DeliaIrisFan

On 11/7/2023 at 8:35 PM, MarlandFan said:

 

Thank you!

On 11/6/2023 at 9:22 AM, MarlandFan said:

The only Marland-era 1985 episodes that have been posted on YouTube are Oct 16, Nov 1, Nov 11, Dec 24 and Dec 31.  I've been downloading and collecting all Marland episodes for years and these 5 dates are the only 1985 episodes I've ever seen.  

Thank you.  November 11 must be the one I was thinking of, but I can't find it on YouTube now.

1 hour ago, Soaplovers said:

I grew up in Chicago.. and in a lot of ways Chicago was similar to New York City in terms of their being various neighborhoods within the city.  You tend to stay in your neighborhood for various things such as shopping, bars, and sometimes even places of employment.

So I could buy Ryan's Hope being so narrow in focus because the family had immigrated to America, open their bar, and had regulars that had coming into Ryan's Bar for decades.  That is how urban areas.. or were at that time.

Agreed, especially before gentrification and the erosion of small businesses.  I can even buy the homogeneity of most of the (original) main characters.  Although there was a missed opportunity to make the show more multicultural over time, especially when the cast turnover started and they eventually gave up the ghost on recasting some core Ryans for years at a time.

I posted the other day about Ana Alicia's (and others') recollections in the book.  While she deserved a more fulfilling role, for me the saddest part of what she had to say was the part about how they wanted her to "do" an accent when she first debuted and she pushed back, to no avail.  I know they were never going to have Alicia supplant Mary as the main heroine, but I wish they would have tried to give even a supporting character the dignity she deserved—and the realism that the show could be so good at in so many other aspects.  Not to mention, that they'd trusted the actor and her lived experience (or, in this case, her self-awareness about what she might not be able to represent).

I still love RH, and I actually think the writers made a great deal of progress in this area in their later careers.  But I appreciate that the book documented everything that was available about the history of the show: good and bad.

20 hours ago, NothinButAttitude said:

I've been down a rabbit hole as of late, and I have been watching 1986.

18 hours ago, NothinButAttitude said:

Overall, '86 was a defining year for ATWT. I just wish that all of '86 and '87 were accessible on YouTube. I hate that majority of the Doug Cummings murder trial in June was removed. 

I would add the fall of 1985 to that.  I am going down a similar rabbit hole, mostly because I started rewatching what's available of the Doug Cummings story.  I certainly want to keep going in 1986 and at least the start of 1987, but I also would just as soon go back and soak up everything I can of Kim's stalker storyline.  Did CBS once re-air an episode from later in 11/85 (after Marie's murder - not Holden and Lily's first meeting and not the Halloween costumed party that stretched into early November) in the '90s/Aughts, or was it on YouTube and it got taken down?  I seem to remember seeing an intact episode at some point, but now I can't find it.

31 minutes ago, gimmetoo said:

Clearly Claire Labine was the beating heart of the series.  She is well represented and praised throughout.  But it's disappointing that her children declined to participate in documenting their mother's legacy — especially considering both eventually became writers on the show.  Paul Avila Mayer’s daughters provide candid and valuable insights into the show, their father and Claire.

Eleanor Labine declined to be interviewed, but Matt Labine actually died not long after his mother.  It was very shocking to read at the time.  As far as I know, her only other son, John, never worked for RH or any other soap.

I agree the Mayer sisters really helped contextualize the book, and Eleanor's voice has been the biggest absence so far.  I can only imagine she might not have been ready to revisit all of that, which had to be difficult to disentangle from the loss of her mother and brother.  I think I said it earlier in the chain that I really hope she tells or writes her family's story one day.  John Labine, too, depending on what he remembers - he was a bit younger, right?  But I can respect that this was not the right time for them.

21 hours ago, DRW50 said:

I can see what you mean, but when I think of moments I enjoyed with Mary or Pat, or even Siobhan, it's down to the actors and their charisma, rather than my seeing the characters as being well-fortified. I don't think, say, Pat was any worse when John Blazo took over - I actually liked his Pat a great deal - but he didn't have what Malcolm Groome had for viewers, so when they gave his Pat such flat storylines, Blazo got the blame. 

