Jump to content
Key Links: Announcements | Support Desk

Santa Barbara Discussion Thread


dm.

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, amybrickwallace said:

their HUGE mistake was firing Carrington Garland

I feel like this has been adjudicated thousands of times within this thread, but here's my take.

 

Carrington is my favorite Kelly, and hindsight is 20/20, but if you think about that time, Eileen Davidson was on the number one soap opera, in one of the most popular couplings, so it stands to reason that if they wanted to replace Marcy, two months after she left, and pair Kelly with Cruz, then hiring Eileen makes sense.  Although, admittedly, Terry Lester's hiring did not improve ratings, and production incompetence regarding his contract renewal lead to his departure, but that was under a different production team.

 

Furthermore, I was recently watching Cruz's final scene when he leaves Kelly begging on the tarmac.  It was bad mostly because there wasn't enough history between Cruz and Kelly to justify her reaction.  After Joe, Jeffrey, and Robert, it made no sense that Kelly would loose her s&*t over Cruz leaving town.  However, it wouldn't have been made any better when played by another actress if the writing and production were some of the primary faults of that plot.

Edited by j swift
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
57 minutes ago, j swift said:

I feel like this has been adjudicated thousands of times within this thread, but here's my take.

 

Carrington is my favorite Kelly, and hindsight is 20/20, but if you think about that time, Eileen Davidson was on the number one soap opera, in one of the most popular couplings, so it stands to reason that if they wanted to replace Marcy, two months after she left, and pair Kelly with Cruz, then hiring Eileen makes sense.  Although, admittedly, Terry Lester's hiring did not improve ratings, and production incompetence regarding his contract renewal lead to his departure, but that was under a different production team.

 

Furthermore, I was recently watching Cruz's final scene when he leaves Kelly begging on the tarmac.  It was bad mostly because there wasn't enough history between Cruz and Kelly to justify her reaction.  After Joe, Jeffrey, and Robert, it made no sense that Kelly would loose her s&*t over Cruz leaving town.  However, it wouldn't have been made any better when played by another actress if the writing and production were some of the primary faults of that plot.

I wonder if Eileen Davidson may have been more successful if she had been brought on as an entirely new character or someone besides Kelly. I just never bought Kelly making the moves on Cruz because of Eden.

On 5/31/2021 at 6:56 PM, j swift said:

 

 

I also wonder what Pamela and Augusta's relationship was like as neighborly newlyweds?  I don't think Pamela and Augusta ever shared scenes, and I don't think Augusta was in SB when Pamela returned.

I'm rewatching the first 100 episodes for the first time since they aired. A lot is rough or not quite working, but Augusta is a stand out. She's a very complex character from the get-go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
4 hours ago, NothinButAttitude said:

Do you all think that because the show never established other core families/characters outside the Capwells (minus Gina and Lionel) that it was hard for them to find footing once Marcy and A. Martinez left the show? 

 

Yes...and no. Another family could have helped shoulder the hole left, but - even if it was another Capwell - I think the show could have weathered it with less pain had the Dobsons kept Carrington Garland and convinced Roscoe Born to stay on. While CG's Kelly/Quinn wasn't my thing [more of a Mason/Julia gal, and they also helped fill the void being put more in front, IMO! I remember a TV Guide article saying as much, too!], but Kelly/Quinn clearly was popular, and I think it could have ended up as a focal-point pairing to move past C/E.

 

Especially since it was already shown that the audience had formed an attachment when Eden and Kelly were at odds over Robert/Quinn's affections. The mere fact that the audience was more than willing to watch Robert/Quinn with a woman who was not Eden should have given TPTB a clue that they had someone great in CG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, pdm1974 said:

I wonder if Eileen Davidson may have been more successful if she had been brought on as an entirely new character or someone besides Kelly. I just never bought Kelly making the moves on Cruz because of Eden.

I was thinking about your question and, if anything, Eileen was typecast at Kelly.  Both Y&R Ashley Abbott and SB Kelly Capwell gave off major Jan Brady, middle daughter, vibes, so I think it made sense.

