(first posted 3/29/2016) New York City is a mecca for filming. How could it not be? It is an iconic, beautiful city with a government that is friendly to production companies. New York City also offers vast neighborhoods full of turn-of-the-century architecture, allowing filmmakers the opportunity to portray an authentic streetscape from any of the past several decades. My good friend Jason White captured a production company doing just that a few nights ago.
These cars were parked on both sides of East 7th Street in Manhattan’s East Village, between Avenues C and D. Trying to pinpoint the year this film is set in is best accomplished by finding the newest car, which is the 1980-85 Oldsmobile Delta 88 in the background of this photo. Of course, many of us have surely noticed era-inappropriate cars in period films including in this year’s Academy Award-winning Best Picture, Spotlight. Let’s hope the producers of this film got it right. I don’t know about you, but nothing takes me out of a period movie quicker than seeing an era-inaccurate car.
A nice touch of realism for this film shoot, though, are the conditions of the cars. The 1976-79 Buick Skylark in this photo is missing some of its side rub strip and its rear bumper resembles a Crocodile Dentist toy.
Past the Skylark and Delta 88, we spy a beautiful pale blue 1975-79 Lincoln Town Car. This year’s gorgeous Navigator concept, coincidentally, was featured in a similar shade. This photo is a tad blurry but credit to Jason for spending an inordinate amount of time in the chilly March night, sans gloves, to bring us these photos. These last, grand Town Cars are beautifully imposing vehicles: doric columns, if you will, on a neo-classical civic building. Contrast this with the needless fripperies of the ’75-76 Cadillac Sedan de Ville and its awkward C-pillar treatment and rather ungainly front end.
Speaking of needless fripperies, take a look at this 1975 Chrysler New Yorker. I appear to be in the minority on this, judging by previous discussion on the site, but I find these to have some awkward touches. The chromed rocker panel downturn at the rear door looks droopy, not helped by the closed-in rear wheel wells. The rear quarter panels are a tad fussy and even the front end styling is not to my liking, although the 1976 adoption of the Imperial’s front fascia helped matters.
Still, although I am personally not a fan, I can certainly appreciate the concours condition this New Yorker is in. And, of course, what an apt setting for a car with that moniker.
This Mopar is more to my liking: a 1973 Newport. The last year of the “fuselage” generation, the 1973 Chryslers featured a very angular and squared-off appearance, very different in appearance from the previous year’s Chryslers. Interestingly, the all-new ’74 models attempted a slightly more fluid look right as the market was embracing a very upright, formal aesthetic.
While the 1973 Newport and New Yorker looked very different from the chrome loop bumper-wearing 1972 models, they looked very similar to GM offerings of previous years. The front-end resembled an exaggerated interpretation of the 1971 Chevrolet Caprice, while the rear end had distinctive notes of Oldsmobile. Still, production numbers for the Chrysler range increased in 1973 by around 30,000 units.
Speaking of the Chevrolet Caprice, here is a 1973 model. You can see where Chrysler cribbed from the styling, with the Chevy’s imposing, sculpted hood.
The rear end is somewhat more rakish and yet still very attractive. The following year, larger 5-MPH rear bumpers were added which upset the balance of the Chevy’s derriere. However, you can’t blame regulatory standards for the other styling changes Chevrolet inflicted on some of its B-Bodies for 1974. The new “Custom” coupe and “Sport” sedan rooflines, in my opinion, sullied the styling of the big Chevys, and similar revisions to GM’s other full-size models ensured that by 1976, they looked dramatically different than they did at the beginning of the generation. And not for the better.
If you like clean lines, the Mercury Zephyr – and its Ford Fairmont twin – were just the antidote to a decade of padded vinyl roofs and other ostentatious design features. Clean, boxy and crisp, although to some achingly anonymous, these couldn’t look any more different from the button-tufted Broughams of the decade. Finally replacing the dated Maverick, which had been supplemented by the formal Granada, the Fairmont was very European in its styling restraint. These arguably look best in more basic trim levels: leave the rub strips and vinyl roofs, or the flashy Futura coupe roofline, and just appreciate the Fairmont for the inoffensive, inexpensive box that it is.
