vetsoapfan

Paul Rauch certainly decimated TGL the way he did all the other shows he worked on, and I doubt you are alone in being turned off for a long time, thanks to the garbage he foisted onto the show and the audience. To me, Rauch and Phelps are two sides of the same coin: soap killers whose names I grew to dread seeing on-screen. Right, once a show destroys the audience's suspension of disbelief with idiotic sci-fi nonsense, it's impossible to return to naturalistic storytelling, so the shows remain tainted long after the dumb shlock plots are over. I also agree that fans of erudite, adult drama would generally not feel enticed to stick around, watching their favorite soap go from Masterpiece Theatre to Beavis & Butthead. The only reason *I* continued watching was because I considered TGL to be my show, after following it for decades, and a tiny voice in the back of my mind kept telling me to hang in there because the show HAD to get better one day. Alas, it never did. It got worse and worse. The last several years were like watching a bloody train wreck play out in sloooooow motion. There was no reason for viewers to believe, when she was FIRST created, or during her first decade on the show, that Reva was expected to have cartoonish sci-fi adventures like being cloned, running around as a mean-spirited ghost, or jumping into paintings and travelling through time. The character was highly emotional and flamboyant, sure, but her initial stories were predicated on romance and family dynamics. Later, viewers learned to expect high-concept material being dumped on Reva, because we had to endure the ghost, the clone, the time traveller, etc., but expecting atrocious writing for the character and appreciating it are two separate things. Zimmer can be a good actress, when given good material and when her scenery chewing is reigned in, but most of her worst TGL plots did indeed come across and both laughable and painfully stupid, IMHO.

I LOOOOOOOOVE Dan Reynolds. Kindness and compassion are so sexy.

Remember how our mothers used to say, when we would do something destructive: "If Johnny jumped off a cliff would you do it too?" Soaps' jumping onto the science-fiction/fantasy bandwagon was the equivalent of such mindless copycat behavior. History tells us that after an initial jolt of surprise among the audience, viewers burn out over the absurd, low-brow campy stories because the shows simply cannot sustain or top them. In the end, the stunt stories just hurt the shows. JMHO.

I don't think Josh (or the show itself) ever did recover from the clone nonsense. It's what drove TGL beyond the hope of salvation, IMHO.

That's a good way to put it. Their work was not the worst in TGL's history, but nothing to rave about either, if you compared them to all the excellent headwriters we had been treated to before.

Right, the characters evolved and grew beyond their original conception, just as Maureen Bauer did. Part of the joy of watching soaps is seeing character evolution.

An "assertion" is not the same thing as a personal opinion, so it was the best word for me to use under the circumstances. And of course, inquiring about the source of an assertion in no way, shape, or form equates to disrespecting a personal opinion. "The character was finite and not meant to last to the end of the series...." is not just a personal opinion, because it suggests what you wrote is an actual, verifiable fact. An opinion would be, "I did not find the character of Maureen interesting and was happy she was killed off." I was trying to clarify why you had made such an assertion, and where the idea of Maureen's only being a "finite" character had come from. I had never see or heard any writer or producer claim that Maureen was created to be temporary. You are the only one to say so, hence my question to you. It should not engender any drama on the board.

And the evidence of this assertion is? Any character, once introduced and embraced by the fans, can become a fundamental and important part of a show's fabric, whom the audience wants onscreen for the duration of the series.

Again, you are making assertions (like Phelps was lying in wait to kill off Maureen) that are not supported by any documented fact. Your personal disdain for the character does not mean she was "definitely" inferior to characters Reva, Harley, Nadine, etc. Bert and Papa Bauer were not flashy romantic leads either. They, like Maureen, came to serve a different purpose on the show, one which could be argued was just as valuable to the canvas. If not more so. You cannot use the argument of what "Maureen was meant to be" to diminish her ultimate place as the TGLs new matriarch. Soap opera characters, like real human beings, are allowed to grow, evolve and change over time. Indeed, with good writing, they should. Originally, Bert Bauer was "not meant to be" the show's guiding light, either. She was introduced to viewers as a selfish and materialistic young woman who could not make her marriage work. But lo and behold, as the years went on (thanks to good writing and acting by the beloved Charita Bauer), Bert naturally evolved into the show's light. The same thing happened to Maureen. It may not have been the original conception of the character, but as Mo took over as the Bauer matriarch and moral compass, she became an important touchstone character, different than Bert but carrying on her legacy.

