EricMontreal22

1 minute ago, NothinButAttitude said:

When did Rosemary Prinz leave ATWT specifically? 

 

I always felt post Irna, someone should've convinced her to return at least on a recurring basis. 

Remember for a while there she was very against the idea of returning to a soap (I think she felt the work wasn't important enough)>  She did AMC for six months (with a special title card in the opening credits with her image) as a favour to Agnes Nixon who only convinced her to do it when she said her character, Amy Tyler, could and would speak out against the Vietnam war and reflect Rosemary's own political beliefs.  She also did How to Survive a Marriage in 1975 when it started because it was being contextualized as the first truly feminist and progressive soap that wouldn't show women dependent on romantic fulfillment (some people said this is partly what killed it--many long speeches that didn't feel natural, etc).  I *believe* she played a marriage counselor (I'm not even sure if she lasted for its brief run--the focus seemed to move to other characters and it quickly changed writers).  She also wanted to focus more on theatre, etc, as well.  Of course, like many actors who leave soaps for a variety of reasons, after some time her feelings about them seemed to mellow (and perhaps she also appreciated the steady income they'd provide) and I'm sure she would have returned to ATWT on a more permanent basis...

1 hour ago, DramatistDreamer said:

 

The DVD sets themselves, seemed like they were on sale for mere months so maybe part of the time was taken up by selecting which videos and then preparing the videos for sale?

From what I remember reading, the videos sold very well.  Of course, some of those videos were scooped up quickly, then re-sold on Amazon for twice and three times the price for which it was originally sold.  By the end, almost all of the DVD had been sold out.

 

What seemed to leave many of us perplexed was the final note that SoapClassics sent via e-mail, which seemed to indicate that they were taking a brief hiatus and that they would return.  In hindsight, this is probably what many companies say when they want to quell followup inquiries of any kind.  It's just a shame because a lot of people felt like they were left hanging.  

Even if SoapClassics couldn't continue, it would be great if they could leave a blueprint as to how they accomplished what they did with P&G.  Another group could benefit from SC's expertise on the matter, should anyone want to try again.

 

Soap fans are exceedingly loyal (even when these companies don't give them reasons to be) and I think there would still be an audience receptive to the classics.

That all sounds vaguely familiar.  It did seem like suddenly they were getting very ambitious (did they ever release AW sets?) and then *boom* they closed up shop.  You're right, of course, that it's pretty common for companies to want to sound as hopeful as possible about a future return, etc, even when that doesn't seem likely...  Frustrating. 

Also how come so many names (with Lemay getting an "and" credit) get the first grouping, then the break down writers and script writers.  Does the WGA make it so that everyone who contributes to the longterm story has to get that first credit?  (The people I was surprised to see were Lemay--as I thought he was a silent consultant--Gillian Spencer who i had no idea was ever on the OLTL team and Tom King)

Randomly watching bits of episodes from the BELOVED Jill Farren Phelps era of OLTL, and specifically the 8 month period between Pam Long and McTavish's HW stints when there was no credited HW, these writing credits caught me by surprise by a number of names listed--including one person who I had always thought had just been an uncredited consultant for a brief period... 

3 hours ago, adrnyc said:

 

 

 

Also, although you all may not enjoy what @JarrodMFiresofLove is saying and disagree with it doesn't make him wrong. Those of us that are a part of a minority have two ways of identifying with it - with the negative aspects of it and bringing it into every topic of conversation and "oh woe is me" about it, pointing out each and every wrong OR we can recognize that, yes, injustices happen but they don't just happen to our minority. Will & Grace just did a fantastic takedown of those types with a "Which minority has it worst?" storyline. Usually, the people who don't carry it around on their backs are the ones who are actively participating in making things better.

That's all well and good and in theory true--but it isn't whatsoever what Jarrod was spouting.

On 4/25/2018 at 9:34 PM, DRW50 said:

 

Boy do those Debbie Reynolds clips make me cringe...

