LA's 6th Street Viaduct: The Most Famous Bridge in the World

[triplemultiplex]

...that most people have never heard of.


http://bridgehunter.com/ca/los-angeles/sixth-street/

I am struck by how many commercials, TV shows, music videos and movies are filmed on the 6th Street Viaduct just east of downtown Los Angeles.  The location right next to downtown means it shows up in lots of establishing aerial shots of the LA skyline.  It's even been in video games:

The list on the Wiki article only scratches the surface:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth_Street_Viaduct#Titles_where_the_Viaduct_is_seen
There is almost constantly at least one commercial running nationally where some new car is zipping across this bridge.  I think there's one for a cell phone company running right now.

It's got a total film noir vibe with that depression-era neo-classical design. The bridge seems like the oldest thing a city where everything looks like it was built post-WWII.


There are some reasons why directors seem to like 6th Street that I can intuit.

First and foremost, it provides one of the most excellent views of the Los Angeles skyline one can film.  The fact that you can shoot the sun setting behind the skyscrapers is a bonus.



The bridge itself is good to look at and says "classic LA".

Another other really big factor must be the City of Los Angeles is willing to shut it down for a few hours.  Whittier Blvd and 6th Street are major streets, but not so major that they can't do without them for a few hours on a Saturday morning.  There are a reasonable amount of alternate routes to divert traffic to during filming.

This being LA, it's super close to all the production studios and advertising agencies.  The logistics of filming there are much simpler.  So much so that many times, I see this bridge in commercials where you don't even know it's LA (no skyline view).

Because the viaduct crosses a light industrial area, the bridge can stand in for just about any place that needs that look.  6th Street can do Detroit, 6th Street can do Chicago, 6th Street can do Newark, 6th Street can do Houston; you name it.  Here it is pretending to be post-Katrina New Orleans in an ad for the Air Force:



It's a good thing there's so much footage of the 6th Street Viaduct, because it will soon be no more.  The bridge is old and deteriorating and a serious liability during an earthquake.  It's replacement design was chosen last year:

Obviously a dramatic departure.  It looks like it belongs in the background of Starfleet Headquarters.

So keep an eye out for the most famous bridge in the world the next time you're watching TV or at the movies.

[theline]

Here it is pretending to be post-Katrina New Orleans in an ad for the Air Force:

Thanks for a fascinating post, triple. Although I've never seen the bridge in person, it immediately looked familiar.

About the "New Orleans" shot: was the water under the bridge likely a CGI addition? I don't suppose the real river ever gets that high, does it?

As for the new bridge, I like the design.

[bugo]

Ugh that new one is ugly.  Why replace an icon with something totally different?  If the Statue of Liberty were to be on the verge of collapse, would they replace it with a statue of a girl in a bikini?  Would they replace the St. Louis arch with a giant question mark?

[triplemultiplex]

About the "New Orleans" shot: was the water under the bridge likely a CGI addition? I don't suppose the real river ever gets that high, does it?

I am pretty sure everything except the bridge itself is a visual effect.  Even the debris and actors have been pasted on the bridge deck with a computer.  The water is definitely CG.  You'd have heard about it if the LA River got that high!

[nexus73]

I love that new bridge design!  Now to see of all the other beauty elements that are depicted get included.  When is the new bridge going to be built and then completed?

Rick

[The High Plains Traveler]

One of you engineer types: what makes the replacement bridge more seismically stable by angling the arches out like that? Gotta love it, but haven't seen that before.

[Duke87]

I will admit I aesthetically prefer the old design, but bridges like that are more expensive to build and to maintain, so it should surprise no one that we don't see them anymore.

As for how the angled arches help with earthquakes: seismic loads are generally lateral loads, so the structure is better braced against them if it has some left-right to its support geometry instead of just up-down.

It's also worth noting that the seismic force on a structure is directly proportional to its weight, so the lighter a structure is, the better off it is in an earthquake. If the new bridge looks less "beefy" to you... that's a good thing.

[NJRoadfan]

I'm surprised this bridge hasn't been landmarked for preservation given its cultural significance. I much prefer the Art Moderne look, something LA is known for.

[roadman65]

I am guessing this is the bridge that you see in a lot of famous films and TV Shows?  I am also assuming that the underside of the structure is the one where a lot of dead bodies are found in film and TV as well.

[Brandon]

Because the viaduct crosses a light industrial area, the bridge can stand in for just about any place that needs that look.  6th Street can do Detroit, 6th Street can do Chicago, 6th Street can do Newark, 6th Street can do Houston; you name it.

Actually, it doesn't do Chicago or Detroit all that well.  There's no bridges in either that I know of that look like it.  If you want Chicago, get a bascule lift bridge.  If you want Detroit, get a stock picture of the Ambassador Bridge.  Otherwise, it's a quick tip-off that the producers shot the scene in LA and not on-location.

