Jump to content

Y&R: Old Articles


DRW50

Recommended Posts

  • Members

Thanks for that.

The GCAC was an odd choice of venue. It was more formal than Gina's. It was a hotel and there was gym and a rooftop bar.

So there were customers all dressy while others were in athletic gear.

At some point the display cabinet went from trophies and momentos to the cheap looking  tchotchkes seen in other sets.

It also seemed to shrink at some point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 14.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

Leslie realistically probably couldn't afford the place, but Bell seemed to fluctuate the Brooks between well-to-do (upper middle class, a term I'm not sure was used in the 70's) and very wealthy. In the first or second episode Stuart makes a point of saying his family isn't rich, just well-to-do. I think this was abandonded at some point or whenever Bell needed them to have a lot of money for story purposes. 

Leslie bought Pierre's after her breakdown and I get the feeling it was a place for her to hide. There was a short story of Maestro basically forcing Les to perform again and Les being resentful of him pressuring her. I think they have a confrontation about it at one point. I think story wise it was her way of having a musical connection without performing on stage as she was too frightened to.

In Dec 74 Greg goes to Leslie and asks her to rehire Gwen at Allegro, so I guess she was hands on when it was needed, but I am pretty sure she really didn't run the place and by 1975 Brock was running it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Right, Leslie owned the Allegro, but I don't recall her ever consistently being a hands-on manager. 

Janice Lynde's Leslie was such an *introverted* person that it wouldn't have made much sense for her to pass out menus, serve drinks, and chit-chat with customers.  But it did make sense for her to sing a Broadway showtune in the Allegro, receive a round of applause, and then duck away behind the potted plants.  

Brock was the type of person who needed to be in the Allegro on a daily basis, and Bill Bell seemed to realize that fairly quickly.  That's really where your 1970s "unity" arose.  Brock could stand at the bar and counsel Chris about the Beckers in the prologue, then give Jack or Joanne Curtis a pep-talk in Act II, and then encourage Kay to forgive Jill for some wrongdoing in Act III -- all in the same set.   The central characters in each separate storyline could stay in their own individual orbits, never crossing paths or even seeing one another, but Brock could speak with any or all of them at the bar or at a table, and it seemed completely natural and organic.

Those interactions didn't happen as often once Jonas was running the place, because Jonas lacked the history with the other characters (and the knowledge of their predicaments) that Brock had possessed, by virtue of Brock being Kay's son, friends with all of the Foster kids, and friends with all of the Brooks girls.    

Edited by Broderick
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Will, in the scene you're speaking of, I believe that Stuart Brooks was deliberately downplaying his wealth and social prominence (as was his nature pretty consistently throughout his run from 1973-1983.)  A few pages back, someone posted an outline from late March 1973 that Bill Bell had typed for Kay Lenard (one of his early script writers) to utilize in crafting dialogue.  One of Bell's reminders in the outline to Kay Lenard was, "Forget about the Brooks' money and affluence; they should emerge in this episode as pretty identifiable people."  We see the same thing in an earlier episode written entirely by Bill Bell (I believe it's Episode 2) where Jennifer Brooks, in her pearls, is tearing lettuce for the salad while her roast is in the oven; they all sit down and eat in the kitchen, and the younger two daughters tease each other about dessert.  (Chris is on a diet.)  While they eat, they speak matter-of-factly about Lorie studying in Paris, as though they believe every family in America sends their kids to Europe to college.  (This is juxtaposed with Jill and Snapper in the dowdy Foster living room, where Snapper is sort of lecturing Jill about skipping work with menstrual cramps, because they need the money.)  What Bell seemed to be striving for here with the Brooks is a family that NEVER has to worry about money, never even THINKS about money, but have no social pretensions whatsoever.  And I believe Bell was doing that deliberately to set the stage for Lorie to breeze in a few months later with a snotty, entitled attitude that wasn't present in any of the other girls.  He was also setting-up Jennifer as a somewhat bored, vain housewife who had no qualms about sleeping around.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Oh wow, thank you for mentioning that! I never knew that was how it all played out as far as what aired when. Also, it’s interesting how it was known as a C-level storyline. So for 1979, who would’ve been the A and B-level storylines while this was all going on? I myself have never been interested in the Brooks or Prentiss families during any time they were on the show. They just didn’t have the excitement for me nearly as much as the Foster and Chancellor families. If I think of memorable scenes or storylines, I never think of the Brooks or Prentiss families. Ever. LOL. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

