EricMontreal22

I liked when she sang In This Life on the Girlie Show, but I have to agree (I, being a Madonna completist, made the mistake of getting the original uncensored Erotica--which has that HORRENDOUS song by some rap group Maverick records were promoting Did You Do It or whatever tacked on right near the end--UGH)--still I really love the album overall (I do agree with one critic who said that it really wasn't about erotica and sex as much as she claimed--the quote was something like "when an album that's meant to be as explicit as a porno has the song Why's It So Hard, and it's not about teh obvious but a plea for AIDS tolerance..." lol). Oh and I'd drop the one joke Where Life Begins too... And yeah, I was just starting high school when ROL came but you're definitely right--it really proved that Madonna was still relevant, etc--it was a big risk forher that paid off, which leads us to... Hard Candy is a mess. While I was so underwhelmed by the tour for it, I admit I realized some of the tracks (Dance 2Night is a fun Chic style disco number, and I think overall the Pharell produced tracks like Incredible and Heartbeat are way better than the Timbaland by numbers stuff) are fun on their own. But the album just feels so cynical and routine, like you say, and like she's the guest. It's telling that she doesn't even get co-production credit with Timbaland--a first for an album of hers since Like a Virgin I think. I also found her image from the time really misguided--just... meh. As much as Celebration (the song) was such a date Oakenfold production, I admit as a long time fan I breathed a sigh of relief just to have the silliness andold school Madonna back (not that the song made any impact really--funny I just realized Ackerlund directed the *awful* video for it too--I guess comparing his work for Gaga on Paparazzi and then Celebration which came out a few months later does say something about what product placement willget you budget wise). Apparently David Guetta is working on a song with Madonna now, which I found kinda disappointing but at least it's a better fit than the Timbaland bandwagon. What was most ironic to me about Hard Candy was she was going urban at a time when American radio top 40 was finally moving away from that and starting to use more dance and euro elements... For the first time in a long time Madonna truly felt behind the times (but I guess the dire 4 Minutes was a chart hit in the US--and for some reason Madonna still really cares about the US market. Of course it's been an awfully long time she's had a SECOND single in the US from any album that's had much impact...) Right, but why would you expect that (of either lady, really?) *confused*. And what is an example of such an album? I keep on picturing you listening serenely to Enya or something, by that definition

It's funny, I loved Ray of Light so much when it came out--and I can still appreciate it, but it's VERY VERY dated. In its way I find it even more dated than her 80s stuff or the now archaic "sleaze" sound of Pettibone's production for Erotica (which, despite being overlong is prob my personal fave). Madonna still tries to do a few, as Sylph says, "melodic" tracks an album-- (The second half of Bedtime Stories--the Bjork song aside--actually is pretty much all in that style and of course around the same time, partly to get past Erotica backlash, partly to court Evita, etc, she tried to model herself as something of an adult contemporary singer even--the Somethign to Remember compilation of slower songs, Take a Bow, the David Foster stuff). Sylph, I mean this with all due respect, but when I read your post about music "now" being a gimmick, etc, I just pictured that crotchety old neighbour everyone has on their block growing up shouting at the teens to turn down their infernal music. Are you 83?

Sorry I wasn't clear--I meant that only recently music videos have become more important again thanks to youtube, etc. And you're right, the early Gaga videos were pretty generic (though I suppose it could be argued they did help introduce people to, tamer versions, of her look), still I think it's undeniable that, at least since Paparazzi her videos have gotten quite a bit of buzz, and will help sell records (but I agree, the way videos are used for promotion, etc, is a very different game than 20 years ago).

Yeah, I can agree with all of that (though the Music videos in did make some impression--the Don't Tell Me one was a bit of a pop culture item with the MTV parody, etc). Still, I woulda liked or hoped Madonan would continue making interesting videos maybe partly out of her own pocket--but I guess I get why she hasn't.

It was Madonna who broke Akerlund into the trendy mainstream with Ray of Light (before that he had done many Roxette videos...), so I think it makes sense. I thought Madonna was at her worse when Hard Candy came out--suddenly she seemed to becoming the joke people mocked her about--self serious, looking her age but trying to look young and hip, etc. But I agree that even just in the past year suddenly she seems to be getting more of a sense of humour about herself. Her tours are funny--she always complains about how so many tickets go to casual fans who just wanna hear the 80s stuff (to her credit, or not depending on your POV, she always focuses on her new stuff--even the ReInvention tour which was billed as a Greatest Hits still had nearly half the program devoted to her underselling American Life album)--and that too many blocks of tickets are sold as corporate seats. But at what she charges she can't get all the younger fanboys (and girls)--even though many do still manage to come. So it's her own fault. (I paid prob about a fifth to see Gaga than I did to see Madonna the last time--actually I paid even less to see Kylie Minogue's tour last year--both Gaga and Minogue's concerts were actually MORE elaborate with much better staging than Madonna's Sticky and Sweet tour--you certainly didn't see the money on stage).

I won't disagree with any of that--I used to think at the least she always would do a good live show, but after how good Confessions was as a concert, to do the awful mishmash she did with her Sticky and Sweet tour (regardless of the fact it promoted a dull album) was I admit a bit of a shock to me. But my point was, you used to be able to depend on Madonna to at least attempt to do an ambitious video. She's still (no matter how half heartedly or with mixed results) trying to do new music genres, etc--yet the fact that she herself, who was madeby videos, seemed to lose any real interest in them 6+ years back seemed telling to me. (then again her last ambitious video--the runway models with war one for American Life was banned, something she oddly never fought, and with that she seemed to lose any interest in the medium) Yes and no--youtube and other online sources has made a big change again. Certainly a lot of Gaga's sustained success has been partly due to word of mouth from her videos--

It is a sad statement of the times when Madonna hasn't even attempted to make an interesting video in over 5 years... (and HASN'T made an interesting one in far longer...) So I do appreciate that people get excited about Gaga's videos, when they'll premier, etc and it is bringing some interest back to the dead genre. That said, I think Gaga (and Ackerlund, no slouch when it comes to classier and better videos) would herself say it was meant to be trash--it's very much in the LaChappelle style (which is kinda played out by now, but...)

Don't forget Dark Shadows did it first...

I agree with that--it doesn't need to be 9 mins with the prison AND the truckstop parts and more of a dance off between the two women woulda been appreciated.

Did PP come to any sort of conclusion?

Whoah, this thread moved. No, of course you're right--much of the theatre a soap vet (even a talented one) would get would be in stock, or rep, or off (or off off) Broadway.

I like it, for the most part. To me it's her most disappointing video in a while (and I'm getting sick of the Gaga/poison thing) but it has some fun moments, the product placement is so over the top it's almost parody, and there's no one else making as interesting mainstream videos right now, so I give her props for that. Poor Beyonce seems a bit out of her element.

I think we have diff backgrounds re theatre--my VERY limited time in Manhattan's theatre makes me think still a lot of actors could to both *worries he put foot in mouth*

There's a clip online of a psychedelic "cream" type real band playing two songs at the teen hangout (blanking on name) in the final year--and the camera angles are crazy for the show. But it's... interesting Besides PP had some hard shoes to sell--they came at a time just when America was really getting into the sexual revolution--what is genuinely shocking in 1965, by 1968 is already tame. They prob needed a whole new soap (or a cheezy Summer spin off?) to address the changes, but tv wasn't ready for that.

I admit, a part of me wishes Betty woulda become the primo bitch a modern primetime soap woulda made her. Yet... being true to the character and how Parkins plays her, this is much more satisfying (and I LOVE hating head nurse Chaoutte--however you spell her name). I also love the dynamic between Ada and Rita--love both characters and am glad they're used more. I've only heard that the last year, when Connie (and her fake eyelashes) and others left, suffered... Yes George (who I guess I've seen the last of) is THE classic example of this. I think Spelling woulda made him such a horrific abusive/molestor of a character, but Monash and crew really make you feel for him and understand how his family feels--the mix of emotions.

I've been remarkably good at avoiding spoilers, but... I remember you said you were into the 200s and it was still high quality soap--which is great, though I admit a small voice in my head keeps hoping it'll stop being so great so I'd stop watching, at least for a bit What kinda bugs me, when I try to find reviews of the show from the 60s was, despite producer Monash working so hard to avoid the "soap" tag (it's a "TV novel", etc, etc ) the critics treated it like a soap from the start--which, espcially means in the 60s, they didn't give it any respect. When really, the level of writing AND acting is miles ahead of so much 60s TV I've seen--and the subtle and honest way they deal with subjects. I especially love (and wish modern soaps would get back to this) the way no one is painted as TRULY bad. Even the villains get sympathy and you always know WHY they did what they did. It's very very real that way, and refreshing even 45 years later. I have PP, and then Dark Shadows and some Knots I wanna get to, as well as rewatching Twin Peaks--and I watch AMC and OLTL daily And a couple of primetime shows (will be fine till my beloved True Blood comes back )

I know how that is. Now that it seems SHOUT won't be able to lease more episodes anytime soon, I hate to say it but I was glad that good quality DVDR bootlegs are easy to find at a cheap price--I just couldn't stop at episode 65. But I keep telling myself I'll take a break and get into the other things I have on DVD (including tons of Dark Shadows, etc, etc) but... it's just so hard to stop when it's still so good...

I continue to be blown away by this show. Anyone who likes character based, compelling, classic soap and hasn't checked it out by now, is missing out (of course they're prob not reading this thread...) I mentioned the change in seasons with the show... Well I admit when I started the new eps, I sorta thought maybe some of the momentum was gone. Paul, a character I loved, was gone, the huge murder mystery which fueled in many ways all the earlier episodes had been concluded (very well I must say--and we didn't even get a cliched court case like I expected), etc... But last night I ended up watching ten (!) episodes back to back until I saw the sun starting to rise and realized I needed to go to bed to get at least a couple of hours before work. If anything I find the show more fascinating and compelling than ever--not one of the stories (even the deaf girl) bores me, evry single scene has a new character or story revelation. I love Claire Morton (a smart, dignified and extremely talented female doctor in 1965 on tv? wow), I love the Shusters, especially the fascinating Doris (I'm certain her daughter saw her do something bad...), love the Reverend and his childhood ties to the community, love Allison not being as happy with her reunited parents as she expected to, love Norman finally acting out, oh and LOVE the handsome, mysterious, slightly sinister Stephen Cord who just showed up (which means Ruth Warrick's Hannah Cord can't be far behind!) and how he and the still unseen Martin Peyton seem to be puppetmastering the entire village... TERRIFIC stuff. On ep 81, and prob will watch another half dozen tonight... lol

There's a really long article I found on the New York Times archive from the university I work for (sadly it's not one of their free ones)--it's too long for me to type out, though I may in chunks as it's fascinating--mainly about As The World Turns' anniversary (3200 episodes) from 1968. Anyway there's a tiny bit that's of interest in this thread. Here, or maybe in the Peyton Place or another thread, we discussed how disappointing Our Private World was--the CBS primetime spin off of As The World Turns that was apparently created to be a direct competitor with Peyton Place. Considering how sophisticaed Peyton Place looks een by today's standards, it was surprising for me to see how cheap World was--it looked not one drop more expensive than the average mid 60s episode of the daytime version. (Our Private World was created by Irna Phillips and Bill Bell, but head written by Robert J Shaw who had written many of the early PP scripts). Anyway, I guess even at the time they realized this. Here's the quote: In May of 1965, CBS instroduced a nighttime soap, "Our Private World," which flopped ringingly and resoundingly. "Which doesn't mean serials can't work at night," says head of CBS Daytime, Fred Silverman. "It lacked any quality. Lousy writing, lousy acting, it was a lousy show. It was a dog and you can quote me on that." But the fact remains that only "Peyton Place," riding high into its fifth season fo "telling the earthy, frank, frequently shocking story of the lives and loves of the men, the women, the teen-agers in a quiet Newe England village," has been successful in prime time. LOL I know Silverman has always been frank, but wow Yeah, though I think I saw Blossom before I got into AMC, or around the same time (then Loving, then OLTL ). It is scary--they need to start doing more theatre again. not that a lot of today's soap actors would be any good at theatre...