Oh Hugh, calling Debbie Reynolds' appearance "bland"!  The Debbie Reynolds Show was one of three attempts by creator Jess Oppenheimer to recreate his success on I Love Lucy with sitcoms around a bored wife and her schemes/fantasies based around a minor female celeb (Angel, and Glynis being the other two).  His son, Greg Oppenheimer, has a YT channel and has uploaded high quality copies of some of his father's stuff, including a ton of episodes of Angel (1960-61) which actually reversed the I Love Lucy concept a bit by making the wife the foreigner who mixes up English words and expressions.  Watch at your own wish (I wish they'd upload some of Glynis if only because I adore Glynis Johns...) 

All I've ever found of Glynis (she played a mystery writer who helped her husband solve mysteries)

14 hours ago, DramatistDreamer said:

It's a shame that those SoapClassics people just up and vanished.  They were obviously able to persuade PGP/P&G to open their vaults, even for a short time.  It's not inconceivable that someone on their level could manage such a feat again? 

ATWT had some really fun, festive party and special occasion episodes and a few were even self-contained. 

I wish I knew more about the deal SoapClassics made.  They licensed their stuff for... a year?  It seemed a very brief amount of time, anyway (none of the P&G soaps have ever been *my* soap, but I did plan on at least buying a few of the box sets except that during that time I was deeply in dept and I always assumed, while I knew they were around for just a limited time, that they'd be more easier available a *bit* longer than they were--BTW is there a site that lists exactly how many different box sets they DID ultimately release and which episodes?  Everything I can find online, now that their site is gone, seems very incomplete). 

At any rate, they seemed to be a very small company and yet I gather the DVDs did sell at least as well as expected.  Surely this shows that such releases of classic soap episodes is very possible and would do decently?  (The only commercial release I know of that has been done in N America are the B&B sets...).  All very frustrating.

Oh, and I agree with everyone else about ATWT (and to a lesser extent GL) around the holidays and how missed it is.  I was never a regular viewer, but would always watch during Christmas break (and especially enjoyed the vintage episodes they usually aired on days off).

 

On 11/23/2018 at 11:40 AM, I Am A Swede said:

Here's some rare footage of Vivien performing a number from her Tony-winning role in Tovarich. 

 

SHe deserved a better show than one written by a novelty songwriter, but I've always loved this performance.

Ed Sullivan (SOFA Entertainment owns the rights I think) *really* needs to do something with the hours they have of brilliant musical theatre performances.  A lot of us theatre geeks have bootleg copies of the stuff (when I was a teen one of the first bootlegs I got was a present of 8 VHS tapes filled with them--all with a timestamp like this has), and most of it is on Youtube if you look hard enough though SOFA has been known to every few years wipe them all out.  They release ONE hour long DVD (with promises of more) with a few of the iconic ones, but it would be great to have them in the best possible quality (unlike the soaps and so much other TV, I believe every episode of Ed Sullivan, at least from 1955 on, was saved on video).  Just so many gems, and so often recreated with the original costumes, staging and choreography and some remnants of the original scenery for shows and performances that otherwise would be completely lost. 

Ha I had the same thought.  It is true though that the premise of the episode seemed to be SUCH a trope in earlier gay (comedy) stories--down to the "You're not my type" conclusion joke.  I suppose it was a relatively safe and inoffensive way to deal with the issue--focusing it through the eyes of a straight character, reassuring the viewer that *they* won't be gay or whatever, etc.

On 11/21/2018 at 8:51 AM, DRW50 said:

 

At first I could only roll my eyes at Miles and I was a bit annoyed that Pat's role in the episode amounted to long-suffering gay pal/lol people think the main character is gay, as it felt very '90s sitcom, but they made up for that with having the hot makeout session between Pat and his ex, which wasn't something I saw on many '90s sitcoms...

Catching up on this thread, but Carl's quote above reminded me of something.  I found that plot point well done and yet in some ways annoying, maybe for the same reasons.  It *didn't* surprise me--I was sure they'd have a gay character on the new show and I was sure it would be Pat since every time I've seen the comedian do standup, his routine has revolved around being a gay Indian, etc and it just seemed odd to cast him in a role where he seems to be playing himself and not using that.  But it also used the now (thankfully) very old fashioned trope where when a TV show, specifically a sitcom, would show a progressive/tolerant view of homosexuality, it almost always involved one of the main characters worrying he was or being mistaken for being gay when it was actually a secondary character.  Of course thankfully in this episode that was only *briefly* played for laughs with Miles and not the focus of the storyline--and it does fit in with the history of Miles as a character (though you'd think he'd be more aware of gays living in DC all these years since the show ended ). 

