Jump to content

Katie Peretti of ATWT...When the h%ll did she become a lead role?


Recommended Posts

  • Members

When did Katie become leading material? Why is she getting all the storylines? And after seeing the spoilers for her character I am pissed!!!!!!!!!!!!! Katie is a bore, whiny brat of a female. She needs to be backburned and not featured in another out of my a$$ storyline by Jean P.

Come on ATWT get with the program!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The show is going down the tubes and isnt funny anymore!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 28
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

ICAM. Actually, I liked Katie a little before this last triangle with Mike and Simon. Now I just want Carly to punch her face in. Could she be a more whiny vindictive witch?! I am just sick of every guy on the show thinking Katie is perfect. I don't want her fired, but I could use a nice long break.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I would love an anwser to that also, it would seem that TC(Katie) is golden to JP, and that she is ATWT, and least that is what JP wants the viewers to think.

I have a feeling it has to do with the huge Matie fanbase that writes letters to JP and CBS everyday and keeps on naming Katie the top character of ATWT in all the soap mags. I am sorry but 99% of the viewers are not part of that fanbase, and JP should not be listening to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Terri Columbino is great, but as a SUPPORTING ACTRESS! That is the problem with the show, the lack good lead actresses. Not because they don't have them, but because they don't USE them. Ellen Dolan, Colleen Zenk Pinter, Martha Byrne and Maura West should be the leading ladies. Terri Columbino, Elena Goode, Marie Wilson and Jennifer Landon should be supporting, but it's the opposite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

B)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Chris B @ Dec 29 2006, 12:09 PM) </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Terri Columbino is great, but as a SUPPORTING ACTRESS! That is the problem with the show, the lack good lead actresses. Not because they don't have them, but because they don't USE them. Ellen Dolan, Colleen Zenk Pinter, Martha Byrne and Maura West should be the leading ladies. Terri Columbino, Elena Goode, Marie Wilson and Jennifer Landon should be supporting, but it's the opposite.

Very true Chris, One of the main reasons that ATWT was so good 2000-2004 was because Ellen Dolan, CZP, MB, and MW were the leading ladies of the show, TC, EG, Marie W, and JL should not be getting nearly the amount of airtime or storylines they are getting. Lets face it the four should be leading ladies have been with ATWT for years and years, yet the JP leading ladies except of TC have been with the show what 4 years or less, that is one of the problems with the show, Just because JL won an emmy does not mean she is Leading Lady material. I would say in 10-15 years these would be the new leading ladies, but not while your real current day leading ladies are still in there prime.

If I was seeing Barbara, Margo, Lily, and Carly(without Simon) everyday this show would be 200% better right now, these are the woman characters that are ATWT not Gwen, Jade, Katie, or Meg, they are like you said they should be supporting characters to the leading characters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Another problem with the show are the bland male characters. The only ones that are fleshed out are Mike, Dusty, Simon, Craig and Paul. Tom and Bob are extras, Jack is Carly's bitch and Holden is like a desperately boring housewife. I'm sure when Austin Peck arrives they'll shove him right down our throats. I dread the day. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I wonder how Terri Columbino feels about this. She is a really good actress, I think, and she showed that well when Katie killed Nick earlier this year. She loves the show as well, and I remember an interview with her in which she said she fondly remembered Chris and Nancy's anniversary 20 years ago and loves working with the older veterans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

B)-->

QUOTE(Chris B @ Dec 29 2006, 11:32 AM)
I'm sure when Austin Peck arrives they'll shove him right down our throats. I dread the day. :(

Another stupid move on ATWT part. Why did they cast him? Just for eye candy!!! He was horrible on Days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

LOL...Soapsuds, I think you've made my bleepin' day!!!!! :lol::lol:

Teri is a nice little actress. Occasionally she can bring the drama or just let Katieb*tch out. HOWEVER, Katie's never been a compelling character. Hogan had a hard time giving Katie anything significant to do, but kept her front and center in stupid adventure stories with Simon, and with Mike in phuck phuck all day long stories.

In some ways, I think Katie's prominence was more circumstance. Think of all the younger actresses that have come and gone in her age group since she's been here.

I'm sure they cast Peck hoping that TC's fans would be delighted with more eye candy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Up until 1-2 years ago, I actually liked Katie. I loved her in the beginning when she and Henry schemed together at WOAK. I loved her w/ Simon, in the beginning, when they first got married just so that Simon could stay in the country, and eventually fell in love. I even enjoyed their island adventures the first 2 times. Even when she and Mike first started dating, I thought they were pretty cute. Then, even when she married Henry and broke his heart, I thought she was still a good character.

I always found her character to be lighthearted...nothing really awful happened to her, you know? Her storylines were always small in comparison to the bigger storylines happening. She came on the show as the "little sister," and IMO, she should still be playing supporting to Craig and Margo. And up until JP took over, Katie was always supporting...and that's where she should have remained. I think TC is a wonderful actress: she's proven herself to be able to pull off dramatic scenes several times before. But she's just not lead actress material, and the more that the writers shove her down our throats, the more I've come to hate the character.

I think the thing that turned me away from the character was when she broke up Jen and Mike's marriage. I guess that's when she started becoming "lead" b/c since then, the character has been on-screen non-stop. Everything she does, no matter how the writers try to justify it, comes off as completely selfish. They try to make her likable by making her friends with Henry and Nancy Hughes, but it really doesn't work, for me: Henry, IMO, deserves his own storyline, and I'd rather see Nancy w/ her actual family.

