San Francisco on Full House

[ThePhun1]

Because of that show, I actually thought of San Francisco as suburban. Took some time for my perception to change in full. Granted, most episodes in full were shot on a studio lot but the intro and house depicted (a Painted Lady) were suburban.

[pj3000]

https://youtu.be/rfWIuymme50

[JManc]

That opening scene is deceiving because it's a small park in front of the painted ladies with the skyline in the distance and it does look suburban on TV but it's a pretty dense walkable neighborhood in reality.

[chris08876]

San Francisco must of been fun during the hippie times. I wish I could teleport back to the Summer of Love, 1967, and be in that city during that time. Rock-and-roll, Orange Sunshine, and folks that were not uptight. That all changed of course, but fun to think about.

I do like the city in "Pursuit of Happyness". Good movie btw.

[ThePhun1]

Originally Posted by JManc

That opening scene is deceiving because it's a small park in front of the painted ladies with the skyline in the distance and it does look suburban on TV but it's a pretty dense walkable neighborhood in reality.

Between that and that the show depicted a family (non-traditional as could be) with suburban values. They didn't venture into other parts of the city much, so the whole premise seemed suburban.

[chris08876]

"Animal Cops: San Francisco" showcased mean folks in San Francisco that abused animals. Few other location settings around the U.S..

[Crawford]

Full House was filmed in LA.

And since when is a cheesy 80's sitcom expected to faithfully represent the reality of city living?

[ilcapo]

Talking about Sitcoms: i always loved Seinfeld partly because of its realism. Something about it that feel genuine and real. Apart from the fact that Jerry often doesnt lock his door. This was during the 90's, surely the crime wave must've affected them somehow?

[mrnyc]

poor mary-kate is having trouble with her hubby these days.

[bossabreezes]

Outside of Downtown, Fidi and Soma, San Francisco has a really dense town-like feeling. Each neighborhood has it's main retail/restaurant area, with plenty of mixed housing types.

Still kind of puzzled how this urbanity developed a couple centuries ago on that side of the US, since there is literally nothing else similar on the West Coast. Seattle might come in as much further second runner up.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by bossabreezes

Still kind of puzzled how this urbanity developed a couple centuries ago on that side of the US, since there is literally nothing else similar on the West Coast. Seattle might come in as much further second runner up.

Because San Francisco was the only sizable city in the Western U.S. prior to 1900.

Population of western cities circa 1900:

San Francisco: 342,782
Denver: 133,859
Los Angeles: 102,479
Portland: 90,426
Seattle: 80,671
Oakland: 66,960
Salt Lake City: 53,531

That was it...nothing else over 50,000. In the case of the non-SF cities on the list, the "urban core" at the time was so small that construction of modern CBDs killed most of the old urban neighborhoods except for some tiny little patches.

The South was fairly similar. with New Orleans (287,104) so much larger than the next biggest city (Memphis - 102,320)

[niwell]

^Oh wow, I knew SF was the biggest by a significant margin, but wouldn't have guessed Denver to be up there! I don't think any western Canadian city was anywhere close to 100k at the time... Montreal was only 267k in 1901, followed by Toronto at 208k

More on topic, I did enjoy how the Degrassi series (Junior and high school) did talk about kids going to Queen st for shopping and to hang out. Being set in the Riverdale neighbourhood of Toronto.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by niwell

^Oh wow, I knew SF was the biggest by a significant margin, but wouldn't have guessed Denver to be up there! I don't think any western Canadian city was anywhere close to 100k at the time... Montreal was only 267k in 1901, followed by Toronto at 208k

There's some surprisingly East Coast looking blocks which still survive in Denver. I think at one time it probably had a pretty decent sampling of rowhouse-like buildings.

[niwell]

Originally Posted by eschaton

There's some surprisingly East Coast looking blocks which still survive in Denver. I think at one time it probably had a pretty decent sampling of rowhouse-like buildings.

Interestingly enough, if you cut out the width of the street that view could easily be Toronto! The house on the right especially.

[jd3189]

Yeah, Full House sure deceived many in giving a sense of SF’s urban footprint. I want to check out that movie “Streets of San Francisco” one of these days but if any of you guys know of shows that do a better job of showcasing the city as a bustling action-filled place, post them.

Stuff detailing the hippies and Summer of Love is one thing, what about stories about Chinatown, the Tenderloin, even the Fillmore District.

[Handro]

Originally Posted by jd3189

Yeah, Full House sure deceived many in giving a sense of SF’s urban footprint. I want to check out that movie “Streets of San Francisco” one of these days but if any of you guys know of shows that do a better job of showcasing the city as a bustling action-filled place, post them.

Stuff detailing the hippies and Summer of Love is one thing, what about stories about Chinatown, the Tenderloin, even the Fillmore District.

Dirty Harry immediately comes to mind. Classic.

[jd3189]

I’ve heard of Dirty Harry. I’ll check it out. In terms of SF’s Chinese American experience, I remembered reading a excerpt from the Joy Luck Club as a kid.

[Steely Dan]

Hitchcock's Vertigo is another fantastic SF film, and it's even cooler than most because it was made long before all of that summer of love hippie-dippie idiocy.

[The North One]

I didn't know Denver was so big compared to other west of Mississippi cities at such an early point.

Seems like it performed horribly in the 20th century then.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Because San Francisco was the only sizable city in the Western U.S. prior to 1900.

Population of western cities circa 1900:

San Francisco: 342,782
Denver: 133,859
Los Angeles: 102,479
Portland: 90,426
Seattle: 80,671
Oakland: 66,960
Salt Lake City: 53,531

That was it...nothing else over 50,000. In the case of the non-SF cities on the list, the "urban core" at the time was so small that construction of modern CBDs killed most of the old urban neighborhoods except for some tiny little patches.

The South was fairly similar. with New Orleans (287,104) so much larger than the next biggest city (Memphis - 102,320)

It’s interesting to consider these sizes, and to think about all the current smaller and medium-sized northeastern and midwestern cities which were as large or larger, and more important, at that time (and likely mumtiple decades into the 20th century).

Rochester was significantly larger than Denver. Syracuse would’ve been the 3rd and 2nd largest city in the west and south, respectively. Scranton was the same size as LA and Memphis.