Jump to content

In The Zone Radio: Season 2


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Sylph and I never mentioned that we thought less of her scriptwriting abilities after the interview, we just had problems with some of Patrick's reasoning. To say the un-abortion did its job by getting the ratings up and doing something that hasn't been done before is ludicrous, without taking into account how it forever impaired AMC's history and the original groundbreaking storyline.

I personally felt offended when she said soap fans don't look at soaps for medical facts or from a technological view (or something to that effect). Soaps are in part supposed to be a reflection of everyday life, and Agnes Nixon knew better than anyone that facts are important whenever you're telling a major storyline. I think by some expecting us to sit down, suspend all of our his belief, and watch these ridiculous plots happen on a show like AMC, which had a long history of being the most "human" soap on the air is degrading. Maybe Patrick didn't mean it in that way, but I didn't like how she defended the un-abortion by essentially saying people want to see ridiculous plotting.

And as Sylph and I mention, how do you defend and talk highly of McTavish, Pratt, and Guza, and forget about Lorraine Broderick and Wisner Washman to an extent? Three of those four Emmy's she has at home comes from Broderick's HW tenure. It left me shocked that someone could speak so highly of McTavish, Pratt, and Guza and basically forget all about Broderick and Washman (arguably Agnes Nixon's most senior proteges).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I totally agree on all of these points. I guess because I read your comments first, before I heard the interview, I wasn't surprised, and instead listened to see if I could hear "the words behind the words". Which isn't necessarily how I *SHOULD* have listened to it. I should have listened to the interview with no warning of what she said, and I'd probably feel the same way. Does that make sense?

(Probably not. I'm not making much sense at the moment. LOL!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Don't worry, when Michelle in on again in a few weeks, we'll address these issues (and I promise we'll have more questions).

Alvin, you can definitely send in more questions. I have to work out a date for her to come back on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

She never directly worked with Nixon, Broderick or Washam the way she did with McTavish, Pratt and Guza. She was a script writer under the NBW tenure, and was an associate head/breakdown writer working with McTavish, Pratt and Guza. She most likely had a closer professional relationship with the latter three than she did with the former three. Just like I am employee under my regional and district manager -- but I don't report directly to or have a close professional relationship with them as I do my store manager. They give directives to my store manager, the manager tells us, his direct employees, and we carry out the task. The higher up the ranks you go, the closer you are to the members of upper echelon. With Michelle Patrick, she wasn't in the story meetings and layout meetings and bouncing ideas off of Nixon, Broderick and Washam. The others were -- she just got the outline and wrote the script. With McTavish and GAP, she was in there, getting their ideas and seeing how they did things first hand, so of course she would bring them up as to what it is she learned from them.

Moving on...

I JUST HEARD THE INTERVIEW IN FULL -- OMG! I can NOT believe Michelle Patrick gave me a shout out! :wub: :wub:

I can skip to bed a happy, happy, happy wannabe writer!

Oh, and also be able to say I'm SO special, and the rest of you are cut glass! :P

Anyway, I'm so sorry I was held up last night and didn't come to the party until like 15 minutes before it ended. I totally would've called in just to converse and banter because the woman seems soooo affable and witty. Good news is that my schedules and priorities are changing so hopefully, if there is a next time, I'll be able to.

Now... gushing--> over.

On to the stuff talked about. First of all, I enjoyed listening to her speak. I felt as if I had pulled up a chair and was just listening to some tell a story. I was about to sit Indian style in front of my computer and drink chocolate milk. Awesome. Secondly, she covered a lot, in my opinion, just by her freely reminiscing and sharing her experiences. Third of all, it's a little too bad I hadn't been able to call in... The Magnificent Ambersons? Got that movie in my DVD collection. Janet dumping Natalie in the well? Been there, saw that unfold every day. It's how Dimitri and Wildwind was introduced, with him falling in love with "Natalia." But, yeah...

Anyway, I understood the Jonathan Lavery stuff. It made sense. I still think McTavish poorly executed the whole thing, but it's over. Jonathan's disappeared, Edmund's still dead -- nothing to be done about it.

