Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

  • Members
Posted

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.

  • Replies 32
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members
Posted

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.

  • Members
Posted

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.

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


  • Recent Posts

    • Well, I can't help but think it would've been written different with CB still there
    • I could've sworn FV let other people direct either here or at OLTL. I may be wrong. IIRC Kimberly is now very active directing multi-cam/sitcom work. I'd forgotten she even did Netflix's One Day at a Time.
    • IIRC MVJ said the million was just the first piece of what Leslie got or was already owed, something they did make explicit in dialogue but not too explicit. Still, I am past worrying about it. I do think they want 30-yo elder millennial Peaches in her Sophia Petrillo wig to be a point of pathos for Leslie. In theory I am fine with that, and don't dislike Peaches despite the jarring physical disconnect and need for a recast lol. But I do think they do a lot of B&B-style whizzing from Point A to Point C with Leslie on this kind of stuff - in one scene she is raising hell, in the next she is weeping over Peaches. There's very little transition to that sometimes that allows for the nuance, and that can be done much better and they can go much deeper with Leslie (and most characters). The newer/younger audience for the show may have less issue with this kind of quick change than we do.
    • Please register in order to view this content

       Thank you.   That was part of my reasoning as well. I think about the days of Kevin, Joey, and Jessica on OLTL or Lucky/Liz/Nik/Sarah/Emily on GH or the Last Blast Kids on DAYS or the Glow by Jabot kids, and it takes me back. Sure I started soaps due to the older cast with their divas, but I do like to see people around my age back then, too. Great memories.   So I love a good relatable teen tale. Bullying. Hormones for the Bad Boy. College choices and internal conflict. 
    • Thank you for the information.  I did listen to the entire interview with Miss Roux -- way back when it was first released.  But I am unable to recall her mentioning Connie Ford, and don't have time nor effort to listen to the entire thing again, just for one small morsel. So again, thanks for responding.    I do recall Roux sounded extremely fragile and perhaps a bit wounded in the interview. I almost felt guilty for even listening to it.  So perhaps that has some influence on my reluctance to listen to it again.  She seemed troubled, to say the least.   
    • Boxer-briefs, huh?   Well...called it on Cane/Giggly Heffa hooking up so not surprised.
    • Do you have Addie’s first air date??
    • Even now Victor is always so warm with Ashley. I liked their brief re-pairing as well.
    • @depboy Thanks. That does help. @titan1978 @Paul Raven Really enjoying the analysis of the production methods and what Monty was doing.  I wish we got some of those biopics here that a few UK soaps got as a biopic on Monty's first few years at GH would be fascinating. 
    • The original 'mansion' was one of the set upgrades they did in 1980 . It was the Chandler residence. When that story fizzled out I think it became Stuart Whyland's house -not 100 on that. But it was revealed that Stuart was working for the Di Mera's (rewrite) so Stefano moved into that house. Mmmm...then it became Alex Marshall's? Neil and Liz lived there also. At some point it was finally replaced.  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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