Central Park West Discussion Thread

[Huntress]

This. 90210 got it right by having one "juicy" storyline per episode while the B-plots were more or less light-hearted. Initially, the focus was on Brandon and Brenda, while the other characters were slowly woven into their lives, dealing with their own personal drama. Most other soaps of the 90s and early 2000s tried to be "Melrose Place Season 4" from the get-go and failed miserably. I mean, why should we care if characters get murdered, attacked, blackmailed or cheat on each other if we've just known them for a second?
I think that "Desperate Housewives" was the first primetime soap in a long time to get viewers invested in their characters while slowly building up a mystery in the background. And of course "Desperate Housewives" had a feeling of community, which a lot of the failed soaps didn't have.

[SFK]

I’m on episode 8, season 1. Perhaps the wrong network, but I’m thoroughly enjoying this watch. It deserved to survive. Back in the ‘90s, I got on board for the special summer series of eight episodes which comprised season 2, and as much as I enjoyed that throwback Dynasty clone, I’m seeing how the first season is superior in depth.

[dc11786]

I didn't watch "Central Park West" during its original run, but I was very excited to discover in either late 1999 or early 2000 that CPW was being rerun on a now defunct local cable outlet called Metro. When I first found the show, the episodes were somewhere towards the middle (7-9) and the show soon suddenly shifted to the revamp. So messy. I've caught most of the show over the years, but I am not sure I ever did a proper watch until now. 

The show is just visually stunning. The look of the show is spectacular. The shots of New York are gorgeous and the whole packaging (the opening, the look of the title card) is very slick. The music is very evocative (for that era). I think the start is incredibly strong. 

Having never properly watched, I didn't understand why people felt that the show needed to slow down. It's face gave the show a telenovela feel that I appreciated, but, as I settled into episode 5, the last episode I've seen, I'm starting to get it. 

The Mark/Stephanie/Carrie story is great. Stephanie is a fish out of water in the New York publishing world. Nothing makes that more clear than Linda's response to Stephanie's query about whether or not Allen Rush always slept with his editors. Mariel Hemmingway isn't bad as Stephanie, but given the amount of money she was more than likely being paid, I could see why she was going to be downgraded. Stephanie is a fun character, but the show didn't need a name to carry that character. Stephanie's internal struggle over how to handle everything is great. 

The machinations of Carrie Fairchild are the true highlight of the show. Carrie learning about Mark's work and luring him onto the plane during Stephanie's arrival party (complete with drag queens, something I have overlooked repeatedly in my original viewings) with the stunning trip over New York City with the U2 song blaring is just wonderful. The Stephanie and Carrie animosity just plays well so that every natural beat (Stephanie cutting Carrie's column) leads to a very real consequence (Carrie having more time to work on Mark's play). Carrie playing her mind games with Mark is wonderful. Tom Verica plays Mark's naivete/learned helplessness well. The allure for Mark is very clear; not only is Carrie attractive, she is available when Stephanie isn't. Every move Stephanie is making is only pushing Carrie closer and closer to her goal. 

By episode 5, the goal seems more complicated. Stephanie has arranged for Ian Walker to offer Mark a $10,000 option for his play, which, in effect, is meant to end Mark and Carrie's working partnership. When Mark agrees to meet Carrie at the hotel bar only for her to shift it to a suite, it is increasingly clear that Carrie's motives have changed. At some point, it seems like we are suppose to believe that Carrie has actually started to develop feelings for him. I could see how Carrie would be drawn to a fellow outsider like Mark. Or maybe Carrie was just excited to make her mark (no pun intended) on the world. In the Fairchild/Rush clan, Carrie has been in the shadows of her brother Peter all her life. Producing Mark's play is a chance not only to screw over Stephanie, but also to make a name for herself. Mark, and truly Stephanie, are taking that away from her. Madchen Amick is dynamite playing Carrie's hurt when Mark casually ends their relationship. 

Something I had notice, but never really thought about, was that Carrie really doesn't have any romantic interest in anyone other than Mark. She slept with that rando in the pilot and very coolly told him she wasn't even sure she wanted to go out with him again when he sought out an invite to the Fairchild lung cancer gala. 

The dynamics in the Fairchild/Rush family are dynamic, but underutilized. Carrie and Peter's relationship is probably the strongest and best played so far. Peter is the golden boy balancing his nonchalant honesty with a true sense of entitlement. Carrie showing up at the lung cancer gala smoking with Linda laying into her for her callowness is a great moment. The pain Carrie shows privately with Peter is also very real. I forgot how complicated, or maybe noticed, her character is. 

Carrie and Allen's relationship is delightfully twisted. Neither has any use for the other one. Carrie certainly doesn't want a father figure, and Allen would rather never have to see Carrie again. Hiring Stephanie to run Carrie out of the office (and possibly out of New York?) is an interesting move. The other Fairchild/Rush event was a brilliant moment where Carrie invites everyone to lunch (tricking Peter) so that she can solicit money for Mark's play. It's a great time. I wish there were more like this, but I don't remember many from my previous viewings. 

Peter is a dope. I appreciate that they try to make him earnest and Barrowman is a capable actor. For me, the issue is Melissa Errico, who overplays everything. If anything, Errico's character was the one who needed to be written out sooner rather than later. I like the idea of Alex Bartoli and the plotting back and forth between Alex and Peter is great. It's just Errico goes too big on so many of the moments. In terms of plotting, I can see where they were going... Alex and Peter would get together while Nikki and Allen's relationship would fall apart leading Nikki and Peter to grow closer. In response, Allen would allign himself personally and professionally by luring Alex into Communique while also pressing Alex to break up Nikki and Peter so that he could have Nikki for himself. I'm just not sure Errico made that work. I am now starting to suspect that Kylie Travis' character may not have been brought on so much because of Hemmingway's stiffness but rather because of Errico's broadness. 

The Nikki/Allen plot also would have benefited from some slowing down. Nikki using Allen as a sugar daddy to fund her art gallery is great. Also, its pretty much established in the pilot that Nikki and Peter use to be a thing ("you said we were going to stay friends"). Nikki and Peter would have been fun. I wish that had been pursued with more energy. Nikki as Allen's mistress is great, but part of the issue is I don't think the fallout is there. Does Carrie react to the revelation that her best friend is sleeping with her stepfather? 

Lauren Hutton is more lively than I've seen her in many other works. I think she comes to life as Linda, who is such an underdeveloped character. While researching, I came across an article where Hutton stated she had a short term contract with CPW (probably the same one Hemmingway had) and that she was really only doing this because she had a syndicated talk show she was launching that fall. In these early episodes, it shows. Linda is a non-entity though there are some natural places to bring her in. I would have been interested in her figuring out the plot with Mark and Carrie and would have loved it if because Linda suspected Allen and Stephanie were romantically linked that Linda did a bit of manipulating in whatever way she felt best. 

Ron Liebman's Allen Rush is a great antagonist. The relationship with Nikki gives him another side which I appreciate. My favorite Allen scene though is when Peter arranges a lunch with him (everyone seems to "need a meeting with Allen Rush immediately") and Allen assumes that Peter isn't looking to curry favor only to discover Peter wants Allen to get Alex rehired at the Globe. Is Allen really the wicked stepfather or have his stepkids put him in the role? Linda and Allen's relationship is also underplayed and it would have been interesting to see that fall apart especially as a hint of things to come between Mark and Stephanie if Carrie is to succeed. 

I also think that Allen would have ended up with Rachel Dennis if only temporarily. I think Rachel would have been the next editor that Allen slept with and I almost wish that it had been Rachel married to Allen when the show went off the air and Allen was left for dead. Rachel as the sole inheritor of the rush empire would have been great.

Kylie Travis is a great addition. She fills several holes. She increases the interoffice dynamics between Carrie and Stephanie while also providing a real threat to Stephanie at Communique. Carrie hated Stephanie, but she wasn't going to be able to go toe to toe with her at the office. Rachel swoops in with a devious plot to cast out Stephanie and assume the reigns of Communique for herself. Travis just makes Rachel such a fun manipulator. 

I don't know what to say about Justin Lazard's Gil. He is just there. The story with Kim Raver comes to an abrupt conclusion, but I am not really sure if there was much more to play with Deanna. I think the set up for Gil is interesting as Nikki declares that Gil is a toxic bachelor. It would have been better to see that play out. Maybe if Alex targeted Gil to get close to Peter, but got close to Gil and then was super hurt by Gil's behavior the Deanna Landers plot would have been more effective. There are also moments where I can't help but wonder if they were going to play with Gil's sexuality. I think it would have been more interesting if Gil's desire to be Peter Fairchild was based in a sexual desire to be with Peter. They never would have gone there in 1995.

I'll probably make it through the next five or so episodes by the end of the week. 

 

[te.]

I kind of wonder if Deanna was meant to last longer, but they didn't feel Raver or the character worked - I know on Melrose Place / Beverly Hills 90210 they talked about how they used to sign recurring characters for three episodes at a time, extending their contract as they went along if they felt they worked. But I agree that there probably wasn't much more to play and was probably too disconnected from the other cast; introducing Kylie Travis's Rachel in the next episode was the right move as she was fully integrated in the mix. 

[j swift]

This thread inspired me to re-read the excellently summarized wiki.

I was instantly struck by the idea that the central conflict doesn't makes sense.  Rachel and Carrie hate Stephanie for absolutely no reason.  There's a rumor that Stephanie was having an affair with Carrie's stepfather to get her position at the magazine, but Carrie doesn't like her step-father and her job was never in jeopardy.  Carrie never mentions that she wanted to be editor-in-chief, and she seems like more of a creative-type than a managerial-type.  Initially, Stephanie respects Rachel's expertise, as she knows little about fashion and is supportive of her skills.  However, Carrie and Rachel are vicious toward Stephanie's mere existence in New York.

Beyond the fact that in hindsight print magazines seem so "90s New York", there's also very little to establish that this publication, (a) whose focus changes as needed by the weekly plot, (b) with subscription number we're constantly reminded are dropping, and (c) a budget that would be through the roof given that in the Fashion Sucks episode they seem to be able to scrap several articles and re-edit the whole issue over night, would be such a source of financial intrigue between powerful media moguls.

Also, if Peter is famous enough to have paparazzi follow him on a date, would the DA's office really be constantly threatening to fire him?  He's clearly supposed to be JFK Jr, who famously was able to keep his job as a Manhattan ADA, despite failing the state bar multiple times.  I think it is ridiculous to set up Carrie and Peter as nepo-babies and have their conflicts based on their professional lives, despite the image that they live glamorous lives and have multiple other options if they fail.

Edited November 20, 2022 by j swift

[te.]

Allen pretty much hired Stephanie because he was unhappy with what was happening at the magazine - especially with his darling step-daughter's contribution (a column with a huge expense account and a large office); he pretty much admits to both Stephanie and Carrie that if she has to cut costs so that Carrie eventually quits her job because she's not getting the same benefits - oh well! He can't out-right fire her himself, presumably because of Linda and it would be a bad look publically. 

Rachel was pretty much instantly established as a social climber with a past that made her flee the over the Atlantic. She was never going to be satisfied with just being the fashion girl.

[j swift]

@te. While I would concede to your point about Carrie's column, what bothered me is that (a) there's no real conflict that Carrie wouldn't be able to write her column somewhere else, (including the tabloid that employed Alex), and therefore (b) Carrie's vitriolic need to destroy Stephanie's marriage makes her seem as nuts as Mark turns out to be.  So, while the conflict is setup by the plot, there is no investment in it for me because there are no existing stakes. 

Even when Stephanie fails, she just returns to her old life with another professional deal, so all that happened to her was that she got a fabulous Tom Ford for Gucci wardrobe and she dropped her cheating no-talent husband.

[te.]

Except Carrie's "job" was basically a sham - it was always just a way for her to get money from Allen in an indirect way and by all accounts her column wasn't good or driving readers; that's why when Stephanie finally cuts her column she stays. She couldn't get another job where all she did was ramble about her nights out and get paid for it.

She knew that Stephanie was basically hired to try and get her out of the magazine and cushy lifestyle; she didn't want to get another job where she had to, you know, work.

[dc11786]

@te. is right. Carrie Fairchild is not only the highest paid columnist at "Communique" by a wide margin, but she has a ridiculous expense account. Stephanie was known for being a by-the-numbers editor who was able to rearrange the budget to get the most out of the resources. Stephanie is unaware that she is coming into a family squabble. In the pilot, Allen Rush makes Stephanie an ultimatum: Carrie loses her job or Stephanie loses hers. 

Regarding Carrie's column, it is basically an excuse for her to go to the Zinc Bar ("the place run by drag queens" as Gil informs us) and write off her drinking as a business expense. Carrie isn't a writer. Allen just refuse to pay her to do nothing. Carrie could go work at the Globe with Alex, but there is no way she could maintain the lifestyle she was accustomed to. Though, something I hadn't considered, that @j swiftmade me consider, is that Carrie's position as Senator Fairchild's daughter should get her some sort of status that would make her marketable even if she wasn't very good as a writer. It might have been interesting to see Carrie have to actually work at a real magazine (maybe run by Adam Brock) where she was forced to acknowledge her inadequacies. 

Carrie and Peter both received trust funds from their late father, the Senator, but Carrie admits that she blew through hers years ago while Peter has managed his better. Allen has been funding her lifestyle through the job, but Carrie really only cares about her job at Communique because it is how she keeps her allowance. 

On the other hand, Rachel Dennis arrives in New York and immediately is jockeying for Stephanie's job. Rachel needs money. She knows Carrie from boarding school where she was on scholarship. Carrie informs Stephanie bluntly that Rachel screwed over her predecessor in her previous jobs to get ahead. Rachel's purpose for going after Stephanie is to be the next editor at Communique. The more I watch, I think Rachel would have been the next Mrs. Allen Rush as Allen had a history of sleeping with his editors. 

The office politics stuff is probably what I remember missing most when the show transitions from "Central Park West" to "CPW." 

 

[Soaplovers]

Since the publication was the main backdrop of the show, it made sense that Carrie had to be tied to that locale instead of being branched out into more organic ways.

In fact, I think a better story would have been to have Carrie be more of an anti fashion girl that is constantly writing columns lambasting the fashion industry.  She could have actually been a decent writer and that could have been how she had an organic way to get Mark's attention since she would have seen his talent vs Stephanie.

I think the Alex character had a lot of potential.. but perhaps had she been played by a different actress.. that potential could have been tapped.  Also, I did like Peter/Nikki's chemistry and could have been used more effectively in the later episodes instead of the lap dancer.

[j swift]

Yeah, but, again where are the stakes?  Carrie was always going to fall on her feet, either by writing, producing, or marriage.  There's no conflict there.

If we take the example of Dynasty, Alexis was always going to be rich, but her ambition ruined her family and romantic relationships.  Dallas's JR and FC's Angela were constantly conflicted about loosing their father's legacy business while maintaining control of their family.  Knots was about sustaining the community. 

CPW lacked those kind of stakes because the conflict over the magazine seemed trivial.  Communique never seemed like the central asset in either Adam or Allen's portfolio, Stephanie never bought into the central theme of the magazine.  Peter could've left the DA's office for a megafirm with one phone call.  Carrie was untalented, and Rachel could only style miniskirts.  So, if it ceased publication, all of them would be fine.

Sidelining the family by making Lauren Hutton and Ron Liebman supporting characters, not establishing a long term core conflict, and having no central set for all of the characters to interact took away too many of the things that make a show a soap; for me.  But, the costumes were great, until Raquel Welsh was cast.

Edited November 21, 2022 by j swift

[victoria foxton]

 

[te.]

The entire run of Central Park West is available on YT at the moment, but I guess if you only want to see Raquel's scenes...

[victoria foxton]

It's a full episode cut into pieces. I saw it and decided to share it. Being fully aware that the entire run is on YouTube. And it isn't clips of Raquel Welch scenes. #SHADY #UNPLEASANT

Please register in order to view this content

Edited April 1, 2023 by victoria foxton