Why has Coronation Street, the actual street itself, become a monument to nostalgia?

PyramidbreadPyramidbread Posts: 10,448
Forum Member
✭✭
Aside from the Bistro, literally nothing has changed on the street since the early nineties, despite many storylines about things changing, it always remains the same, only allowed to change marginally (new signs ect). The street feels stuck in some kind of weird time bubble where everything remains the same. The producers seem scared of changing anything, because god forbid the street changes to reflect the era it is set in.
«13

Comments

  • cuslirveecuslirvee Posts: 76
    Forum Member
    I think you've nailed it, because someone somewhere at ITV is scared to take any risks. So we get outdated relics like Underworld, or Rita having to work at the Kabin even though she's getting on to 90 now. I don't think it's the producers, because I could see Kate Oates not being scared of making those sorts of changes, I think the problem is higher up than that.

    I wish when they'd introduced the Co-Op and Costa Coffee storefronts, that they'd created some exterior sets for them because those are the kinds of sets Corrie could do with. Although I guess product placement rules might mean they're not allowed to do that.

    At the very least, turn Underworld into a supermarket. It's had its day.
  • mo mousemo mouse Posts: 38,764
    Forum Member
    Because most people are strangely resistant to change. I would love to see The Rovers knocked down and rebuilt with a new, modern name - but no, not allowed. We've got to stay stuck in the past.
  • KarlyKarly Posts: 10,460
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    It's ridiculous. The last best thing Corrie did was to knock down the factory and build the modern housing on the other side of the street. They need to allow for more modern housing. Build more little offshoots like 'Coronation Mews' or whatever and let the old houses be modernised. Keeping something because x had it in 1982 is just stupid. Thank goodness Hilda's muriel went before this mindset came in or Jack Webster would still be eating his breakfast staring at it.
  • MaxcidentMaxcident Posts: 7,270
    Forum Member
    Iain MacLeod has had plenty of opportunity to change the set, which he implied he intended upon doing, many a time, but he’s still scared to do anything, that some viewers may regard as too radical a change. When the factory collapsed, that should’ve been it for Underworld, and if they insist on keeping a factory on the street, they could at least change what is produced at the factory, as I’m sure the days of sewing knickers together, by hand, are few, thanks to increase in mass production lines. Furthermore, he could’ve seen part of the street demolished as part of Ray Crosby’s development plot, but once again, too scared to do anything, and then we’ve recently had the sinkhole disaster (disaster meaning how bad the episodes were, as opposed to the sinkhole stunt), which did no damage at all, but they could’ve wiped out a house or something like that, with the stunt. Hey, they’re even averse to knocking down that brewery, in the backdrop of the street that’s never been used. I’m sure Corrie isn’t going to lose too many viewers, because a set that was never used, is being demolished.
  • J-BJ-B Posts: 18,612
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I think some of it comes from fan service to existing viewers, across all soaps - the number of newer, younger viewers is essentially a rounding error, so soaps are stuck placating an ever dwindling number of viewers that have watched for years, why not just carry on with more of what they are used to whilst soaps still manage to scrape enough viewers to keep their slots.

    Thanks.
  • PyramidbreadPyramidbread Posts: 10,448
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Karly wrote: »
    It's ridiculous. The last best thing Corrie did was to knock down the factory and build the modern housing on the other side of the street. They need to allow for more modern housing. Build more little offshoots like 'Coronation Mews' or whatever and let the old houses be modernised. Keeping something because x had it in 1982 is just stupid. Thank goodness Hilda's muriel went before this mindset came in or Jack Webster would still be eating his breakfast staring at it.

    It's so ridiculous that the old Duckworth house looks the exact same over 10 years after Jack passed away
  • Robert_Davies1Robert_Davies1 Posts: 898
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Years ago they'd change things up, knocking down the other side of the street, building new houses, burning down the rovers etc but now it's all about what they think the long term fans want, nostalgia.
    I love a bit of nostalgia but I'd happily take the odd picture in the background rather than the shrines we have now.

    Fiz's house is how Jack and Vera, a couple in their 70s had it over 10 years ago. Rita in The Kabin is ridiculous, Roy in the Cafe is ridiculous.

