Tasteful Friends and Old Hollywood Fans - Judy Garland's Bel Air estate can be yours!

I was molested there.

Mom! He did it again!

I like it. Nice but not showy at all. The pool/guest house is cute.

I love you, R1! I came here to type the exact same comment.

I love it, which is a rarity for me with these TF threads.

I was molested in the master bathroom.

I LOVE this home, it's a normal home on almost 2.7 acres. I could be very happy there, love the pool area.

Beautiful home. Classic. I'd say timeless but I'd sound like a Mary!

It is absolutely lovely.

I love it. I want to decorate it for Christmas.

Beautiful. And the pool and the guest house are incredible.

I also love the home. It's been thoughtfully updated but retains its original aesthetic and charm. Plus, sitting on a nearly 2.7 acre lot in Holmby Hills almost makes $11.5m seem like a bargain!

No you're right R8 and absolutely no Mary about it. It's timeless, tasteful, luxurious but understated. The house layout is perfect. The grounds are perfect. The pool is perfect and the pool house is fucking perfect. I'd live in it. It's all gorgeous. I'm super impressed actually. I'm Gen-X so I couldn't name even one Garland song or Minelli song but that house is 10/10. The Rainbow song? Was that Garland? Red shoes or something. Kansas. Arthur. Anyway - that house is very nice and I'm sure it will be snapped up by a rich Eldergay fan. It's lovely. Is it in a nice part of LA? It's quite a good sized property. Lots of room to roam.

Now you queens can see that when I clicked my heels three times and said, "There's no place like home," I meant it.

[quote] I'm Gen-X so I couldn't name even one Garland song or Minelli song but that house is 10/10. The Rainbow song? Was that Garland? Red shoes or something. Kansas. Arthur.

Give me a break.

It’s very white.

Seems like it has a lot of privacy, no sweeping views. The house is sunken into the property. Most of the back yard is on a slope, but that's what gives it privacy.

I wouldn't call the guest house "incredible." Couldn't really see the pool, but it looked small.

How long did Judy live there? Was it her home or or parents’ home/her childhood home? Who else has lived there?

Yes. I'm also not interested in any way in singers like Garland and Minelli R15. They don't do anything for me. Garland died long before I was born.

There's your break.

Homosexuals are born, not made… but surely living in Judy’s house would immediately convert any and all resident to gay?

R18 It was built for her in 1938. She lived there before she got married, afaik. Lived there with her sisters and her mother. And maybe Will Gilmore, her mother's second husband (?). See the Xmas photo.

OP, can it be in Holmby Hills and Bel Air at the same time?

It's so nice to see a "Hollywood home" that hasn't been totally fucked up by successive owners, but I fear that 2.7 acres for that price could mean it will give way to a mega-estate. ☹️

Pleasant and well executed and livable, but it does nothing for me. It falls short in the architecture department.

Somehow Cape Cods don't translate well to Southern California. The low ceilings are oppressive. Half of the house is walk-in closets and bathrooms with no character at all; the kitchen expensive and huge but likewise charmless and made more for show than for use.

You could spend a weekend in the house and a week later have only the vaguest memory of the place. It's subtlety is forgettable, generic. The huge bay windows at the tear elevation and that green valley of a rear garden are the most impressive aspects of the place. And the pool house/guesthouse wins a few points because of its different style and for not being so studied and white on white on white.

Had the house a bolder sense of style in its decoration, it could be.more agreeable, but the architecture isn't there for me.

I appreciate the comments of those who.like it, it's just not a house for which I have much enthusiasm.

^ Show us on the doll where Judy Garland hurt you

Beautiful house, but underwhelming interior decor - as R16 says, so much white! But it has masses of potential, would be interesting to see colour pics of what it looked like prior to someone going mad with a spray gun and a bulk lot of developer's cream paint. I wouldnt do a thing to the exterior, its damn near perfect, but the interior needs more colour and more patterns throughout. Also I'd remove most of the can lights except in the kitchen and bathrooms

I get why R23 cant muster much enthusiasm for it. The architecture needs a bold style of decor, how it is now just conceals its good points rather than brings them out

I do actually know who Judy Garland is, she starred in a film

To all the architectural snobs weighing in the house was designed by Wallace Neff...

"Today, Wallace Neff homes are highly desired by the Southern California Elite. Wallace Neff is known for developing the area’s distinctive architectural design described as “California Style.” His influential clientele once included Judy Garland, Cary Grant, Charlie Chaplin, Mary Pickford and Douglas Fairbanks. His work for them considered to be the true essence of Southern California architecture."

R23, the low ceilings also struck me the wrong way. Not a total deal breaker but a material flaw.

