Members Khan Posted November 22, 2007 Members Share Posted November 22, 2007 LOL! Yes, apparently, by the time La Kane was 18 years old, she -- Had been married three times... Had a daughter, an abortion (which was later, uh, overturned?), a miscarriage, and an "hysterical pregnancy"... Had been accused of murder on at least one occasion... And had worked as a model, an actress, and a failed disco owner. Quite a life, wouldn't you say? ETA: All that, and she STILL made the time to travel to Woodstock...when she was seven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted November 22, 2007 Members Share Posted November 22, 2007 Skip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricaKane70 Posted November 22, 2007 Members Share Posted November 22, 2007 That desiree dubois storyline was terrible, I had to close my eyes or change the channel whenever I saw her in that wig and get up. *Shudders* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Angela Posted November 22, 2007 Author Members Share Posted November 22, 2007 Isn't the Kendall story issue more about the fact that they didn't hire a 24-25 year old actress back then and they didn't hire a 34-35 year old actress 9 years later? History wasn't really erased, timelines were just skewed (okay...revised, lol) and in that they were asking us to buy something that is just a big reach - Erica was 30 in 1993 and is still in her 40s as we speak. I loved/love the story so much the skewed timeline and age stuff never bothered me much. The story worked better with Kendall coming on in as a teenager who's psyche could be f**ked up. If Kendall would have come in 25 years old (she was a teenager for the first 6 months until McTavish gave into pressure) the story would have potentially been as annoying as the Ethan/Zach storyline because you have a grown-a** person there. The battle between the two women - the push/pull, the different dynamic it brought out in Erica. It's one of my favorite AMC stories ever. I do understand that some saw and see that as equivalent to the abortion re-write and I can understand why to a point despite my love for the story. In my opinion it was one of those positive "mistakes," being any significant revision or "revision" of history is a mistake on some level. Both "surprise kid" stories were controverisal in their own way but one clearly became considered a HIT, while the other is still considered a MISS. Moving on to the MISS... The abortion thing, it was the first damn abortion on daytime - they should have not messed with that. Erica got an abortion because she wasn't ready to be a mother - she was very career minded, and they changed that to she was still "acting out" from the rape/Kendall's conception. Nixon gave Erica the reasoning she did for a reason and this is just not the time to play with abortion topics like that. On top of that, they already played their luck with the surprise Kid # 1 introduction. At some point, I just reckoned McTavish wanted to "birth" all of the Kane family's children before she was fired again. Erica has two daughters, we need a son. And on and on... Why would Susan Lucci mind that Erica is (forever) in her "40s"? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Pine Charles Posted November 22, 2007 Members Share Posted November 22, 2007 I think she's finally speaking out because of the abysmal ratings---mostly the fear that AMC will be cancelled (which is a real possibility right now). It obviously must be painful for her to see the show---literally---at the bottom. It's not like she needs AMC for money, and she could probably find other TV work, but in many ways it's HER show; HER child (just as much as Agnes Nixon's). Can she imagine not playing Erica Kane, which has been her role for 37 years, a year from now? Every show must end eventually, but I don't think Lucci is ready for that just yet. She doesn't want to see AMC die a painful death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Angela Posted November 22, 2007 Author Members Share Posted November 22, 2007 The more I think about this, the more I believe that. It's rare for this woman to make a negative comment about the writing of AMC to the press - and she's had bad storylines over the years, she's had periods of being backburned over the years, she's had quite a few storylines where she's been a bit more supporting character to her children rather than a fellow lead. I think the woman is really concerned about where the show is going, she sees the ratings and she knows the feel of the show and that it's really bad right now (her drama, fun mix comment). She just doesn't want "her baby" to die quite yet and finally got on the ball. I'm going with that. But speaking of Desiree, I had to get this out of the vault. Bad Susan! Bad! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Pine Charles Posted November 22, 2007 Members Share Posted November 22, 2007 Erica had her drinking "under control", says Cowudders. Is that why she needed an intervention for her guzzling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricaKane70 Posted November 22, 2007 Members Share Posted November 22, 2007 Angela you are killing me with that pic of erica as a show girl, *shudders*. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DaytimeFan Posted November 22, 2007 Members Share Posted November 22, 2007 I'm thinking that Lucci looks at the ratings, looks at the show and looks at the future and doesn't like what she sees. AMC has fallen hard and I think she's fearful that it won't be able to rebound. AMC is HER show, in reality it's just as much hers as Agnes Nixon's (in fact, Lucci has been there longer). She doesn't need the money, she doesn't even really need the attention. I think this is a desperate attempt to salvage a show that she loves. Lucci has always played by the corporate rules in public, never slamming the show even when it deserved it. No surprise that she's lasted 37 years. Until Frons, JHC and B&E are fired I don't hold out much hope. Frons is the major problem. If Angela Shapiro was still at ABC, the poor performance of JHC and B&E would have resulted in firings years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Angela Posted November 22, 2007 Author Members Share Posted November 22, 2007 Sorry You know, I was actually thinking of going to Eden's site to get some large color photos from Erica's fanatasy reunion with B/K - where she still has on the dang wig ... but I didn't! PC, I just fixed the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members quartermainefan Posted November 22, 2007 Members Share Posted November 22, 2007 Bravo to Lucci. I wish she would go further and tell ABC either the show changes writers and she wants approval on who gets hired or she walks and tells her fans to walk with her. She's put her entire adult life into selling daytime, ABC and AMC and she's watching Frons and his minions piss all her work away. It's obvious she loves AMC to have stuck around all this time when she was already so wealthy, it must pain her to see the show sinking into oblivion at rate matched only by DOOL. 37 years teaches you some things, like what works and what doesn't. AMC were idiots to make Kendell the star of the show and push Erica to the side. If someone thinks that was a workable concept, maybe they should next advise Passions to stop having the guys take off their shirts or do a season of LOST where Locke is barely seen? It's just about the same level of sanity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members juppiter Posted November 22, 2007 Members Share Posted November 22, 2007 Lucci has always been like the Queen of England, who is reluctant to express any political view. For her to say this means that she thinks AMC is in trouble. I have nothing but the utmost respect for Susan Lucci.... hopefully TPTB will listen closely to her input if AMC gets to the scab phase. She is truly royalty in the world of soaps. I know that my grandmother (an Italian immigrant) watches AMC just for her. I'm sure lots of people, of all ages, do. If there is a "face of daytime," it's Susan Lucci. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Steve Posted November 22, 2007 Members Share Posted November 22, 2007 I think you hit the nail on the head. AMC's quality has sunk in the past but it has never been last place in the ratings until now. I don't blame Susan Lucci for finally speaking out against the writers. Hopefully, someone at ABC will pay attention and salvage AMC before its too late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members R Sinclair Posted November 22, 2007 Members Share Posted November 22, 2007 I know! Susan even said on a Soap Net interstitial a couple years ago that we first met Erica as a "15 year old high school girl" (HA! The very first episode, Mona said something to Nick Davis about ever since Erica got that car of hers, she's been out all the time. What 15 year old has a license and their own car?) So, even by those standards, Erica should be 52 years old by now. I also have the A&E Behind the Scenes Biography on DVD (which was documented during the Culliton period) and they briefly talk about the abortion, and Susan said Erica was a teenager and she had crossed state lines to get married in the snow and -- wait! A teenager?! In 1973?! Just how old IS this woman?! Okay, I can maybe buy Erica debuting in 1970 as 16 at the absolute youngest. But I had always thought the whole bunch of them (Erica, Phil, Tara, etc.) were college age. I never liked the Kendall story. Even back then when I was a teenager, I just didn't like it. It was a lot of crap to buy with absolutely no room to store it. I mean, really. I can understand how Erica might've blocked out the rape -- but to block out the rape and the subsequent NINE MONTHS that followed, and then continued on with life as usual for the next twenty years? Plus, I think the whole Kendall story has colored Erica, who once was this larger than life character which is why viewers loved/loved to hate her, into this darker character. I mean, damn. Not only was she raped and impregnated at 14, NOW she's been used as a piece of meat, a bargaining chip, by her very own father? As for the abortion, like you said, Nixon defined the reasoning behind Erica's abortion for a purpose. Especially in 1973. But that's not even the biggest problem I have with the unabortion since people give one reason for doing something to placate others, while really having another reason altogether. So I could possibly buy that Erica -- not being able to deal with the rape -- could've passed it off as being a mother might disrupt her career goals. That's not my main gripe. My main problem is the fact that the story went into SCIENCE FICTION TERRITORY WITH HAVING A PROCEDURE THAT IS MEDICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO DO just to undo a very real, very true, very groundbreaking storyline in the show's history. THAT'S what pissed me off. You simply can't abort a pregnancy and transplant the fetus -- I mean, "embryo" into another woman's uterus! Abortion and surrogacy are two different things. And the fact that we were just told to deal with it and shut up made me extraordinarily mad! She's the Blanche Deveraux of Pine Valley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bellcurve Posted November 22, 2007 Members Share Posted November 22, 2007 LMAO! I *heart* you Khan! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.