Members Sylph Posted June 3, 2008 Members Share Posted June 3, 2008 *AHEM!* Who told you that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted June 3, 2008 Members Share Posted June 3, 2008 You did of course, but why bring that up. Got anymore personal info, you spy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted June 5, 2008 Members Share Posted June 5, 2008 Here's a recent interesting article I've found that quotes Nancy. Guess who it's written by? MICHAEL MALONE! So weird, I didn't know those two knew one another. I have an old SOD issue from 1995, where it talked about Michael stepping down and that ABC wanted Nancy and Stephen to take over the reigns at OLTL, that would've been good had it happened. It's an article Malone wrote about the town of Hillsborough, North Carolina, where I believe he resides. Nancy's quote: http://www.visitchapelhill.org/locations/hillsborough Hey Nancy, how about doing some "hard work" as headwriter of any given soap again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted October 15, 2008 Members Share Posted October 15, 2008 Look what Marlena Delacroix had to say about Nancy Curlee: BTW, does anyone have that interview? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted October 15, 2008 Members Share Posted October 15, 2008 But it is understandble why Curlee and Demorest get most credit for this period in GL history. They were there for a good couple of years, Reilly and Broderick weren't. Also, Curlee was the cloest thing Pam Long had to a Co-HW during Long's final stint with the show. In some credits, you'll see Curlee listed after Long, Trent Jones as well. Reilly left in 92, and the show continued to get better. Broderick stayed on for a little while longer, but she left by mid 93, and it was just Nancy and Stephen writing. When Nancy left in early 94, the show wasn't the same anymore, and Stephen was still there. How would Marlena or Jonny explain the shift in quality? Reilly can get some credit for the stuff that happned in 91 and through mid 92. I don't see why Nancy and Stephen shouldn't get most of the credit from 91 to 93 though, they were there the longest and knew much more of GL's rich history. Also, when Patrick Mulcahey gives interviews about this time, he only speaks of Nancy and Stephen. If Reilly had so much influence, why hasn't someone spoken about his contributions to the show? Mulcahey doesn't strike me as the type to omitt someone's work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted October 15, 2008 Members Share Posted October 15, 2008 I'm not questioning her status, I'm amazed that Marlena Delacroix is. Note those inverted commas that come with legendary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted October 15, 2008 Members Share Posted October 15, 2008 Curlee only had one writing stint, so I can admit that she's far from "legendary." Irna, Agnes, and Bill are legendary. However, Curlee's overwhelming contribution to GL during this time was evident. Nancy and Stephen were the ones guiding that show. GL didn't suffer when Reilly or Broderick left, but when Curlee left in 94, GL lost a certain sophistication and complexity to its writing that was there before, and I don't think it's a coincidence. And if we're willing to give out so much credit for this period, than JFP should be included as well. She had a heavy hand in a lot of the exection of these storylines during this time. Someone should interview JFP, so she can tell us who was really in charge during this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dan Posted October 15, 2008 Author Members Share Posted October 15, 2008 I can understand what she means too. The GL internet community has lionized Curlee after the fact with a whole lot of inferior stories and regimes past us. It certainly makes it easier to be objective. But also, take a good look at the RATS database, at comments made from online posters when these shows were airing. Truth be told, many of the comments echo exactly what we say even today. Stories and characters are boring, stupid, etc. Hell, they even had nicknames for various characters. The show was "getting away from its core." That's not necessarily a critique against us posters, but even then, we felt we weren't getting the quality of storytelling that we deserved or feel we deserve. To be fair, they also praised many of the moments and storylines that we love today and ratings rose during the early part of their tenure, so there is strong evidence that the general audience also loved the show at the time. However, as a whole, the Curlee/Demorest tenure is looked upon much more favorably than when it was really happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 I found this SOD interview with Curlee, Reilly, and Demorest from November 26, 1991. SOD doesn't specify which writer said what, but coins them as "GL Writers." The interview focuses only on Nick and Mindy, sadly. Also at this link, you'll find interviews with Agnes Nixon and Donna Swajeski regarding a particular couple from AMC and AW at the time. http://www.network54.com/Forum/390270/mess...%3B+Alla+Korot) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted October 29, 2008 Members Share Posted October 29, 2008 Looking back, I kind of see the Alex/Nick/Mindy unconventional triangle as a spin on what Lemay did on AW with Iris/Mac/Rachel. Only this time, you had the mother who tried to ruin her son's relationship, and the mother who had an intense rivalry for her son's affection with the woman he "loved." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.