That's a fair point with Pat, although I do think Groome isn't totally wrong that some initial aspects of the character got dropped when Frank survived.  The fact that Pat made a strong impression that first year when he was in story limbo was probably largely due to Groome.

As far as Kate Mulgrew/Mary, though, I really do think they found just about the only actress who could embody everything the writers wrote for that character.  With each recast, they seemed to go with someone who, at her best, could come close to approximating one or more aspects of what Kate brought to the role (some much closer than others).  Nevertheless, some other essential element of Mary always suffered. 

I actually think Siobhan was similar: Sarah Felder, especially in her first year, played an original, three-dimensional character that nobody ever replicated.  That Siobhan is probably my favorite soap heroine ever.  Alas, Joe and Siobhan became the show's de facto supercouple after Luke and Laura took off, and Siobhan had to become a different character to keep that going.  It so happened Marg Helgenberger was really talented and had great chemistry with her co-stars, and became popular playing a character type more in the vein of Margo Hughes/Deborah Saxon or a prototype of '90s Harley Cooper.

23 hours ago, safe said:

Yes, we got the backstory of Jack and Jill were together before the show began.

Here is what Totally Kate ---webmaster of TotallyKate! The Official Website pf Kate Mulgrew---wrote on the Soapnet board

 

3/15/08

by TotallyKate

A few years ago I happened to acquire from eBay notes about the original casting and storyline for Ryan's Hope. I had forgotten what was in it until I came across it last week when I was looking for something else.

In the original bible for 'A Rage to Love', Mary has gone to the police academy to follow in the footsteps of her big brother, Frank. Frank is still a policeman and he and his partner, Saul, are involved in a case with mob connections. Saul dies and then Frank is found at the bottom of the hospital steps. Frank eventually dies and Bob Clancey (last name was changed to Reid) and Mary investigate his death as they don't believe it was an accident. Mary "quits" the police force and goes undercover taking a job at the hospital. Jack does not agree with Mary risking her life by going undercover and this breaks up the relationship that has already developed between them. Jack then starts a relationship with Faith, although both he and Mary love each other. Faith was involved with Pat but that relationship broke up after Faith wanted marriage and Pat didn't. Jack's relationship with Faith of course is wonderful for the widow Delia who wants Pat back. So everyone seems to be without the person they really love which makes for many hours of wanting them to get back to the one they love.

Of course many aspects of the storyline changed drastically by the time "Ryan's Hope" made it on the air. It's interesting to note though that a lot of these original storyline ideas either ended up as backstory for the characters or as future storylines, such as the police academy and Siobhan.

 

 

Oh, wow, I think I'd drifted away from the SoapNet boards by then.  I don't think I ever read this before.  That is all so fascinating: different from what aired, of course, but also different from what multiple sources, some actually affiliated with the show, have said was in the original RH bible. 

I wonder if some of the details were intentionally fudged for the casting notes to avoid spoilers.  I really can't imagine Michael Levin's Jack with any of the Faiths (then again, going by all the cast members who said in the book they were shocked to learn his real age and had assumed Jack was supposed to be around 30, maybe they retooled that character a great deal once they cast Levin).  And even assuming both the Clem rumor was untrue and Kenneth Castle was unplanned filler they came up with to give Pat and Faith something to do after Frank didn't die, I tend to think Bucky and Pat alone would have been enough to keep Faith occupied that first year or two with Delia as her chief antagonist.

I wonder if AMC wanted Evans to play Gloria?  Or were they already hedging their bets for a Natalie recast at that point, instead of offering Kate Collins the moon to stay?

12 hours ago, Soaplovers said:

I thought I had read that the Kim/Michael/Rae climax in the summer of 1981 during the writer strike netted the show some good viewership.  

Maybe Labine had sour grapes because this wasn't her idea and that idea helped the show get a bump in viewers.  

