Administrator Toups Posted August 13, 2008 Author Administrator Share Posted August 13, 2008 B&B: - Adam Dusevoir first listed as Script Writer on August 13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted August 13, 2008 Members Share Posted August 13, 2008 Bang, bang. Like I said. Where is Soapsuds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator Toups Posted August 14, 2008 Author Administrator Share Posted August 14, 2008 Woah! Pratt and Guza aren't close anymore? I think that's what Michelle Patrick just said in the ITZ interivew. THey've been BFFs since USC Film School (mid-late 70's?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members LeClerc Posted August 14, 2008 Members Share Posted August 14, 2008 It sounded to me like she just misinterpreted the question as "there were rumors of a blowup between you and Guza and Pratt...." (ie rumors that all three were at each other's throats, rather than Pruza vs. her). So she said she couldn't speak for Bob and Chuck's relationship but there was no blowup between her and either of them. I thought it was odd though that Brian Frons called up a staff writer to tell her about a transfer. I can't wait to hear what R Sinclair has to say about her reaction to the Josh storyline. Her "the ratings went up" rationale is sort of...off. They may have gone up for the reveal but there was also a huge explosion that may have had something to do with that. The ratings plummeted during the ensuing months. Definitely sounded like she is done with soaps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator Toups Posted August 14, 2008 Author Administrator Share Posted August 14, 2008 Yeah, you could be right. I'll go back and listen to it closely to make sure. Yeah, "transfers" don't happen to often. I wonder why Guza let her go though. I think if Guza wanted Michelle to stay, Michelle would've stayed - Frons would choose Guza over Megan anytime! I would love know the whole story though. I was so disappointed how she backed McTavish's unabortion. Oh Michelle, why??? That's okay, you still rock. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator Toups Posted August 14, 2008 Author Administrator Share Posted August 14, 2008 At 72:18 Ryan: It’s funny how rumours start online because for the past 3 years, Jen and myself and others have heard from the soap “insiders” that there was this huge blow up with you and Bob and Chuck and that’s why you quit General Hospital and went back to All My Childen. Michelle: No........If there was a blow up, I wasn’t involved in it. And I didn’t quit General Hospital, I was sent back to [All My Children]. I know that Megan wanted me. Megan made no bones about the fact that she really really wanted me......she really really wanted me.....and she had tried for a while to accomplish this. There was no blow up between me – I can’t speak up for Bob and Chuck......they were friends from film school. Whatever might have happened between the two of them, it had nothing to do with me.....or let me say, if it did, I’m completely unaware of it. Ryan: Well there you have it folks. There you have it straight from the woman herself, so you can stop all the conspiracy theories. Cause that’s all I heard going into this interivew, “Oh my God, Ryan, you need to ask her about the incident between her and Bob and Chuck. We need to know.” There was no incident, people. Michelle: As I say, there may have been an incident, but I don’t know what it was and I was not involved in it. I mean, Chuck and Bob, I think, parted ways but again, it had nothing whatsoever to do with me, nothing. So much so, that I don’t even know.....Well, I know that Chuck left to do a night time show, then, just like you, the rumour was they’ll never work together again. There’s always people in soaps that’ll never work together again and then they end up working together again. There may have been some edgyness between Chuck and Bob, as I say, they a relationship that goes back decades.........but I was not involved in it or at least if I was, I have no idea in what way. -------------------------------------------------------------- "I think, parted ways" - What does that MEAN!!??? The way I'm interpreting it is that they had a falling out. How are you guys interpreting it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JackPeyton Posted August 14, 2008 Members Share Posted August 14, 2008 that they didnt have the sam vision/wanted diff things and he left. doesnt eman there was a blow up at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted August 14, 2008 Members Share Posted August 14, 2008 I just listened to the Patrick interview, and though I still respect her, some of what she's said had me rolling my eyes. Michelle Patrick really seems to adore McTavish and Guza's "vision" from what I've listened to. What she said about liking how Guza writes for dark male characters who aren't the ones bringing women flowers all the time had me in a deep gasp. I'm sorry I didn't get back in time to send my questions, Ryan. I would've loved to hear Michelle talk more about working with Lorraine Broderick, since 3 of those 4 Emmy's she has comes from Broderick's HW tenure at AMC. When she talked about admiring certain things from certain writers, Broderick was noticeably missing, maybe she just forgot. It seems to be a common theme for people who've worked with McTavish to defend her crappy storytelling, maybe it's an act, but let's just say I expected something different regarding the unabortion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted August 14, 2008 Members Share Posted August 14, 2008 Same here. I thought about your reaction exactly when she said that. It was all so unbelievable... So many of these great writers are divorced from reality. How can you forget Lorraine Broderick? How? And remember and praise McTavish? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted August 14, 2008 Members Share Posted August 14, 2008 Because Broderick would never allow writing storylines for thugs who are painted as the central heroes on soaps, or stories about faux sci-fi plots that totally damage the groundbreaking history of a particular soap. A recent quote from Broderick, given during an interview regarding the soap opera screenwriting class she taught at Drexel University earlier this year: Yes, you can tell so many of Patrick's answers left me a bit bitter. When she talked about how GH did all this ridiculous stuff in the 80's, and used it as an excuse for Megan's shitty storylines, I was about to loose it. AMC and GH are two totally different shows. Agnes Nixon is known for injecting reality into her storytelling, and even though she supposedly supported the un-abortion, Agnes would never allow such a medical abomination on any of her shows if she had total control. AMC was known for being a trend-setter in terms of social issues, not a poorly written and executed rape infested (Megan's trademark!) sci-fi rip-off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted August 14, 2008 Members Share Posted August 14, 2008 And how come she mentioned Agnes Nixon only in passing? Even though, I believe that Agnes has a lot more blame on her than many of the fans would want to admit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted August 14, 2008 Members Share Posted August 14, 2008 Maybe because she didn't work directly with Agnes, and Agnes' influence seemed to wain significantly from when Patrick first joined AMC to now. She mentioned Agnes sharing the HW duties with Lorraine Broderick (the ONLY mention of Broderick in the interview) and Wisner Washman when she first joined. I think Agnes worked more so with the HW's and EP's, not the script or breakdown writers. It seemed to me that she's more of a fan of fantasy related storytelling than realistic storytelling, which there's nothing wrong with per se, but I found some of her justifications for poorly received storylines very flawed, but that's me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted August 14, 2008 Members Share Posted August 14, 2008 This whole interview has left me deeply, deeply depressed, actually. I turned in 90 minutes from loving this woman so much to being so disappointed. Apart from praising Joanna Cohen, she hasn't said one single right thing. She pushed all the wrong buttons. This is why it is so scary to say you wish a SW you love would become the show's next HW. There are so many variables here in play we don't know about. It's a worn-out story that the fact the script, the dialogue is great doesn't mean their stories will be too. How can someone praise Megan and her ways? And love Guza's dark and brooding men? I have turned into something I don't like: I have difficulties with 90% or more of today's writers. I just don't know what are these people doing here! They are so divorced from what a soap opera should be - I mean split screens à la 24?! That said, I really, really think Pratt should get her to write for AMC as soon as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JackPeyton Posted August 14, 2008 Members Share Posted August 14, 2008 See, i love Guza's dark men. And i love it when soaps do things like split screens. however the issue is the same issues soaps have faced for decades. balance. those dark guys need soemthing light. those split screen should only be used few and far between. campy over the top action storylines should be played during one very true to life, and not campy at all. etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted August 14, 2008 Members Share Posted August 14, 2008 You are right. But my point with the split screens aren't per se going to make soaps popular. All these people seem to forget one immensely important thing: first comes the story and then the way you tell it. Besides, 24 has really gotten only worse during all the years it's been on: you can clearly see the pattern the show tells stories and it wasn't interesting because you knew what was going to happen. Hopefully, Howard Gordon (or whoever runs that show now) will fix and stir things up a bit. As for those dark and brooding men - they have clogged the screens and it's time to get some rest from them. Had they been balanced from the start, I wouldn't mind them. But after all these years... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.