Totally don't agree with the rationalization of the Un-Abortion. It was just... WRONG! No matter what spin, no matter how much I adore Michelle Patrick and her writing, no matter how much soap fans don't watch soaps in general for technological accuracy... in 1973, when Erica Kane had daytime's first legal abortion, it wasn't about technology... it wasn't about fantasy... it was about addressing a very important woman's issue head-on on a show that's been based before and after on being honest in their telling of contemporary social issues. I mean, that's like saying we find out almost 40 years later that Ruth wasn't protesting the Vietnam war. She was actually ahead of her time and received intergalactic radio waves while she was sleeping and actually was protesting the war between planet Zarnoff and the galaxy of Jabberwalkies that's going to happen in 2390. I mean, come on! No matter what, McTavish took a very real, very serious, very monumental story that's been deeply woven into this show's historic fabric... and made a mockery out of it with her "Let's pretend that something that wasn't even possible 30 years ago happened!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Less than a relative outsider. I can't give AMC more than 5 minutes of attention, and yes I have tried.

My point, of course, was that ultimately we can only judge a writer-as-writer based on their output. So, for a script writer, the ultimate point of evaluation point has to be the script.

Patrick may have loved the totalitarian Soviet Union. She may have adored 'Dumb and Dumber'. She may believe in taxation without representation. None of these things have any bearing on her as a writer. So, too, she may be a Scientologist (which some here hate) or she may praise McTavish and the un-abortion story....but that doesn't make her any more or less of a writer.

So, when these interviews shape someone's thoughts about the writer, I wonder if they are really shaping impressions about the idealized person behind the writer. Which makes sense. If we like how someone writes, then in the absence of further information we may also think the person themselves might be someone we would like. Then, they open their mouths, and show us we were wrong :).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Naturally. I am just that easy.<_<

Seriously, what the hell did she say that was so awful? You did this with the Thom Racina interview, too. That man had me cracking up and I enjoyed his interview, and yet, somehow, he rubbed you the wrong way, too.

Well, whatever the case, nothing she said changed my opinion about her work. She's still one of my favorite writers, I immensely enjoyed her work and looked forward to an episode she had a hand in... especially her scripts. If she comes back to AMC, I will still look forward to it. Nothing about her comments -- which I honestly don't see what was so wrong with them -- has changed that for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yup. I get that impression from a lot of post-ers after they hear someone they've always looked up to in terms of seeing their names on the credits say one or two things they might not agree with. It's like the rose-colored glasses are shattered. And I'm not talking about solely here on SON, but on other boards as well.

Yeah, but that's just Sylph, God love him. I'd be stunned if he DIDN'T think less of a writer after hearing their personal thoughts and opinions. I think Bibel's the only one who's managed to get out of that unscathed. He's an opinionated guy, and sets really high standards. Nothing wrong with that. We may not agree with it all the time, but it's just who he is. If you fight it too much, it'll just leave you really frustrated, and won't be any skin off his back. :D:P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Haven't I put a :P ? That should mean something. I was joking, you know?

Thom Racina is the guy partially responsible for death of daytime. And his Y&R scripts are full of history dishonouring. I have no problems with you liking him. He probably has, like, 2% of the blame. Certainly, hadn't he written the Ice Princess and the Freezing of the World, someone else would have... But that doesn't excuse him.

And if after all my posts and Y&RWorldTurner's you don't know what's wrong with some of her attitudes (note the emphasis on some) - then I cannot help you.

And, yes, after brimike's, who's like a ping-pong ball, jumping from one point of view to the other. Make up your mind already, brimike!!! :P

I so misunderstood this. That is, maybe I didn't, but I found it offensive. Opinionated and having an opinion that I am ready to change when someone convinces me are two very distinct things. B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I make up my mind. But I do like to see all different angles of a situation before I do. Think about why I would say the same things if I were ever in that person's shoes. Wonder what personal grounds they have on top of professional grounds. I've seen way too many people get way too worked up over a silly joke to just assume I know exactly what someone means on first assumption.

