Favorite Train Movies

[RAM]

I just love these movies where they go to new york city on the Santa Fe or go to the west coast with a train pulled will a GG1.

[taz-of-boyds]

Go GG1 go!
Charles

[WGL]

 I was watching "Sleepers West," a 1941 Michael Shayne detective movie. The train travels from Denver to San Francisco & is pulled by a steam locomotive called the Commanche.  Does that ring a bell or toot a whistle for anyone?

[SteamGene]

Speaking of anachronisms, there was a remake a few years ago of "I'm a Fugitive from a Georgia Chaingang."  In the beginning the protagonist leaves a train yard - full of 50' boxcars without full ladders or roof walks, 100ton covered hoppers, beer can tank cars, etc.   Fortunately, no locomotives were visible.  The rest of the movie was set in the period 1919-1940. 
Gene

[Johnson Bar Jeff]

I stand, err sit, corrected and am mortified. I think I'll go over to Pixlie and down my woes in a big root beer float.

Aw, heck, and you didn't invite me to join you? I love root beer floats! 

Just don't go burning any railroad ties on your way back to Hooterville. It makes the Cannonball put out too much black smoke. 

[Johnson Bar Jeff]

Speaking of anachronisms, there was a remake a few years ago of "I'm a Fugitive from a Georgia Chaingang."  In the beginning the protagonist leaves a train yard - full of 50' boxcars without full ladders or roof walks, 100ton covered hoppers, beer can tank cars, etc.   Fortunately, no locomotives were visible.  The rest of the movie was set in the period 1919-1940. 
Gene

Here's another one for you. Early in Brokeback Mountain, Heath Ledger watches a freight pass, in 1963 Wyoming, with no caboose. ...

[glennk28]

One of my late railroad friends was a retired USMC Lt. Col.  Ot one time during his career, he and his unit were detailed to assist director Otto Premminger in a movie about the Marines in WWII.  They were shooting scenes involving artillery.  After a couple of days of this filming, Premminger asked the Col. to turn the guns around and sshoot the other direction to get footage as the other side.  The Col. protested that it wouldn't look right--to which Premminger replied:  "The popcorn eaters won't know the difference".    I'm sure the attitude still prevails.  We may know something is incorrect, but "the popcorn eaters------ '

gj

[WGL]

  Prior to the 1950s, movies were 1.37: 1, a rather arbitrary choice, since humans' binocular vision is suited to a wider ratio.  TV screens at 1.33: 1 are slightly narrower than the old movie format.  Looking at credits, one will often see that a letter on each side of the screen is missing.
You probably know that Cinemascope was introduced to get people away from their TV screens & back into movie theaters.  The great directors compose each shot & don't like the ends lopped off to fill a TV screen.  In pan-&-scan, you often don't see the actors interacting, because one is lopped off the screen.  There's a scene in "How to Marry a Millionaire" in which two actors are conversing at a table; only their noses appear, but the lamp in the middle seems to be the focus.  I love letterbox.  When I watch "Desk Set," I want to see both Spencer Tracy & Katharine Hepburn in the picture reacting to each other, as the director intended.  "Lawrence of Arabia" profits from ultra-widescreen format, while movies set mostly indoors are usually better filmed in 1.37: 1 or 1.85: 1
  For train scenes, 1.37: 1 is better for cramped interiors of cars, while for exterior shots, widescreen can show a panorama of the entire train.
  I remember seeing film of a dying John Huston on oxygen testifying before Congress against colorization of his & others' films.  I expect that he felt the same about cropping his widescreen films.
  I'm glad finally to have a 16x9 TV screen.  It eliminates letterboxing of the now standard 1.85: 1 & makes images in Cinemascope bigger.

[Woody Elmore]

Charles Bronson made a movie, the name of which eludes me, about a depression era guy who fights for money. Several scenes include freight cars, several of which were used way after the depression. If I recall, there was an "ICG" box car - the mergers took place thirty years after the start of the depression.

[Johnson Bar Jeff]

  Prior to the 1950s, movies were 1.37: 1, a rather arbitrary choice, since humans' binocular vision is suited to a wider ratio.  TV screens at 1.33: 1 are slightly narrower than the old movie format.  Looking at credits, one will often see that a letter on each side of the screen is missing.
You probably know that Cinemascope was introduced to get people away from their TV screens & back into movie theaters.  The great directors compose each shot & don't like the ends lopped off to fill a TV screen.  In pan-&-scan, you often don't see the actors interacting, because one is lopped off the screen.  There's a scene in "How to Marry a Millionaire" in which two actors are conversing at a table; only their noses appear, but the lamp in the middle seems to be the focus.  I love letterbox.  When I watch "Desk Set," I want to see both Spencer Tracy & Katharine Hepburn in the picture reacting to each other, as the director intended.  "Lawrence of Arabia" profits from ultra-widescreen format, while movies set mostly indoors are usually better filmed in 1.37: 1 or 1.85: 1
  For train scenes, 1.37: 1 is better for cramped interiors of cars, while for exterior shots, widescreen can show a panorama of the entire train.
  I remember seeing film of a dying John Huston on oxygen testifying before Congress against colorization of his & others' films.  I expect that he felt the same about cropping his widescreen films.
  I'm glad finally to have a 16x9 TV screen.  It eliminates letterboxing of the now standard 1.85: 1 & makes images in Cinemascope bigger.

Letterboxing doesn't bother me, but colorization of old B&W films. ... 

[Jhanecker2]

I agree that colorization should not be performed on Old Black & White Movies. First of all very few people know for certain exactly what the real colors originally were . Secondly depending apon what type of black & white was originally used and how that film was lit would would significantly effect the contrast ratio of the picture. That is one reason all those color filters exist for both black & white & also color films .  The interaction of light with film stocks was dependent on color temperature and contrast ratios.

Also Directors are specialists , the narrower the speciality the more they think they Know Everything about Everything Else . Modest aren't they?

All this reminds me , I need a popcorn fix as well . So Good Evening!!!

[Johnson Bar Jeff]

I agree that colorization should not be performed on Old Black & White Movies. First of all very few people know for certain exactly what the real colors originally were . Secondly depending apon what type of black & white was originally used and how that film was lit would would significantly effect the contrast ratio of the picture. That is one reason all those color filters exist for both black & white & also color films .  The interaction of light with film stocks was dependent on color temperature and contrast ratios.

Also, I discovered that they once gave Academy Awards for set decoration for Black and White films. Though it has nothing to do with trains, one of my favorite old films, The Heiress, with Olivia deHavilland and Montgomery Clift, received an Oscar for Best Black and White sets. Can you imagine colorizing a film that actually won an Oscar because it was in Black and White?

[WGL]

 Some of the great directors preferred black & white as a more artistic medium than color--just as some great photographers did, like Ansel Adams, who photographed wild landscapes.

[pdlethbridge]

O Winston Link used Black and white film and used it very well in taking N&W railroad photos.

[WGL]

 I just watched "The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3."  My favorite line is "How the hell do you expect me to run a railroad without swearing?"