And many GenXers grew up watching the Wizard of Oz every spring on network TV, as well as all the old Garland flicks on cable, so I'm stunned by anyone in my peer group who couldn't name at least a handful of her most popular songs and movies.

[quote] OP, can it be in Holmby Hills and Bel Air at the same time?

R21 My bad. It's definitely in Bel Air, though the Holmby Hills neighborhood is very close by.

Low ceilings are very desirable for a musician. Acoustically, you get a warm close sound in those rooms. High ceilings create ricochet and bad sound. I would buy that house and hug it every day, and invite my select DLers over to roll around on the rugs in glee. Then I'll tear the kitchen island out, that wasn't hers.

I loved the grounds but the house was just okay. I had a problem with the ceilings too. The ugly carpet running through the entire place didn't help. It looked like a standard upper middle class house like you would see in a T.V. series starring Donna Reed. It was nothing special.

Loved the generous sizes of the rooms. Neat and tidy grounds and pool.

I’m very confused by that carpet being in every. single. room. It was even wall to wall in certain rooms. That type of grass carpet is very uncomfortable on feet. I’m wondering if it’s just for the staging. Otherwise, I like it. I agree the ceilings seemed a little low, at least in the pictures.

My entire apartment could fit into just one of those bedrooms. With room to spare. Looking at those pics is just another reminder I must be one of the poors.

“I dont know who Judy Garland is.” Gurl, please. Everyone on the planet knows her. Wizard of Oz is one of the most famous movies ever made and was played constantly on tv while you were growing up. And it has the most famous song to ever come out of Hollywood. Everyone knows Somewhere Over the Rainbow. Please be for fucking real. Ridiculous.

for most DL’ers the staircase alone would be a dealbreaker. Basically a deathtrap for most over 55.

What say I?

[quote]"Judy was one of the most talented singers ever. She also had a lot of pain and struggle throughout her life. Despite that, she had a good heart, which is hard to encounter in Hollywood. At a time when gay people were oppressed beyond belief, they identified with her struggles and she theirs."

Oh, the number and variety of reenactments you could have performing "Life with the Lufts!" With season three's very special episode, "Lorna's Molested."

The Lufts never lived there.

It's a 5 bedroom house, not an estate.

I like Wallace Neff, sometimes, though not his super-pared back houses. I prefer the earlier historicist houses richer in detail or his more modern work. I know his name must be uttered in a reverent whisper in Southern California, but a fair amount of his residential work is middling-luxe, like the Garland house.

Here's a Neff house I like better, half the price (last year) but in Altadena. It's a somewhat pared back Spanish Colonial Revival, but more interesting architecturally and more appealing. For me.

That house seems awfully familiar...like it was used in Columbo episode or something.

A list w/pics of most of the houses Judy lived in, including the Garland-Luft house in Holmby Hills, the Rockingham house, and the Scarsdale house.

Included with the purchase of the house is the Judy Pills Automatic Dispenser 🤪

That’s a lot of lawn for LA.

R40 No where near as refined and sophisticated as the Judy house.

R45, we have a difference of opinion then. I don't care for super spare and streamlined detailing. Although I know it's an important aspect of Southern California architecture, magnifying the scale of a Cape Cod then distilling and stripping away the characteristics of the style to a sort doll's house synthesis: a tin box punctuated by gabled dormers and oversized picture windows. That aspect of California design that takes everything away until there's so little left but the huge price tag doesn't work for me. I understand the aesthetic, I just don't like it.

For me, the Cape Cod model is so modest and spare in it's defining characteristics that to strip it all away leaves a big nothing. I don't see sophistication so much as dowdy and boring, if very well built.

^ All interesting observations. And not wrong.

I however find the gross heavy stucco, wrought iron doo-dads, ersatz terracotta, faux historical details of the house at R40 just too kitsch for me.

[quote] Although I know it's an important aspect of Southern California architecture, magnifying the scale of a Cape Cod then distilling and stripping away the characteristics of the style to a sort doll's house synthesis: a tin box punctuated by gabled dormers and oversized picture windows.

Well put! And R40 is much more to my liking.

Complete tear down. Scrape the lot clean. I want one like the Kartrashians.

She lived there for a few years when she was young? I'd hardly call it her estate. She was completely broke at the end. Sneaking in and out of hotels. The many millions she made from concerts stolen from her by husbands and agents and she was so drugged up she didn't notice.

[quote] she was so drugged up she didn't notice.

That’s not the only thing she didn’t notice. I was molested.

It's a beautiful house.

But that shot of the staircase looking downward did make me think, You wouldn't want to stand in that spot for too long when you had a few dolls on board. Instant Ivana.

It's a mansion, I suppose. But this is no "estate".

Isn't it a Colonial, rather than a Cape Cod?