And then recently on my news feed one of those "explaining gay pop culture" videos from Matt Baume popped up on my feed.  I find Matt Baume's videos both well done and sometimes insightful and extremely obnoxious and annoying (and no, it's not just because he did one devoted to musical theatre where he spouted off things about Sondheim shows which were factually *wrong*... I swear ).  I guess there's gonna be a second video addressing this Murphy Brown episode, but here he talks about a '90s episode that did play off the Miles might be gay thing for the entire episode--and to my surprise I suddenly remembered that episode and how uncomfortable it made me watching it with my parents... 
 

18 hours ago, Paul Raven said:

I didn't connect Darlene's boss with his Mad Men character at all. Thanks for pointing that out. I still remember when he went all  late 60's hippie inspired and was bursting out of very tight trousers.

 

 

Tight trousers indeed!

I'm impressed that she seems to remember so many story details off the cuff from 30 or so years before this interview was done--full character names, etc.  Seriously, so many soap actors can't do that (and I don't blame them).

" Also you have no idea if I am multiracial/multicultural. Or others on this board. We are not shoving our ethnic heritage front and center in the majority of our posts. I think you get a weird satisfaction from going round and round in circles about race. I am not against a good dialogue about race, but you have to start saying something new, something different, not beat the same old drum all the time. It alienates others who would likely be on your side because they believe in progressive issues as a whole. I feel sorry for black people who over identify with being black; I feel sorry for white people who over identify with being white; and with gay people who over identify with being gay, etc. It's only one part of who you are. Stop narrowly defining yourself and clinging to victimization. Be truly progressive and move yourself forward. The second A in NAACP stands for advancement. Advance yourself, stop pulling yourself back and allowing yourself to be defined by one part of yourself that you can't even be positive about, a part that on some level must seem like an inescapable curse. "

This is the most inanely bizarre thing I've read on this board in a VERY long time.  And that's saying something.  Sure race or sexuality is only "one part of who someone is"--but it IS one big part, and it is you Jarrod, who has the problem if you find it irrelevant that someone would bring it up on here when discussing how they've seen different storylines handled where it becomes incredibly relevant. 

Ah I missed that--had no idea ABC even acknowledged the online versions....

2 hours ago, Paul Raven said:

Chris Hubbell Chuck #2 wasn't up to performing live on tape so was dropped.

Fascinating--I dunno why I haven't gotten around to tracking down a copy of that book yet.

Hubbell was actually Chuck number 3 http://www.pinevalleybulletin.com/Quick Guide/BiographiesWeb/TylerChuck.html

5 minutes ago, Vee said:

Ferguson was so, so, so hot on Real O'Neals. He's still hot here and I do love him with Darlene. I just wish the very sexy indie film he did with Twin Peaks star Sheryl Lee would finally come out.

When was it shot?

On 11/21/2018 at 3:03 PM, dragonflies said:

OMG Darlene's new boss is HOT

You don't recognize sorta-almost former teen idol Jay R. Ferguson?  (He was Ponyboy in The Outsiders TV series...)  I loved him as Stan on Mad Men, his most significant role and I'm glad he's on a hit after being a lead in several sitcoms (The Real O'Neals and last year's Living Biblically) that went nowhere.  Apparently he briefly dated Sara Gilbert--in this stylish ensemble

 

On 11/25/2018 at 2:58 PM, Goldensoaps said:

Thank you very much Eric for this AMAZING find

I'm glad you enjoyed!  Interestingly a year later there was a major shake up (even if the actors themselves seemed to want new writers, I'm glad TPTB didn't replace Gordon and Hall who would go on to write some of their best work.)

3 hours ago, All My Shadows said:

And at this point, what is there to lose? Just put a bunch of longtime AMC people in a room and let ‘em rip. Who would they piss off?

That's my fault but I know at least one major writer who I've chatted with a fair amount--a lot of stuff had to be completely off the record, certain things they wouldn't answer, when I did an official interview with them that I could pull quotes from for my grad essay, I had to agree to let those quotes be reviewed, etc--and that seems pretty typical of the majority of the people who were in the bizz.  I guess it's just about not burning any bridges cuz you never know what connection you might have for other possible jobs?

I'm actually still watching--God knows why (just like God knows how this was renewed).  And...  I think I like this season a lot more than the first season.  Maybe I just now like the characters?  It's not great TV, it's definitely a show that I watch while doing other things, but...  *hides*

Well I mean JG was enamoured with the Ford Bros on OLTL so I can't really take his criticism of any young male actors seriously

Yes he spearheaded it seemed to me the hatred the soap press had for the Prospect Park soaps.  Was that because he thought it would take away from his dream team over at GH?  I never got all of that.  I suspect now it would be different--since Hulu has shows that are treated on an equal footing as any network show--but at the time the thought seemed to be that the soap press would gain nothing by covering them...

An online "friend" of mine who used to be involved with AMC has mentioned and recommended a book to me that I'd never heard of, though with the caveat that he thinks the gossip and talk in it is only about 60-70% right (but that seems like a decent ratio for a very biased tell-all).  Has anyone else read it?  I'll probably eventually get a copy with hopefully some Christmas money...  Apparently it's filled with details about the turmoil behind the scenes on AMC (and a bit at OLTL) in the second half of the 1990s--including the firing and rehiring of McTavish and the EP shuffle... 

http://www.mondocult.com/articles/makeup.html

http://www.makeupandmisery.com/

 

SOAP OPERAS ARE DYING OFF. But  years  before  the funeral began, veteran makeup man Norman Bryn was embalming Divas in front of the camera, while dueling with some behind it too!

Makeup & Misery: Adventures in the Soap Factory relates  Norm’s  five-year  cosmetic  chronicle  doing simultaneous  duty at All My Children for Disney/ABC and NBC’s Saturday Night Live.  Stars including the late Phil Hartman, Susan Lucci, Sarah Michelle Gellar and Kelly Ripa appear in this frank behind-the-scenes look at network TV production from the viewpoint of the makeup artist.  Facelifts and friendships, hirings and firings, death, politics, Emmys, unions, and the rivalries among cast and crew  drive this story of the decline of Daytime Serials right up to 2009.  Slashed budgets, falling ratings, the threat of Reality-TV and the  internet  paint  a  vivid  picture  of  the  changing fortunes of soaps and the TV business in general.  This “makeup memoir” is a must-read for would-be cosmeticians, actors, and of course soap fans.

Amen.

13 hours ago, dc11786 said:

 

No. I got these episodes from another source. Mostly full episodes (often missing credits) with long stretches with very few episodes missing. 

 

Even though Millee Taggert and Tom King had a good stretch (two and half years), there were three different executive producers they worked under. From the bits I've seen, Taggert/King and Babbin seem to have the strongest material, but I think the show also made some major changes to the canvas that hurt the show in the long run and weren't rectified for quite some time. 

I guess Taggert really (with different other writers) has the most accumulated years writing for Loving--four or so?  I find her late 80s stuff with King has good individual scenes but kinda dull stories--a lot of corporate world based stories which never seemed to be what Loving should be about. I agree that Babbin helped them create their strongest work.  In a soap rag interview I found with her when she came on, she has a clear vision for the show--unfortunately she also says she has only agreed to join on as a "favour" (I assume to Nixon after their time at AMC?) and will ONLY be there for a year, which in soap terms isn't really all that long as you know...  (Ironically though Fran Sears stayed on as EP after her for even less time, and I doubt the year commitment was one of her conditions)

13 hours ago, dc11786 said:

 

I love Sears/ Ryan Munisteri's run, but Munisteri's strength lies in character rather than plotting. With that said, I did enjoy a lot of the story. Ava/Paul/Carly/Flynn is an incredible quad that easily could have been generic but the characterization is so rich (and definitely builds on what King and Taggert were already doing) that the story remains deeply engaging. I love that Paul never really gives up on Ava despite all the terrible things she has done. I also think that by allowing both Ava and Kate know Carly's secret, a lot of strong natural tension was built between the Rescott women and the Slavinski men. The Ally / Matt pairing was well done, but Matt's story is certainly more engaging. Laura (Sisk) Wright is more at ease in the role of slightly devious schemer than she is as a more outgoing ingenue. Eric Woodall just works beautifully with every actor they pair him with. Matt's relationship with Kate and Louie is very poignant, and the connection with Ceara provides some of the show's strongest moments

I forgot that Ceara interacted with them--well I mean I know she stayed at the Rescott's in that first AMC crossover in '91, but... 

13 hours ago, dc11786 said:

The alliances being built in order to prevent Clay from taking over Alden Enterprises is an intriguing concept and is a story that at least gives the Aldens a sense of family unity, but it also seems to meander a bit. More things happen under Walsh, they just don't have the impact without the story. 

That sounds fair--I probably hold Walsh's Loving to too high a standard because it's when I started to watch the show as a kid (I was an AMC nut and only became aware and started watching Loving with the 91 AMC crossover, and only started watching daily the following summer with the full on Carter Jones AMC/LOV crossover). 

13 hours ago, dc11786 said:

What I've caught of Haidee Granger's work is bizarre. The storyline ideas are definitely meant to grab eyes (Giff goes crazy and kidnaps Trisha! There's a ghost at 35 Maple Street!), but the scriptwriters and actors manage to make some moments very meaningful. As much as I hate seeing the destruction of Giff Bowman, Cox and Stewart are pretty damn amazing in some of their final confrontations where Casey is trying to convince Giff to tell him where Trisha and Christopher are. For all the complaints made about Matt not having ties, Casey has the same issues once Richard Cox departs, but both actors give the characters an edge. On an hour show, Woodall and Stewart could have driven story for years, it's a shame they weren't given that opportunity.

 

 

Shame on them for not looking for something more unique and truly 'embarassing' like the Jonathan Maitland story. Then again, maybe the deal with the devil stuff was under Jonathan Maitland's second run.

It was 1986 wasn't it that the snake happened?  I adore the fact that Agnes Nixon always maintained that was one of her all time favourite storylines I mean I've tracked down very little of it, but just due to the rep it has, etc, it kinda makes me happy that Agnes stands by it.

I would love to know more details about why Granger and Walsh disagreed so strongly that Walsh broke her contract leaving the show without a headwriter for four or so months (and that woulda been just when the AMC Carter crossover was revving up *I think* if I have my dates right--I always wondered who wrote what for that--Agnes Nixon had just passed the official AMC headwriting reigns over to McTavish but she was still involved obviously in both soaps...  I assume you're not at those episodes yet (and I may have the dates wrong...)

13 hours ago, dc11786 said:

 

Also, if Rose was a staunch Catholic, this might have been an end to that relationship. I think more story at the parent level would have enhanced story at the child level. 

 

I know it was probably too early for it, but I think they should have bitten the bullet and had Doug been deeply in the closet. Doug and Merrill's relationship

Agreed about the parent/child stuff...  Agnes Nixon probably had no interest in trying another gay storyline--while researching my MA essay about gays on her soaps I found a brief interview where she mentions how little story they were allowed to tell with the 1983 Lynn Carter lesbian storyline on AMC (and of course Agnes originally wanted it to be a gay male storyline but ABC said they already had a gay male on TV--Stephen on Dynasty) and finally realized it was just "too soon" to tell that story, so diving into a gay story on her new soap right around the same time probably felt useless.  But it's not a bad idea.  Early Loving certainly wanted to push the boundaries (and they could have tied it into the AIDS research story which really went nowhere even if it was even just groundbreaking to mention AIDS on a soap in 1983).  I'm not saying Doug would have AIDS but...  (And I see you just had the same thought lower down in your post LOL sorry I'm replying as I read...)

13 hours ago, dc11786 said:

 

 

Overall, the Donovans and Vocheks needed more inherent tension that a family like the Rescotts provided. I think they could have worked, but it would have meant a major overhaul. 

Agreed there.  I wonder if that was partly Marland's fault.  The Donovans seem to want to fit into his Snyder prototype sorta boring lower middle class family slot that he's so attached to but I find kinda dull...

I'm sure there is much more "embarrassing" footage from his career out there...  Sigh.

It is crazy how quickly most of the Donovans were written out...