One thing that ATWT doesn't do well is specifying between lead and supporting. I always thought that it was good to have an ensemble cast, but now it seems to not be working well on the show. Take for instance MW, who most people would assume is lead. Well, in 2006, I didn't see Carly as lead. In fact, I think TC and KMH are more of the leads now, which is sad b/c I think Katie and Emily do a lot better as supporting characters. In 2006, for the most part, Carly was the one supporting Katie's storylines, and characters like Meg were supporting Emily's storylines.

Just b/c a character is supporting doesn't mean that they're not as important as the leads. IMO, I find the supporting actors and actresses to be a lot more talented than the leads in most cases. At the Emmys, the supporting categories are always my favorites b/c they're a lot more balanced and well-represented than the leads, which tend to be really predictable. But some people view supporting as secondary, which doesn't make sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Horrible is too kind a word for his terrible acting. Even with the interim HW and Hogan's scripts he still sucked donkey balls. The other actors put him to shame in the reveal scenes with Sami, Carrie, Austin and Lucas. ATWT has always been known for having one of the best casts and he is no doubt going to drag it down. I just hope it's such a failiure (like everything else they;re trying) and they write him off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • I read that, but my interpretation was that she is uncredited because it is in a non-production capacity.  In others words, she's not secretly producing, as some had speculated prior to the confirmation.  I assume we agree on this?
    • Errol already confirmed she is back at Y&R and in a non-producing role; this alludes to she is not credited for the role she has.
    • I don't think Lisa served a purpose after the serial killer storyline. The writers never gave her anything to do but be Vicky's nemesis. Joanna Going deserved better. Another example of a character taking over the show and then the writers not having a longterm plan for the character.  Exhibit B: Sally Spencer. Such a missed opportunity. It really angers me how they misused her. She could sing and act and they just threw her away in that sexist nonsense storyline. Once the story was over, they wrote her off. The McKinnons should have lasted for years. I will give the show credit for how they introduced Sandra Ferguson as Amanda. I thought it was expertly done. She comes in and she immediately connected to RKK's Sam. She has chemistry with Matthew and she has realistic conversations with MAc and Rachel. That's how it is done. 
    • Great points, and it has not completely vanished. Leslie on Beyond the Gates fits the trope (she's still not over that Ted lovin' two decades later), though I will say there does seem to be an effort to make her more complex.
    • I understand why people speculate, but I have to say it doesn’t sound very plausible that Jill Farren Phelps would be working at Y&R in any uncredited role. CBS daytime shows are tightly bound by union contracts and corporate oversight, and that kind of informal arrangement would be a major liability in 2025. Before the mergers of SAG-AFTRA and the two WGA branches, it may have been easier to hire someone quietly or off the books. But those days are behind us. With digital payroll, tighter pension tracking, and increased scrutiny from legal and compliance departments, it’s just not the kind of thing anyone can get away with anymore. Most union members, especially producers nearing retirement, would not risk their eligibility or benefits to take an uncredited role. The Producers Guild of America is also very clear about crediting. To even receive the PGA mark, a producer has to be verified through a formal review process. According to their credit certification guidelines (source), "only individuals who performed a majority of the producing functions on a motion picture or television production" are eligible for credit, and those credits must be official and recorded. If someone is functioning in that capacity, they are not supposed to be uncredited. Studios that are union signatories, like CBS and Sony, know better than to skirt those rules. If anyone has a legitimate, primary source confirming that CBS is hiring someone like Phelps in an uncredited production role, I’d honestly be curious to read it. But without that, this just feels like rumor—not reality.
    • I keep thinking about the persistent trend of eroticizing mental illness on Guiding Light. Sonni and Annie were never more compelling, or more attractive to the show, than when they were manic. It played into a recurring theme: strong women undone by their unhinged reaction to sex. The writers were likely inspired by Basic Instinct and the broader wave of neo-noir films in the late '80s and early '90s, where female sexuality was often equated with instability. The result was a crude portrayal, not just of mental illness, but of womanhood itself. Both Sonni and Annie were introduced as sharp, capable women, brought in specifically as formidable antagonists to Reva. They were logical and composed, standing in contrast to Reva’s emotional volatility. That difference made them threatening, but not especially “sexy”—until desire became their undoing. In a very male fantasy, their strength unraveled the moment they slept with Joshua. As soon as they got a taste of Lewis lovin’, they spiraled into scheming lunatics, willing to torch everything to hold on to him. It was part of a larger trend in the culture. Fatal Attraction, Single White Female, and The Hand That Rocks the Cradle all traded on the idea that female desire was dangerous, barely held in check, and always teetering on the edge of madness. Looking back, it's a pretty grim trope. And while it's not completely vanished, I'm grateful we don't see it quite as often today.
    • Elements of it were silly, but it was a small price to pay to get Zas back. I should say there's a difference between in town and out of town returns. It's understandable for Roger to skulk around town in a bad wig and clown suit when he's in Springfield and running the risk of bumping in to people he knows.  Taking us out of town to find someone always has a short shelf life. Then it usually becomes about another character knowing X is alive but determined to keep them out of Springfield. Like Alan discovering Amish Reva. I don't know how long it went on, but it was probably twice as long as necessary.
    • Elizabeth Dennehy complained on the Locher Room about how ridiculous so much of the writing was for Roger's return. She laughed at so much of Roger's antics and how it was hard for her to take them seriously. Probably another reason she was fired as she didn't play the game.  
    • Only thing I enjoyed was Abby / Olivia, etc., and the addiction storyline. Otherwise, I could do without the season.
    • Right? Vanessa had a ball gown for every occasion.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy