Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2014 17:56:11 GMT
I watched the four original Superman movies this week on-line and when it came to part four, I was nearly knocked out of my seat ....as Lois Lane goes about getting somewhere in Metropolis via the Metro City Subway (Metropolis Subway system) ....  I was sitting there thinking, that looks an awful lot like a London Underground station...the design, shape, architecture...the lot  Then I saw the side of the train and could have sworn that looks like a Piccadilly Line train in the old livery. I thought to myself ...."cant be...., why the hell would they use a tube station. As nice as it is to see , wouldn't it have been better to film on the New York Subway for authenticity?"  Clark Kent follows and makes for the train  ......"COME ON CLARK!!!".......  ....and misses it!!!  ......Blatantly a 1973 Piccadilly Line train, I don't care what the destination blind says!  As Lois stands in the train and reads her magazine, I can't help feeling a little nostalgia over the yellow wallpaper the trains used to have in those days...  I mean, look  Something happens to the driver (Metro City Transit???!!!  )  Lois slowly starts to realise that something isn't quite right about the train...and sees she is on the London Underground...  And screams out "help Superman!!!"  ................................  Clark desperately looks for an ideal place to secretly change into the Superman outfit. They put Metropolis South signs over the real ones.....  They had telephone booths in Aldwych Tube Station?  "Perfect!!".....  And Superman flies into the tunnel  ...and strangely comes out into the exact same station and platform, where he demonstrates for us that with his powers, he can stand on the live rail without being electrocuted  Cool stuff  (Christopher Reeve as Superman, Statue Of Liberty on poster, torch lit, New York 10018....still can't conceal the fact that this is a London Tube Station, ha ha )  "Move aside ladies and gentleman, and let me show you how a tube train is driven!" (Christopher Reeve getting into a 1973 Piccadilly Line tube train, wow, ha ha)  And Superman goes about taking us to Heathrow, telling us that even HE couldn't fly us ALL to where we want to go......  ...but comes back out saying that it is crampy in there  And flies back to Krypton  I found this interesting that they decided to use a tube station as a stand in for the New York Subway, as they look nothing alike. Also interesting is the fact that they filmed the majority of the film in MILTON KEYNES!!! On a side note, Superman IV SUCKED!!! : ) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2014 17:59:27 GMT
Nice one, never knew that.
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,724 
|
Post by class411 on Dec 3, 2014 11:06:30 GMT
Surely 'Metropolis' isn't New York?
So the last thing they would want (for an American audience, at least) is to use an underground system that is clearly known to be somewhere that is NOT Metropolis.
|
|
|
|
Post by bassmike on Dec 3, 2014 13:45:54 GMT
Metrolopis
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2014 14:35:16 GMT
Surely 'Metropolis' isn't New York? So the last thing they would want (for an American audience, at least) is to use an underground system that is clearly known to be somewhere that is NOT Metropolis. Metropolis is supposed to be entirely based on New York City, which is why in Superman 1 he flew Lois Lane past the Statue Of Liberty and the Empire State Building In Superman IV, the one with Aldwych Station, Superman places the Statue Of Liberty back in place and visits the UN building (all shot in Milton Keynes of course!) In fact Metropolis IS New York City, but only name changed in Superman's world ,.. which is why they placed hot dog stands and yellow cars and buses in the streets of Milton Keyenes when filming....and I think the film-makers specifically said "we used Milton Keynes as a stand in for New York City" Poor choice if you ask me.... if they had budget problems...why not somewhere a bit more similar, like Toronto, etc? Even Superman fans in You Tube and IMDB said that it CLEARLY looks like the London Underground, with the distinct train and station The reason they shot in England was budget constraints, whereas the first three Superman movies were all filmed in New York City and the real subway I can't see why they couldn't shoot in the Toronto Subway, or something, as at least it is very SIMILAR to the NYC Subway in looks. Seeing people who are NOT train enthusiasts have said it is CLEARLY a London Underground train and station, because of "the distinct shape of the train", etc, suggests this was a huge mistake. They should have just had Lois and Clark visit London in the films story...then they could have got away with it and it would have looked right... as they would have been on the London Underground IN THE STORY too!! |