The whole ABC lineup (that still had affiliate clearance) briefly hit the top of the ratings that summer.  They all probably benefited from GH and the Ice Princess being the marquis act for the network - and, I suspect, further attrition for their timeslot competitors (I have not heard of anything memorable that the scabs at the other networks wrote that summer).  Arguably, RH at that time may have been a better fit for the audience that was waiting to see Luke and Laura than it would have been at any point previously, but I doubt that spillover would have been sustainable no matter what the show did next.

25 minutes ago, safe said:

It's certainly possible. Of course in those original bible notes  for 'A Rage to Love'  that Totally Kate got her hands on said after Jack and  Mary ---and Pat and Faith --- break up they were putting Jack and Faith together.   Pat and Faith were to break up because Faith wanted marriage and Pat didn't  and we know 1975 Jack didn't want marriage either ---but perhaps early rough drafts versions of Jack he wasn't anti-marriage. 

My memory must be playing tricks on me - I thought Jack and Jill were the ones who were supposed to get together while Jack and Mary were on the outs.  They had a history prior to the start of the show, I recall.

I've just finished the 1980 section of the book, and I'm about to begin the chapter on the 1981 writers' strike.  Ana Alicia and Jose Aleman's interviews—and what they and others had to say about Hannibal Penney—were tough to read, but would be tougher to argue with.  That really sucks, for a lot of reasons, including my love for the show and respect for its creators.  That is still there, but they could and should have done better by these actors/characters.

Not to make excuses, but reading about Penney did remind me of a rumor someone who claimed to have insider knowledge posted on the old SoapNet board: that in the show's original bible, Clem was intended to have an interracial relationship with Faith.  I don't know that that was ever totally debunked; as far as I know, it was never verified.  And I have learned to be even more skeptical of things I read online in the past 20-25 years, but part of me still wonders...  Clem did have that whole backstory with the Coleridges, and the character was named after Claire Labine's then husband; that seems like more attention than a minor, supporting character might get.  Anyway, he seemed like a good actor and that would have been much better than anything Faith did in the show's first year or so at the very least.

It also sucks that Alicia, in particular, didn't go onto more work—even after her breakout role on Falcon Crest (wasn't her character really popular?  I always meant to watch more of that show when it was airing on SoapNet, mostly because of her, but two episodes of RH a day plus whatever soaps I was still hanging onto in real time by then was already a lot to keep up with).  From her credits, it seems like she was almost back to square one in terms of casting once that role ended, even after overcoming heaven knows how many barriers to get to that point.

Catherine Hicks' candor was a bit surprising, at first, but then not too surprising the more I thought about it.  I can see how this was a thankless role for her, but she was still my favorite Faith by a mile.  That's cool that she and Alicia and Kristen were friendly on the set.

35 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

I think the problem with the Ryan kids was most of why they worked was down to the original actors and their appeal. The characters themselves were not special. The character who was the sturdiest was Frank, at least after Michael Hawkins was fired, which is probably why Frank had the most well-received recasts of any of the kids. 

 

Oh, I disagree.  I think the characters were so complex and unique—partly informed by the actors who created the roles of course—that the show couldn't just go out and find another "type" to replace them.

If anything, I think Frank was easiest to recast because he was the least defined at the beginning.  My guess is Labine and Mayer had a handle on who they thought Frank was, but the audience was introduced to him in other characters' (idealized) flashbacks.  If he had died as planned, I wonder if Frank would have remained kind of an enigma, with all those who knew him remembering him differently.  Anyway, no actor had ever fully embodied all those original aspects of who the audience thought Frank might be, so there was more leeway to write to different actors' strengths over the years. 

Also, for much of the show's run, the Frank recasts may have benefited from audiences having a uniquely positive association with the words, "The role of Frank Ryan will now be played by..."  RIP Michael Hawkins, and I know he was dealing with his issues, but the first time those words were uttered a lot of viewers must have breathed a sigh of relief (I know I did when I watched on SoapNet).  Andrew Robinson was such an improvement from day one, and most if not all of the subsequent Franks brought something unique and really good to the table as well.  Whereas by the time Nicolette Goulet debuted as the fourth Mary inside a year, the audience had to be at their wits' end.

PS: I was sorry to hear Eleanor Labine declined to be interviewed.  I hope she does tell her family's story (or write it herself) someday, when she's ready: not just their work on RH but also GH, and anything else she wishes to share.  So much TV history.

Awww thanks for the shout outs. 

I just watched the Locher Room video, and I can't wait to read the book - should be arriving today.

What Durham said about Claire Labine was fascinating, although I believe she softened on the subject of Dakota over time.  She said in an interview in the '90s that the fallout from that was one of her five favorite stories, on any show she wrote.

Not only did I not watch RH during its ABC run, I also skipped 1984-86 on YouTube.  With that major disclaimer, I think there were a few issues with the way the interim writers introduced Dakota:

1) No moral judgments about Johnny having an affair from me, but it does seem completely out of left field for the character.  How was he not racked with guilt every time he and Maeve lay awake at night fretting about Frank or Pat breaking someone's heart because they couldn't keep it in their pants?  As long as they were going for a soap cliche, I think the long-lost son should have been Sean Ryan, the youngest (I think?) Ryan sibling, switched at birth with another infant who had died.

2) Speaking of cliches, of all the ways to reveal a long-lost, illegitimate son of a core family member, he just happened to be the guy his sister-in-law hooked up with while she had amnesia?  For a show that had avoided so many soap opera cliches, did they need two for the price of one (three, if you count the character name)?

3) Did Maeve and Johnny even get much material out of the actual reveal?  I do remember watching that scene they discussed on Youtube, with Johnny moving out after Maeve said Dakota was no longer welcome in their home.  It was amazing, but I remember being surprised to realize THAT must have been the story Labine had been talking about in the aforementioned interview—not devout Catholic Maeve's actual reaction to learning Johnny had had an affair in the first place.  And Dakota's mother was already dead, right?  If they were going to do this story, they should have cast a stage veteran to play her, at least briefly, and/or used Dakota as a bridge to introduce members of his other family.

Anyway, in the later episodes I saw Durham did make a great villain.  And he (and Ilene of course) still look amazing.

I of course would have welcomed either actress back as Iris.  I'm not sure if I knew at that point that McKinsey had originated the role either, but even if I thought she was Alexandra, that wouldn't have been a bad thing either.

That said, if someone actually went to all that trouble to try and get Beverlee back but she was unable for medical reasons, they should have pivoted and ended with a recreation of Carmen's intro: a freeze frame of Rachel answering the doorbell and exclaiming in disbelief, "Iris!" without actually showing who was there.  If Iris had returned for the finale, I assume it would have been a cameo like Mark Pinter/Grant anyway, so why not?  That way, anyone watching could have imagined her as they remembered her.

I believe Claire Labine would have done well at just about any soap prior to 1995-96, before the networks and production companies got scared and/or got taken over by people who didn't understand soaps and wouldn't give writers more than 10 seconds to tell a story and develop characters and build to an earned payoff.

The biggest what-if for me where Labine is concerned would have been ATWT when Doug Marland died, around the same time she came back to daytime after almost 5 years (to GH).  I know she was offered that ATWT job a few years later, but again I think she would have had problems after Trach had been replaced by Fitts (and then MADD), plus the ratings across the board had everyone spooked.

Anyway, the tone Marland had established—family drama and socially relevant stories—which seemingly would have been right up her alley, had already changed by the time she almost became head writer.  She had never written an hour show before so I'm sure she would have streamlined the cast post-Marland, but that probably would have looked a bit different than what happened, i.e., probably not Iva and/or Lyla.

AW in the early '90s would have been interesting for Labine.  I could easily see her writing for many of the characters, now that I think about it.  I just wouldn't think of the show as a whole being her cup of tea, structurally, by that point.  There was nary a strong core family intact, with most of the stories and couples islanded.  Not that GH was much different in that regard, but I think of the Quartermaines at that point as being more robust than even the Corys.

Maybe Labine would have introduced her own families in Bay City and/or rebuilt one or more that had been phased out.  I could see Emma coming back and having deeper conflicts with Frankie over their different world views, a la early Siobhan/Maeve.

On 6/12/2023 at 7:55 AM, MarlandFan said:

The article was in the February 5, 1991 issue of Soap Opera Digest. So the episode probably ran in either the last week of January or the first week of February 1991.

Thanks.  I couldn't find it on YouTube - most of the last couple of weeks of January are absent, and now that I think about it, I have a vague recollection of SOD issues being post-dated.

Although I did notice some B&W flashbacks in episodes around that time featuring James Rebhorn's child molester character and his mother from back in the day, which I couldn't bring myself to watch.  Maybe someone in the wardrobe department had negotiated a good deal on a bulk purchase at an estate sale?

16 minutes ago, JoeCool said:

All My Children dethroned ATWT and AW in the summer of 1978. AW fell farther first when ATWT fell out of the top spot but was still Number 4 when AMC was Number 1, followed by GH then Y and R. AW fell from Number 2 to Number 8 in 78-79.  In 79-80, ATWT fell to Number 6 and AW was Number 8.

 

Essentially your assumption is correct. AMC knocked off ATWT and AW and GH knocked them of the top 3 as did Y&R. It all happened beginning in the summer of 1978.

Oh yeah, I was referring to June/early July, when AW was still in the top three (and briefly the highest rated P&G show), but then—as you said—really cratered while ATWT at least stagnated.

It's also interesting to see that AW and ATWT's falls did not (exactly) line up.  I always assumed AMC and GH supplanted them both at the same time.

Ryan's Hope at #2-4 is really fascinating...especially at this time.  The writing was still good, but soooo many recasts/departures...especially that summer, when so many of the original cast's contracts were up.

I wonder if I was a few weeks off when I archived those recaps SoapNet posted all those years ago (SN never indicated the original airdates on their website, so I did my best).  Faith's stabbing and Jill finding Frank and Rae in bed together a few weeks later seems like the kind of drama that might give a soap a temporary boost. 

Either way, this really makes ABC's treatment of Sarah Felder a few years later all the more outrageous.  She was front and center that whole summer, and those early scenes of Siobhan butting heads with Mary, Maeve, and Jack were always some of my favorites.  These ratings definitely suggest that the years more of story she could have driven would have resonated with viewers who had watched when RH was competitive in the ratings.  There is an alternative universe where Siobhan and Jack eventually became the Bob and Kim of RH...

In any event, I'm just relieved to learn that the 1981 writers' strike and the coattails effect of GH's Ice Princess story did not mark RH's all-time highest ratings.

The article is great - thank you.  Has the flashback episode ever turned up on YouTube?  I was trying to pinpoint the dates based on IMDB credits, but Prunell doesn't seem to have ATWT in her IMDB credits, and Litt is credited for three episodes from 1994, which I know must have been too late for this.  (Is that just inaccurate or did George appeared in additional flashbacks during the climax of the Royce story?)

What were Caleb, Kirk, et al so mad at Lucinda about this time, I wonder?

44 minutes ago, Vee said:

IIRC Geary may have also claimed Suver co-wrote the original pitch for the "Endgame" mess with him in 2001, which I think was to also feature the return of Robert Scorpio and which he said JFP totally discarded. I may be wrong on her name being linked. That is as much as I know about her.

That does sound vaguely familiar.  Maybe that's partly why her name stood out for me in those credits.

Having recently watched what has turned up on YouTube from Luke and Laura in 1993-94—some/most of which I was seeing for the first time—the writing was surprisingly seamless, considering the dates in the credits and that article.  ABC had allotted ~ 6 months after announcing Genie's return, which should have been more than enough time to plan a story.  But then the previous regime was out in August, the Labines' names first appeared in the credits in mid-October, the show was already committed to some version(?) of Suver's story, and the Spencers were back by Halloween.  I do wonder if Suver was actually in the building/in meetings at all by that point, or what.

1 hour ago, Soaplovers said:

Marland did say that GL was the easiest soap for him to take over...that the Dobson's left it in such great shape.  And a lot of his first year on GL was finishing out some of what the Dobson's had written.

