Jump to content

Y&R: Hack Marie Latham forgot Doug Marland's 6th rule


Recommended Posts

  • Members

This is absolutely my problem with her regime, it's turned Y&R into Just Another Soap. I don't mean to say Y&R was Shakespeare before or Arthur Miller or Citizen Kane, it was just head and shoulders above the rest, now it's fairly middle of the pact. Maybe a little bit better but not by much. The mediocrity of the other soaps (even though they can have flashes of brilliance, such as GL this past week and a half) is what drove me to Y&R in the first place.

Soaps used to have a singular vision and voice and creators who knew their characters intimately. That's not the case anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 32
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Yup. It's sad. And that's part of the reason for these rules being broken so often. Decisions are made by fifty people now, rather than one. A headwriter might have great story intentions, but for one ridiculous executive decision or another, the idea is nixed. Either that, or their original story vision is modified until it looks nothing like the original idea. Only a select few in daytime are really given free reign, and unfortunately for us, those few aren't worth a pile of sh!t.

When headwriters are given the chance to plow full steam ahead with their sole vision, greatness can occur. That rarely happens in today's world. Because of that, we can't really blame only the headwriters. There's a whole group of people who deserve to have eggs thrown at their heads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Oh I agree, but the show has been changing ever since Bell stepped down and then passed away. I for one quit watching under Alden & Smith. I couldn't stand what they did to the show. At least under Latham I do find the show watchable. She pulled me back in when John was found guilty of murder and then I stayed. I couldn't stand to watch much under Alden and under Smith I couldn't watch at all.

No one will ever be as good as Bell. Those days are over - unfortunately. And who knows even if Bell was still around - who knows that some of the things wouldn't have changed.

As others have pointed out it was a committee that didn't even include Latham that made a lot of the obvious choices like the shots of flowers and all. And one of those was Bell's own son. I mean that was published that he and his committee were the ones that made those changes, and they had nothing to do with Latham. Alot of those changes made by Bell and Bloom are the main things that don't make Y&R seem set apart anymore. It makes it appear just like the other soaps, but Latham had nothing to do with those.

I don't agree with everything Latham has done. But one thing that I have learned in the last year with all my shows - and believe me it was a hard lesson to learn. You can't compare your show to the way it used to be. If you do you will not be able to enjoy it anymore. That happened to me last year with so many of my shows.

You critique them and decide from that if you like what is happening and either move on or don't, but there are so many factors that influence what the shows are able to do today. As Kenny pointed out there is more things controlled by committee. Today the heads of daytime seem more involved than I ever remember them being. And of course budgets are not what they were.

Y&R fans are just now facing what many of us have had to face for a long time.

With that you may still find you don't like Y&R. I realized that and there are still things I don't like about my 2 absolute favorite shows Days and AMC, but I am able to watch them some now and enjoy them. Neither are going to be as good as they once were. I know many say Hogan has brought back the old Days but IMO he hasn't. His Days is still a pale version of the Days I have loved in the past - some of that has to do with him but others I am sure is Corday and Wyman. But it is better than it was. And to me Y&R is world's better than it was under Smith, and still heads above the rest of daytime in quality.

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

    • When Anita read Barbara's letter, it started out with the viewers hearing it in Barbara's voice as Anita read silently. And then Anita saying the next portion aloud while Barbara's voice continued simultaneously. And then ending with Anita alone saying the last part aloud. Excerpt from interview  (link to full interview) The rest may be spoilerish -- Only the nonspoiler part here: I love the idea of reading that letter,” shares Tunie. “And at one point in the script, I think it said that my voice joined her, and [Anita] started reciting the letter from memory because [she] memorized this letter. I suggested to Steve Williford, our director, ‘What if it’s like that moment in Hamilton when Hamilton is writing the resignation letter to George Washington, and then he starts saying it too, and then Hamilton’s voice fades away, and then it’s all George. What if we do something like that?’ And he was like, ‘Oh, my God! I just got chills. Let’s do it!’ So, we did it.” I understood that it worked really well, so I’m really happy about that.”  
    • I think MVJ and Guza made a good team in the launching of the soap, and I'm hoping that the rotation of all stories and characters is maintained once he officially departs from the credits. And so far, Ron C's breakdowns have been decent... but they pop only when he's paired with a good script writer like Jazmin.   I hope once Guza leaves officially... that MVJ is able to reign in Ron C and the dread Jamey G.
    • 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.  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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