 

Again, I think it was the plotline.  Cruz could have gone on for a year or two without a love interest and still have been a viable character as a crime solving moral compass.  Having him escape the law, (without his younger kids), in order to save his previously unknown daughter was a major character assassination.  If you think about other soap super couples splits, like those on DAYS or GH, both Bo and Felicia were allowed to be in other successful relationships, because they were paired with new characters as part of a captivating mystery storyline.  Cruz and his middle class high school sweetheart, that wasn't Victoria Lane (who could have been a good alternative part for Eileen to play), did not have the same appeal.

 

Meanwhile, I liked Kelly and Connor as a couple.  I enjoyed Eileen's familial chemistry with CC and Sophia.  And I think she had potential to play a more confident Kelly who had grown from her earlier relationships with men, rather than being defined as Eden's little sister.  Eileen has a gravitas that made her Kelly seem slightly smarter and more worldly than Carrington's portrayal.  As a result, Kelly seemed to have matured beyond CC's princess that we met in 1984.

Edited by j swift
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Posted (edited)

Interestingly, regarding ED, Y&R's Ashley is a very popular interesting beloved character who actually has never had a really popular pairing. Her most memorable partner was Victor - and most of the audience wanted him with Nikki as the endgame - and her longtime relationship with Brad was never considered a hot romance. She's had plenty of men: how many do "we" really remember (well, besides the real obsessive fans like us)?
Similarly while ED had some chemistry with DH on Days, Kristen and John was never the endgame. 
So ED is a powerhouse actress but, once she was in the role, wisely or not, based on name recognition or not, the right way to use her was to use her as a character actress NOT as a romantic lead. Because fairly or not, as great an actress as she is and as wonderful a career as she's had, she has never really exhibited great chemistry with anyone on-screen and that's not what she was known for.
As j swift wisely said, casting ED should have been intended as a way to mature Kelly into different storylines. If they were going to keep playing her roughly the way she had been all along, CG had done a great job with it and there was no need to change.
Most of the time, when a recast is miscast, it is because it changes the nature of the character (see the Santanas). In this particular case, however, she was miscast because they *didn't* adapt the character.

Edited by FrenchBug82
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
15 hours ago, amybrickwallace said:

They couldn't do anything about MW walking at the end of her contract in 1991, but their HUGE mistake was firing Carrington Garland. She could easily have carried the show's leading lady mantle (along with NLG) the rest of the way.

 

Firing Carrington Garland was a mistake. Completely. And the reason she was given, to me, was B.S.

 

14 hours ago, j swift said:

I feel like this has been adjudicated thousands of times within this thread, but here's my take.

 

Carrington is my favorite Kelly, and hindsight is 20/20, but if you think about that time, Eileen Davidson was on the number one soap opera, in one of the most popular couplings, so it stands to reason that if they wanted to replace Marcy, two months after she left, and pair Kelly with Cruz, then hiring Eileen makes sense.  Although, admittedly, Terry Lester's hiring did not improve ratings, and production incompetence regarding his contract renewal lead to his departure, but that was under a different production team.

 

Furthermore, I was recently watching Cruz's final scene when he leaves Kelly begging on the tarmac.  It was bad mostly because there wasn't enough history between Cruz and Kelly to justify her reaction.  After Joe, Jeffrey, and Robert, it made no sense that Kelly would loose her s&*t over Cruz leaving town.  However, it wouldn't have been made any better when played by another actress if the writing and production were some of the primary faults of that plot.

 

Garland, to me, was the essential Kelly Capwell and if Santa Barbara were ever rebooted, I'd want her to return to the role.

 

13 hours ago, pdm1974 said:

I wonder if Eileen Davidson may have been more successful if she had been brought on as an entirely new character or someone besides Kelly. I just never bought Kelly making the moves on Cruz because of Eden.

I'm rewatching the first 100 episodes for the first time since they aired. A lot is rough or not quite working, but Augusta is a stand out. She's a very complex character from the get-go.