lol, I guess it's a matter of opinion what's the "A-story", the "B-story", and the "C-story", but in Bill Bell's case, the dialogue and the music cues typically showed you what he felt most invested in.  And he clearly LOVED anything involving Lorie and Lance, which is why I consider that his "A-story".  The "B-stories" at that time were probably the doomed marriage of Jill and Stuart, the gaslighting of Kay Thurston by Suzanne Lynch, and Chris Brooks getting caught up with Sharon & Julie (or whatever their names were) -- that evolved into the "White Slavery" storyline where Brock and Snapper had to save Chris from Rose Deville's backroom at Second Hand Rose's Antiques & Pretty Things.  The whole storyline with Nick and Nikki played-out on random, non-consecutive days almost as an afterthought (which is why I called it a "C-story").  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I wonder at what point Bill decided Nikki had some potential as a longer running character?

Was she at first one of his Summer teens who would highlight a social problem eg STD's and then learn her lesson and disappear?

The difference with Nikki ,unlike Jody before her, was that she was related to another character, so had more presence on the canvas.

Did Bill bring back Greg with the intent of him hooking up with Nikki and thus anchoring her onto the canvas?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'd say in terms of Greg, I doubt it. Wings was on by very late Nov 77 and I don't think Greg and Nikki interacted until early 79. Fairly sure it was after Melody was in the role, around the time Nick Reed showed up. Pretty sure Bill Bell never really thought out such connections a year or more in advance, so I assume he got Nikki and Greg together as it suited the Nick story, of him being jealous of Greg dating his daughter, and maybe MTS and Wings had chemistry that Bill thought was worth exploring. I could be wrong though.

I do get the feeling Nikki was possibly a character that he thought had some potential, but was easy to dismiss if she wasn't working. Of course why go to the trouble of recasting and remaking her if you aren't at least somewhat invested. If I had to guess I would say Bill Bell was more invested in Casey and wanted to expand her sphere by bringing in her sister and father, then it went from there and once MTS was in the role he saw the potential. No doubt by 1981 Bill Bell made Nikki a much larger focus of the show. 

I think it is worth reiterating that Roberta had auditioned as a sub for Jaime Lyn Bauer and wasn't successful but the show told her to hold tight because they had a longer term role for her. So I do feel the idea that Roberta and Casey were seen as important is probably more true. I think MTS probably made Bell take more notice of Nikki.

Edited by will81
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

There was a 1978 episode on YT where Casey mentions her kid sister but Nikki wasn't seen in that episode. I think Casey was introduced as the new doctor in town, and troublemaking younger sister Nikki arrived shortly after.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I honestly enjoy discussing these type of details.

Linda and Larry Larkin was his first real story, besides minor supporting role stuff. 

After that wrapped up he had little to do until about Apr 79 when Greg and Nikki began dating, which led to the Nick Reed confrontation. 

I do wonder if Bill was a Superman fan or something. Lois Lane, Lana Lang etc...

Casey came in almost as a replacement for Chris when Trish Stewart left in March, I think Casey popped up the following week. Not sure if they always intended to replace Trish or not. Her first story was a sort of romance with Snapper, then Chris returns (now Lynn Topping) and Snapper has to decide.

Nikki came on in May. So it is possible Nikki was always intended to be part of the show or Bell quickly created her once he saw Roberta as Casey. There isn't much of a gap between them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think Nikki just slowly evolved into someone worth keeping.  As mentioned earlier, the emphasis (at first) seemed to be on Casey, and Nikki was almost an afterthought -- Patty Minter's lazy sidekick at the Allegro.

Erica Hope played Nikki as trashy and slutty, without much depth (which is the way the part was written).  When it became evident that Erica Hope wasn't working out -- and I was never sure what happened backstage, but I sorta suspected she was coming to the studio unprepared and hungover, lol -- the recast started things moving in a more long-term direction. 

