Members Kubla Khan Posted January 6, 2008 Author Members Share Posted January 6, 2008 It's kind of ridiculous to blame Cady for "just leaving" and refusing to "tough out the bad times." Guess what? Daytime TV is notorious for actors coming & going at their own will. Big deal. It happens all the time. Cady's been in this business for roughly twenty years, and she made the decision to leave three times. In 1996, she left after 7 years with AMC. She left again in 2002 after four years. She was with ATWT for three years before bailing. She's certainly worked her butt off and put plenty of years into her work to be able to choose to leave if she wants to. I also think it's stupid to make judgments about her decisions to leave when we're not in her head - we don't know the very personal circumstances that led to her decisions to leave. She wasn't even unhappy with things at AMC when she left the first time - she just wanted a break to focus on other things in her life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members WorldTurner Posted January 6, 2008 Members Share Posted January 6, 2008 Did you see the version of Rosanna in the whole Cabot story? That was a pathetic and desperate woman too so Rosanna really hasn't seemed any different to me this time either. I only saw her as tough with Craig but once she was moved to story with Paul, I thought she became very weak. And Cady is hardly the only actor that has had to act out bad stories. Most actors also don't take their stories personally. I think it is important for actors to speak to the writers and producers that can actually change things. I don't think it should be done in the press the way she is doing it. To me it comes off as whining when she does this repeatedly and yet says but I would be willing to return to AMC where I think I was treated the worst. She could have presented her concerns in a much better manner regarding the genre in general and not just talked about herself. If it's that bad, why continue to go back? By doing that she isn't doing anything to fix things for the viewers but to me at least just comes off as complaining about her situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members stenbeck212 Posted January 6, 2008 Members Share Posted January 6, 2008 Is Slezak "complaining"? Lucci? If the soap press can't be used for exposing the genre's problems, then what good is it? Having just read Victoria Wyndham's recent interview, doing it all behind the scenes doesn't exactly help. She tried to save Another World for 20 years, and I don't remember her using the press to do it. If all the actors stay silent and simply abandon the genre, we'll have none of the performers we love on screen. At least Cady McClain's revolving door mentality isn't frustrating because she's a total hack. I'd rather see her come and go than the industry's crappy writers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members P.J. Posted January 7, 2008 Members Share Posted January 7, 2008 I totally give the character of Rosanna a pass on the $50 million trust fund thing. It wasn't Cady portraying her during that time, and frankly, the entire story got boggled down in the writing changes that no one could make any sense of it at the time. I used to get a headache trying to remember how many different sets of terms and conditions there were on that thing. When Cady assumed the role in '02, Hogan gave it a darker spin, which suited Cady's talents. (YP sucked...) I think it's a little unrealistic to expect post-coma Rosanna to be as "strong" as Cady would prefer. I feel for Rosanna more now, than I probably ever have. I agree this return has been mostly wasted by sticking her in an awful story. But no doubt that's the story Cady knew she would be in. Slezak is an instituition on her show. She's earned the right to take her beef to TIIC and point out what they should have seen smacking them in their faces. Cady, otoh, kind of takes the "hit and run" approach, doesn't she? NOW that she's out, she's piping up. And Cady wasn't exactly "with" ATWT for three years before leaving. She would sign for six months or a year, then hemmed and hawed while she decided whether or not she was up to continuing. The show was on pins and needles wondering if she'd re-sign, and had to keep writing her in and out based on which way the wind was blowing. Another example of short-term plots that disrupted the flow of the show. I'd guess half the reason Rosanna was continually obsessed with Cabot was because that was a self-contained plot TIIC could easily write or scuttle. You couldn't have Rosanna be a major player in another plot, if you didn't know if you'd have her in a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dragonflies Posted January 7, 2008 Members Share Posted January 7, 2008 PJ that post rocks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevotedToAMC Posted January 7, 2008 Members Share Posted January 7, 2008 I agree here....she signed on long enough to have a story developed from beginning to end. It was pretty obvious she would only be in one story arc for the short amount of time she signed on for when returning. I wish Cady the best of luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevotedToAMC Posted January 7, 2008 Members Share Posted January 7, 2008 I agree here....she signed on long enough to have a story developed from beginning to end. It was pretty obvious she would only be in one story arc for the short amount of time she signed on for when returning. I wish Cady the best of luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dawn9476 Posted January 8, 2008 Members Share Posted January 8, 2008 So ATWT fired half their crew? That probably means that the blind item about a soap replacing its crew with non-union workers was about them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members P.J. Posted January 8, 2008 Members Share Posted January 8, 2008 I wouldn't doubt it. I'm wondering if that's where the significant savings come in---I guess if they're shooting in NJ, they don't have to use union workers? I believe that blind item even mentioned non-union directors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dragonflies Posted January 8, 2008 Members Share Posted January 8, 2008 I also HATE when Paul Leyden, as much as I like him, makes these short term returns. Either sign long term or just don't come back LMAO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members stenbeck212 Posted January 8, 2008 Members Share Posted January 8, 2008 You're supposed to use union workers no matter what. Location isn't a factor. All P&G will gain from alternative staffing is a bad reputation, once solidarity becomes an issue as other strikes become possible this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.