More international/cosmpolitan: Chicago vs. San Francisco (Atlanta, downtown, market)

[DubaiUAE]

Originally Posted by Tex?Il?

These are merely filmed in Chicago. They are set in fictional places in some alternate universe. I don't see ANYTHING "Chicago" about the Dark Knight. Sorry.

I think a movie that is SET in a particular city, even if it is filmed somewhere else is more meaningful to me, than a movie that is FILMED somewhere but set somewhere fictitious.

(Movies filmed in Toronto but set in Chicago such as Blues Brothers 2000 (which was a flop I know) or Big Fat Greek wedding) are more "Chicago" to me than the Dark Knight.

The only time that a real world place gets my attention because a movie was filmed there, but set in a fictitious universe is when that place otherwise gets NO other attention. (IE: Lord of the Rings/Hobbit filmed in New Zealand. Poor kiwis, everyone forgets they even exist until Lord of the Rings).

This entire statement shows me that you're pulling information out of an unknown region of yourself.

Have you even watched two of the three films that grossed over $1 Billion I mentioned? The city of Chicago is heavily embedded into the plot of Transformers. Christopher Nolan chose Chicago because of its extremely unique architecture and setting.



My ENTIRE POINT is that Chicago's pop-culture is greater than San Francisco. You people defending SF keep bringing up all these inconsequential facts that are either ancient or do not pertain to topic at hand. Get a grip and just accept that SF is not as "grand" as you may believe.

[anonelitist]

Originally Posted by steeps

OMG... IF DOWNTOWN CHICAGO IS VERY VISIBLY SHOWN IN THESE MOVIES AND MENTIONED? IF CHICAGO'S DOWNTOWN GETS DESTROYED... AGAIN AND AGAIN....YOUNG PEOPLE IN THE WORLD DO REALIZE IT IS CHICAGO?? THEREFORE INFLUENCE NEVERTHELESS OF CHICAGO??? Apparently my other post to you was a meh? I still do not get your NEED TO LESSEN CHICAGO??? WHEN OTHERS DEFEND IT AS NOT EVEN LOCALS?? YOU A FORMER HOMIE DISSING IT YET?

^^^But nobody it's Chicago. Trust me. Only skyscraper nerds would be able to call out a few of the buildings and realize, hey, that's Chicago! It's a fantastic big city backdrop that can be used for generic purposes. SF is too identifiable to make "generic".

[steeps]

Originally Posted by anonelitist

^^^But nobody it's Chicago. Trust me. Only skyscraper nerds would be able to call out a few of the buildings and realize, hey, that's Chicago! It's a fantastic big city backdrop that can be used for generic purposes. SF is too identifiable to make "generic".

Won't argue the point... Batman does not get Chicago mentioned because the city is suppose to always be GOTHAM. It does get mentioned in most other action movies? I think MILLENNIALS In the world do know ...or seek to find out. Word always gets out on social media today.

[anonelitist]

Originally Posted by Caesarstl

Being really liberal with the last few years there huh....

How was that list liberal? Which artists do you disagree with as being strongly associated with the Bay Area?

[DubaiUAE]

Originally Posted by anonelitist

I just have to say - you basically stated that SF has not contributed anything to culture/pop culture. Then questioned what popular movies are based on the city, what bands, etc.

You responded with 2/3 of the new Batman movies (set in Gotham, played by Chicago...but only nerds would even know, and now rightfully the setting is returned to NYC), Tranformers, Divergent, IRobot, Eagle Eye, etc. All of these movies use Chicago as a sci-fi big city backdrop, but none make it clear that the settings are actually Chicago and the movies themselves don't focus on "life in Chicago". So that's not really a contribution to pop culture now is it?

HAHAHAHA oh my God this is too much, I can't, I just can't lol.

I'm a nerd? lol thank you.


If you even watch the first 30 minutes of most of those movies you'll see that Chicago is mentioned MANY times.

Perhaps if you were able to comprehend sentences better you would see that I specifically said "within the past 10 years".


Off-Topic:

Neal Adams, the artist of the Batman comics officially states that the city resembles Chicago due to its architecture, alleys and mobster history, but it was named Gotham because of Bob Kane looking at a phone book in NYC, so you can take that however you like, There's a reason Christopher Nolan chose Chicago and not any other city. The TV show Gotham is filmed in NYC (and it's great), but that has nothing to do with a movie...

[anonelitist]

^^^Chris Nolan also moved setting to New York for his latest Batman movie, and going forward. Something is going right over your little head.

Ferris Bueller's Day Off is a Chicago-filmed movie about life in Chicago. It did wayyy more for American audiences seeing and appreciating Chicago than the Dark Knight.

[steeps]

Originally Posted by NOLA101

I would say that Chicago is more cosmopolitan, but SF is more international. I think that's fair. Chicago has more of a big city feel, and SF has more immigrants and non-American visitors.

Also, LOL at some SF forumers claiming that SF is more exciting because of Apple and Google. Giant corporations don't exactly make a place more exciting, and neither company is based in SF city or metro area anyways. "Hon, let's check out SF because the world's leading search engine is located in a nearby metro area". Yeah, no...

After reading NOLA here defending and DECLARING CHICAGO MORE COSMOPOLITAN OVER SF... I WAS FLOORED... LOL

And Tex? Il? Posting this in another thread ... "Will Chicago feel like a worldly, cosmopolitain city coming from San Francisco?"

