Tisy-Lish

I didn't understand today's final scene with Leslie waking up on the couch. I'm assuming someone she called from the bar picked her up and took her home. But if that is correct, I think they left out (or cut out) a clarifying scene here. On the other hand, perhaps we are supposed to believe the entire episode was just Leslie's dream. But if that is correct, it was a poorly written dream with all those points of view from different characters. So fellow BTG fans -- what was the meaning of the final scene?

This seemed to happen a lot on AW, didn't it? LOL. Many American actors either can't or won't sign on to play an accent long-term on a soap opera. So TPTB often drop any European character details as soon as the role is cast. I do remember John Aniston successfully played characters with accents long-term on two soap operas, Love of Life and Search for Tomorrow. And Barbara Berjer appeared on AW for several years using a Scottish accent. But when Carmen Duncan was cast as Iris on Another World, apparently she was not asked to use an American accent. I assume it was discussed, but they agreed to let her use her native Australian accent for some reason. And on ATWT, when Nick Coster was cast as Eduardo Grimaldi he affected a Maltese accent for a few weeks, and then the accent was dropped with no explanation. Frankly, Coster's attempt at a Maltese accent was embarrassingly bad, but he gets some points for giving it a try.

You mean like Cecile dePoulignac and Phillipe Lyonnes?

Agreed. If a sitcom is going to do a significant amount of location/exterior shooting (The Andy Griffith Show for instance), then single-camera probably works best. But if a show is mostly confined to indoor spaces and/or fake exterior sets, then three-camera (with a studio audience) can be a good choice.

It seems clear to me that they are chem-testing them, and it is probably too late for anyone to change the trajectory. But I agree, NO THANKS.

Sorry, I meant Hayley. I've corrected the post.

Sorry, I meant Hayley. I've corrected the post.

Sorry, I meant Hayley. I've corrected the post.

I love BTG, but one of the stranger choices the writers have made is allowing the three "big antagonists" (Leslie, Joey, and Hayley) to remain on the canvas since day-one, despite all three of them being either murderers or attempted murderers. Can we please serve justice to at least two of them? At this point, I really don't care which two. But this on-going killers never pay a price crap is taking me out of the believability of the rest of the show. Writers, move on from a couple of these "big-bads" and give us some new antagonists.

It's interesting to note all the exterior scenes were shot on videotape (matching the interior scenes). This was unusual (or perhaps unheard of) in 1972, when the few soap operas that did occasional location scenes almost always shot them on film which, of course, did not match the videotaped interiors. No doubt, This Child is Mine had a bigger budget than any of the ongoing daytime soap operas of the day, but still it is amazing that they actively decided to spend the extra money to shoot the exteriors on videotape for this daytime production. If my memory is correct, the final time a daytime soap opera shot exterior scenes on film (rather than videotape) was on As the World Turns in 1981 during the honeymoon of Kim and Nick Andropolis on location in Greece. If this is incorrect, please let me know.

I am somewhat afraid of what Jamey and Dan will do with our show. But I have to admit, it can't be worse than the drivel we've been fed for the past few years. I'm just hoping Jamey doesn't push comedy and camp. Y&R is not the right show for that nonsense.

Thank you for the response. Your explanation makes sense. It's difficult for me to articulate in what ways it seems different this year. Just not as lush and magnificent (the exterior scenes) as they have been in the past. Or as I mentioned, maybe a new director or different script writers. I know budgets are tight on all the soaps these days, so that may be having an impact. Who knows? Does it seem different to you as well?

Is the cast really in Monaco for these location shots? It seems they use a lot of establishing shots of the real Monaco, and many of the location scenes involving the cast include rather generic dialogue that could have been taped months ago, and just weaved into the episodes. And then the more specific dialogue exterior shots are mostly rather close-up, and could have been taped at a location in LA -- perhaps a botanical garden or some other scenic location that could double as Monaco for close shots. This Monaco visit seems different from past European location shoots. TPTB don't seem to be featuring the location as much -- in fact, they are almost minimizing the location. Makes me wonder if they are faking this trip. I'm not saying they ARE faking it, but I'm just saying maybe. It could be something as simple as a different director, but something seems different.

I assume these movies will be shot on film, not videotape (or the digital versions of film/video). So they won't "feel" like a soap opera. Won't that make it less likely the movies will lead to a reboot of a daytime series?

Yes, I've always assumed the room is much larger than the set we see. And that it continues well beyond the back of the piano. But I am rather neutral on the photos. I'm not crazy about their arrangement, but it really doesn't bother me.