A Standoff Over Plan for ‘Die Hard’ Filming – Los Angeles Times

A Standoff Over Plan for ‘Die Hard’ Filming – Los Angeles Times
One particular quote I love, from Amy Lemisch, director of the California Film Commission:

“We’re not shutting down the airport,” Lemisch said. “It’s always a balancing act always finding the balance between what the production company needs and what businesses, or communities, can live with.”

The arrogance of the movie industry is astonishing sometimes. While she represents the film intersts  in California, I’d of prefered her to say “production company can live with, and the needs of the businesses and comunity.” Closing down a major freeway and a major highway for filming will be a near disaster for many people. As the article states, routing 6 lanes of traffic onto 2 will be a huge problem. There are many benifits to California from the film industry, and many good and easy ways to film that are not so distracting, however:

lanes on the 105 Freeway would be closed intermittently “for safety reasons” to ensure that looky-loos aren’t peering over the highway to watch the action

Closing down a freeway just to prohibit looky-loos(pedistrians I imagine, though it could be people in cars crusing by every 15 minutes, driving slow), that is already illegal stikes me as just plain stupid. Hire extra rent-a-cops to stand at freeway entrances and make sure nobody gets onto the freeway or something!

That sectoin of the freeway is already elevated over the street level, so much so that overly tall vehicles have no problem driving under the freeway. One would have to stand on the edge of the freeway, and lean over to see anything. Knowing people, someone would fall off and kill themself. Howeve, to punish all the drivers, cargo, and businesses of that area because of that chance? A better solution has to exist, and if it can’t be done, maybe the movie shouldn’t be filmed there at all.

I wonder what is next, a redevelopment agency zoning a piece of property to be used in filming for 2 days, then returned to the rightful owners, all in the name of growth? I wouldn’t put it past someone in this state.