j swift

49 minutes ago, vetsoapfan said:

She was a leading lady and BM was a STAR, more befitting of Mike Bauer's/Don Stewart's leading man status.

 

This is total speculation but one imagines that BM would have preferred an Alex/Mike/Roger triangle over Alex/Mindy/Roger - a star would always want to be the crux of the triangle not the older, less desirable one...

ep187 is so much fun - Minx, Lionel and Augusta are hysterical, Mason is really charming and fun, and they have the Flashdance soundtrack in the background of scenes.   There is an odd amount of voiceover that seems so anachronistic now.

However, Marcello is "counseling" Kelly in Bermuda and tells her "You have so much to live for.  Your beauty, your charm and you are a wonderful companion."  I laughed harder than at the Minx scenes.  The only things Kelly has going for her is that she's nice at dinner? 

Also, how old is Marcello?  Because at dinner he tells Kelly that she lost his entire family in "the war" which I assume is WWII but it is 1985? [Edit:]  I just read the SB online site that Marcello was 10 in 1944 when his parents were murdered; so he's 50? And he's unusually close to his stepmother whom he met 16 years ago after Channing's murder when he was 34?  Those Countess Armonti Cosmetics are amazing!

44 minutes ago, zanereed said:

Mike Bauer wasn't a "good guy" initially, either.

BY "good guy"  perhaps I should have specified both Mike and Bill as their respective mother's favorites?

It is interesting to me that these guys who were a little too old for their respective action stories of the 70's were never adapted to age later in the series.  I am filled with memories of actors with hair dyed a little too dark, running around in safari leisure suits chasing villains.  Of course there are actor issues but, I wonder if it is easier to keep a female character going (like Reva or Vanessa) than a male lead character?  Most soaps had fathers and uncles who aged but I can think of few examples of leading romantic men willing to age into their roles and even be backburnered a bit without a recast.

18 hours ago, vetsoapfan said:

Yes, the reason George Reinholt popped into my head when writing about Stewart is that, if the stories about them are true, then both men shared similar attitudes and behavioral problems as their popularity soared. More than likely, the actors knew that their huge and devoted fan base offered them more security and protection than the Average Joe. (I do wonder, however, if Stewart would have lasted so long on TGL if he had had to work with the likes of Paul Rauch and Harding Lemay.)

I would like to offer the comparison of the characters of Mike Bauer and Bill Horton.  Both were leading roles that did not age well with their shows and both left huge holes in their wake when they left the canvas.  However, Ed Bauer and Micky Horton might never have aged into the avuncular characters they became (given their misspent youth) if their older good-guy brothers hadn't left town. 

Today's notes from watching the pre-tunnel episodes.  The whole town goes to the State Street Cafe for lunch but the set is so small, the bar is oddly placed and it looks so cheap.  Gina's pusher plays a whole episode in a set that is just a payphone on a wall.  Eden and Gina were fighting in the huge Capwell living/entry room while Cruz was meeting Minx in the Lockridge tiny blue living room so,  Augusta, Laken, Jade, Mason, Lionel, Warren, and Maggie all have to squeeze into the cafe.  In retrospect, one can see all of the lessons learned once they build the Orient Express set and people can move around a little.  Meanwhile, nobody ever goes back to the Beach Bar; even Warren who still has a locker there?

Also, I love the Reagan tidbit when Jack Lee is leaving town to "explore Europe for the president" and he is going to "brief him on his next vacation to Santa Barbara" since the Reagan's vacationed so close to the Capwell villa.

36 minutes ago, watson71 said:

I take all soap timelines with a grain of salt-

Agreed

BUT after rewatching the scenes when Reg comes back with Mary today there were a few issues:

It is amusing that years later when Donna and Peter meet Jake McKinnon, neither of them remark that he has the same last name as their former housekeeper who had an affair then mysteriously disappeared with their father?  And Jake never invited his cousins to his wedding to Marley at the Love mansion where their mother had worked?  Wouldn't Michael's time working in the stables overlap with Mary's employment; so why didn't he recognize her?   I guess it just struck me recently that this seems like as case of having an interesting plot - missing mother returns with amnesia - that required a lot of ret-cons to work.