Although the Fairmont and Zephyr arrived in 1978 to replace the Maverick, that role was originally reserved for the 1975 Ford Granada and Mercury Monarch. When buyers started shopping for smaller vehicles in the wake of the OPEC Oil Crisis and soaring gas prices, Ford cleverly kept the Maverick and positioned the Granada as a more aspirational “senior compact” despite its shared, 1960 Falcon underpinnings. Despite the arrival of the more modern and space-efficient Fairmont/Zephyr, Ford kept these around and they continued to enjoy strong sales. The Granada and Monarch were by no means world-beaters in handling or mechanical refinement, but they were one of Ford’s biggest success stories in the 1970s, showing that compacts need not be utilitarian and only for skinflints.
Like I imagine many Granadas and Monarchs did back in the day, this one is missing its fuel filler door.
Even in the context of this film, this 1960 Pontiac is old. It has clearly been well cared for, however, and has obviously not been parked on NYC streets its whole life. For 1959, the Pontiac range was dramatically redesigned with a wider track and thus better proportions; high-end models also lost a lot of their excessive ornamentation. The result was one of the most beautiful American cars of that year.
For 1960, the rear-end was toned down a little bit and the dual-nostril grille sadly removed. Pontiac designers realized the dual-nostril grille was an important visual signature and it returned for 1961, although they removed it from the 1962 Tempest and returned it the following year. The dual-nostril grille was employed by countless Pontiacs between then and the brand’s demise in 2009.
This ’60 is painted in a very plain pale green and I believe it is a Catalina.
This 1974-76 Plymouth Valiant is also painted green, albeit a richer forest green. The handsome green, rub strip and hood ornament contrast with the dog dish wheels and that very basic bumper. Still, this is no Valiant Brougham: this looks like a well-kept, skinflint special.
And if you’re more of a Dodge person, here’s a mechanically-related Dart. Again, in green. There sure are a lot of Mopars on this street! While the detailing of the Valiant’s grille is nice, I think the Dart has a more attractive face. Despite their age, these were still selling quite well in the wake of the oil crisis. It’s a shame, though, that Chrysler never rebodied the sedan like they did in Australia. The contemporary Australian Valiant had smooth, handsome Fuselage styling that made it look like a much bigger and more modern car. These American Darts and Valiants looked like stodgy, librarian’s specials in sedan form.
And here we have our final car and the only import on the street: a Saab 99. The pale blue color is nice, as are the distinctive wheels and OEM mudflaps. With front-wheel-drive and a four-cylinder engine, this 99 is dramatically different to everything on the street.
My friend Jason has lived in NYC all of his life and has never seen so many period cars on one street for a film shoot. He went back early the next morning to grab some daytime photographs but, as suddenly as these cars had appeared, they were gone.
It’s so refreshing to see on-location filming in New York City. So many TV shows and movies over the years have used inauthentic backlot sets for street scenes, throwing in a few trash bags, paid extras and yellow cabs and hoping viewers won’t recognize the difference. The real deal is always better. And being able to stumble across an entire city block in New York City lined with classic cars is one of the reasons I miss this city so much.
Related Reading:
Curbside Cinema: The Cars of “Smokey & The Bandit”
Curbside Cinema: The Cars Of It’s A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World
CC Outtake: Classic Fords of Red Hook, Brooklyn
Curbside Capsule: Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera – Official Car Of The Chelsea Projects
Great lineup. I get annoyed by period films in which every car in the background is a glossy showqueen. 73 Cheb for me, but twist my arm and I’ll take the gold Newport as well. Nice spotting Jason.
Thanks!
Two things are missing: NYC in the ’70s was all trash and litter. And those ’60s cars would be lacy rustbuckets in the ’70s, not well-kept antiques.
Somehow I don’t think the city would be too happy if the production company went for period authenticity with the trash and litter.
Speaking of filming in New York, The ’60 Pontiac could have been used by the detectives on TV’s “Naked City”!