    They have changed the corner shop plenty of times so I don't understand why they can't change the other sets. Although, after the shambles they made of Number 3... 🤦🏻‍♂️
  • Nova8221Nova8221 Posts: 1,448
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    After the awful refurbishment of Number 3 I would rather they leave the sets as they are.
  • DimsieDimsie Posts: 2,019
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think maybe it’s yes they want to keep it all looking familiar for their older viewers (of which I’m one). Would I mind if they made changes? Not really, time changes and things change, but OTOH it’s true that a lot of streets nowadays look similar to one another, not so much individuality as in the past. One thing I definitely think should change is Fiz’s house interior, it does look very dated, as though she and the girls were living there with older people who didn’t want any change which isn’t the case. Even the girls must notice how old-fashioned their house is compared to friends’ houses. Rita is old, so I’m not really surprised she doesn’t make changes, and I think Roy wouldn’t have been keen to make changes that would make things different from when Hayley was alive; Nina might make changes now, of course.
  • BurnleyRubbleBurnleyRubble Posts: 19,209
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    One of the reasons the first Rovers Return fire sticks in my mind is because they refurbished the place from top to bottom. I remember Bet telling Jack how excited she was and how the fire was the best thing that could ever have happened to the place.

    Now they wouldn't dare shake things up.
  • Robert_Davies1Robert_Davies1 Posts: 898
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    One of the reasons the first Rovers Return fire sticks in my mind is because they refurbished the place from top to bottom. I remember Bet telling Jack how excited she was and how the fire was the best thing that could ever have happened to the place.

    Now they wouldn't dare shake things up.

    Whereas after the second fire it was refurbished exactly the same, despite it being absolutely gutted. Even the photos of past residents were replaced. They're just scared of change these days.
  • ZzlyonsZzlyons Posts: 2,046
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It's strange watching the classic episodes because the street is constantly evolving and changing. Sets and businesses reflect the 90s at the time. Now its just a mismatch of different businesses that should of been closed years ago

  • PyramidbreadPyramidbread Posts: 10,448
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    One of the reasons the first Rovers Return fire sticks in my mind is because they refurbished the place from top to bottom. I remember Bet telling Jack how excited she was and how the fire was the best thing that could ever have happened to the place.

    Now they wouldn't dare shake things up.

    Whereas after the second fire it was refurbished exactly the same, despite it being absolutely gutted. Even the photos of past residents were replaced. They're just scared of change these days.

    Funny thing is, they changed it more in 2008, than they did after the fire
    article-2325556-19D49ECC000005DC-640_634x350.jpg

    Then about two months later, without any mention, it changed back to the red and gold
  • Seymour ButtsSeymour Butts Posts: 3,750
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    One of the reasons the first Rovers Return fire sticks in my mind is because they refurbished the place from top to bottom. I remember Bet telling Jack how excited she was and how the fire was the best thing that could ever have happened to the place.

    Now they wouldn't dare shake things up.

    Whereas after the second fire it was refurbished exactly the same, despite it being absolutely gutted. Even the photos of past residents were replaced. They're just scared of change these days.
    That really was ridiculous. There is no way Stella would have redecorated it in that way. It was a great opportunity with a character who had no connections with the past to really modernise the place but they chose to keep it exactly the same.

    As for rebuilding the street exactly the same after the tram crash...
  • MJsDirtyDianaMJsDirtyDiana Posts: 372,993
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited 30/11/21 - 16:41 #16
    I hope the Street stays the same for the foreseeable… I don’t know why Costa has to be there though. It’s like a blot on the landscape.
  • Polly_PerkinsPolly_Perkins Posts: 21,656
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    mo mouse wrote: »
    Because most people are strangely resistant to change. I would love to see The Rovers knocked down and rebuilt with a new, modern name - but no, not allowed. We've got to stay stuck in the past.

    One if the reasons soaps historically have had a fan base is partly down to the familiarity.

    Like I would hate the cladding to go on the Duckworths old house.

    These are all touch points with the shows past and I love that about Corrie.

    There is something quite comforting about it.

  • Nova8221Nova8221 Posts: 1,448
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    How would fans seriously feel if the cobbles were dug up and replaced with tarmac?
  • Nova8221Nova8221 Posts: 1,448
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    mo mouse wrote: »
    Because most people are strangely resistant to change. I would love to see The Rovers knocked down and rebuilt with a new, modern name - but no, not allowed. We've got to stay stuck in the past.

    To be fair though modernizing places tends to ruin them and strip their character. Old fashioned pubs like The Rovers tend to have a warmer feel to them.
  • SuccessionSuccession Posts: 6,499
    Forum Member
    mo mouse wrote: »
    Because most people are strangely resistant to change. I would love to see The Rovers knocked down and rebuilt with a new, modern name - but no, not allowed. We've got to stay stuck in the past.

    Because the form of the soap opera itself is inherently resistant to change- hence why you have characters who stay on for 60 years.
  • Polly_PerkinsPolly_Perkins Posts: 21,656
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    edited 01/12/21 - 07:48 #21
    Succession wrote: »
    mo mouse wrote: »
    Because most people are strangely resistant to change. I would love to see The Rovers knocked down and rebuilt with a new, modern name - but no, not allowed. We've got to stay stuck in the past.

