Jump to content

Daytime's Oldest Sets


Recommended Posts

  • Members

On Y&R the Newman ranch was introduced in 1980.It was redecorated to it's current look in 1989.

That set is badly in need of an update.Sticking a sketch of Sabrina on the wall is not enough!

The Abbott house has been around since 82.

This has been discussed before,but I feel it too needs an update,Some of the pieces are hideous.Another poster argued that rich people wouldn't change their house,but I feel a few appropriate changes would be welcome.The breakfast room is a nightmare of clashing colors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 19
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

I think it depends on the kind of person you are.... I don't change my house. I think it's "middle class" people who are always "updating" things. The rich, alot of times.. DO keep things the same, restore or keep historical things. In this day and age of budget cuts... I say NO NEED to redecorate, if nothing else... they can buy a couple gallons of PAINT and change the walls in the Newman Ranch.. a fresh look for not much money. Right now, it's that burnt peach color... used to be celadon.... I don't know WHAT you'd change it to? I think all the sets look good, no need to spend money redecorating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

One thing to keep in mind when it comes to the decoration of houses of the upper class and the rich (not the new moneyed super rich), they often hire interior decorators who incorporate period pieces in the home to reflect the owner's tastes. Through their travels all around the world, they collect various pieces of art such as paintings, tapestries, carpets, etc. Things you may see in a Christie's or Sotheby's auction. For example, if you were to look at Brooke Astor's pre-war co-op that has been on the market for about a year now, nothing has been changed since Albert Hadley decorated it in the late 60s, early 70s. Reasons being are the rooms become so iconic. When you entertain, your guests always have a familiar sense of your home. The world around Park Avenue may be changing every day, but one will always expect to see those chintz sofas in her living room and those ox-blood red lacquered walls of her library, the most photographed room in New York.

This is why the Abbott house and the Chancellor Mansion are never really changed. Things are refreshed, but never redecorated. Katherine's tastes would not change over the years. Just like Jack would inherit his father's tastes by keeping the house the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I always thought that set was hideous, it was great and marbly but looked so cheap and fake, nothing remotely like a mansion. I was SO happy when they completely re-did it, I just wish they would have mentioned the change on the show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Llanfair burned down on Halloween 1992. Jessica's pumpkin started it- or a candle or something. Gottlieb completely revamped OLTL's production values and lighting. A completley new set was built and is the set we see today- although it has gotten new wallpaper, ect. They changed the wood trim around the bookcases, fireplace, ect

I liked the understated grey that Gottlieb did much better..

The new Llanfair was revealed when Bo and Cassie's wedding was held there in November- and the awesome Alex brought back Sarah who was alive!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • I had forgotten that several Days stars came out strong against Melissa. Good for them!
    • That would have made sense. Did all these characters get dropped when DePriest left or had they already been dropped?
    • The other issue with Missy: in June 2020, she "liked" some social media posts by Candace Owens -- things Candace said that were against Black Lives Matter.  That is described here https://tvline.com/news/melissa-reeves-racism-days-of-our-lives-instagram-controversy-2894568/ I don't know if that was ever resolved.
    • She appeared onscreen not long after Rose Livingston and Sara Montaigne, and we found out that Sara was Rose's estranged daughter. I wonder whether Peggy might have been part of that family group -- or else they were just juggling a few different potential mysteries so that they could develop whatever seemed to be getting the best response from the audience. They didn't do anything much with Rose and Sara really either. Maybe Rose would have become more prominent if Rachel and Mac had split up over Mitch, or if Sara had really flourished. In some ways I can picture Cheryl being affected by MJ's prostitution similarly to how Josie was distressed by finding out about Sharlene. But I can also see that Josie as a Frame being involved with Matthew would have different stakes for Rachel and Sharlene than Cheryl being involved with Scott. I do think the solution for Cheryl would have had to be a badder boy than Scott -- either a real bad boy who would do her wrong, or the kind of bad boy (not Chad!!!) who is essentially misunderstood and other people just don't understand. Cheryl would also have been better off with some friends her own age. Matthew and Josie benefited a bit from having other teenagers to interact with.
    • Sally Spencer was a decent actress, but the writing destroyed the "M.J." that Kathleen Layman had built. Layman had a quiet strength about her, and she and Osburn really felt like sisters. Spencer's character should have been either an unmentioned sister, or maybe Jake's that grew up close to Kathleen, M.J. and the rest, but was away for a few years before joining the force. Kristen Marie was o.k., but I always got a mousier vibe from her. Being pigeon-holed with Scott for most of the run hurt things for her, as well.  The Loves were also underserved between Rhonda Lewin and Philece Sampler. Philece would have been better as Nicole. Thank goodness Anne Heche  showed up for the next round of auditions. Christopher Holder was mediocre as Peter, but given a shot, I think Marcus Smythe could have stuck around for a while.  I would have had Peggy Lazarus be a Frame -- possibly an ex-wife for Vince with an agenda. Smythe and Hollen had  a fun chemistry that could have kept the two around.. Bringing recasts for  Cheryl and Ben back mixing it up with other Frames. Corys, Lawrences at the time might have kept all the families stronger. 
    • shoot...he said in that Locher room with Krista. I think he met her before that---she was doing Broadway and they had mutual friends or an agent maybe?
    • Yes. And I assume he met Mary Ellen Stuart at GL.
    • That's an odd coincidence. Yeah, Roger would turn anything he could to his advantage. At the time, he's just taking the pictures to bank leverage over Reva, Billy or the Lewises.  I'm kinda squeamish about 1986 episodes myself. I'd love to hear the original version of Ross/Vanessa/Dinah, but the Cain story is bad, and I don't want Billy and Vanessa to break up.
    • Eeek. I didn't know this either! I will say, though, even though they skimmed over a lot of Roger's past, I will give them props for not trying to turn him into a hero. Yeah, I was hoping we would get more 1986 episodes than were available on YT before, but now I'm wondering if I really want to see that. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy