Why can't they drive 55?
May 30, 2009 7:09 PM Subscribe
In the movie "Transamerica" (2005) with Felicity Huffman, why didn't Bree and her son travel on the interstate when driving from New York to LA? Wouldn't it have been a lot faster?
Some people like to stay off the highways for numerous reasons: it's more scenic, and less dangerous, for starters. Plus transgenders passing through small towns makes for a good story.
posted by nitsuj at 7:12 PM on May 30, 2009
posted by nitsuj at 7:12 PM on May 30, 2009
It's probably more of a headache to film on large highways, which translates to more expensive, which is no go for a low-budget independent movie.
posted by hermitosis at 7:31 PM on May 30, 2009
posted by hermitosis at 7:31 PM on May 30, 2009
My grandparents never drive on the major highways, never have. They take a weird network of back roads and older highways. They just like it that way.
posted by RustyBrooks at 11:01 PM on May 30, 2009
posted by RustyBrooks at 11:01 PM on May 30, 2009
Best answer: No justifiable reason. That movie kind of sucked, and that was one of the major plot holes.
posted by serazin at 11:38 PM on May 30, 2009
posted by serazin at 11:38 PM on May 30, 2009
No reason. But, a movie about some trannies driving 14 hours a day, eating McDonald's, and sleeping in rest stops probably isn't as entertaining.
My grandparents never drive on the major highways, never have. They take a weird network of back roads and older highways. They just like it that way.
Your grandparents have clearly never looked at the plotted difference in time, when traveling more than a couple hundred miles, between traveling on the state and US routes and traveling on the Eisenhower Interstate System.
I don't like the Interstate. But, it's the difference between Missouri-Philly being a 20 hour drive and a 40 hour drive.
posted by Netzapper at 1:25 AM on May 31, 2009
My grandparents never drive on the major highways, never have. They take a weird network of back roads and older highways. They just like it that way.
Your grandparents have clearly never looked at the plotted difference in time, when traveling more than a couple hundred miles, between traveling on the state and US routes and traveling on the Eisenhower Interstate System.
I don't like the Interstate. But, it's the difference between Missouri-Philly being a 20 hour drive and a 40 hour drive.
posted by Netzapper at 1:25 AM on May 31, 2009
Response by poster: Thanks for the answers. I understand that there are great reasons to stay off the interstate from a story (and perhaps budget) angle. But unless you explain a choice like that, it really messes with the suspension of disbelief. I liked a lot of things about the movie, but that wasn't one of them.
posted by Shoggoth at 5:27 AM on May 31, 2009
posted by Shoggoth at 5:27 AM on May 31, 2009
it's more scenic, and less dangerous
More scenic I'll give you. Interstates are soulless monstrosities. But less dangerous? Not a chance. You're less likely to have an accident driving coast to coast on I-90 than across town on your local streets. The US interstates are pretty much the safest thing going, as far as cars are concerned.
posted by dmd at 8:07 AM on May 31, 2009
More scenic I'll give you. Interstates are soulless monstrosities. But less dangerous? Not a chance. You're less likely to have an accident driving coast to coast on I-90 than across town on your local streets. The US interstates are pretty much the safest thing going, as far as cars are concerned.
posted by dmd at 8:07 AM on May 31, 2009
I have to say, if I were to ever drive from LA to NYC, I would not do it all on freeways, because I think I would arrive in NYC a raving lunatic. Surface roads are much more interesting. And if speed were your top priority, you would just fly.
Also, I think there is a safety issue with freeways like I-90, in that I, at least, tend to get somewhat hypnotized by more than 2 hours on a freeway.
posted by lunasol at 8:37 AM on May 31, 2009
Also, I think there is a safety issue with freeways like I-90, in that I, at least, tend to get somewhat hypnotized by more than 2 hours on a freeway.
posted by lunasol at 8:37 AM on May 31, 2009
Definitely wouldn't have been worth making a movie about driving coast to coast on an interstate, unless you're doing it at 180 MPH dodging gun-fire and such.
Also, I think there is a safety issue with freeways like I-90, in that I, at least, tend to get somewhat hypnotized by more than 2 hours on a freeway.
Sounds like you are the "safety issue" on I-90.
posted by toomuchpete at 8:49 AM on May 31, 2009 [1 favorite]
Also, I think there is a safety issue with freeways like I-90, in that I, at least, tend to get somewhat hypnotized by more than 2 hours on a freeway.
Sounds like you are the "safety issue" on I-90.
posted by toomuchpete at 8:49 AM on May 31, 2009 [1 favorite]
Your grandparents have clearly never looked at the plotted difference in time, when traveling more than a couple hundred miles, between traveling on the state and US routes and traveling on the Eisenhower Interstate System.
Or, they don't care.
posted by RustyBrooks at 9:13 AM on May 31, 2009
My friends and I prefer to avoid Interstates on a road trip. It's much nicer to see the country up close, and also we'd rather eat home cookin' in a diner than deep-fried freezer food in a highway chain restaurant. It's all about local colour, and the extra time you spend on small highways is well worth the improved atmosphere.
posted by pseudostrabismus at 10:15 AM on May 31, 2009
posted by pseudostrabismus at 10:15 AM on May 31, 2009
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by musofire at 7:11 PM on May 30, 2009 [1 favorite]