    Because the form of the soap opera itself is inherently resistant to change- hence why you have characters who stay on for 60 years.

    Isn't that the whole point of soap opera, long term investment in characters, which other shows can't acheive.

    We have seen what has happened to Eastenders with it losing so many cast members.

    Plus I don't get this obsession with change. I have people in my street who have lived here over 50 years, nothing has changed really since the 1930's apart from one small block of luxury flats and changes in shops.

    But Corrie has always been a show to keep it's finger on the pulse. The building of the houses opposite the Rovers with the GP surgery, then we had Better Buys etc, the factory closing, reopening, a shift to an online model with Nick and Sarah

    I loved all that.

    I'm not sure else they could do or why they would make big changes
  • Kenzie70Kenzie70 Posts: 1,590
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    edited 01/12/21 - 08:04 #22
    What's the point in changing the Rovers? There's only ever about 2 people in at the one time. And even before Covid times, there was next to nobody in. What happened to extras making the place look like it was a decent pub?
  • lufcfan1998lufcfan1998 Posts: 18,489
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Succession wrote: »
    mo mouse wrote: »
    Because most people are strangely resistant to change. I would love to see The Rovers knocked down and rebuilt with a new, modern name - but no, not allowed. We've got to stay stuck in the past.

    Because the form of the soap opera itself is inherently resistant to change- hence why you have characters who stay on for 60 years.

    Isn't that the whole point of soap opera, long term investment in characters, which other shows can't acheive.

    We have seen what has happened to Eastenders with it losing so many cast members.

    Plus I don't get this obsession with change. I have people in my street who have lived here over 50 years, nothing has changed really since the 1930's apart from one small block of luxury flats and changes in shops.

    But Corrie has always been a show to keep it's finger on the pulse. The building of the houses opposite the Rovers with the GP surgery, then we had Better Buys etc, the factory closing, reopening, a shift to an online model with Nick and Sarah

    I loved all that.

    I'm not sure else they could do or why they would make big changes

    It's quite similar on my street too - I've lived on my street for 23 years (so my entire lifetime) and when me and my sister were kids (so during the 00s), there were my house and 1 or 2 others on the street. Since 2010 however, there has been loads!
  • slabberingaboutcbbslabberingaboutcbb Posts: 752
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I think they could change a few things, like the interiors of some people’s houses maybe. Fiz’s house is utterly grim, but to be fair, is she meant to be stylish and stuff? Maybe it’s a choice? Still and all, it just looks minging to me for some reason, like it hasn’t been cleaned in years. But Tracy in Ken’s house? Surely they wouldn’t keep that wallpaper and stuff from like 50 years ago? David and Gail’s house is also outdated, but I think they got a new kitchen and wallpaper about ten years ago, but to be fair, Gail probably likes it that way and I can’t imagine David cares much about decor.

    I think the actual street and The Rovers and stuff is fine looking like that, it would look weird if it was all changed! And also, didn’t The Bailey’s house get changed up and everyone hated it?
  • PyramidbreadPyramidbread Posts: 10,448
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    It's less about big sweeping changes, and more about small adjustments that get brought up in stories and never come to pass - Underworld should have been replaced by now, it's kind of silly that its still going. Fiz's house should have gotten a makeover by now, instead of being some shrine to Jack and Vera. The Rovers needs a little modernising, not over the top, but enough to make it look a little more up to date. The old Brewery should be renovated into new apartments, and the yard opened up into a new street.
  • Vinnie_WrightVinnie_Wright Posts: 16,493
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Maxcident wrote: »
    Iain MacLeod has had plenty of opportunity to change the set, which he implied he intended upon doing, many a time, but he’s still scared to do anything, that some viewers may regard as too radical a change. When the factory collapsed, that should’ve been it for Underworld, and if they insist on keeping a factory on the street, they could at least change what is produced at the factory, as I’m sure the days of sewing knickers together, by hand, are few, thanks to increase in mass production lines. Furthermore, he could’ve seen part of the street demolished as part of Ray Crosby’s development plot, but once again, too scared to do anything, and then we’ve recently had the sinkhole disaster (disaster meaning how bad the episodes were, as opposed to the sinkhole stunt), which did no damage at all, but they could’ve wiped out a house or something like that, with the stunt. Hey, they’re even averse to knocking down that brewery, in the backdrop of the street that’s never been used. I’m sure Corrie isn’t going to lose too many viewers, because a set that was never used, is being demolished.

    I think it's less about being too scared and more about not being given permission. No producers on the show have been allowed to make real changes to the locale in many years. The most we get is something like The Bistro.
Sign In or Register to comment.