I did read a rumor once that in 1985, he was given a choice of GL and ATWT...and he picked ATWT.  Not sure if true..and what his reasonings were for choosing ATWT at that point...other then ATWT had somewhat been fixed by Horgan Bledsoe while GL was knee deep into the Infinity story (which maybe Marland didn't want to touch with a 10 foot pole lol)

That's very interesting.  On the one hand, you'd think Marland would have jumped at the chance to return to GL and salvage characters he had created that were foundering/discarded, and reinforce his vision for a show that had gone in various different directions since he had left.  On the other, GL had changed so much in those few years, and the time since he left had been longer than the time he was there.  Maybe he knew a "fresh" start would be for the best (I don't think he tried to namedrop—let alone revisit—the Willows or anything else from that brief stint in 1979 in his second run?).

5 hours ago, dc11786 said:

Bill went from working class guy to insta millionaire due to money he inherited from Fred Eckert. Joey was replaced by Gerald Hopkins' AJ Quartermaine who's graduation from prep school was being discussed in the same episodes where the Eckerts were grieving the loss of Fred.

5 hours ago, Khan said:

The main thing that I remember about the period immediately before Claire Labine's start was the many "resets" to Bill Eckert's character.  Whenever one characterization wouldn't work, the show would come up with another in the hopes that Bill would somehow take off.

4 hours ago, dc11786 said:

Thanks. I found the article. In case anyone else is interested: its here

Bill Eckert as the "Father Knows Best"-type must have been incredibly short. I just watched a late September 1992 episode where Sly gets into a fight in school and runs off because he doesn't like Bill dating Holly instead of Julia. This relationship pattern continues quite a bit as I've later seen the same situation when Bill has chosen Victoria over Holly. It was also very neat seeing the origin (or so I imagine) of the Scott/Sly relationship.

I'm so confused...the Eckert patriarch had millions of dollars to leave in his will?  How were these people supposed to be working class?  I always thought he had gotten rich somehow from his dealings with Julia's (and Brenda's) father.

Anyway, I remember this article - probably from that very same site.  It's weird to hear Geary being so enthusiastic about Claire Labine.  What's funny is if GH had been seriously committed to becoming a more reality-based, working-class show with the Eckerts, Labine would have been a logical choice (not that I can imagine her and Monty working together).  And Geary might have liked Labine's version of Bill or a single Luke.

I also remember reading Geary talking up Irene Suver's role in the Frank Smith story in this interview, and I recognized the name in some of the 1993-94 credits that have turned up on YouTube in recent years.  She was credited (sporadically) alongside the dialogue writers.  I assume that was for union reasons, when stories she contributed to were featured heavily, and not because she actually wrote entire scripts for other characters. 

Suver's name turned up later into 1994 than I would have thought, at least as late as the first half of May sweeps.  The A story in that episode was Luke and Laura and Sean and Tiffany being tied up by Frank's thugs and left to be eaten by an alligator, but by that point Maxie was also very sick and BJ's death was a week or so away.  I recall Suver was gone from the credits by the time of the heart transplant episodes.

6 hours ago, dc11786 said:

Credits for the 1992 episodes online seem sparse so it's hard to see who to attribute what to after about April. I do know there were articles from late summer 1992 claiming that ABC wasn't happy with Wendy Riche and were supposedly seeking her replacement because she was too involved in the story. 

Interesting.  I've always wondered how Riche managed to last as long as she did while the show was in such turmoil. 

In fact, hadn't the ratings sort of improved by the time Monty had left, although still behind AMC (and Y&R, of course)?  I believe it wasn't just that Riche hadn't repaired the damage, but in fact viewers tuned out again shortly after Riche arrived.  I'd be curious if DC or anyone has a theory on why some viewers returned (and quickly tuned out).  Was the Nancy Eckert murder such a good whodunit that it got the show some attention again?  I will say the idea of Bobbie becoming a prison penpal to a convicted killer is a more interesting basis for a story than much of what I've read about GH in the year before or after, but it sounds like it was better on paper.

Anyway, back to Riche, I know the ratings had improved by the end of 1992, or at least the rankings.  Did they just not find a replacement in time, and Riche was well-regarded enough by the cast that the network was willing to do an about face?  I gather part of the reason the ratings turnaround didn't save Monty's job the year before was the backstage tension (and high-profile departures).