It is kind of classic case of soap fandom.  I was on the edge of my seat waiting for Marissa to find out about Reginald.  However,  there are multiple recasts to endure, the history doesn't fit with established characters, and all of the sudden everyone in Bay City goes to Mary's Place for lunch.  But any true soap fan stays through it to get to the scenes where Mary and Vince reunite.

36 minutes ago, watson71 said:

Here is a brief background on Jason Frame:  

 

In the late 1960s, Jason Frame was a horse trainer for the Love family.  He was in love with Elizabeth Love.  When Reginald found out about the affair, Reginald murdered Elizabeth, then Reginald faked his death in Egypt with the assistance of Andrew Hutchins, Carl's father.  Jason left Bay City and joined the Navy. Jason claimed to be in the Navy for over 20 years; however, it was revealed that he was dishonorably discharged on suspicion of treason for selling arms to the Viet Cong.

So the Marrisa/Mary timeline is a plothole. 

In the Mary McKinnon story (which I thought was genius) Jason Frame pre-dated Steve's arrival in Bay City.  Marley would never had been believed as Donna's sister if Elizabeth left in 1969.  The McKinnon daughters would all have been older than Marley if Reg faked his and her deaths soon after Elizabeth was murdered.  That continuum just makes no sense.  However, like any soap, Denise Alexander's performance made that story work and I've never noticed the plotholes until now.  

I confuse Jason and Vince Frame, and according to the AW HomePage Jason first arrives in '87, so I defer to others on this one,

Is this timeline correct? Reginald and Elizabeth Love had three kids.  In 1969 Elizabeth and Jason had an affair and she was murdered.  Then, Reginald hired Mary McKinnon, in the early 70's, while Jake and his side of the family stayed in Lassiter. Mary and Vince McKinnon had three kids and lived in Bay City near Ada.  Later Reg and Mary have an affair and they leave town for South America. All of that was back story later added to the Love cannon.

My question is: does the timeline fit into the story of how the Love's were introduced?  I know Donna, Marley, and Peter lived in the house, then Carl stole their money but somehow they got it back.  However, wasn't Reg around before Mary?  Did he just never mention that he has a wife in South America? I know Jake never mentioned having family in Bay City before his cousins were introduced and although they were close I guess Jake never visited his cousins in his youth.

3 hours ago, adrnyc said:

I just watched the entire storyline last fall and I have to say that the Nicole reveal does not come out of nowhere. First of all, she is all over Jason in the weeks leading up to the murder. He terrorizes her over the fact that he killed their mother. Also, he had been attacking Cass, and Nicole had been begging Jason to leave Cass alone. I had watched the murder storyline as a kid and, during this re-watch, I thought to myself "How on earth did I, and other people, not see that Nicole killed him. It's clear as day!!"

Point taken, the whole story may deserve a re-watch

1 hour ago, Paul Raven said:

How was the fact that Jason Frame never existed in the original Frame story of the 70s ever explained?

I don't know what you mean?  Originally Steve had no siblings but once Lemay provided the new backstory Jason was one of the sibs introduced while Steve was still alive.  I know he was around during the Janice storyline.

I do precisely recall that Linda Dano was hosting her lifetime talk show Attitudes at the time of the Jason Frame murder trial.  As I recall on the talk show there was much discussion about Linda's bob hairdo that was actually a weave.  I also have a vague recollection that there was an episode where Linda went upside down and parts of her weave fell out.  I do not recall if the weave made it through the trial but I am eager to see it on my re-watch.

But for me, AW will always be about Willis Frame and Robert Delaney; two intense guys who could design and build you a house, they were devoted to their women, and they were too smart for damsels in distress.  Soaps don't build 'em like that anymore.

Can we discuss the Jason Frame murder for a second?  In my opinion, it was another great idea that was poorly executed.

This is all from memory so please feel free to fill in the gaps.  However, the murder in the hall of mirrors feels like a GL ripoff.  The introduction of a Michael/Iris backstory is an unnecessary red herring.  Finally, the Nicole reveal comes out of nowhere.  As an audience, I recall that we knew that Nicole was guilty a few days before the reveal but there was no prior groundwork that would have marked Nicole as the culprit.  I love a surprise reveal but I think it has to be earned and in this case it felt random.

Nicole Love is a missed opportunity of a character.  In her first iteration as a drug addicted model she could have been an excellent counterpart for Vicky Hudson; old money promiscuity vs new money hussy.  I would have liked to see the Reginald/Mary reveal through Nicole's eyes as she was the youngest Love sibling.  Philece Sampler may have also been a better Nicole than a Donna recast.   

3 hours ago, dc11786 said:

Lindsay fascinates me. I realize he is only a bit player, but I wish they had revisited him. The Dobsons have donated their papers to the University of Wisconsin, and, among their SB papers, was a bit of information about AIDS. Bridget Dobson states that NBC (Brian Frons, in particular) wanted them to write an AIDS storyline into the show as part of the network's agreement to air the series. The Dobsons didn't want to do it, but, to appease Frons, they planned a storyline where Mother Isabel, Mary Duvall's superior at the convent, would succumb to the disease. Dobson said she thought it was the least threatening way to handle it. NBC eventually caved, and I'm not even sure the show even hinted at the story. I sort of wish they pushed the envelope and had Lindsay Smith return to town in 1986 with the disease. Rejected by friends and family, Sophia would offer to take him into the Capwell mansion during his final days. I think it would allow Sophia the chance to learn more about Channing, a young man she had believed was her son. On the other hand, they could have just kept Lindsay around in a recurring role without his sexuality being a major issue until they wanted it to be one.

First, if you have reviewed the Dobson's library archives then bravo; that is a source rarely used in forum discussions. 

Second, I whole-heartedly agree with you on the Lindsay points.  It is remarkable how tolerant the writing is around the reveal and everyone's response.  I appreciated that both Cruz and CC were respectful.  It is the only time that I remember sexuality being used as a red herring in soap history.

3 hours ago, dc11786 said:

In what I've seen, Kelly is very generic. Robin Wright is strong, but the writing doesn't really doesn't give her any shades. The pregnancy ploy during the standoff with Peter Flint is interesting, but I couldn't help but wonder if it wouldn't have been more interesting to actually go there. C.C. was determined to have a grandchild and having Kelly having Peter's baby, and passing it off Joe's, may have given some more layers to Kelly.

Re-watching Kelly drives me nuts.  Her defining characteristic is that she is beautiful.   At least once a week someone comments on Kelly's beauty.  Men fall literally madly in love with her.  However, she is merely an object.  She expresses no personal desires, drives or beliefs. 

3 hours ago, dc11786 said:

Eden's relationship with Sophia fascinated me. The level of vitriol that Eden uses to attack Sophia when she is masquerading as the Suzanne Carlyle, the reporter, is shocking when compared to the level of compassion Eden feels for Sophia when Sophia is unmasked as the killer. Eden begging Sophia not to leave them and revert to her damaged psyche is a really well done sequence. I thought Cruz's decision about whether or not to turn in Sophia provided Eden and Cruz a real natural conflict highlighting a lot of Eden and Cruz's flaws (Eden raised entitled and above any rules beyond her own and Cruz being honest to a fault without often considering the impact those laws would have on others). 

I think the same thing!  At the Gina/CC wedding, Gina tells Eden she is at fault that CC never dated after Sofia left him.  We are also told that Eden wanted to take Channing's place in the company and her father's heart.  However, none of that actually happens.  CC never really has to depend on Eden for the company and Eden never seems to really be driven by CC's approval. 

I also agree that the one thing that would have differentiated Kelly and Eden is if they had different responses to the Sofia reveal.  The stage was set for Eden to be mad and vindictive.  There could have been years of drama with Eden in the executive suite at Capwell versus Sofia at Armante.  Instead, Eden and Kelly's responses are barely explored before a trauma cements their newfound relationship with Sofia.   Then, right before Eden leaves she realizes that she was angry the whole time?

3 hours ago, dc11786 said:

I didn't know Santana and Gina had a history prior to Gina's arrival in Santa Barbara.

Eden/Gina scene before the wedding when Eden reveals that Brandon is CC's grandson she refers to Santana as Gina's old friend; although she may be using it colloquially.

Finally, can someone comment on the Lilly Light character?  The timing of her birth makes no sense with the eventual adoption of Brandon.  The switch from con-man to ingenue seems to occur both times that the character is introduced.  She is old enough when she is first introduced to be a romantic interest for Mason although Gina, Santana and CC Jr were about five years younger than Mason?  Did Summer or Haley know about Lilly?  I think she would have been more plausible (and served the same story purpose) if she was Stockman Demott's kid and GIna's stepdaughter.

9 hours ago, robbwolff said:

I thought Channing’s murder was wrapped up in May 1985. That was when Julia was introduced.

It is currently right before the tunnel explosion which brings Julia to town - that was probably in spring 1985.

I recall the denouement of Maggie the Cop is in August.

It is worth noting that Charles Bateman got some of the great material despite his OTT performance.  His diatribe toward Mason when he finds out that Channing was gay and his stuff with Gina prior to the wedding are examples of great writing. 

I continue to find fault with most of the Capwell female characters.  There is very little differentiation between Kelly and Eden.  Also, Sofia can't decide if she is going to be cold object of longing for Lionel & CC or a warm caring mother to Ted. 

Finally, I enjoy all of the tidbits that didn't get explored such as the idea that Gina and Santana were friends prior to 1984.

I'm having so much fun re-watching the episodes being currently uploaded from the summer of 1985.  It has inspired a couple of thoughts from the era:

1). Maggie the Cop is not given much to do but I like her non-sexual/cop/buddy relationship with Cruz, it is shame that she will disappear. 

2).  I forgot how long it was until Jed Allen and Robin Mattson appear.  Before them, CC and Gina are so mean and filled with anxiety.  However, the scene when Gina berates Eden for making CC stay alone after Sofia followed by Eden's revelation that Brandon is CC's grandson is great.  I like the characterization that Eden was always a little bitchy, Cruz softened her but, she reverted to type when threatened.  Early CC and Gina weren't great but they brought out a lot of good stuff in other characters.

3). Thank goodness the writers created Julia for Augusta to talk to, in this episode she was having lunch with Laken and Jade!  No wonder Augusta got so bored waiting for Lionel to return; she had no friends, she had major mother-in-law issues, and she clearly did not enjoy the ocean.

4.)  One year in and although they still haven't solved Channing's murder a lot happens in every episode.

It's funny that if the writers had made Megan Gordon into the un-dead baby of Cathy Craig & Joe Riley then they would not have had to come up with Eterna.  Megan would still have had a reason to feud to with Vicky.  Also, 10 years later, Vicky wouldn't have had to explain how she gave birth five times (Megan, Joey, Kevin, and the Jessica twins) but only remembered three of the babies.

I'm also surprised that future writers never used comebacks of the Michael Grande, Max Holden or Paul Kendall families; nor was there ever reference to Tony Lord's progeny.  Victor Lord had three kids postmortem (Tina, Todd & Vic Jr), it would have been far easier to explain a long lost kid of Tony Lord from when he was traveling abroad.

I was just thinking about this issue while reading the AW forum about Iris's return to Bay City:  Did Eliot Carrington come from a wealthy family? 

There's so much talk from Paige about getting Alex's money once she finds out that he is Dennis's father but didn't Eliot have money?  He was wealthy enough to hire Alice has Dennis's full-time nurse when he was a kid.  The Carrington's owned a townhouse in Manhattan where Alice lived.  Also, Iris was living off of her divorce settlement from Eliot for a long time.  I know that he didn't make a huge salary as a war correspondent.  However, I think from reading the history, that he had a substantial if not equal family fortune to Alex.  Unless, he spent his family's fortune on Dennis's illness and Iris's divorce?

I think Iris as the Chief is a great reveal without a great motivation.  I get that Texas is non-canonical to the AW universe but Iris's return negates her time in Houston.  She didn't need the cash, Dennis's inheritance was intact, and she had evolved from Mac's baby girl.  Texas-Iris lacked the passion and the confidence for business to pull off that scheme.  That's why she was never a threat to takeover World Oil; or Marshall Oil or whatever it was called.

The other obvious flaw in the story was Evan.  His connection to Janice was told so dubiously it seemed like the writers were trying to decide his actual origin after the character was introduced.  Replacing the actor did not help the character.  It was a classic soap problem, the exposition about the character is that he is a charming lout but then on screen he is depicted as a weasel.

Women being aroused by violence or grief is as fictional as evil twins or sudden teen aged infants.

Felicia changed a lot over the  years.  My least favorite was when she was with John Hudson, I hate any relationship that is predicated on "taming a wild spirit"  and John certainly never learned to appreciate Felicia's energy.  It is amusing in retrospect that she was brought on as an ex-lover of Carl Hutchins because (a) years later they acted like they never knew each other or only met while he was in town and (b) the whole-first-love-first-child story never fit the timeline from when she was introduced.

I wanted to recommend an amusing re-watch.  I put together a playlist of the youtube videos of Irene Manning's explanation of the Todd/Victor Jr story with the original death of Irene Manning from the period when Tina was introduced.  It creates some retrospectively amusing observations. 

(1), Vicky finds out that Karen is a suburban hooker when she collects Irene's things from the hotel and sees Karen in the lobby.  Karen is there looking worse-for-wear in a green shawl, Marco introduces her to the "john" and the guy is really handsome.  It is easy to see how Karen kept her secret because no one would guess that such an attractive guy was paying Karen for her time. 

(2) Irene looked healthy when she was dying.  The doctor tells Vicky that Irene is in constant pain and has only days to live but honestly, except for some shortness of breath in discussing Tina, Irene seems fine.

(3) Years later, Irene tells this whole story to Todd, Victor and Vicky but she never mentions Tina?  She briefly mentions that she was reuniting Vicky with her sister.  However, she never mentioned if she tracked Tina or Tina's kids. 

(4)That entire exposition was so rushed and contrived it would have been better if McBain was given the job of explaining the outcome.  McBain's main duty is trying to tape Irene's confession (despite the fact that she is confessing in front of 3 witnesses; including 2 journalists and a former mayor).  I would prefer if he had actually done some detective work and then explained the outcome. 

(5) The timeline from Tina's birth to the twins doesn't really make sense. Todd/VictorJr are the same age as Kevin who is easily 15-18 years younger than Tina  So how long was the Victor/Irene affair?

The generational changes in head writers seems remarkable.  You get the originators who are strict stalwarts of story, then you get their trainees who assert their individuality by ignoring history and trying to be socially relevant, and then you get the current generation who treat history like cannon to be mined either for camp or trivia.

5 hours ago, edgeofnik said:

 

BTW - Does anyone know why SG left the show at that point? Upon her return, she was clearly being punished by being left out of the new opening credits, which debut months after her return - despite being the main female protagonist. Obviously, that was more that made up in future openings.  

I seem to recall during one her podcast interviews SG mentioned that she had left the show for pilot season in LA so they didn't kill her off.

This is a perfect example why it is a whole team and not just a writer or producer.  The run from Margo's murder to Draper's escape to the Puppet Murders to Emily & Sharky to Nancy & the Bryson clinic to Sky is a remarkable achievement in terms of intersecting mysteries and characters that lasted years.  At the same time, actors were leaving, pressures from the networks existed and, technology was changing.  So, to achieve that linear story is amazing in retrospect and makes the firing of the writer seem like a bad idea.

Question: Was there ever a connection made between the fact that Cathy Craig's baby with Joe Riley was named Megan and then Vicky's long-lost daughter was named Megan?

Megan Gordon was probably named by Roger, (I guess he married later and had Sarah).  She also would have been older than Megan Craig-Riley. The whole coincidence is also likely due to a change in writing and production.  However, it was interesting that an oversite in naming Todd Manning created his whole relationship with Vicky but there was no mention of the two Megans.

Two fanfic possibilities: (a) Somehow Cathy Craig knew about Eterna and named her daughter Megan just to torment Vicky about her secret child. (b) when the whole town gathered around Megan Gordon's deathbed to retell the history of Landview (because that's what nobody does when a loved one is dying) Vicky's memories of being present at the birth and death of Megan Craig-Riley were effected by time travel.

The Knots Landing"bottle episodes" are some of my favorites and they differentiate Knots from other prime time soaps.  Bottle Episodes are when a few characters are stuck in a single set for most of an entire episode.  I remember an early episode when the women go to a house owned by a family member of Abby and Karen (through her dead husband).  There is the Abby/Olivia drug episode.  There is also a bottle episode with Mack.  These types of episodes were necessary for budget and writing when each season required more than 22 episodes.  However, while the other soaps would depend on flashbacks or clip episodes I always appreciated Knots quirky single-episode stories.

1 hour ago, Soaplovers said:

Saw the last month's of 1984...and I think Sheldon wrote some great episodes....not anything like slesar..but the show was pretty good still.

It is hard to say whether I enjoyed Sheldon's writing at the end or if I enjoyed Raven and Sky so much that I didn't notice the change in writing.  However, it seems to me that the Raven/Sky relationship shifted by 1984.  When they were investigating Nora's murder Raven and Sky were a team.  My favorite type of soap duo is a Thin Man/Nick & Nora type of couple who are written as equals.  Later in the series, perhaps to facilitate the actresses real pregnancy or it was a reflection of the writing, Raven became a damsel in distress that needed to be saved by Sky (Sky-prime not fake-Sky). 

Contrast that with my favorite period of the show when Raven left town for the first time before Margo's murder and Raven does seem different; if not more mature.  One of my all time best soap scenes is when Raven explains to April how she gave herself her nickname.  I love when Logan tells her that she incapable of love and she believes it so she gives up parenting Jamie.  I love her weird relationship with both Ansel and Draper that dripped of sexual undertones.  I love that she and the Chief Mallory have no-strings-attached sex and there are no consequences.  I also love that she is ambivalent about motherhood.  I think what sums my appreciation of that era is that it is so contemporary.  Unlike the Irma Phillips characters who were always shamed for their craven desires, Raven's punishment was much more internal.  Of course she lost her kid and some money along the way but it wasn't until Sky-prime that Raven believed that she was capable of being loved.

In both stories that writers needed to deal with Raven's temporary departure but the earlier one is done in a much more intriguing way; but I can't tell if that is writing or producing or just time.

4 minutes ago, vetsoapfan said:

Please don't take anyone expressing different points of view as a personal affront, or that folks don't want to hear your views about what you watched as a child. I have vivid memories of soaps from before I was in kindergarten too, LOL. I am only responding to you because I am interested, not because I want to complain that you don't agree with me. Disagreement is normal. Conversations can be lively and even heated at times (we soap devotees are a passionate bunch), but of course your thoughts are welcome. If we all sat across saying, "Why yes, you are perfectly right...I agree with you 100%....our beliefs are perfectly in sync...." it would be soooooooooo tedious, LOL. 

 

 

Thanks and Happy New Year!!!!