Paul Raven

Guiding Light discussion thread

4,455 posts in this topic

Just now, zanereed said:

 

He really did. I don't remember any real consequences for Ed and Lillian.

 

I also thought that Ed would get some heat from Roger. Once again, Ed Bauer took something away from Roger Thorpe (whether directly or indirectly), this time a good friend. I figured Maureen's death would have/could have kick-started an Ed/Roger feud again.

 

Lillian did catch a bit more heat than Ed did though. I just hate that there was no character on the canvas that called him on his sh-t. Not even Roger as you mentioned. Most of them just patted him on the head like 'poor Ed.' 

 

I would've been all for Roger calling Ed on his crap, as I always team Roger. It would've been nice to see Roger lord something over Ed's sanctimonious head for once. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holly was initially very disappointed and let down by Ed when she found about about everything, which I thought was pretty realistic (as she had always built him up as her "hero"). I don't think it lasted too long though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, DRW50 said:

 

It's a shame it took two and a half years for that scenario, by which point it had no real impact. I guess as the Reardons had mostly been gone for a long time in soap terms, it was a way to save money to only mention them, but I do wonder if having some back, even just Bea, might have made her goodbye feel like it was more about her instead of JFP clearly not caring about the character, which was another factor in viewers quitting the show.

JFP strikes again, couldn't they have asked the actors to appear for a few episodes? Wasn't KDP still available at the time Maureen died?

3 hours ago, BetterForgotten said:

Holly was initially very disappointed and let down by Ed when she found about about everything, which I thought was pretty realistic (as she had always built him up as her "hero"). I don't think it lasted too long though. 

What was the reason for the Nursery Rhyme Stalker story?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, cassadine1991 said:

JFP strikes again, couldn't they have asked the actors to appear for a few episodes? Wasn't KDP still available at the time Maureen died?

What was the reason for the Nursery Rhyme Stalker story?

 

Holly lost her daughter Meg due to her indexisiveness over Roger..and Fletcher got fed up and left with their daughter.  Holly felt guilt..drank...blamed herself for being a bad mother...then viewed other women who neglected their kids and decided to punish them.

 

The riddles and methods she used were clever...but the aftermath was cut short...sadly...including a few scenes of holly and Annie befriending each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, zanereed said:

 

Ah, yes - correct. While it was great to have Rick back, that was just *one* legacy Bauer who came back, even if it was only a short-term visit. I don't recall a mention during the 50th of Mike Bauer, no mention of Meta or any other legacy Bauers, and having a SORAsed Alan-Michael arrive essentially squashed any chance of Hope Bauer ever returning. While I did like Alan-Michael, I still think he was SORAsed waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too quickly. If anything, I would have loved to have seen Hope Bauer be the one who parachuted into Springfield - a changed Hope (probably recast if Elvera wouldn't do it) who - since leaving Springfield 4 years ago - has become a stronger person than the one who was duped by Alan on so many occasions. The old Hope would have never taken a risk of parachuting, but this Hope would. It would be symbolic of an independent Hope would has taken control of her life. She would be more of a risk-taker both personally and professionally.

 

Alan, of course, would be horrified at this change in Hope, and would immediately try to get custody of a non-SORAsed Alan-Michael.

Rick's return wasn't a short-term visit. He stayed around until early 1991.

 

Sheri Anderson was head writer at that time and seemed intent on beefing up the presence of the Bauers through Johnny's family members. Of course, those weren't the Bauers that viewers wanted to see. As I recollect, Mary Stuart was even supposed to join the show in 1987 as Hannah Bauer.

 

Hope Bauer was slated to return in 1986. Then head writer Jeff Ryder talked about Hope returning in a Soap Opera Digest interview. I might be wrong, but I think he even mentioned Alan-Michael in that interview. In the same interview, he also discussed introducing Sarah and Rusty Shayne. Weeks later, Ryder was out and Mary Ryan Munisteri's disastrous reign began.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Nothin'ButAttitude said:

 

Only characters I'd want were Danny, Cassie, and Reva. No other Shaynes. All the other Santoses are dead. 

 

 

I SUPPOSE I could have handled having just those three characters on the canvas of TGL, as long as they were not crammed down viewers' throats 24/7, and as long as there were no stupid, campy, and/or offensive stories about clones, time travel, fictitious islands, and shoot-outs in the Bauer kitchen. 

 

 

5 hours ago, zanereed said:

 

Yes, Hulswit should have been the one to return as Ed in 1986 versus Simon. It would have helped immensely. Also, just think of how much more of an impact the returns of Holly and Roger would have been with Hulswit as Ed. I think that Ed Bauer would have had a lot more story and interaction with Roger if that were the case. I remember seeing a soap mag in 1990 with a photo of Zaslow and Hulswit together, and Hulswit looked exactly the same as in 1981, so he would have been perfectly fine back in the role. I wonder if they did reach out to him in 1986 but he turned it down? I would have loved Stewart back as Mike, but Hulswit would have sufficed just fine. As you said, Stewart apparently was problematic to work with, so there might have been reluctance to ask him back.

 

I read somewhere (probably earlier in this thread?) that Kobe and Long were fine doing a complete overhaul of TGL cast (letting long time vets go in favor of new characters) as long as they had Charita there as the heart of the show. I know that Kobe and Long both encouraged the Bert leg amputation storyline for Charita to do. Apparently they were shocked when she passed away, as they never realized how sick she really was. Regardless, TPTB definitely should have brought in Meta (preferably with Demming in the role). Meta could have decided to come back and stay in Springfield after Bert's passing, even if just a recurring presence for the rest of the Bauer family.

 

 

To me, having Hulswit return as Ed would have sufficed too, but ideally, I would have wanted both him and Stewart back on screen as tentpole characters.

 

It was just so misguided to fire Hulswit in the first place. Marland claimed they wanted a younger, sexier Ed to play romantic stories, but...look at the lead on daytime's top-rated GENERAL HOSPITAL during the early 1980s: Tony Geary. Hardly the epitome of male beauty! TPTB didn't, and don't, understand that the audience responds to actors for many different reasons, and we are not all obsessed with six-packs and chiseled cheek bones. Hulswit was a cuddly teddy bear; quite adorable in his own way. Patriarchs, in particular, do not need to be sex-gods. The audience just wants them to be...endearing and comforting. 

 

On the show, to explain Charita Bauer's absence after she passed away, it was said  that Bert was out of town visiting Meta in Florida because Meta had had a stroke. After the character of Bert also died, it would have made perfect sense for Aunt Meta to return to Springfield to be with her family. Months later, Jeff Ryder, who was writing TGL when it dealt with Bert's death, acknowledged that the audience kept clamoring for the Bauers to return, but claimed there weren't even many of them to bring back. Only Mike and Hope. He had already forgotten about poor Meta, LOL. In any case, he had no interest in reinvesting in that family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, robbwolff said:

Rick's return wasn't a short-term visit. He stayed around until early 1991.

 

Sheri Anderson was head writer at that time and seemed intent on beefing up the presence of the Bauers through Johnny's family members. Of course, those weren't the Bauers that viewers wanted to see. As I recollect, Mary Stuart was even supposed to join the show in 1987 as Hannah Bauer.

 

Hope Bauer was slated to return in 1986. Then head writer Jeff Ryder talked about Hope returning in a Soap Opera Digest interview. I might be wrong, but I think he even mentioned Alan-Michael in that interview. In the same interview, he also discussed introducing Sarah and Rusty Shayne. Weeks later, Ryder was out and Mary Ryan Munisteri's disastrous reign began.

 

Sorry, Robb. I didn't mean to single out Rick Bauer. I knew O'Leary was back long term at that point. I meant that the show could have brought back other legacy characters for the 50th, even if was for a short term visit.

 

I though both Hope and Mike were slated to return (in one form or another - I suspect recasts for both) in 1986.

 

Oh, gawd...Mary Ryan Munisteri...

37 minutes ago, vetsoapfan said:

To me, having Hulswit return as Ed would have sufficed too, but ideally, I would have wanted both him and Stewart back on screen as tentpole characters.