I can never keep white fabrics white. I’d be paralyzed by that decor but if I could afford a $11M house, I’m sure redoing the interior wouldn’t be an issue.

Unless I’ve just revealed my gauche and lowly origins by imagining that one “redoes” Judy Garland in any way.

It's a lovely, cozy house. I would live there in a heartbeat. Tastefully decorated, just perfect. But it makes me feel sad, knowing how Judy's life ended, and the terrible struggles of her later years. This is the house she should have grown old in, and lived in comfort, and died peacefully.

Teardown or make servants quarters.

This is a great house for Hancock Park, but not Bel Air. It's over-priced for an old home with low ceilings and small rooms, and a very dated pool area. I can't imagine someone spending $11 million for something so small and dated. You see houses like this in any nice neighborhood around America for a couple million.

R58 I agree it's overpriced, I think $6-7 Million would be the top end of asking price. But not less than $4Million.

Chic house. Still, in the New England colonial style it faithfully reproduces the low ceilings and I just don't feel a LUXURIOUS house should have quite low ceilings. They don't need to be Italian villa high, but there should be an airiness you never get in these colonials.

Didn’t have enough medicine cabinets or bar areas for me. Also, the toilets were rather small. I need a toilet with a large seat so that I can get comfortable for a long rest.

They may have been able to scrub out my hymen blood from the carpets, but my shame lingers on.

You’re not spending 11 million on the house R58, you’re spending it on the Bel Air location and property.

[quote] You see houses like this in any nice neighborhood around America for a couple million.

And?

[quote]You see houses like this in any nice neighborhood around America for a couple million.

This isn't "around America". It's Bel Air.

^ So, about $7-8 million overpriced because it's in Bel Air, got it

It’s the real estate market. One piece of land costs more than another, based on location.

It's news to R66 that location influences the value of real estate.

The lot value is not worth $11.5 million for that property, especially with no view. Because of the slope, most of the lot is unusable,, and a house has to be built right on the street. Also, it's not in the best part of Bel Air.

For an older home like this, you wouldn't want to buy it for much more than lot value, because the next buyer will probably view it as a teardown and won't care who used to live there, or how much the renovations cost.

Yeah, i like the downward slope in the back yard because it lends privacy. But it also makes that part of the land unusable. I wonder if you could grade the land.

Yeah, i do think a buyer would tear down the house and try to level out the land.

It seems like a rather generic 30s/40s style you'd find in many parts of the country and not characteristically New England-ish or "historical". Lots of houses like this in relatively well-off first or second ring suburbs. An uncle of mine lived in a neighborhood with similar houses outside of Cleveland. It's nice inside--not a lot of fussy details or leftovers from ugly eras. It's too white, but than can be fixed.

I don’t see the point of lending a New England feel to Bel-Air. Why not appreciate what southern California has to offer, its good climate, etc.

There used to be a hotel in Hawaii called the Riviera and one of my friends thought it was ridiculous.

I wouldn't tear it down. And I don't care about the sloping lot. I think it's charming. I would make a nice little shrine to Judy out in the yard and have a my burglar alarm play "Somewhere Over the Rainbow " whenever someone approaches the house.

Its on a postcard.

Judy Garland's rustic Bel Air home was built in 1938, one year before she skyrocketed to fame in The Wizard of Oz. In 2011, it sold for $5.2 million, was flipped, and sold again the following year for $6.7 million.

The charming story-book quality of the architecture and garden is so Hollywood 1930s.

BUT after looking at that street on Google Maps, just no.

It is a charming home in its non-vulgar simplicity. Not pretentious and it has a feeling of warmth. It is a winner.

I'm buying it.

You need to throw a DL party R79.

It makes me laugh when people refer to the rooms as small.

I think we have to remember that this is not merely an ample home in a pleasant neighborhood.

It is the home commissioned by a film star.

It is a set for her as much as any film set was.

And in 1938, that meant pared-back old-fashioned nostalgia, or simple modern lines and no excess. Neff took the former route here.

That stripped-back style referenced a foursquare American aesthetic that was comforting, but not opulent, aristocratic or decadent (think Norma Desmond's bizarre, lavish and snobbish palace in "Sunset Boulevard").

The Garland House is about as good as this line of thought could deliver.

When the postwar era rolled around, ostentation and artistry were back in and Palm Springs Modernism became the West Coast gold standard.

I wonder what the kitchen of the house was like originally. Electric ranges and dishwashers were available for who could afford them. The first automatic washers went on sale in 1937.

We take all of these things for granted today but a home so equipped in 1938 would have been a marvel and the height of luxury.

[quote] It is the home commissioned by a film star.

But I don't think a buyer would care that much about it.

The house in Grand Rapids, Minnesota where she lived for just a few years, is simple but attractive. Has anyone been to the museum there?

Judy was very hands on during the design and building of the house...

"It was thus not just a house but a romantic vision of what home was meant to be. And like the studio art directors of the thirties and forties, Garland identified that platonic ideal not with the sun-drenched houses she saw around her in California but rather with the Christmas-card images of New England, where, as everyone who had ever been to the movies knew, there was always snow on the ground for the holidays and, inside, happy families drank hot chocolate around a fire. The Bel Air house, with its warm brick exterior, its covered front porch, its rustic shingles and its understated dormers, almost looked as if it had been transported from Connecticut."

A routine, hardly New England-y suburban house. Paul Williams, who worked in a number of different styles probably would have given her something more interesting. He could do modernism or use traditional styles but without fussy, un-necessary details.

Judy was quite porky during the time she lived in this house.

You're an asshole no matter what house you're in, R88

@r87, But Judy liked this house and if a 17 year old girl is paying the bills the lady gets what the lady wants

R89, And you're fat no matter what house you're in.

Girls! Girls! That's enough!

I can lose the weight but you can't lose the cunt, r91.

Mine? Mine? Mine???! Thanks for posting! This is my ideal house! The best one yet! Of course I would add colorful touches here and there of turquoise, blue, and greens, I love every picture. I love that it's light and bright and clean. The amount of natural light in this home is amazing! And that wrought-iron staircase! The only thing missing is an old- fashioned swingset and teeter-totter.

Meh on the Paul Williams Stan. Williams' flamboyant and even fussy designs are what we value, not his boring modest houses.

I love this house. Is it in a good neighborhood today? I don’t know LA at all.

^ Yeah, Bel Air is considered pretty nice, the medium price for a house is over $8 million

Speaking of Bel Air, R96 and R97, I think an earlier poster suggested some parts of Bel Air are not so nice. Is that possible?

^ No, $8 million will always get you a nice neighborhood, even in California

lol, no, there are no parts of Bel Air that are “not nice.” It’s one of the most expensive neighborhoods in the world.

R100, I beg to disagree.

Too white white white. And where is the Pill room??

Why is Judy Garland always "The star who did drugs"? It wasn't even her choice, the habit was forced on her. Marilyn Monroe did drugs. Montgomery Clift. Elizabeth Taylor. David O. Selznick. But it's always "Judy was a drug addict."

R101 Nicole Simpson lived in Brentwood, not Bel Air.

The Fresh Prince did live in Bel Air, however.

I'm not familiar with BelAir, but a friend of a friend lived in Brentwood, near the old OJ Simpson house. THAT is a nice neighborhood. Not opulent, just leafy and green and secluded.

Nicole lived near the entrance of Brentwood, I think. OJ lived further into the neighborhood, which is nicer, of course.

From an old Beverly Hillbillies episode. Mrs. Drysdale goes over to the Clampetts collecting donations for her woman's club

Mrs. Drysdale: "Granny, I'm collecting for the poor, care to donate?"

Granny: "No"

Mrs. Drysdale: "But, Granny, the people of Brentwood need our help"

I like the Hotel Bel Air.

The house is not even blue. Pass.

All Bel-Air is nice, but some parts are nicer than others. You're talking $8M homes vs $80M homes.

r105 but the house was actually in Brentwood.

No charm. The house looks a bit sterile.

It should be dropped on a witch!

[quote]I would buy that house and hug it every day, and invite my select DLers over to roll around on the rugs in glee. Then I'll tear the kitchen island out, that wasn't hers.

MARY!!

[quote]Why is Judy Garland always "The star who did drugs"? It wasn't even her choice, the habit was forced on her. Marilyn Monroe did drugs. Montgomery Clift. Elizabeth Taylor. David O. Selznick. But it's always "Judy was a drug addict."

None of those people spiraled completely out of control and lost everything the way Judy did.

Remember Judy Pills?

If it were Suzanne Somers prior home you’d all hate it

R115 I would say Monroe was worse than Judy - Judy could remember her songs, Marilyn couldn't remember 3 lines. She was sleeping on a mattress on the floor. Clift was pretty far gone, too. That's why he died.

Also I wouldn't say losing money or possessions is the main sign you were the flagship drug addict.

Besides, people stole a lot of Judy's money and property. Especially her agents.

[quote]Besides, people stole a lot of Judy's money and property. Especially her agents.

Because she was stoned 24/7 and unable to manage anything herself.

Ha! Ha! I'll say.

R104 I think Nicole technically lived in West LA.

R123 Nope, not at the time of her death. Definitely Brentwood. Her prior condo on Gretna Green was also in Brentwood.