I completely disagree with the unfair comments about the New Yorker. The 1975 New Yorker was a beautifully styled car and perhaps the best representative of what was good about American luxury cars from the mid-1970’s. I don’t agree that the kick-back of the tumble home looks “droopy”, but does what it does to expand behind the front doors to enclose the rear wheels in those “spats” that it seemed all self-respecting top-of-the-line models sported back then. The brushed aluminium accent pieces I feel are an especially nice touch, lending an added layer of richness to the overall appearance of the car. And I definitely fail to see anything “busy” in this design and believe it to show remarkable stylistic restraint and cleanliness of line, especially when compared to the Fords and Mercurys of the same year, with their superfluous and ridiculous “quill fillagree” and heraldic stamp accents on the tail light bezels and hide-away headlamp covers. “Busy” styling would be the ’75 Oldsmobile 98 with it’s cathedral rear taillamps and baroque headlamp housings.
No, all things considered, in an era of tufted, ‘loose pillow’ crushed velvet interiors, “opera” windows, electro-luminescent “coach lamps” and other skin deep luxurious touches that in hindsight only lasted just one moment on the lips, Chrysler’s New Yorker was the class act and “The Talk of the Town” to quote Mr. Jack Jones.
And from a purely practical standpoint, the stainless or aluminum trim on the lower body provided a good surface for the constant sandblasting that those severely tucked under rear quarters got on the later cars. After a few years, most of these had no paint left and were covered with surface rust on those lower rear quarters, but you had to get on your hands and knees to see them. Ask me how I know.
I don’t think his comments were “unfair.” It’s just not William’s cup of tea, and he recognized that in his text.
With that being said, this website has made me appreciate all of these huge ’70s luxury cars more than I ever would have on my own. Both Chryslers and the Lincoln both look great, although I’ll always take a big Chevy over any of them. So, the ’73 Chevy gets second place behind the ’60 Pontiac, because, well, I just like ’60s cars. 🙂
Agreed. If anything is “unfair”, it’s to come down so strongly on William for expressing his opinion. There’s no such thing as an “unfair” comment about a car’s styling, especially when it’s done so reasonably and qualified as his.
True, car styling – like any other art is subject to opinion that can be neither “unfair” or “unfair”. I personally like the styling of the 1980-84 Seville. If many (most?) think It’s ugly, they’re not being “unfair”. It’s just not for them.
And I’m one who would take the N.Yer over the Newport!
I remember seeing a styling sketch of this New Yorker in Collectible Automobile. It was about three inches lower to the ground, and that really made the design come alive,
how about when film makers ues 1973 and up non chrome bumper checker cabs in their 1960s peorid movies . I guess they don’t notice the difference
We do
Such a great photo opportunity! If you hadn’t told me, I would’ve guessed this was filming for FX’s The Americans, as despite the location of the D.C. area, I believe much of the filming is done in NY. They’re generally pretty good with period cars, although the most recent episode takes place in 1983, and there was clearly a FWD DeVille in one scene.
An impressive impromptu cruise night. 🙂
That particular combination of grill and rear bumper makes the Dart a ’73.
This is a great find. March through October it is not at all uncommon to stumble upon a period film shoot just about anywhere in NYC, but this one is quite extensive in its use of period cars. I’m guessing the film is going for the vibe of a different neighborhood in the 70’s though, as the East Village would most surely not have been that clean, nor quite so riddled with expensive metal during that timeframe. One would have to expect that particular block to be littered with waist deep trash heaps, burned out or boarded up buildings, and a junkie on every other stoop. The Koch administration years were far from a time of gentrification for the city, and the EV was not a neighborhood to aspire to at that time unless you had a death wish. They might even be going for an Upper West Side vibe here. As a Moparfile I’m loving the choices, although by the time the Fairmont was sharing the street with these big Chryslers they’d likely be looking much worse for wear if they were native New Yorkers (or native Newports as the case may be). Three or four years on Manhattan streets would really have taken a toll on these big old cruisers in real life, and one would at the very least expect a layer of dull smog fog over their shiny bits and missing hubcaps galore. Kudos to the stylists for including some less-than-perfect cars though, depending on camera angles and lighting some of those details could be exploited to create an aura of grit that many (myself included) find ironically absent in today’s New York. Now I’m homesick.
The light green Dart is a 1973. I found the same car parked behind a 1968 Chrysler Newport Custom a few weeks ago on the street in Forrest Park, Queens.