 

It was just so misguided to fire Hulswit in the first place. Marland claimed they wanted a younger, sexier Ed to play romantic stories, but...look at the lead on daytime's top-rated GENERAL HOSPITAL during the early 1980s: Tony Geary. Hardly the epitome of male beauty! TPTB didn't, and don't, understand that the audience responds to actors for many different reasons, and we are not all obsessed with six-packs and chiseled cheek bones. Hulswit was a cuddly teddy bear; quite adorable in his own way. Patriarchs, in particular, do not need to be sex-gods. The audience just wants them to be...endearing and comforting. 

 

On the show, to explain Charita Bauer's absence after she passed away, it was said  that Bert was out of town visiting Meta in Florida because Meta had had a stroke. After the character of Bert also died, it would have made perfect sense for Aunt Meta to return to Springfield to be with her family. Months later, Jeff Ryder, who was writing TGL when it dealt with Bert's death, acknowledged that the audience kept clamoring for the Bauers to return, but claimed there weren't even many of them to bring back. Only Mike and Hope. He had already forgotten about poor Meta, LOL. In any case, he had no interest in reinvesting in that family.

 

Hulswit apparently rubbed Marland the wrong way. As was mentioned earlier in this thread, Hulswit seemed to be the only actor that Marland was ever negative towards in an interview from the mid-1980's. I had read somewhere that Potter fired Hulswit because he was so critical of the writing. Marland must not have taken kindly to that.

 

However, he could have been brought back in 1986 when it was a new regime. I agree, when it comes to the patriarchs, looking like an Adonis is not a prerequisite. Well, Don Stewart was an exception I suppose...

2 hours ago, Soaplovers said:

 

Holly lost her daughter Meg due to her indexisiveness over Roger..and Fletcher got fed up and left with their daughter.  Holly felt guilt..drank...blamed herself for being a bad mother...then viewed other women who neglected their kids and decided to punish them.

 

The riddles and methods she used were clever...but the aftermath was cut short...sadly...including a few scenes of holly and Annie befriending each other.

 

The one thing I was shocked by during the Nursery Rhyme Storyline was that they brought back Holly's brother, Ken Norris - still being played by Roger Newman! Although I think Newman was a writer on the show at the time, it was still nice to see the show dig back into its history and bring back a legacy character. It's too back they didn't do more with Ken. They could have brought in his daughter that he had with Janet and expanded the Norris family a bit more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, zanereed said:

 

Sorry, Robb. I didn't mean to single out Rick Bauer. I knew O'Leary was back long term at that point. I meant that the show could have brought back other legacy characters for the 50th, even if was for a short term visit.

 

I though both Hope and Mike were slated to return (in one form or another - I suspect recasts for both) in 1986.

 

Oh, gawd...Mary Ryan Munisteri...

 

Hulswit apparently rubbed Marland the wrong way. As was mentioned earlier in this thread, Hulswit seemed to be the only actor that Marland was ever negative towards in an interview from the mid-1980's. I had read somewhere that Potter fired Hulswit because he was so critical of the writing. Marland must not have taken kindly to that.

 

However, he could have been brought back in 1986 when it was a new regime. I agree, when it comes to the patriarchs, looking like an Adonis is not a prerequisite. Well, Don Stewart was an exception I suppose...

 

Marland was usually so affable and gracious in the press. I was shocked when he referred to Hulswit as a "dodo" in an interview.

 

At various times, TPTB paid lip service to the idea of Mike and Hope returning, but there could not have been serious interest in carrying through with it, because the show had many opportunities to bring those characters back but consistently failed to do so. In the early 1980s, Pamela Long said that she was interested in having Meta Bauer return, because "so much happened to her," but that did not pan out until 1996.

Edited by vetsoapfan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, robbwolff said:

Rick's return wasn't a short-term visit. He stayed around until early 1991.

 

Sheri Anderson was head writer at that time and seemed intent on beefing up the presence of the Bauers through Johnny's family members. Of course, those weren't the Bauers that viewers wanted to see. As I recollect, Mary Stuart was even supposed to join the show in 1987 as Hannah Bauer.

 

Hope Bauer was slated to return in 1986. Then head writer Jeff Ryder talked about Hope returning in a Soap Opera Digest interview. I might be wrong, but I think he even mentioned Alan-Michael in that interview. In the same interview, he also discussed introducing Sarah and Rusty Shayne. Weeks later, Ryder was out and Mary Ryan Munisteri's disastrous reign began.