|
|
|
Post by John Tuthill on Dec 3, 2014 15:06:50 GMT
Surely 'Metropolis' isn't New York? So the last thing they would want (for an American audience, at least) is to use an underground system that is clearly known to be somewhere that is NOT Metropolis. Metropolis is supposed to be entirely based on New York City, which is why in Superman 1 he flew Lois Lane past the Statue Of Liberty and the Empire State Building In Superman IV, the one with Aldwych Station, Superman places the Statue Of Liberty back in place and visits the UN building (all shot in Milton Keynes of course!) In fact Metropolis IS New York City, but only name changed in Superman's world ,.. which is why they placed hot dog stands and yellow cars and buses in the streets of Milton Keyenes when filming....and I think the film-makers specifically said "we used Milton Keynes as a stand in for New York City" Poor choice if you ask me.... if they had budget problems...why not somewhere a bit more similar, like Toronto, etc? Even Superman fans in You Tube and IMDB said that it CLEARLY looks like the London Underground, with the distinct train and station The reason they shot in England was budget constraints, whereas the first three Superman movies were all filmed in New York City and the real subway I can't see why they couldn't shoot in the Toronto Subway, or something, as at least it is very SIMILAR to the NYC Subway in looks. Seeing people who are NOT train enthusiasts have said it is CLEARLY a London Underground train and station, because of "the distinct shape of the train", etc, suggests this was a huge mistake. They should have just had Lois and Clark visit London in the films story...then they could have got away with it and it would have looked right... as they would have been on the London Underground IN THE STORY too!! I remember reading at the time that even Hollywood reckon we have the best special effects people. Also, wasn't some filming done at Didcot power station? Apart from the Aldwych, the whole 'Metropolis' streets were built at Elstree |
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,724
|
Post by class411 on Dec 3, 2014 17:05:31 GMT
Surely 'Metropolis' isn't New York? So the last thing they would want (for an American audience, at least) is to use an underground system that is clearly known to be somewhere that is NOT Metropolis. Metropolis is supposed to be entirely based on New York City, which is why in Superman 1 he flew Lois Lane past the Statue Of Liberty and the Empire State Building In Superman IV, the one with Aldwych Station, Superman places the Statue Of Liberty back in place and visits the UN building (all shot in Milton Keynes of course!) Thanks. I had never realised that Metropolis was supposed to be (or be in) New York. I had always imagined it as some sort of 'everycity'. like Gotham City in Batman. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2014 19:58:19 GMT
Metropolis is supposed to be entirely based on New York City, which is why in Superman 1 he flew Lois Lane past the Statue Of Liberty and the Empire State Building In Superman IV, the one with Aldwych Station, Superman places the Statue Of Liberty back in place and visits the UN building (all shot in Milton Keynes of course!) In fact Metropolis IS New York City, but only name changed in Superman's world ,.. which is why they placed hot dog stands and yellow cars and buses in the streets of Milton Keyenes when filming....and I think the film-makers specifically said "we used Milton Keynes as a stand in for New York City" Poor choice if you ask me.... if they had budget problems...why not somewhere a bit more similar, like Toronto, etc? Even Superman fans in You Tube and IMDB said that it CLEARLY looks like the London Underground, with the distinct train and station The reason they shot in England was budget constraints, whereas the first three Superman movies were all filmed in New York City and the real subway I can't see why they couldn't shoot in the Toronto Subway, or something, as at least it is very SIMILAR to the NYC Subway in looks. Seeing people who are NOT train enthusiasts have said it is CLEARLY a London Underground train and station, because of "the distinct shape of the train", etc, suggests this was a huge mistake. They should have just had Lois and Clark visit London in the films story...then they