From watching films and tv made in NYC in the 60s and 70s I am always amazed by the amount of trash/litter seen in most shots, so I agree these pictures are too clean looking.
In the early 70s I visited my sister who lived near NYC. Feeling (overly) confident I decided one day to drive my 68 Cyclone into the city. In the 60s-70s taxis and delivery trucks dominated the streets, and the private cars you saw were rusty AND banged up…..I don’t see either in these shots.
As I’ve said before, what irks me is when movies that are set in the past, say the time around WW II, have shots of newer cars visible in the rear windows. As a previous poster said: they think “we” don’t know the difference.
Great selection. I agree that the 60s stuff would have been more weathered and worn by the early 80s in a city environment. I also note the concentration of Mopars that would have been higher than any neighborhood outside of Highland Park (Chrysler’s corporate HQ) in the early 80s. You saw a lot of Dusters, Darts and Valiants, but not too many others back then. No Cutlass Supremes? 🙂
Beautiful photos and great commentary … but where are all the Pintos, Corollas, Datsun 210’s and VW’s one would have seen on the street circa 1980? And not even one AMC product? Oh well, we all know movies aren’t real life.
Great pics! If they’re going for UWS or UES circa 1980, the amount of trash and graffiti isn’t too far off. If they’re going for the Village, they’ve got some work to do.
There are three big misses on the cars:
1.) None are missing hubcaps
2.) No bumper over-riders
3.) At least half of those cars would have had the metal plates that bolt over the trunk locks to keep hoodlums from pulling them out with slide hammers.
Yup. I forgot about those trunk lock plates. Another biggie back then was the chain bike lock looped through the grille to lock the hoods closed before inside hood releases were standard on every car. It was way too easy for batteries or miscellaneous mechanical bits to go missing from an engine bay when hoods coule be opened just by tripping a lever through the grille.
Ah yes, the NYC trunk lock plate. Those went the way of the B bodies. Now if this was a late 80s / early 90s shoot, there would be less trash, but more than likely a line of broken windows, shattered safety glass on the street, and a constant wail of car alarms. There’s a lot of rougher New York to miss, but it really is a remarkably low-crime place these days.
And a not on the window: No Radio. No Stereo.
And I personally don’t mind the 5mph bumpers on the 74 up Impala/Caprice. I have never been a purist of automotive design and appreciate the “bumpability” of said bumpers. It really did save folks a lot of money. In fact I find the 73 earlier ones with the tailights in the bumper not attractive at all. They just look weird to me. Although to be fair I do like the looks of the front ends. Different strokes for different folks.
The Olds looks to be an ’81 or ’82 model. 83 had three segments in the taillight, and 84 had amber turn signals, 85 could be all red similar to the 84 lights or exactly like the 84 lights with big horizontal back up lenses.
I’ll take the 1970 Delta 88…that would look GOOD in my driveway. I prefer the pointier front end of the ’69 model, but beggars can’t be choosers.
The first time I ever saw a ’73 Newport on the road, I thought that someone had wedged Impala grille/lights into a different car. It still looks like that all these years later.
That black New Yorker, on the other hand, is quite sharp. As much as I usually love late 70’s Lincolns, I think the NYer would be my pick of the bunch.
I like the last big Lincs too, But I’d go for the New Yorker as well. (an Imperial would be even better!)
I’ve always thought the 1960 Pontiac was one of the best looking cars ever
+1.
If the movie/show is supposed to be 1983-85, the pre 1977 cars should be “beaters” all rusted and dented.
Having spent six weeks near and around this neighborhood in 1973, I can tell you that it doesn’t look at all like the streets did then. But it’s a great car show!
This picture is a bit the other extreme, but not totally unusual.
Great shots, Paul. My first trip to NYC was in the spring of ’73. I remember seeing gypsy cabs and the regular cabbies complaining about them – they all seemed to be old Checkers painted any color but yellow. Also the old green MABSTOA busses (Manhattan and Bronx Surface Transportation Operaing Authority, and one of New York’s greatest acronyms). Plus a bunch of ’72 Chevy Biscayne cabs with urethane front ends – part of a DOT test fleet. We went to the police museum and got to watch pistol practice, and I still have a used scowling mug target somewhere. And the police cars were still green, black and white.
Here’s a couple more from 1973-1974:
And another:
One more:
Those are a lot more like it, for sure! These film shoots always fascinate me when I run across them. I’ve settled in to watch a few filmings when stumbling upon them with time to spare. As I scroll through the pics above again I’m tempted to believe that the “center of the action” for the scene they’re setting is likely the front of the building in the shot of the dark green Valiant. Judging by the piles of lighting, dollys, etc across the street from there, where the Saab and Pontiac are parked as well as an apparent piece of film equipment in the front of that building itself. There’s a stretch about 3 buildings deep on both sides of the street from that building where there’s been some obvious staging, ie: period correct pieces of cast-off furniture, full sheets of tossed out plywood showing age and use, unwrapped mattresses leaning crookedly against buildings facades, etc. Just figured I’d throw in a few non CC-related observations, as stage setting, decor and film & TV styling is another of my nerdy hobbies/obsessions.
You know seeing that last shot reminds me that some things just look better in black&white. Especially a grimy street shot. That’s why even now in 2016 in addition to a digital camera I also carry a 1940 4×5 Speed Graphic loaded with b&w film I still process myself in my home darkroom.
Very cool pictures. It goes without saying, but seeing all of these cars, in somewhat used shape on a film set is so much more interesting, and genuine, than near perfect vehicles at a car show. They depict a variety that seems truer to life than row after row of muscle cars and hot rods. Granted, as Dman mentioned above, there are no imports from the era present, and that would certainly take this time warp even further. But still. . . it’s not like most of these cars are found today at shows. They simply aren’t popular enough. It’s like listening to the same songs over and over on the radio when you know they are skipping most of the tracks that didn’t make the top 40.
I think all those cars seem to be in good shape.
And a Saab 99 too! Where would I find a used one?
Where do film-makers find these cars?
Can anyone tell me?
tom, just Google “Movie car rentals New York.”
Cheers.
Looks great fun. I’m going for the New Yorker and the Lincoln, a aback to back road test may be needed.
And SAAB 99 Combi Coupe – so rare, and that’s not right!
In the 5th photo, what is the car in front of the New Yorker?
That 99 is gorgous in that colour! The green car in front of the NYer is the green Dart I think.
The first two pics make me think this is some sort of retro charity event ie. “Bring all your meticulously restored 1970s and early 1980s cars to the event to raise $$ for – insert whatever charity here- and the best car will get a blue ribbon” etc. As has already been said, the cars are too perfect and the streets are way too clean and gentrified.
A great number of neighbourhoods in New York in the ’70s were filthy, dirty places infested with rats and graffiti. Even in the wealthiest place the grime was ever present. New York was a failed city back then always close to collapse, which made it a fascinating place where culture flourished despite every obstacle. Watch the movie “Eyes of Laura Mars” if you want to see what New York’s street scene was like in the late ’70s.
I also like the New Yorker, though I’m a bigger fan of the ’76-78 model with the Imperial grill. The Lincoln Town Car is a ’78-’79 model as it only had the smaller fender skirts those two model years.
All in all a great writeup!
I’d take the Dart, New Yorker ( I could have bought a rough but running 77 for $50 back in 01), and of course the Lincoln. My friend bought the above 77 and sold it t months later for $500. Not a bad profit.
Just a correction, the ’76+ New Yorker didn’t just adapt the ’75 Imperial’s front fascia or grille. Instead, the ’75 Imperial was discontinued and the whole car was rebadged as the New Yorker for ’76. So the “trim change” to the New Yorker a few are praising here isn’t a trim change at all, it’s a completely different car.
Actually, no it’s not a completely different car. New Yorker and Imperial shared the same basic chassis and body, with Imperial having a few upgrades ie. waterfall grill, ritzier interior and 4-wheel disc brakes. So grafting the Imperial front clip onto the 1975 New Yorker created the ’76 New Yorker, which didn’t have the former’s disc brakes.
The two cars related to each other much the same as the Lincoln Versailles and the Ford Granada.
I guess they grafted the rear from the ’75 Imperial onto the pictured New Yorker for ’76 by that logic because the back on the ’76 is the same as the Imperial as well. So are the doors, windows, etc. The ’75 Imperial is exactly the same car as the ’76 New Yorker with different badges and better brakes. The ’75 New Yorker is not the same as either.
These are some great looking classics. While I agree the city would’ve been a bit rougher looking in the time of these cars, I enjoy the results, like this, of the film shoots as well, which are a frequent occurrence in my neighborhood. You never know what cars will show up.
I think I like that ’80-’82 Olds Delta 88 most…that green is so perfect for that era.
While I like film shoots like this, I am concerned that there will be fewer film shoots on NYC streets. In the past few years, the city has been replacing the older sodium vapor streetlights with new LED streetlights and they both look different. It will make street scenes look different and anachronistic.
It is probably not too hard for them to correct the color these days. Last year I visited a company that digitally removes new signage, street furniture, road markings, etc for period productions as well as correcting the skyline. Anything that can’t be easily removed or covered they just do digitally, it was quite interesting.
Great to see the photos here, but better to hear the stories such as the trunk lock covers!
The 1973 Newport is close to my heart, as my late Grandfather ordered one new to tow his 20 ft. camper for his later years. It was an unusual combination of options: Custom trim with the 440, TorqueFlite, full trailering package, SureGrip, Heavy Duty everything, factory dual AirTemp II, and AM/FM. Yet no vinyl roof, power windows, seats, solar glass, or wheel covers. Strangest of all? It was Sun Fire yellow. Dad was highly aware anything above 3/4ths of throttle could and would ignite the tires. The AirTemp would leave literal frost on the vents if you set it cold enough. They clearly got a good one (Tuesday afternoon car?). Sadly, Grandpa passed not long after, and Grandma decided it was way too much car for her. She sold it, along with her ’68 Valiant four door, to step into a new Lucerne blue ’74 Valiant Scamp…
Fantastic lineup of cars, and beautifully lit too, thank you William and Jason. I like the NYer, but that Saab is just so pretty in that colour I think I’d have to take it!
That ’60 Pontiac is way out of place here. In NY, it likely wouldn’t exist at at, having become a rusted out, then abandoned and trashed heap, sometime in the Nixon admin.
I’ve seen this mistake in other movies too. There’s a scene in Goodfellas, for example, when a mint ’58 Impala drives past Henry Hill’s home while he’s in the driveway trying to wash out the stench of Billy Batts from the trunk of his GP. This was set in 1970, and in reality, that Chevy would have been a heap, at best, likely not existing at all by that point.
Yeah, just as much as anachronistic vehicles take me out of the moment in a period movie, so too when every car on the street is a shiny show queen. I remember the ’60s and ’70s well, and there were a LOT of dented-up rust buckets with faded paint and missing hubcaps, body trim, and mufflers on the streets in those days, especially in the Rust Belt. Even new cars deteriorated at an alarming rate in the Midwest and NE back then. You could almost hear them rusting (example: the Plymouth Volare/Dodge Aspen twins).
As for anachronisms, I was watching a movie recently that was made in the late ’80s but the scene was set in 1977 Chicago. The principal actors were driving an appropriate mid ’70s Japanese station wagon, but the period vibe was completely lost when a late ’80s Ford Taurus went by in the background. I guess they were hoping no one would notice.
If you want to see it done right, check out season 2 of Fargo, set in 1979 Minnesota. A real curbside classic cornucopia. The cars were suitably weathered, and mostly period correct. I give them a B-plus. The reason for that is I had to take issue with a couple of things.
Firstly, the protagonist’s State Police cruiser is a ’75 Grand Fury 4-door hardtop.
We all know what’s wrong there. Was it that hard to find an R-body?
The Kansas city mob rolls in a ’69 Olds Ninety-Eight. Would they really have a 10 year old car? There’s a scene where the Fargo mob boss is being driven in a ’66 New Yorker. Really, what self-respecting mob guy drives a 13 year old anything?
A Fargo detective has a ’77 Gran Fury sedan, right year and body style but wrong trim level. Cops didn’t drive Broughams. Are there no base Gran Furys left in western Canada? Maybe not.
