressed.
In “The Majestic” the railroad equipment played a part, but never showed an identity (unless you know museum line’s paint schemes). In fact, in a departure scene, the engineer even whistled off the brakes as they prepared to pull out, and you could hear the diesel winding up in the background. The Geep used was even prototypical for the period of the movie.
Cartoons are indeed cartoons. In many cases the train is part of the caricature, so outlandish is the word of the day. But in other cases, the cars and trucks look real, why can’t the trains?
It is fun to nit-pick and probably everyone does it when a scene involves something near and dear to them or relates to their business. I knew someone who couldn’t watch scenes involving hospitals or medical facilities without giving a running critique of the equipment, supplies, procedures, etc. It meant nothing to me that a monitor of some kind was connected in an odd way. In fact, I’m happy to not get bogged down in the details. The stories themselves usually are tedious enough.
Wayne