Advertising Last completed movie pages 1978 Ford FairmontClass: Cars, Sedan — Model origin: 
00:57:47 ![[*]](/res/star.png){kind=small}
Background vehicle
Comments about this vehicle| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
◊ 2007-05-01 19:46 |
silver sedan |
|
◊ 2007-05-01 23:06 |
Ford Fairmont |
|
◊ 2009-11-14 21:50 |
Ford Fairmonts were so freakin' ugly!  Anyway, the blue 1957 Ford Thunderbird that was used in this movie is actually one of the red Thunderbirds used in the TV show "Vega$" with Robert Urich as "Dan Tanna." After "Vega$" was cancelled they sat on a backlot until they were re-painted aqua to be used in "Breathless."Some guy that was involved in the production of "Vega$" ended up buying the 2 Thunderbirds back after "Breathless", re-painted them red again, and then sold the stunt one--but kept the mint one for himself. I believe his son now owns the famous "Dan Tanna" T-Bird. |
|
◊ 2009-11-15 08:26 |
I actually like the looks of the Fairmont  -- Last edit: 2009-11-15 08:26:13 |
|
◊ 2009-11-15 09:27 |
I think HunterMan is confusing the term "ugly" with "boring/generic", as many people for some reason often do when it comes to cars. The sedan at least (I can see how the coupe could be seen as unattractive, with that odd roofline) is a very inoffensive car, most were in the 1980s. It doesn't stand out at all, and I don't see how anything so generic and average looking can be "ugly". That term is saved for things that are truly polarizing in their style, like the Fiat Multipla or Pontiac Aztek. And of course there are bound to be people who like the looks of those too (I honestly don't mind the Aztek, really doesn't seem that bad to me). So no, the Fairmont is not an "ugly" car by any means, just generic. -- Last edit: 2009-11-15 09:28:53 |
|
◊ 2009-11-15 17:32 |
Thanks, Taxiguy, and I agree with your sentiments. I almost posted something similar myself when I read what Hunter said but didn't have the time yesterday. (Of course, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder) |
|
◊ 2009-11-16 09:06 |
Some cars that majorly stand out can be ugly too. But American cars, especially from the 50's and 60's were about syle and color. By the late 70's and early 80's, that was sadly lost for the most part. I think largly because of the gas crisis at the time, everything became small, "boxy" and as taxiguy stated above--boring and generic! (Boring and generic can be ugly .gif ";)") ) Even Mustangs were butt-ugly during this time period (aka the "Charlie's Angels" Mustangs--show and Angels were awesome...the cars were not! ). The Camaro is one of the few American cars that really kept its muscle car look and performance.So, by no means am I trying to insult anyone who likes old late 70's Ford Fairmonts! To each his or her own (as Commander 57 states--beauty is in the eyes of the beholder), but generally over-all most agree--the small boxy cars from the late 70's and on through the mid-80's were not only very cheaply made but (again) freakin' ugly! I mean...come on! In this picture if you had your choice--are you going to say you'd rather have some old ugly Fairmont...or the 57 T-Bird?  -- Last edit: 2009-11-16 09:14:30 |
|
◊ 2009-11-16 15:24 |
Well, I would take the 'bird, of course! But I take exception to your line: "....generally over-all most agree--the small boxy cars from the late 70's and on through the mid-80's were not only very cheaply made but (again) freakin' ugly!...." You are making a big assumption - hard to do without a poll. I would be more of the impression that most would use the term "boring" rather than "ugly" which connotes something offending to the senses, rather than something that just doesn't stimulate them. Don't forget, the Fairmont was one of the best-selling cars in those days - something that wouldn't have happened if most felt they were truly "ugly". |
|
◊ 2009-11-16 23:51 |
Exactly, not everyone has the same "opinion" as you. I know a ton of people who love the angular cars of the late-70s/early-80s, and there is no denying they are certainly much more functional than the designs that came before and after (visibility, interior packaging, space efficiency, general simplicity, etc...) and they to those of us who have an eye for such they don't look half bad either. If done right angular cars can look quite elegant, in the right paint scheme a Ford Fairmont sedan could be quite dashing. Or at the very least blend into traffic... but it is never going to be offensive to anyone's eyes. For that a design has to be truly radical and polariaizng (i.e. Ford Sierra, Pontiac Aztek, Fiat Multipla, etc..) |
|
◊ 2009-11-17 02:33 |
You're probably right..."boring" might be a more accurate term, and by no means am I trying to say that everyone thought cars such as the Fairmont were ugly. (P.S. I'm watching an episode of "Vega$" as I'm typing this and a certain car just tried to run down Dan Tanna--guess what kind it was? A Ford Fairmont! Ironic and funny) I understand that some people attribute "ugly" to very outlandish and "gaudy" looking cars...and I agree those can be ugly too. It's just that sometimes boring can be ugly as well. Cars such as the Ford Fairmont or the Plymouth Valore (which I think was a little more "stylish" than the Fairmont) were popular sellers with families. I think the reason was kind of what I'd stated before, that they were supposed to be better with gas (some were some weren't) and they were cheaper and smaller. During that time because of the gas crisis a lot of people were willing to buy because of "cheapness" (price and with use of gas) even if the cars were boring and/or ugly. Now, taxiguy stated that a Ford Fairmont could be elegant or "dashing." Maybe, but in order to do that I'd think you'd have to cusomize them to make a statement of some sort--aka make them "gaudy" and stand out since they were so "boring/ugly". I don't think Fairmonts were designed or marketed as elegant or dashing. They were cheaper cars that families and even some law enforcement could easily afford and they were supposed to be better with gas mileage. I'm sure there actually were a few that did, but I really doubt as a whole that many bought Ford Fairmonts for their stylish looks. They were more than likely buying for economic purposes. -- Last edit: 2009-11-17 03:40:38 |
|
◊ 2009-11-17 15:36 |
Actually, while I myself felt the base-line Fairmont (the single headlamp models) were too spartan, a nicely-equipped Futura sedan is quite classy looking. http://stuartscustoms.freeyellow.com/Components/82Fairmont.jpg http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/1010/1980fairmont.jpg -- Last edit: 2009-11-17 17:52:33 |
|
◊ 2009-11-18 08:28 |
I completely respect your opinion that maybe the Ford Futura was more "classy" than the Fairmont. But I look at both and see the same thing...just different model names. They both are "boring", "boxy", and are marketed and/or geared towards simplicity for economic purposes of the time. I have a hard time seeing the differences between a Fairmont and a Futura. But this is just my opinion! When it comes to more basic or "simplistic" models of cars I still like them to be somewhat bigger and spacious. Some cars of the late 70's (such as the Fairmont) and a lot of them from the 80's are too boxy and small for me. For example, in the show "Charlie's Angels" the bad guys usually drove 70's Ford Galaxies or LTD's. I liked those cars, as simpler cars, as they still had size and style. But even by the end of that show sometimes the "baddies" were driving Fairmonts or the Mercury version. Ironic to me is that not only were some of the scripts starting to lack style...but even the cars the bad guys drove no longer had "statement." Again, though, just my opinion! |
|
◊ 2009-11-18 19:51 |
Well, we certainly have that in common, Hunter. I prefer big cars myself. (And I plan to hang on to my '85 Crown Victoria right up until Al Gore takes it away from me!) |
|
◊ 2009-11-19 05:39 |
LOL!!! Go for it! .gif ":)") |
|
◊ 2017-06-03 06:58 |
Another seen:![[Image: breath-11453z.jpg]](http://pics.imcdb.org/9656/breath-11453z.jpg) ![[Image: breath-11529z.jpg]](http://pics.imcdb.org/9656/breath-11529z.jpg) |
|
◊ 2017-06-03 07:17 |
This is more likely a Mercury Zephyr given the unique color scheme (also seen on that era of Mercury Monarchs). |
Add a comment Advertising Advertising