Oh, please don't be offended. It was meant with no malice, and was no underhanded insult, I swear. I never thought of "opinionated" as being a bad thing, ever. You have very strong opinions. Every post I read of yours is very boldly stated. That's SO not a bad thing, at all. But it can come across as curt sometimes (c'mon, even you can't deny that. Other people have said the same thing to you before). But once I realized not to take every post you ever wrote disagreeing with me as a personal affront, I found a new appreciation for you, my friend.

I can be wishy-washy (the back-and-forth on MP is a prime example, and I agree with you). You can be blunt and a little elitist (You use of popular literary foreign phrases, for example). It's the individual fatal flaws of our Internet-posting pseudonyms. I wouldn't have it any other way. :D

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

    • To me, that made no difference. The point stands whether Eva wants to be a Dupree or not. Anita was 110% on top of things. Also it's a logical inference that Eva might be interested in having a place in her supposedly real family. Frankly though I wonder if Eva knows how to feel ... yet. She could really be confused.
    • Does Jack ever dress in drag during that early '00s period where he was trying to get Jennifer back...or does he just fake being gay around then?
    • Here you go, by special request! https://www.instagram.com/p/DJlXDnWJImW/ DAYS 9-26-90 Matt Ashford as Jack Deveraux in drag
    • Concluding 1976... Raymond Schafer arrives in Springfield and begins an extensive probe into Malcolm’s death, puzzling Ed, who wonders why most of Schafer’s question sessions keep turning back to Rita’s involvement with Malcolm. Ed assures the man that Rita’s only connection with Malcolm was as his nurse; he is unaware that Schafer knows a great deal more about Rita than he does. Just to protect Rita, Ed has Mike check on Schafer’s credentials, and learns that he’s a  well-respected criminal attorney. The waitress at the restaurant where Malcolm suffered his stroke tells Schafer that the woman who was with him reacted very professionally to the sudden emergency, as if she were a nurse. Realizing that her little sister has fallen hard for Tim, Rita warns him that she’s very vulnerable and innocent, but Tim tells Rita her advice isn’t necessary. But Tim then receives a plum job offer to be chief neurological resident at a prestigious Philadelphia hospital and can’t pass up the opportunity. Evie is crushed by the news and spends the next several days at home crying. Joe Werner, fully recovered, has accepted a post as a medical aide in a destitute village in India and leaves alone, with Sarah to follow him later. Justin asks Sarah to consider a partnership with him in private practice, but she explains that she thrives on the hospital atmosphere. When a call comes from India that Joe has had another massive attack, Sarah leaves on the next available flight and arrives only moments before he dies. The painful news is relayed back to Cedars at once. Sara returns from India a heartbroken woman, but the day-to-day involvement of raising T.J. and of her career seem to be her salvation. Justin shows a surprisingly compassionate and understanding side to Sara, but, ironically, Justin’s ex-wife, Jackie, arrives in Springfield with her diabetic father, who is suffering from a heart attack. In the process of consulting with Justin on her father’s condition, Jackie comes face to face with Sara for the first time since their college days. Evie’s heartbreak at Tim’s departure turns to fury and hatred when she inadvertently discovers a letter which Tim wrote to Rita just after he left. In it he concedes that Rita was right about Evie’s vulnerability where he was concerned but reminds Rita that he badly hurt her in the same way she feared Evie would suffer. Evie is now sure that Rita somehow forced Tim to leave town and is livid at the idea that Tim was Rita’s lover. She insists she’s cutting off her relationship with Rita and will pay her back for any help she’s received in the past. Ben and Hope’s wedding plans are off, as Ben, while still insisting he’s innocent, won’t explain why the robbery evidence points to him. Hope feels his unwillingness to tell her the truth makes marriage to him impossible, but confides to Ann that she is miserable without him. Ben has echoed these sentiments to Mike but won’t confide in him, either as Hope’s father or as an attorney.   Holly is trying very hard to build a life without Ed, but since she sees him virtually every day at work,she’s unable to put him out of her mind. She accepts a date with a member of the hospital administration staff but is unable to avoid making comparisons between Ed and this young man and winds up alone, sadly holding Ed’s picture and recalling how much she loves him. Believing that the hospital board’s conclusions on Grainger’s death have settled the question once and for all, Rita has regained her self-confidence, and her romance with Ed is growing daily. They admit their love for each other, and Ed confides that he intentionally  held back with Rita for fear of making another mistake. Rita then tells Ed she has never married because for her marriage must be forever. Rita’s mother realizes that Rita is truly in love when she confides in her that she doesn’t understand why she’s been so lucky in having him love her and how she wants to be the very best person she can be for him. Ed proposes marriage to Rita and gives her time to think about it before answering. Rita painfully realizes that her past could, if it rose again against her, make a life with Ed a lost dream. But Raymond Shaefer has been quietly but efficiently carrying on his investigation and has learned that Grainger argued with Rita at her apartment. He presents the evidence he’s compiled to District Attorney Eric Van Gelder, who decides the case warrants further investigation. Rita goes to Ed’s office to tell him she loves him but can’t marry him, that she doesn’t deserve him and “can’t do it to him.” As she turns from a confused Ed to leave, she finds the district attorney and a police officer outside Ed’s door, waiting to arrest her. Ed, insisting that a serious mistake has been made, calls Mike to help her as Rita, shocked and humiliated, is taken under arrest through the hallways of the hospital in which she works. Mike manages Rita’s release on bail only after she has had to submit to the degrading booking procedure. Mike sees her alone at her apartment, explaining he can help her only if she tells him the whole truth. Rita equivocates until Mike mentions Texas, indicating to Rita that he knows at least some of the story. Van Gelder has, in fact, let Mike see the bulk of evidence in the case against Rita, to convince him her arrest wasn’t a capricious whim. Rita explains to Mike that Malcolm believed she intentionally vilified him to his father, to do him out of his rightful inheritance, and then wanted his father dead to collect her money. Mike expresses his appreciation of Rita’s honesty, promising to help her. But Rita’s tormented dreams confirm that she hasn’t yet told all the truth, and after Peggy visits, expressing firm support, Rita tells Roger she has to reveal his part in the story. Roger painfully tells Rita about his being Christina’s father to show her that if Ed knew, it would end Rita’s chances with him forever. Rita, who was ready to tell Ed the whole story, now realizes how risky that would be. Adding to Rita’s pain is her forced leave of absence from the hospital until she’s cleared and the embarrassment of seeing her name in the headlines.
    • Please register in order to view this content