[vtk]

It's replacement design was chosen last year:

Okay, but what will it look like crossing the Los Angeles River instead of some naïve urban planner's wet dream?

[roadman65]

Because the viaduct crosses a light industrial area, the bridge can stand in for just about any place that needs that look.  6th Street can do Detroit, 6th Street can do Chicago, 6th Street can do Newark, 6th Street can do Houston; you name it.

Actually, it doesn't do Chicago or Detroit all that well.  There's no bridges in either that I know of that look like it.  If you want Chicago, get a bascule lift bridge.  If you want Detroit, get a stock picture of the Ambassador Bridge.  Otherwise, it's a quick tip-off that the producers shot the scene in LA and not on-location.

You think that the producers care?  Look at the old Kojak and A Team reruns where they take place in New York City.  You will see the  LA double guy mast arms on occasion over NYC's double guys.  Even in the Facts of Life, an 80s sitcom, where one of the girls goes out for her drivers test that was filmed on a street in California with Caltrans mast arms in the backround. The thing is, that the Facts of Life took place in Peekskill, NY where span wires are the norm for traffic signals there.

If you point that out to them (or anybody for that matter) you will be looked at funny as many believe that us road geeks are nuts, and ask you the question "Who in their right mind pays attention to simple details like traffic signals?" 

[Big John]

^^ or even in newer shows.  Like on 24 in scenes depicting Washington DC or New York, it still had the California traffic lights. 

At least for Perfect Strangers, it was set in Chicago but had the California street shots for the first season.  But then they corrected it with real Chicago street shots for the following seasons.

[roadman65]

^^ or even in newer shows.  Like on 24 in scenes depicting Washington DC or New York, it still had the California traffic lights. 

At least for Perfect Strangers, it was set in Chicago but had the California street shots for the first season.  But then they corrected it with real Chicago street shots for the following seasons.

They also made the WELCOME TO CHICAGO sign that is leaving O'Hare as if it was on one of the freeways leading into Chicago from outside the city as character Larry did drive his old Mustang to the Windy City from Madison, WI. In reality you would have have to arrive by plane to see that particular assembly, not by car as producers want you to think.

[Brandon]

^^ or even in newer shows.  Like on 24 in scenes depicting Washington DC or New York, it still had the California traffic lights. 

At least for Perfect Strangers, it was set in Chicago but had the California street shots for the first season.  But then they corrected it with real Chicago street shots for the following seasons.

Chicagoans do know when something was filmed in the city or in some other locale.  The streetlights are wrong.

[triplemultiplex]

Because the viaduct crosses a light industrial area, the bridge can stand in for just about any place that needs that look.  6th Street can do Detroit, 6th Street can do Chicago, 6th Street can do Newark, 6th Street can do Houston; you name it.

Actually, it doesn't do Chicago or Detroit all that well.  There's no bridges in either that I know of that look like it.  If you want Chicago, get a bascule lift bridge.  If you want Detroit, get a stock picture of the Ambassador Bridge.  Otherwise, it's a quick tip-off that the producers shot the scene in LA and not on-location.

It doesn't have to look like an actual bridge in the city the action is supposedly takes place in.  Movie/TV people just go for a "look" for stuff like that.

[mc78andrew]

Because the viaduct crosses a light industrial area, the bridge can stand in for just about any place that needs that look.  6th Street can do Detroit, 6th Street can do Chicago, 6th Street can do Newark, 6th Street can do Houston; you name it.

Actually, it doesn't do Chicago or Detroit all that well.  There's no bridges in either that I know of that look like it.  If you want Chicago, get a bascule lift bridge.  If you want Detroit, get a stock picture of the Ambassador Bridge.  Otherwise, it's a quick tip-off that the producers shot the scene in LA and not on-location.

It doesn't have to look like an actual bridge in the city the action is supposedly takes place in.  Movie/TV people just go for a "look" for stuff like that.

When they go outside in  "the office" you can seen the mountain ranges on the horizon are clearly not the rolling Appalachians outside of Scranton PA.  It's obviously filmed in LA.

I have been pointing this bridge out for years to my wife.  It's in car commercials as well as a dozen movies I can think of.  I wonder if there is a hard number on just how many times it been filmed. 

[Stephane Dumas]

They also made the WELCOME TO CHICAGO sign that is leaving O'Hare as if it was on one of the freeways leading into Chicago from outside the city as character Larry did drive his old Mustang to the Windy City from Madison, WI. In reality you would have have to arrive by plane to see that particular assembly, not by car as producers want you to think.

Add to the list Due South who was also set in Chicago, except for the pilot episode. Lots of the filming was in Toronto.

[codyg1985]

I believe The Mask featured this bridge as well.

[J N Winkler]

Actually, it doesn't do Chicago or Detroit all that well.  There's no bridges in either that I know of that look like it.  If you want Chicago, get a bascule lift bridge.  If you want Detroit, get a stock picture of the Ambassador Bridge.  Otherwise, it's a quick tip-off that the producers shot the scene in LA and not on-location.

I don't think that producers who choose to set a show in either city are, in fact, angling for local color so much as a generic Midwestern metropolis which a national audience instantly recognizes as a "big city" but has likely never visited and thus is less likely to recognize, let alone be offended by, an overlay of typical (southern) California visual elements and background details.  Case in point:  a TV show called Detroit 187 instead of, more authentically, Detroit 750.316.

[jeffandnicole]

Ugh that new one is ugly.  Why replace an icon with something totally different?  If the Statue of Liberty were to be on the verge of collapse, would they replace it with a statue of a girl in a bikini?  Would they replace the St. Louis arch with a giant question mark?

I believe the World Trade Center building were icons.  The Liberty Bell became even more of an icon with the crack.

If the bridge is an icon because it's used in movies and commercials, then let the filming industry pay for a new, identical one. 

Actually, it doesn't do Chicago or Detroit all that well.  There's no bridges in either that I know of that look like it.  If you want Chicago, get a bascule lift bridge.  If you want Detroit, get a stock picture of the Ambassador Bridge.  Otherwise, it's a quick tip-off that the producers shot the scene in LA and not on-location.

I don't think that producers who choose to set a show in either city are, in fact, angling for local color so much as a generic Midwestern metropolis which a national audience instantly recognizes as a "big city" but has likely never visited and thus is less likely to recognize, let alone be offended by, an overlay of typical (southern) California visual elements and background details.  Case in point:  a TV show called Detroit 187 instead of, more authentically, Detroit 750.316.

I always give The Sopranos and the NJ Turnpike Authority credit for shooting the opening scene of the automatic ticket dispenser...with the graffiti/bumper stickers still on the machine.

[Duke87]

I believe the World Trade Center building were icons.

And there were people saying we should build them back exactly as they had been built in the 70's.

But two facts prevented that from being a practical option:
1) the buildings' structural designs were unorthodox and a more "standard" design might not have collapsed in the same situation - and since the structural design was a major part of the buildings' appearance inside and out, recreating them with a more standard design wouldn't work
2) it would be tougher to rent out space in the new buildings if they were the same as the ones that were destroyed due to stigma


Similarly, in this case, we'd like to keep the same appearance but:
1) the earthquake vulnerability would remain if we did
2) it'd be more expensive

[JREwing78]

I don't think that producers who choose to set a show in either city are, in fact, angling for local color so much as a generic Midwestern metropolis which a national audience instantly recognizes as a "big city" but has likely never visited and thus is less likely to recognize, let alone be offended by, an overlay of typical (southern) California visual elements and background details.  Case in point:  a TV show called Detroit 187 instead of, more authentically, Detroit 750.316.

Funny thing is, Detroit 187 got the LOOK of Detroit mostly right, because it was filmed in Detroit. If you've spent any time there at all, the little things like street signs, landmark buildings, and other items make it obvious Detroit 187 wasn't a back-lot LA job.

[hobsini2]

Because the viaduct crosses a light industrial area, the bridge can stand in for just about any place that needs that look.  6th Street can do Detroit, 6th Street can do Chicago, 6th Street can do Newark, 6th Street can do Houston; you name it.

Actually, it doesn't do Chicago or Detroit all that well.  There's no bridges in either that I know of that look like it.  If you want Chicago, get a bascule lift bridge.  If you want Detroit, get a stock picture of the Ambassador Bridge.  Otherwise, it's a quick tip-off that the producers shot the scene in LA and not on-location.

That's one of my biggest gripes with movies and TV shows that they say that the area is something and then it does not even remotely look close to it. Let me give you a prime example. The TV show Married With Children was set in Chicago. The episode where Al is getting told old and bad for his softball team and he gets replaced by a young strong Swedish guy named Sven. Right at the end of the episode, there is a caption that says Kankakee (only one I know of is in Illinois). Problem is there are MOUNTAINS in the background with the caption at the 5:10 mark of this video.  Closest mountains to Kankakee are in West Virginia. All I ask is to do the damn research when you say you are at such and such a location.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kPhsmAontE

[vtk]

Part of the problem is TV producers assume (or hope, to keep the budget manageable) that nearly all the viewers are in NYC or LA and don't really know what other parts of the country look like.  This assumption is certainly sometimes made by producers who themselves don't know what other parts of the country look like – but I have to imagine it's more often the case that the producers know better, but trust the audience won't.