Melody Thomas brought a certain "scatter-brained stupidity" to the character that made her sluttiness FUNNY and sort of ENDEARING, instead of just provocative.  She still wasn't anything to write home about, until she crossed paths with Victor and Kay.  The depth and maturity of Eric Braeden and Jeanne Cooper really HIGHLIGHTED the immaturity, impulsiveness, and air-headed characteristics of Nikki, and that's when I believe she broke-out of the "sidekick" role and truly became an ingenue in her own right.       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I am pretty sure, without naming her, Kay Alden mentioned that Erica was too much like her character and often wouldn't even turn up and they had no other choice but to replace her. Probably why they went a slightly different direction with MTS being cast. Once bitten, twice shy and all that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • The show is definitely trying to make Lulu seem like she's wrong and Brook Lynn is being tormented.  I just don't really see it that way.  Lulu really hasn't done anything except confront BLQ.   She hasn't told anyone, Chase already knows, and she's writing an article about adoption.  Everyone is jumping down her throat for something Lulu actually has a personal investment in.  Brook Lynn's freakout about a newspaper article on adoption is way more suspicious than Lulu just writing a story about it lol. Chase is coming off ridiculously self-righteous too.  Telling Dante to make Lulu stop while lying to him about his child.
    • I do like that they seem to be pushing ahead with Dante and Lulu as opposed to what I feared would be an overly-long wait for a reunion. But while Lulu has always been rash and at times self-righteous, the story does feel skewed towards FV's faves (Setton vs. Laura's kids).
    • The fact that Lois brought Gio to Brook Lynn's wedding, encouraged him to stay in town, then decided he should live at the Q's make her look dim and like she was asking to get caught lol. I still strongly dislike this story, but the performances have been good.  Like you said Gio finally has a story and Dante will get something to do besides playing house with Sam on the backburner.
    • @Maxim

      Please register in order to view this content

       
    • I'm up to 300. About 12 episodes left of the Barnes.  The development of the Prescott family has been the big event in the last few months of episodes I've watched. Jerry Timms as Gil is a nice addition as the show's new young stud. I like when the villains start out as deeply human and just generally flawed individuals like Gil, and early Nancy. Something the show does well is the sorta low level conflict that can generate with things like Gil's carefree playboy "life of the party" lifestyle interfering in the day to day happenings of him and his family. Gil is a shameless flirt and orders a beer or three when he is on lunch from the construction site. I think the conflict between himself and his father, Jason, is compelling even if I'm not sold on Read Morgan. If Morgan was a local talent, I think I might be more generous, but Morgan had a bit of primetime credits I believe. Jason, like Gil, isn't a one woman man so the internal conflict within the Prescott clan is ripe for drama. Yet, there are definitely flaws. Gil's relationships with Sheila Carter, a recast Vicki Lang, and Deena Greely seem to unattached to the larger story that I am not invested. Donna Denton isn't bad as Deena, but she lacks a bit of presence to carry the story in Mitch Dunbar's absence; she is now Mitch's law partner. Gil's flirtation with a married Lori was interesting and appeared to be done to build conflict between Gil and Russ, who seems to be heading in Renee Crawford's Marianne Prescott's direction now that Becky is out the door. Crawford slides right into the role of Lori's friend and Russ' love interest well even if Becky was (at least in the pre-Barnes) episodes more compelling as a woman who had deeper flaws than Marianne. Marianne's inner conflict has some legs if it goes anywhere. With her mother Corrine's passing, Marianne has assumed the mantle of the woman in her father's life and defacto mother to her restless, reckless brother Gil. At present, Marianne is putting her graphic design dreams on hold to work at Prescott Development, sacrificing her own desires for the "greater good" fo the Prescott men. I feel like Marianne is the kind of girl that Carrie Weaver will love and unintentionally terrorize with her overbearing, nearly incestual love for her son, Russ. If Chris Auer hadn't jumped ship to the writing team (his scripts are strong so I'm not mad), I would have liked to seen Francis pining for Marianne to complete the assumption of Becky's role in the lives of the men Becky knew (and who loved her).  The complete revision of the Vicki character with the recast and pairing her with Gil is odd. It is basically a new character. Laura Leigh Taylor's Vicki was more conservative and business focused while the new Vicki is more outgoing and lively. I don't hate the new actress but it's such a dramatic shift in characterization and I'm not clear why. I know a later character (Stacey Phillips) assumes the characterization of Taylor's Vicki Lang, but I don't think that occurs until a few months into Jason Vining's work. I also just cannot see Taylor's Vicki giving Gil the time of day when she constantly rejected Peter.  The quad between newly arrived developer Jason Prescott, recently widowed Terry, Terry's old friend Dr. Alex Greely, and Jason's corporate attorney Sharon Landers is equally weak. Alex comes off as desperate. Robert Burchette is more than serviceable in the role of friend and the lovelorn colleague, but Alex's jealousy of Jason doesn't work for me. I don't get the sense the friendship has run that deep, but maybe it does for Alex. The actress playing Sharon lacks the bravado to sell Sharon as this shark who kills it in the boardroom and could tear apart the moral Terry. I like that Jason's relationships with Terry and Sharon echo Gil's own bad boy behavior that Jason constantly chatisizes Gil for, but I do wish there was some angle here to root for other than praying that Terry decides to enter the convent.  As I was reflecting on the Prescotts, I can see why Vining makes some of the changes he does. Jason isn't a bad character, but Read Morgan doesn't work in the role. Recasting probably would have worked given the show's large canvas involved in the city planning of Kingsley from the political and business angles, but as the show delves deeper into the criminal underworld, I can see why Jason was just dropped. Also, it would have been more interesting if Jason's wife wasn't dead, but had divorced him ages ago and was living in abroad to pop up as a conflict down the line, which is ultimately what happened with Dave and Kate Phillips. On a side note, Dave has been offscreen for most of the tailend of the Barnes run reconciling with his either estranged or ex-wife, I cannot remember which.  The Prescott Development stories are bizarre. You have the antics of Gil slowly turning Peter to the dark side (a story that would have worked better with Nancy as the devil on Peter's shoulder) which is obviously built to give conflict between Jason and Terry. Simiarly, Gil's romance of Alex's niece Deena seems to set up animosity between Jason and Alex over their child and defacto child. I just cannot invest in Terry and Jason. Not that I want Alex and Terry, but Jason is just not working for me. I get we are going for the gruff widower who works in construction with a strong belief in the Lord, but I just don't think Jason projects the image of romantic lead. It's reminiscent of Bert Kramer as Alex Wheeler for me.  The story the Cavalares family is insane. Dom Cavalares is the drunk single father of teenage Donna. Donna is friends with Jill and they smoke some weed together before Donna ends up being taken into the Cummings home because when her father gets drunk he gets physically abusive. The scene of a drunk Dom breaking into the Cummings' home and attacking Donna is wild. It is a terrifying sequence where Dom comes in raging to get his daughter back with the Cummings' girls (Liz, Jenny, and Jill) and Donna present before Jeff comes in and gets knocked out by Dom. I think it ends with Donna being dragged away. I cannot imagine any show doing that in the past two decades.  In some ways, I suspect that the Barnes might have dusted off Roy Winsor's projection for the Jeff Cummings story and used them as the inspiration. When Jason learns Dom is a drunk, Dom ends up going to AA, which was the original story direction before Jeff was saved by the light. The bookstore angle quickly faded before being shifted to Jill to give her something to do. The set up for the Cummings' turning their home into a halfway house was probably the spinoff idea. I don't think its terrible, but it's not working in the larger scale of the show's canvas. I appreicate the attempts to rectify the Jeff story by having Dom turn to AA (offscreen), but I would have liked it more if we actually saw some more regret from Jeff over what he had done. Beth Slaymaker's role in this story is intriguing. As the judge handling Donna and Dom's situation, it is clear that she has a bit of sympathy for Dom that she might not have had if she hadn't given up Jill when she was younger.  The Jill-Peter romantic angle never developed the way I expected it to. Jill's "transformation" leading to more interest from both Gary and Peter feels dated by modern standards, but was probably a popular trope for the time. I think Jill has stopped appearing now that Beth has bought her the book store. I cannot say I am sorry to see her go because I don't think they knew what to do with her. Jill was such an abrasive character who I didn't like as a person, but who made sense. She was just exhausting in larger doses. Seidman was much more appealing as Jill's persona softened.  The Redlons reunion has been odd. I don't remember if it was earlier and included in my last post, but Carla nearly runs off with Jimmy in a sequence that is very well done and tense. I don't think Carla and Gene work completely. Both actors are wonderful, but I don't like how they play the duo. Carla's career should have her being pulled in directions (which it does, at times) but I think its such an odd choice to play this story in isolation of the Russ-Becky marriage. Gene's political career isn't my favorite story, either, but that's more because I don't care for Jason. I'll do a separate post later about the Carpenters with Nancy and the end of Becky and Russ' marriage. 
    • I don't know about that, I think BC has mostly improved by leaps and bounds. He's not perfect but he's come along a lot.
    • Agreed. Ted getting recasted before Martin is crazy work lol. 
    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • @Maxim

      Please register in order to view this content

       
    • Please register in order to view this content

       
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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