         
    • Yes, but the stories are all pretty awful Seeing Victor rehashing his hatred of the Abbotts  when he married one of them and has a daughter that is half Abbott as well as walking around with Traci's daughter's heart keeping him alive makes him look worse than he already is. And I remember he and Jack chatting amicably in the past few years. Victor interfering in Kyle/Claire is just repeat of Billy/Victoria. Sharon, Nick,Phyllis etc are around but again the stories are lacking.
    • I think Kevin's 1996 Emmy was fair enough. He barely appeared for his second. I don't think anyone else on the list is that deserving but I might have gone with Moore as he did try with the whole Keesha AIDS story. @alwaysAMC Thanks to slick jones' cast list I was able to see that Nikki Rene played Tina. Not much on her, as you mentioned. Tap and a few Broadway listings (it doesn't help that a younger actress with a similar name is in a lot of roles). Nikki Rene: Credits, Bio, News & More | Broadway World https://onceonthisisland.fandom.com/wiki/Nikki_Rene Nikki Rene - IMDb
    • Thank you. That does ring a bell. I remember Theresa and Julian's drunk, giggly fake wedding (with Julian asking "Whassup?" to the minister). Was Bruce tricking the pair as a prank, or did somebody put him up to it? I especially liked Katherine recalling how dashing young Alistair was when he'd pick up Rachel for dates, and how she wished she could be her sister, then feeling guilty once Rachel had her boating accident ...
    • And Kevin Mambo beat Shemar Moore for those two Emmys. I chalk up the wins to the voters not wanting Jonathan Jackson to eventually end up with a five peat (he won 1995, 1998, 1999). These were the 1996 and 1997 Younger Actor races. 1996: Nathan Fillion, Jonathan Jackson, Kevin Mambo (winner), Shemar Moore, Joshua Morrow 1997: Steve Burton, Jonathan Jackson, Kevin Mambo (winner), Shemar Moore, Joshua Morrow
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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