Originally Posted by Tex?Il?

Chicago will absolutely feel like a world class city in regards to any tangible quality coming from San Francisco or anywhere really.

Now, Chicago might have a higher % of its residents or neighborhoods that may come across as a bit "out of the loop" in regards to the cultural and demographic changes that have affected world class cities all over, but that is a whole separate discussion.

I'm REALLY CONFUSED... LOL NOLA DEFENDS CHICAGO??? WHO KNEW....

[DubaiUAE]

Originally Posted by anonelitist

^^^Chris Nolan also moved setting to New York for his latest Batman movie, and going forward. Something is going right over your little head.

Ferris Bueller's Day Off is a Chicago-filmed movie about life in Chicago. It did wayyy more for American audiences seeing and appreciating Chicago than the Dark Knight.

Why just bring up Ferris Bueller's Day Off if you're going to bring up rather old movies, why not bring up Home Alone, The Breakfast Club (close enough right?), The Untouchables, The Fugitive, etc.

Your lack of knowledge is overwhelming,

first off, Christopher Nolan is not directing any more Batman movies,

second, The latest Batman movie (Batman vs. Superman, directed by Zack Snyder) is being filmed in Chicago.

third, The Dark Knight was primarily filmed in Chicago. The Dark Knight Rises was not primarily filmed in New York...

Fourth, go back to school, because your reading-comprehension needs a little fixin'.

Fifth, please watch more movies...


Every recent Batman movie has been based on the below storyline.

"In 1971, writer Dennis O'Neil and artist Neal Adams came aboard the title and re-infused it with the darker tones of the 1940s.[20] O'Neil and Adams introduced a new villain named Ra's al Ghul,[21][22] and would also revitalize the Joker by bringing him back to his roots as a homicidal maniac who murders people on a whim.[23][24] Comics historian Les Daniels observed that "O'Neil's interpretation of Batman as a vengeful obsessive-compulsive, which he modestly describes as a return to the roots, was actually an act of creative imagination that has influenced every subsequent version of the Dark Knight."[27] Len Wein became the writer of the series with issue #307 (January 1979) and in his first issue, created Wayne Foundation executive Lucius Fox,[31] later portrayed by Morgan Freeman in the movies Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, and The Dark Knight Rises."


"Batman artist Neal Adams sees the 1940s mobster history of Chicago as the basis for Gotham"

"Christopher Nolan has stated that Chicago is the basis of his portrayal of Gotham, and the majority of both Batman Begins (2005) and The Dark Knight (2008) were filmed there."

You keep bringing this thread off-topic. Anyway, the pop-culture of Chicago exceeds San Francisco greatly.

[jessemh431]

How do movies being set in a city make it more cosmopolitan? I'm confused as to how we got this deep into a rabbit hole here. By that logic, LA is the cosmopolitan city in the world and nobody would even come close. As a native Angeleno, even I can't say that LA is more cosmopolitan than NYC, London, or Paris.

I said it before and I'll say it again, as have others. SF is more international. Chicago is more cosmopolitan. SF has immense diversity of Asian cultures, people, and languages. But, from what I've noticed, Chicago has a more varied diversity. There are Irish, Italian, Polish, Russian, Ukrainian, Puerto Rican, and Greek populations I can think of off the top of my head. A quick google search and apparently there is Chinatown, Little Vietnam, Little India, and Czech, German, Swedish neighborhoods. In SF, off the top of my head, there's Little Russia, 2 Chinatowns, Japantown, Little Italy, Little Saigon (in the TL), and the Mission. Am I missing any others? I guess you can throw in Daly City as Little(?) Manila? I did a google search and couldn't find much more. Additionally, Chicago has done a lot for the black community, even if the South Side is the Baghdad of America today. And someone was mentioning the music scene. No matter your stance on how good electronic dance music is, there's no denying it's worldwide popularity right now. Chicago is the birthplace of house music, the original genre that led to all the current subgenres of house and electronic music today.

Also, I can't comment on a lot of the ethnic villages in Chicago, but I can on SF's. Chinatown is a giant tourist trap that sells stupid little knick knack things with subpar Chinese food. The true Chinatown is the Inner Richmond. That's where the good Chinese food is. And Japantown is just a few restaurants and stores of Japanese culture with no real Japanese people living there. Little Italy is a collection of Italian restaurants being encroached upon by Chinatown full of tourists with not many Italian residents. Little Saigon is a few Vietnamese restaurants surrounded by crackheads and heroin junkies. The Mission is turning into hipsterville almost entirely throughout now. For real ethnic neighborhoods, you gotta leave the city of SF. The exception would be Little Russia. There really are tons of Russian families and Russian markets and cafes in the Richmond.

Being a little biased, but I also love the fact that Chicago has a Koreatown. I haven't had the pleasure of visiting it yet, but coming from LA, the land of KBBQ and the largest Korean population outside of Korea, the Korean culture is my favorite Asian culture and KBBQ is one of my favorite cuisines.

[HC1980]

[quote=NOLA101;38009394]
Also, LOL at some SF forumers claiming that SF is more exciting because of Apple and Google. Giant corporations don't exactly make a place more exciting, quote]

Have to disagree with you there. My experience in major cities has always been dictated by Google and Apple, more so Google.