Yeah, wasn't she on another ear,lier Spelling show too? Malibu Shores? Or am I confused cuz Christian Campbell was on that... And yes--well I NEVER watched GH at all, but was 10 or so by the time she joined Blossom, so Embarassing, I know

Except storywise didn't the Shapiros basically stay out of the kitchen from season 2 on? Which writer from PeytonP joined the show? I'm still amazed at the awesome level of quality behind the writing of Peyton, and yet how nearly every writer involved flopped when they went on to HW various soaps, etc... (The DeFero's, Robert J Shaw, Peggy Sloane, Nina Laemmle, Peyton's longtime story editor, etc...) "Finola Hughes is a lovely actress and I'm surprised another soap hasn't picked her up in a big role. She should've just taken the Y&R role in hopes something would develop. GH will never use her. Maybe she can go back to AMC. That's the only place I knew her from before. Love David and Anna, especially when Leora died." Word to all of that. I only knew her from Staying Alive (LOL) and I think Blossom (?) before she joined AMC but I loved her so much on the show, especially as Anna, it's such a waste not to have her doing steady acting. I'd love to see PP (Pacific P not Peyton:P ) again

Just crossed the 70 episode point. It's too bad SHOUT couldn't have ended at ep 68 instead of 65 and it's a natural pause in the story--like we had 35 or so eps earlier when Fall became Summer and we jumped forward a few weeks--now it's Spring from Winter (which is good, with the amazing weather we're having here, I was starting to feel strange watching a show with so much snow and Winter ). Anyway we've jumped up to a certain wedding which seeme dinevitable but I liked how the proposal, etc, happened "during the jump". Also, already we're introduced to the wealthy Shuster (sp?) family who has taken over the Mill--Doris Schuster is played by the gorgeous Gail Kobe in full snob mode--it's so great to see her in front of the camera since most of what I know about her is as a soap producer (I believe she started at Return to PP interestingly). And we have a new young minister, who I assume will become more a part of the story than just marrying people... As Chris mentioned before, even though these characters were introduced suddenly, it was done as usual for PP so well that it feels like they always existed, either in peyton Place or just outside in Chicago or wherever. Excited to see new faces, and where the show seems to be going.

Who's "we"? LOL Yeah I grew up with Kids of Degrassi (which I remember being awful) and the show of ocurse--thye even showed key eps in our sex ed classes. (Toronto is kinda America Jr, and an often ugly city though it has some great areas--but it definitely models itself more on the US than Van or Montreal ever would--though not as much as Little Dallas--Calgary. I'm not a big fan at all but it has some great parts and is very diverse)

I watched like two Liberty Streets (it had the actor who played Joey right?) I remember it sorta having potential, but not much else about it (and can't find clips) I was only 14 or so at the time and always seemed to miss it. It did have Joel Bissonnette who i'm a fan of. I remember they all lived in a "quirky" apartment building--kinda a wannabe mix of Degrassi and Reality Bites/Singles. Riverdale was launched with tons of fanfare, because CBC has always had such success with Coronation Street. I remember they went on about how it was created by one of the Corrie execs. It had a few great older Canadian theatre actors but was pretty awful from what I remember--I was excited and tried getting into it from the start--kinda just a lame wannabe Corrie with lame writing and bad younger actors. Looking at Wiki I had no idea it ran three years and nearly 100 episodes! I wish I could remember some of the stories. I can't even find a youtube clip, which is odd.

Glad you're keeping us au courant with your viewing, Chris You mentioned the Dobsons earlier--I wondered what involvement they had in the show from Schemering's brief comment--they'd be pretty busy with Santa Barbara, wouldn't they? Funny, I remember PP being kinda like Melrose meets Knots Landing--I thought it was Spelling's attempt at a Knots. But you're right, what I remember of it was pretty--well crazy. (and Lucky V proved that his lack of any acting ability as Varla Grubbs/Carol Burnett's fiance on AMC was no fluke...)