 

I do think, had Eileen Davidson been cast in a different role she would have been more successful. I've only looked at clips of Davidson's time as Kelly, and it is a bit off... but I don't blame Davidson as an actor. The writing just flipped for the role of Kelly... at least from my point of view.

 

13 hours ago, NothinButAttitude said:

Do you all think that because the show never established other core families/characters outside the Capwells (minus Gina and Lionel) that it was hard for them to find footing once Marcy and A. Martinez left the show? 

 

I think, between all of the executive and writing regimes, each wanted a different family opposite the Capwells, and they never stuck. The Lockridge family should have continued to be the adversary family (a-la the Abbott-Newman comparison on The Young and the Restless), and they failed to keep that connection. Hell, even a B-level family in the Andrade family seemed to come and go faster than the speed of light. By the end of its run, I think adding an influx of recasts and new characters it just was too late to re-structure Santa Barbara for its success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
6 minutes ago, Forever8 said:

I'm curious if hypothetically you became the new EP/Head Writer of Santa Barbara if the show continued through 1993. How would you restructure the show if you had the chance to? 

I would have centered the show around:

 

Continuing the Capwells with keeping CC and Sophia apart as long as possible, revamp Kelly (bring back Carrington Garland) and possibly have a back from the dead Joe to complicate her life (he had to pretend to die to save her somehow), and give Mason and Julia a new conflict with Pamela coming to live with them fresh out of the hospital...and still a bit crazy.

 

Lockridges: I loved this family. I would have brought back Laken to be a spoiler for Ted/Lily, Augusta to be an obstacle for Lionel/Gina. I loved the character of Cassie and would have found a way to bring her back. BJ would realize that she rushed into marriage with Warren too soon as the two struggle being newlyweds with Anglea setting sights on Warren again. I thought Minx worked well as the eccentric grandmother.

 

A SORASed Brandon would be in a triangle with a rich snobby teen and a soapy sweet Latina who helps Brandon explore that side of his background.

 

And a combined Andrade/Castillo family with Rose marrying Cruz's father....bring back Santana (possibly with CC's baby in tow for the drama), one of the Andrade sisters we hadn't seen yet maybe the one that was the med student now doctor, and Cruz's half-brother Rafe, and through extension Brandon, centering the family.

 

I thinking focusing on these three families would center the show. I would phase out the Walkers and maybe keep BJ. Not sure about the DeAngelis family that was there at the end.

 

I would have also brought back the quirky and Gothic overtones the show had lost at that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I say this as someone that liked Julia Campbell in the role, but if we needed Eileen Davidson on the show as a Capwell, she maybe could have been a recast Courtney Capwell [she who killed her bitchy sister, Madeline for...reasons I totally forgot! A.K.A. Grant Capwell's daughter.]

 

She could have been released from prison [assuming she was there? I forget the details...] and decided to stay with Uncle C.C., etc. And CG could have remained as Kelly. Maybe Courtney could have pursued Warren [BJ would be gone in my world.].

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Forever8 said:

I'm curious if hypothetically you became the new EP/Head Writer of Santa Barbara if the show continued through 1993. How would you restructure the show if you had the chance to? 

Getting rid of the Walkers and DeAngelis . Bring back Brandon as a teen. Have Brandon question his identity. Discover that he has a dark side like his bio father. Put Angela in the frontburner. Bring back some of SB glitz and glamour. While weaving in social issues. Try to reflect the world of 1993. As much you can do for a soap. Really invest in characters. Instead of dropping them at a drop of a hat. Have a nice diverse cast. Where when something affects one character. It will affect everyone else. Most definitely bring back Flame, Quinn, Ric, Cassie and Santana. 

Edited by victoria foxton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
18 hours ago, Forever8 said:

I'm curious if hypothetically you became the new EP/Head Writer of Santa Barbara if the show continued through 1993. How would you restructure the show if you had the chance to? 

 

meryl streep GIF by 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment

 

  • Restore Carrington Garland as Kelly Capwell; bring on Eileen Davidson as nü Angela.
  • Restore Ava Lazar in the role of Santana, who returns to Santa Barbara to once again reconnect with a now-teenage Brandon DeMott Capwell.
  • Ditch the DiAngelis and Walker families in ex-change for the restructuring of the Lockridge family; return Augusta (Louise Sorel), Laken (Julie Ronnie/recast) and Cassandra (recast).
  • Find a way to resurrect the role of Joe Perkins, either under Dane Witherspoon or recast the role with Mark Valley (ex-Jack, DAYS).
  • Put stock in returning some classic sets, ie: La Mesa (under new ownership of Rosa Andrade), the Capwell Hotel (under new ownership of Ted Capwell — with Todd McKee returning to the role), the Orient Express (under the ownership of a returned Cruz Castillo and partnership with Kelly Capwell, and design by Santana), a less drably-renovated the Liar.
  • Return Roberta Bizeau Weiss to the role of Flame Beaufort, working alongside Kirk Cranston (Robert Newman) seeking revenge on those in Santa Barbara who wronged them.
  • Restore either Lane Davies or Terry Lester to the role of Mason Capwell.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think Gordon Thomson was a much better Mason recast (since we had to have one as Lane Davies was done with SB) than Terry Lester was. Terry Lester didn't get the tortured aspect of Mason, IMO, and made him too...slapsticky.

 

Also, if Angela Raymond was to stay, Nina Arvesen was perfect in the role. As was Karen Moncrieff as Cassandra, even if I hated the character as she suffered next to no consequences for helping to split Mason/Julia in the first place - and they never found out.

 

I do agree that the DeAngelis and Walker families could have been axed.

 

Paula Irvine was way too young as Lily considering her checkered past. The first actress playing her bore a strong resemblance to Robin Mattson. I would have brought her [think her name was Lynn Clark?] back or at least recast with a more age-appropriate actress.

 

Also would have liked to see Brick Wallace, a.k.a. the real Channing Capwell, return as he is an important character yet he just did a fade. Don't know who I'd pair him with, though. But the character deserved more than he got.

 

I'd also leave Joe dead. As I said above, my first instinct would be to keep Roscoe Born opposite CG, but if that wasn't in the cards, I'd either bring back Ric for Kelly [as I thought Carrington Garland/Peter Love had a nice vibe] or, barring that, still bring on Charles Grant as Connor McCabe. I bet Connor/CG's Kelly would have been awesome. CG seemed to generate chemistry with every male lead she interacted with. [Just realized it would be a double CG pairing as they both had the same initials! Although I do know Charles Grant previously went as Charles Flohe. No idea why he changed his last name!]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
5 minutes ago, Wendy said:

I think Gordon Thomson was a much better Mason recast (since we had to have one as Lane Davies was done with SB) than Terry Lester was. Terry Lester didn't get the tortured aspect of Mason, IMO, and made him too...slapsticky.

 

Based on the scenes I've seen (as my first-watch of Santa Barbara is still on-going with Davies in the role), Lester was much more Mason than Thomson was.

 

6 minutes ago, Wendy said:

Also, if Angela Raymond was to stay, Nina Arvesen was perfect in the role. As was Karen Moncrieff as Cassandra, even if I hated the character as she suffered next to no consequences for helping to split Mason/Julia in the first place - and they never found out

 

Again, this would be an alternate universe.. and in my universe, Arvesen would return to The Young and the Restless, hah.

 

7 minutes ago, Wendy said:

Paula Irvine was way too young as Lily considering her checkered past. The first actress playing her bore a strong resemblance to Robin Mattson. I would have brought her [think her name was Lynn Clark?] back or at least recast with a more age-appropriate actress.

 

Lynn Clark was perfect as Lily Light... and knowing they recast was heartbreaking. That being said, Paula Irvine, to me, would've worked better with Linda Gibboney's Gina, who I ADORED!

 

8 minutes ago, Wendy said:

Also would have liked to see Brick Wallace, a.k.a. the real Channing Capwell, return as he is an important character yet he just did a fade. Don't know who I'd pair him with, though. But the character deserved more than he got.

 

Knowing what we know now about Richard Eden, the role would have to be recast, in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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