All in all, though, it was really well done, and there’s a bonus for Canadian Classic lovers. Being that it was filmed in Alberta, a number of Canadian Pontiacs show up in background scenes.
I really wish that the CC comments had a star or thumbs up or something on each comment.
Every review of the movie Carol, out this year and set in 1953, has mentioned Carol’s Packard convertible, about a ’51 or so. The weird thing they didn’t notice is how terrible the other cars are, which is really odd for the meticulous period-aware director Todd Haynes. Whoever was in charge of the cars was an idiot. The same black Oldsmobile is prominent in shots in the NE and Iowa. It would be practically new, but has dull paint and is missing some chrome bits. And an early 50’s Ford shown in Iowa very prominently had narrow whitewalls which came out in 1962 only not as narrow yet as the ones on that Ford, and 1955 or 56 wheel covers!
In Mad Men (also very period correct) and Foyle’s War car interiors were shot with tattered headliners, which is really crap since headliners of that kind can be period correctly replaced easily and not that expensively because they are fabric or vinyl stretched between metal rods (don’t know what they are called – not battens exactly). Often actors are shown in various period TV shows and movies in closeup with their hands on cracked or worn steering wheels, also easily fixed.
And yes, if that’s supposed to be LES in that movie it should be a lot trashier.
The fabric or vinyl headliners stretched between metal rods are called “bow” headliners, last appearing in the big ’76 GMs and the ’79 Lincoln Continental.
now we know why there are no four doors at car shows.
they all ran away and joined the movies!! 😉
Lots a fun to look at; cars, street are waay to clean though. In the old flick, “The Subject Was Roses” , Patricia Neal’s character crosses a “too clean” street lined with “too clean ” cars.
Know the neighborhood from those days since my college had a campus nearby. My girlfriend’s brother had a apartment even closer and I was a frequent visitor. Some things missing were the dents, dings and dog-doo. My girlfriend needed to remind me about the dog-doo once. Re-chromed bumpers were common and I could often clearly see that they had been redone. Those city accessories with rust stained chrome. Good choice of cars though. Correctly heavy on Mopars. Older cars were common since many cars in the city did not see everyday use. That Pontiac fit right in. The Saab did too, many foreign cars in town.
If you see a car with those tall, substantial bumper guards the owner must be from NYC or the French Quarter of New Orleans. The same street parking conditions exist in both areas.
I’d have expected to have certainly seen some Beetles in any NYC street scene, just for a realistic touch. Perhaps a Mustang here or there, an LTD, maybe a Chevelle or Malibu too. Nice to see these high end cars in this upscale themed neighbourhood. I wonder what movie this was.
I spotted the rear of the Dart Swinger in the earlier photo of the New Yorker.
A 1968 or so Olds Delta 88 seems to be visible across the street from the 1973 Chevvie.
No way that 1960 Pontiac is not all beaten to hell if it had lived all those years in NYC.
Excellent finds one and all!
“New York is not mecca. It only smells like it.”–Neil Simon
The ’80s Delta 88 is 1983 or earlier; ’84-’85 has either amber rear turn indicators or the wide backup lights from the ’80-’84 Ninety Eight.
The Lincoln is a ’78 or ’79 because it has skimpy fender skirts compared to ’75-’77.
The downturn in the rear door of the ’75 New Yorker is an echo of the ’67-’68 model. The rest of the car also references the ’65-’68 NYers in things like the straight lines and window shapes. It’s like the fuselages never happened.
Most authentic touch is the missing gas flap on the Monarch.
As has been noted, it jumped out at me right away, is that many of the cars look too clean and some simply not appropriate for the city at the time. Parked on the street a car looks like crap by four years. Visiting family in 1980 I walked the streets from the lower Bronx down to Wall Street and I saw nothing like that other than on the move in Wall Street. NYC is made for beaters.
That’s obviously true, but it’s essentially impossible to recreate life 40 years ago. It is the movies, after all, and not real life.
Great to see owners proud of their rides. If it weren’t for such people these cars would no longer be with us. Scene needed more missing wheel covers, broken tail lights, grime etc. to be realistic. Yes, movies are fantasy not reality. I think generally our memories grow fonder as time passes. This post brought back some good ones for me.