Right. No one could help the show losing Bert Bauer, but killing off Maureen, Bert's successor as the show's matriarch and light was a foolish and conscious decision made by TIIC, which was done for no valid reason (I do not consider freeing up cash to pay for Justin Deas a valid reason, if that rumor is true). It pissed off the fans AND damaged the core of TGL, a lose-lose situation.

With other actors in the roles, both Tom and Margo were engaging, appealing characters. But as the writing got increasingly worse, both Holmes and Dolan seemed to settle into giving harsh, or at least cold, interpretations to T&M. Maybe they were bored or frustrated with the wretched material, but the actors' lack of warmth greatly diminished my interest in the characters..

In an interview after her departure from TGL, Dolan explained that she had supposedly been brought in as a "lead," but Maureen was not being used as a principle character, so she was dissatisfied. Yes, which is why I was only indifferent to her early on, but I later grew to dislike her Margo very much. As others have said, the atrocious writing made things worse, but under Scott Holmes and Ellen Dolan, both Tom and Margo often came across as strident, stern and unpleasant. Such a radical and unwanted departure from Gregg Marx and Hillary Bailey Smith!

I totally agree. As Maureen, I found Ellen Dolan to be cold and off-putting. As Margo, I found her to be cold and off-putting. Both characters came alive for me under the warm, poignant portrayals of Ellen Parker and Hillary Bailey Smith, but Dolan made me indifferent at best to Maureen and Margo, and as her tenure on ATWT went on and on and on, I grew to actively dislike her character on that series. The character of Bert Bauer had begun on TGL as a rather unpleasant, selfish woman but grew over the years into the warm, wise, maternal matriarch fans adored. With Dolan in the role, Maureen was much colder and less maternal and could never have inspired the same reaction and affection from fans as Parker did. Parker took Maureen from an aloof, non-essential component of TGL to its heart and soul. That's why, 25 years later, viewers still remember her and recognize her importance. Of course, you cannot make the sweeping, unsupported allegation that fans mainly grieved Maureen's death because we were upset Parker had lost a job. It's clear from viewers' own heartfelt comments over the years that fans were upset at losing Maureen because the character had become the show's heart and matriarch, and because of Parker's memorable performance. Viewers did not sit in front of their TVs sobbing for days because an actress they had never met had lost a job. And it was not Parker over-inflating her own importance to TGL; it was the fans acknowledging it.

A "reaction video" is a video in which a fan of a TV series or movie sets up a camera to film himself watching the show or film in question. For example, many youtube fans of Glee did this when Cory Monteith passed away. The show aired an episode called "The Quarterback" which dealt with the death of Finn Hudson, Monteith's on-screen Glee character. Youtubers filmed themselves sitting on the couch in front of the TV, sobbing their way through the episode and discussing their own personal feelings about the storyline, Cory Monteith, and Finn's passing away. Many folks also made "reaction videos" to a short film called "In a Heartbeat," about a gay child experiencing his first crush. Youtubers videotaped themselves reacting to the film (usually bawling their eyes out) and commenting on their thoughts while watching it. I personally don't "get" the point of filming yourself watching TV, but to each his own.

No, but it looks enough like him to be cast as his brother.

Painfully stupid writing, not funny or amusing at all. This was at the height of TGL's killing itself. BUT! Look at that great, huge, gorgeous set and how well it's lit!

I doubt that I am alone in believing a uniform (any kind of uniform) can add sex appeal to most men! Of course, just a regular pair of jeans can also do the trick.

I agree, she was woefully miscast.

Now back to our regularly-scheduled program:

It was repugnant, even worse than Frederick Bauer sleeping with Christina/Blake on TGL, whom he had known as his sister when she was born.

Pffft. Just sayin'. Nothing comes between me and my man.

Yes, as it turned out, it was the definitive nail in TGL's coffin. Sure, the show limped and then staggered along for years afterwards but it was a pale imitation of its former self. The light never shone brightly again. Before the show's final episode, TPTB had ruined so many things.

MINE! (Just so there is no confusion moving forward.)

While I originally found fault with Long's camp fantasy plots and disinterest in history and factual reality, she drastically improved over time, and I do believe she would have gotten a handle on Rita and written the character effectively. Long's insight into characters deepened as she went on. Marland tattled to the press once that Kasdorf hated working with Mart Hulswit, but they had wonderful chemistry on-screen. I cannot say that I would have loved to see her with Peter Simon's E, who was always so morose and listless. Rita needed someone with some passion and fire, who could give back as good as he got. Could Simon have risen to the challenge? I know. At GH, he was great at capturing the essence of legacy characters like Lesley Faulkner, Jessie Brewer, Monica Quartermaine, etc. So why did he stumble at TGL with some of its most iconic female leads? For the most part, I liked the characters he created, himself, for Springfield, but it hurt the show to lose people like Holly and Rita. Marland later said in an interview that axing a bunch of the older characters was a direct mandate from P&G, who wanted him to youthify the show. Adam and Barbara Norris Thorpe also got the heave-ho along with Steve Jackson. Marland said he regretted that order, because if he had been able to keep them, he "would have found something for them to do." (This quote sticks in my mind because it suggests he may have been wondering how to write for them.) For the record, Marland also said that when he took over GH, he happily wrote for the vets like Jessie Brewer, but ABC told him to stop it, to backburner them and concentrate on the younger characters and on the few older characters whom the teens in the audience wanted to see, like Edward Quartermaine. When new writers take over, they often have different perceptions of various characters, and sudden personality changes can be quite jarring for the viewer. When Harding Lemay arrived at AW, he imbued pre-existing characters with traits they had never had before. Sometimes it worked very well, and made the characters more three-dimensional and realistic, but in a few cases, it left me scratching my head. Mary Matthews, for example, who had been a warm, protective matriarch with a wry sense of humor, suddenly became somewhat shrewish in her domineering behavior over her adult-children's lives. I was able to justify this by saying that by then, Mary had watched her children suffer so much, she had just HAD ENOUGH, and gone into Mama Bear mode. But it happened quite suddenly. Alice Matthews had always been a charming, capable young woman until Lemay started writing her as a sad and fragile Dresden doll who would fall apart and run away at the first sign of stress. Again, I eventually justified it in my mind by saying that years of pain had finally worn Alice down to the point where she was exhausted and unable to find much strength to fight anymore, but the Agnes Nixon version of of Alice and the Harding Lemay version of Alice were quite different.

Actually, Steve Jackson vanished without explanation in 1981, two years before Bill Bauer died. While I agree with your point, I look at it from reverse: With well-established characters on the show who already served specific purposes, why dump them in order to use NEW, unfamiliar characters to then serve the exact same purpose? TGL had Rita to go against Alan, so why bother with Reva? The show had spent years weaving Jackie into Phillip's story, so why artificially insert Alex (who had never existed before) into the mix? Why eliminate characters whom the audience already knows and cares for, with strangers whom viewers may or may not ever accept? What reason would the show possibly have for firing Charita Bauer, for example, only to cast a new, older woman named Gert Lauer (LOL) who buys the Bauer house,. starts volunteering at Cedars, and dishes out advice to the people of Springfield? Would viewers of Y&R understand the mentality behind firing Jeanne Cooper, and then introducing another semi-bitter reclusive matriarch to Genoa City, one who lived alone in a mansion, hated Jill Foster, and made it her life's goal to make Jill miserable? Why throw out what you've already got, when it works so well, unless there's a valid reason like an actor's quitting or dying?