Will Detroiters ever accept a TV show or movie like Martin v. filmed elsewhere?

I am watching episodes on DVR of an ABC sit-com called Happy Endings. It's supposed to take place in Chicago, but it's obvious from the street scenes that it is filmed someplace else and they just call it Chicago. I thought about Detroit 187 and how many people weren't satisfied until every last scene was filmed in Detroit. There was also some backlash on DY about the HBO show Hung when certain scenes turned out to be LA doubling as GP. Then I thought about the Fox comedy Martin. The only Detroit scene in that show was the shot of Martin's apartment building on Jefferson, yet people were OK with Martin taking place in Detroit.

I don't know the fate of Happy Endings, but I like it and it's pretty funny. Seems to me that there is a net benefit in saying that a show takes place in a city even if it's not filmed there. Think about Happy Days and Laverne & Shirley and what it did for Milwaukee. Do you think Detroiters will be happy to just get mentioned in a TV show or movie? Will everything get pooh-poohed by Detroiters unless it's 100% keepin' it real MADE IN DETROIT?

I don't think to many people, if any, are going to trip over a television show that's filmed in a sound studio on a hollywood lot. That's no big deal.

The difference for dramas or movies is that people want to see something authentic on the screen. Seeing the actors physically present, not just a few landmark shots, in the city always adds a little flavor to a production. After all, if a movie like Robocop is going to be set in Detroit as an indication of how screwed up the situation is that the main characters have to go through, it would help the audience if they're able to see something that shows it's Detroit and not just rely on the characters of the movie saying they're in Detroit.

But, for the most part, Detroiters are like anyone else watching television or going to the movies. We just want to see something good.

Detroit 1-8-7 was not originally intended to be filmed in Detroit. The reason it came to Detroit was the film credits, otherwise Atlanta would likely have been the stand in for the entire series/season run.

The street scenes for the "Temptations" mini series were filmed in Pittsburgh. Viewers who are not familiar with the Detroit places portrayed in the film wouldn't really notice the difference, but I surely did.

I think it is a riot whenever anything shows up on TV or the movies that I recognize. It makes the story more 'real'...that transcendance or suspension of disbelief is much more secure.

Doesn't matter if it is Detroit, Chicago, LA...where-ever.

Conversely, I totally hate it when there is a disconnect. When they say they are in one place, yet I know for sure they are not. Blows the whole illusion for me, and is unrecoverable.


Because I know Detroit better than other locations, and I'm filled with the Spirit of Detroit [[well, that and horseshit, according to some folks!)...AND I'm totally aware of all the exciting positive things which were happening all around with family, friends, businesses, and neighbors with the influx of Hollywood here during the pre-Snydely days of film credits...I'm now going to be sick to death every time I encounter faux-Detroit onscreen.


Cheers

This may sound a bit weird but some in the historical circles actually plan vacations around the buildings used or viewed in movies,through the years the house used in Gone With The Wind has drawn millions to the local economy in tourism,so even though movies are more of the entertainment aspect I think locally produced does have its side benefits and advantages.

Can you please fire off a missive about that to Governor Snydely for us?!

[[as IF you aren't busy enough...heh)

There was some italian-made movie that was obviously filmed in Detroit. Don't know what it was called, didn't watch much of it, it was horrible. I think I saw a police car badged as "Miami Police" in one scene - with everyone in heavy coats and snow on the ground

At Virginia's ratifying convention in 1788, George Mason made the case for a citizen legislature grounded in reality: "Nothing so strongly impels a man to regard the interest of his constituents, as the certainty of returning to the general mass of the people, from whence he was taken, where he must participate in their burdens."

He would not reply anyways ... lol