 

You are right: no one really cared about the newbie, "fake" Bauers suddenly retconned into existence. If Papa Bauer had had a brother Otto, nephew Jack, etc., we would have known about it decades earlier. As a viewer, I was annpyed at being presented with these characters instead of seeing the REAL Bauers back on my screen. :(

 

I did not know that Jeff Ryder had discussed bringing back Hope before he was replaced as headwriter. I remember his comments in the press about how the fans kept demanding a return of the family, but that only Mike and Hope remained. He did not (in that interview) indicate he had any intention of bringing them back. I did not like Ryder's work, but I would have been appreciative of his efforts, if he had actually had Hope return.

 

Mary Ryan Munisteri...yikes! The show went through so many dreadful writers during the 1980s and '90s. They should have stuck with pat falken Smith, who had showed great promise when she briefly replaced Douglas Marland. Her scripts were great and I felt she "got" the characters and the tone/style/feeling of the show.

Edited by vetsoapfan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trudy, would have been the only Bauer that they could have brought back and created new family etc around her, as she disappeared decades earlier. Some imaginary Bauer would be annoying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ~bl~ said:

Trudy, would have been the only Bauer that they could have brought back and created new family etc around her, as she disappeared decades earlier. Some imaginary Bauer would be annoying.

 

Yes, Trudy's branch of the family tree could have been explored and it would have played into established history. There were a few different ways the show could have reestablished the Bauer family, had they delved into the past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was there a reason why Pat Faken Smith was replaced after such a short time?  

 

What fascinates me about Pam long was that she infused GL with a lot of heart and emotion....and was a good fit for the show...but sometimes her plotting was a little off if she didnt have a strong co head writer to help with the plotting.  Though I do admit I enjoyed both tv movies she penned for Dolly Parton :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, vetsoapfan said:

 

I did not know that Jeff Ryder had discussed bringing back Hope before he was replaced as headwriter. I remember his comments in the press about how the fans kept demanding a return of the family, but that only Mike and Hope remained. He did not (in that interview) indicate he had any intention of bringing them back. I did not like Ryder's work, but I would have been appreciative of his efforts, if he had actually had Hope return.

 

There was an item in SOD around 1986 or early 1987 suggesting a Hope return, possibly with Alan-Michael. I guess the show, heavy into the teen market and also full of a lot of women in her age range, decided to just age him and not bother bringing her back.

 

As for the Santos and the Winslows, I liked them more than I should have (other than Pilar, who always bored and annoyed me), because of the casting and because for their flaws I thought B&E did a decent job with their material. I thought the Labines were very tone deaf about what worked for the characters - Edmund as some sort of dark prince with Beth as his dim bulb enabler was unwatchable, as was Danny as the Sonny Corinthos of Springfield. And then after that it never really worked - likely it wouldn't have anyway. I will say I liked Danny/Cassie - it's a shame the show caved to pressure from "Manny" fans.

 

I do think it was a huge mistake to bring Bradley Cole back as Jeffrey. I know he had a lot of ardent fans but what charm and style he may have had as Richard was MIA in the truly disgusting Jeffrey (as was any chemistry he had with Laura Wright). David Andrew Macdonald was a much better lead in an antihero sense and continued to be a highlight of even the dumbest stories (like the "evil Will" tedium). He also had a great, great ass. 

Edited by DRW50

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David Andrew MacDonald's Edmund was the closest this show ever came to another Roger Thorpe and I'll go as far to say that I found Edmund's reasons for his more horrific behavior far more compelling than I ever found Roger's.

 

He was the only character from those dark San Cristobel/Santos days that ever should have lasted more than nine months, in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, katie_9918 said:

David Andrew MacDonald's Edmund was the closest this show ever came to another Roger Thorpe and I'll go as far to say that I found Edmund's reasons for his more horrific behavior far more compelling than I ever found Roger's.

 

He was the only character from those dark San Cristobel/Santos days that ever should have lasted more than nine months, in my opinion.

 

I liked Edmund but no. 

 

Edmund was nothing like Roger. Roger was way too complex to emulate. Edmund was mustache twirling at best. He's nowhere near Roger on the spectrum of complex villains. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.