Jump to content

ALL: Sex and Suffering in the Afternoon


Recommended Posts

  • Members

I just found this article, and have been reading it. I love the history in and thought I would post it over here. I remember the article years ago. I don't remember if it is the one where Bill & Susan Hayes were on the cover or not. I do not that it was a cover article for Time magazine.

It was titled Sex and Suffering in the Afternoon. (dated Jan 12, 1976)

from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/...13850-1,00.html

Of course you know me I ate up all the Another World stuff. Loved all the other too, but my heart belongs to Another World especially from the 1970's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 13
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

It amazes me that even in 1976 writers made that much money. I know that we only hear rumors these days about how much money the writers and producers actually make but I can almost guarantee you they are still making more than the actors are.

I have preached it before and I will preach it again, I find it so funny and deplorable that we continue to read about performers being asked to take pay cuts to save the show but you never read or hear about producers or writers doing the same.

It makes me angry that we are losing the talents of daytime like Julia Barr and Stuart Damon who are being cut due to the budget while hacks like Passanante, McTavish & Higley and mediocre writers like Brad Bell, Kreizman, Guza, Sheffer, and Latham keep chugging along and being paid the big bucks. When is it their turn to take a pay cut or to take one for the team.

I get so tired of fans too who think that performers shouldn't have a problem with taking recurring just so the show can stay on the air. There are people out there who actually say that Julia Barr wasn't fired - the show offered her recurring and she should have been happy with that.

I don't blame any actor out there who doesn't agree to those terms. I say more power to them. I know if I had been with a company for 30 years and they suddenly wanted to take my benefits away, and say we will call you if we need you, and expect me to take one for the team. My response would be only if you do too.

Recurring is an insult to a performer like Julia Barr, Suzanne Rogers, Jerry Ver Dorn, Peggy McKay, etc. who have put in years and years with a show - years and years of loyalty. They stayed there and pushed story along while many of the more popular stars came and used the show and then jumped off for bigger and better things.

There is the occasion when a performers asks for recurring himself, but it is rare. Most actors want to work and they want security just like you and me.

Well end of rant about that. I just hope one day someone like McTavish or Frons sees one of these posts and sees that there are fans out there who tired of losing our performers just so their pockets can get fatter. To me it is TPTB are the biggest problems with soaps today. It is the talented performers who are turning the s*it they write into gold on our screens almost every day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Preach it my brother!!

Yes it is so disrespectful, we often forget these people are at "work." This is their career, what if you worked full time, 40 hours a week for 30 years and then all of a sudden you were told, you're to old, you'll be replaced with a cheaper, unexperienced, lack of talen 20 year old and be given 5 hours a week. Screw off!! Is what I would tell them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Believe me both Sheffer and Latham are overpaid for the stories they are putting out on their shows.

I know that you did too but I put up with Hogan for quite a few years over at ATWT, and to me only 2000 to 2001 were truly great. After that and still today is just a mediocre writer who has some good stories now and then but he is nothing special.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I remember the article very well. It mentioned about Edge of Night: "If Hell were a city, it'd be a lot like Monticello." That pretty much described mid-late 1970s Edge, which knew how to tell a good mystery and leave you hanging on the edge of your seat.

Regarding Sheffer: Compared with who occupied the writer's chair over the last few years, Hogan is the second coming of Jesus Christ. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Just hope that Days doesn't get as bad as ATWT did the last year under Hogan. If it does then you will rethink those words. His stuff the last year at ATWT was if not as bad was near as bad as what JER wrote. He got to where many of the vets he didn't even show, and many people were wondering whether some of them were still on staff.

I was reading some old stuff from a board from about 2004 during Hogan's last year, and believe there wasn't much nice being said about him on the message board.

The last 2 weeks on Days have reminded me very much of that last year - too much focus on one story with the rest used a filler and way too much focus on the younger set.

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 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.
    • Roger's return storyline may have been silly but Roger's return was what lead to GL's last golden era.  It was the combination of Roger's return and Robert Calhoun becoming EP that got GL to finally hit it's stride after some really bad years. It will always disappoint me that the ratings during Robert Calhoun's run didn't reflect the quality of the show.
    • He also gave some of the best episodes, like the episodes surrounding Doug's death. The problem with Days was that Ron had a horrible vision from he top. I don't feel the same for MVJ and nothing that has happened in all these months suggests she doesn't have a handle on the show. Now if it becomes an issue I'll acknowledge it, but I'm not seeing it so far.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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