could have got away with it and it would have looked right... as they would have been on the London Underground IN THE STORY too!! I remember reading at the time that even Hollywood reckon we have the best special effects people. Also, wasn't some filming done at Didcot power station? Apart from the Aldwych, the whole 'Metropolis' streets were built at Elstree Copied and pasted from the films official IMBD page: "The vast majority of the external scenes were filmed in and around Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire, England. Producers Menahem Golan and Yoram Globus couldn't afford to shoot in New York." That is including all the street scenes And yes it does say filmed at Didcot Power Station too, though I don't remember which part looked like a power station Here is a link detailing all the location's in Milton Keynes : www.movie-locations.com/movies/s/superman4.html#.VH9qyMtFDqAOn a side note... Does anyone know if the train used in that scene still runs on the Piccadilly Line? The unit number is shown on the picture I posted above |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Dec 3, 2014 21:17:30 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2014 21:49:13 GMT
Thank you so much for that picture! Wow... I really must look out for that unit, lol So would that be the EXACT car, or just the entire unit? As I don't really understand train unit numbers ... Like is 891 just one car or the whole train? Or half of the train? Cheers |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Dec 3, 2014 22:45:24 GMT
So would that be the EXACT car, or just the entire unit? As I don't really understand train unit numbers ... Like is 891 just one car or the whole train? Or half of the train? Yes, and no, and sort-of. On the Piccadilly Line's 1973 stock, two three-car units make up a train. Most units are made up of Driving motor (DM) - trailer (T) - uncoupling non-driving motor (UNDM), having a cab at one end only, but a few have cabs at both ends (DM-T-DM) to provide a bit of flexibility (and back in the day to allow a 3-car unit to work on the Aldwych branch) car numbers: single-enders are 1xx-5xx-3xx or 2xx-6xx-4xx (DM-T-UNDM) .There are two types: even numbers are A-end and odd numbers are D-end (or is it the other way round?) An "A" can only couple to a "D" (UNDM to UNDM of course). Originally all the A's faced one way and all the D's faced the other but since the T4 loop opened, at any one time half the units (give or take) are back-to-front. Double enders can couple to the UNDMs of single enders provided they are they right way round (odd numbered DM to odd numbered UNDM and vice versa). This one is a double-ender: recognisable (apart from the number) by the vertical flanges on the sides of the cab front to allow inter-car barriers to be connected when the cab is in the middle of a train: single-ender's cabs can't be formed in the middle of a train so don't have these flanges. Other changes in appearance since 1987 are evident: the entire fleet was refurbished, and painted, some time in the intervening 25 years. double enders are numbered 8xx-6xx-8xy (DM-T-DM) where xx is an even number and xy is the subsequent odd number - so this unit is 890-690-891. Unit numbers: units are usually known by their lower-numbered DM : 890 in this case. So if the photo is, as captioned, of No 891 that is indeed the same unit, seen from the same end, and therefore the same car, as in the Superman shots. (some shots may have been taken from the other end of the unit of course). As it was filmed at Aldwych, the unit must have been on its own, and not part of a six-car train. Cars are occasionally shuffled from one unit to another, usually to make one good unit out of two damaged ones: a car may be renumbered to match its new fellows. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2014 23:28:31 GMT
So would that be the EXACT car, or just the entire unit? As I don't really understand train unit numbers ... Like is 891 just one car or the whole train? Or half of the train? Yes, and no, and sort-of. On the Piccadilly Line's 1973 stock, two three-car units make up a train. Most units are made up of Driving motor (DM) - trailer (T) - uncoupling non-driving motor (UNDM), having a cab at one end only, but a few have cabs at both ends (DM-T-DM) to provide a bit of flexibility (and back in the day to allow a 3-car unit to work on the Aldwych branch) car numbers: single-enders are 1xx-5xx-3xx or 2xx-6xx-4xx (DM-T-UNDM) .There are two types: even numbers are A-end and odd numbers are D-end (or is it the other way round?) An "A" can only couple to a "D" (UNDM to UNDM of course). Originally all the A's faced one way and all the D's faced the other but since the T4 loop opened, at any one time half the units (give or take) are back-to-front. Double enders can couple to the UNDMs of single enders provided they are they right way round (odd numbered DM to odd numbered UNDM and vice versa). This one is a double-ender: recognisable (apart from the number) by the vertical flanges on the sides of the cab front to allow inter-car barriers to be connected when the cab is in the middle of a train: single-ender's cabs can't be formed in the middle of a train so don't have these flanges. Other changes in appearance since 1987 are evident: the entire fleet was refurbished, and painted, some time in the intervening 25 years. double enders are numbered 8xx-6xx-8xy (DM-T-DM) where xx is an even number and xy is the subsequent odd number - so this unit is 890-690-891. Unit numbers: units are usually known by their lower-numbered DM : 890 in this case. So if the photo is, as captioned, of No 891 that is indeed the same unit, seen from the same end, and therefore the same car, as in the Superman shots. (some shots may have been taken from the other end of the unit of course). As it was filmed at Aldwych, the unit must have been on its own, and not part of a six-car train. Cars are occasionally shuffled from one unit to another, usually to make one good unit out of two damaged ones: a car may be renumbered to match its new fellows. Cheers for the info, and for taking the time to write it. I didn't know about units and stuff, so that helps Here is another screenshot from the Superman film, of the driver going down...and it is written in felt tip pen in the front door 'in car 891'  Another question....what is the other number in the front of the cab that says '467'? |
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,225
|
Post by rincew1nd on Dec 4, 2014 1:17:33 GMT
Mmmm, I do like the double ended units and their 'fins'. |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Dec 4, 2014 12:29:29 GMT
Thye big "D" inside the door indicates that it is the D end of the unit (and therefore should only be coupled to the "A" end of another unit) - these stickers only became necessary when the T4 loop opened: until then all A ends faced one way and all D ends faced the other way, so having two D-ends facing each other could never happen. (If you are wondering what happened to B and C, I understand the letters originally referred to the axles on each car, of which there are of course four)
467 is the duty number - which roster that train is working that particular day. In the refurbished units it appears above the destination display.
|
|
hobbayne
RIP John Lennon and George Harrison
Posts: 516
|
Post by hobbayne on Dec 4, 2014 15:40:31 GMT
Yes, and no, and sort-of. On the Piccadilly Line's 1973 stock, two three-car units make up a train. Most units are made up of Driving motor (DM) - trailer (T) - uncoupling non-driving motor (UNDM), having a cab at one end only, but a few have cabs at both ends (DM-T-DM) to provide a bit of flexibility (and back in the day to allow a 3-car unit to work on the Aldwych branch) car numbers: single-enders are 1xx-5xx-3xx or 2xx-6xx-4xx (DM-T-UNDM) .There are two types: even numbers are A-end and odd numbers are D-end (or is it the other way round?) An "A" can only couple to a "D" (UNDM to UNDM of course). Originally all the A's faced one way and all the D's faced the other but since the T4 loop opened, at any one time half the units (give or take) are back-to-front. Double enders can couple to the UNDMs of single enders provided they are they right way round (odd numbered DM to odd numbered UNDM and vice versa). This one is a double-ender: recognisable (apart from the number) by the vertical flanges on the sides of the cab front to allow inter-car barriers to be connected when the cab is in the middle of a train: single-ender's cabs can't be formed in the middle of a train so don't have these flanges. Other changes in appearance since 1987 are evident: the entire fleet was refurbished, and painted, some time in the intervening 25 years. double enders are numbered 8xx-6xx-8xy (DM-T-DM) where xx is an even number and xy is the subsequent odd number - so this unit is 890-690-891. Unit numbers: units are usually known by their lower-numbered DM : 890 in this case. So if the photo is, as captioned, of No 891 that is indeed the same unit, seen from the same end, and therefore the same car, as in the Superman shots. (some shots may have been taken from the other end of the unit of course). As it was filmed at Aldwych, the unit must have been on its own, and not part of a six-car train. Cars are occasionally shuffled from one unit to another, usually to make one good unit out of two damaged ones: a car may be renumbered to match its new fellows. Cheers for the info, and for taking the time to write it. I didn't know about units and stuff, so that helps Here is another screenshot from the Superman film, of the driver going down...and it is written in felt tip pen in the front door 'in car 891' Another question....what is the other number in the front of the cab that says '467'? Its the train number. Train numbers were set by a thumbwheel on the right hand side of the cab. After the 1996 refurb they were set by a digital display on the front of the cab under the destination blind. In this case 467 is not a valid set number. The Picc uesd numbers from 240 to 347. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2014 13:24:53 GMT
Thanks for both your replies, great information
Even on the refurbished trains, the place where the duty number originally was is still visible at the front
in regards to the refurbishment in the 90s, which I can remember happening ...which one do you prefer? the train in its original state or the refurbished one? I prefer the refurbished look myself, as it makes the train look newer and brighter, plus more colourful . As nostalgic as it is, the original state looked to generic to me and dull.....yellow wallpaper, etc...but I guess that suited the 70s and 80s ......?
cheers
|
|
|
|
Post by Indefatigable on Dec 5, 2014 23:48:16 GMT
I have my own question... For shots where the driver is clearly visible and the unit in motion was it a LU operator dressed up or did they do the old trick of filming in the reverse cab with all motions backward so that when they reversed it it looks normal?
|
|
|
|
Post by csalem on Dec 6, 2014 20:50:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by revupminster on Dec 7, 2014 7:20:07 GMT
DC Comics (the DC originaly stood for Detective Comics) had a policy of not using real cities to broaden the appeal across the USA hence Superman, Metropolis; Batman, Gotham City; Flash, Central City; Green Arrow, Star City. Marvel Comics entered the super hero field and based most of their characters in New York. Because of poor distribution in the USA in the 40's -70's A January issue was published in October to give it a long life in the supermarkets and would not arrive in Britain until March, six months after publication. There was only one specialist comic shop "Dark they were and Golden Eyed" in Berwick Street, Soho where you could get the comics within days of publication, that I knew of. This shop after a few relocations and change of names developed into Forbidden Planet. |
|
|
|
Post by blackhorsesteve on Dec 7, 2014 12:56:20 GMT
Video here - think I spotted a couple of continuity errors but I could be wrong:
|
|
|
|
Post by theblackferret on Dec 7, 2014 15:03:36 GMT
DC Comics (the DC originaly stood for Detective Comics) had a policy of not using real cities to broaden the appeal across the USA hence Superman, Metropolis; Batman, Gotham City; Flash, Central City; Green Arrow, Star City. Marvel Comics entered the super hero field and based most of their characters in New York. Because of poor distribution in the USA in the 40's -70's A January issue was published in October to give it a long life in the supermarkets and would not arrive in Britain until March, six months after publication. There was only one specialist comic shop "Dark they were and Golden Eyed" in Berwick Street, Soho where you could get the comics within days of publication, that I knew of. This shop after a few relocations and change of names developed into Forbidden Planet. I remember them in Berwick Street-somewhere around the time I purchased a garlic press in the street market there in 1988 for 50p-and it still works! There also used to be one in Camberwell Church Street (as that bit of the A202 is), just after its' junction with Camberwell Grove, on the left hand side of the road as you walk towards Camberwell Green & before the next junction with Grove Lane on that side. From what I remember, this was late 60's to about 1976-it was still there after my Nan moved to Hounslow in 1975, but not when I was job-hunting round there in 1977. There were Maltese & both Greek & Turkish Cypriot shop-owners on that stretch and all three had relatives over the pond, hence the ready supply of up-to-date DC comics, together with some cracking vintage, including the very first Batman appearance (which wasn't it his own comic, I believe?), which went for £1,500! |
|
)
