Jump to content

Central Park West Discussion Thread


Sylph

Recommended Posts

  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
  • Replies 73
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • Members

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. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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 by j swift
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

@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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

@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." 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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 by j swift
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Admittedly, I was a latecomer to ATWT (first becoming a regular viewer in 2000). But I really liked KMH's Emily. I thought she was a very specific kind of neurotic professional character, and I loved her prickly relationship with MM's Susan. I will say I don't think the show did her any favors after Hal died, stranding her in storylines with several of the show's dullest characters: nu-Paul, nu-Meg, and nu-Dusty. I actually quite liked one of her last major storylines, when she discovered she had a grown-up biological son with Larry named Hunter. But then Hunter just sort of disappeared, and the story fizzled out, which was pretty typical of the late Goutman years. 
    • I know the fashions have gotten mixed reviews but I actually like what the new costume designer is putting the cast in. It feels more modern and the more tacky pieces I feel make sense for rich people. They're buying for the brand and the price and we often see celebs in things like this. Especially for a character like Nikki, I feel the more over the top (and tacky), the more realistic it is.
    • Well, her staff pointing out the movie connection never seemed to stop Long from using those plots.  She was right about Vanessa--she needed a man who loved her, which she'd never really had up to then. But as others have pointed out, Long borrowed heavily from Taming of the Shrew to get it done. (which while I kinda disputed that, I get more now, having watched Kiss Me Kate a few times since.)
    • "Holly had her share of the blame..." NO, she did NOT. WOW. That's what you get for trying to be fair and giving these people the benefit of the doubt! The Rita rape episodes do not seem to be available. It sounds like Calhoun thought it was not dramatized, but it was. I saw it when it aired. Yes, it's close to 50 years ago, and memories aren't 100% reliable. I also know that Zaslow reportedly complained that it was written too much like a seduction and that's why the Dobsons portrayed Holly's rape differently. Maybe it started like a seduction and she rejected him and that's when it turned violent. I don't remember that part, if it exists. What I do remember is that Roger threw Rita so violently to the floor that she hit her head. They showed him coming at her from her point of view and he looked all fuzzy. It was an act of violence, not a seduction. Rita kept it a secret until it looked like Roger might be acquited, and then finally admitted it. She didn't make it up, it definitely was not a ploy.
    • I was actually referencing another scene between Roger and Alex, which I think is right after they marry.  But yeah---I'm not really impressed with Calhoun's reasoning. Or the "both recall it wasn't unprovoked" line. Wasn't Holly trying to leave him when he raped her? Oy vey.
    • I know we have discussed the location of Bay City in the Another World thread and the fact that originally Irna conceived of it as being the real Bay City MI, and it was later writers that treated it as a fictional Bay City [probably IL]. This article seems to suggest that that idea was well-established by 1981. I wonder when it started.
    • Desert Sun, 22 December 1983 Guiding Light’ writer looks for fresh ideas By TOM JORY Associated Press Writer NEW YORK (AP) - “Guiding Light” has been a daytime companion for millions since 1937, starting on radio and switching to TV after 15 years. Can anything new, really new, ever happen to the Bauers or the Reardons or any of the other folks in Springfield? “I get really upset,” says Pamela Long Hammer, principal writer for the CBS soap opera since March, “because I’ll come up with this neat scenario and someone will say, ‘That’s like “Strangers on a Train.’” “I think, ‘They keep stealing my material.’ “The way I figure it,” she says, “there are only so many stories in the world. It’s the characters who keep the show new and exciting. All of our stories come from them: I don’t come up with a plot, and then work a character into it.” Continuity is important. Someone out there surely knows all that’s happened, to everyone on the show, in 46 years. How about Miss Long Hammer? "Nope. I care about what our core families have been doing,” she says. “I’m always interested in what happened to Bert Bauer (played since 1950 by Charita Bauer) 20 years ago, but as far as going back and reading scripts, no. “Others on the show keep track,” she says. “I’ll suggest something, and be told, ‘You don’t remember, but five years ago, they had this terrible fight. They would never speak to one another now.”’ Miss Long Hammer, a former Miss Alabama who came to New York as an aspiring actress in 1980, began writing for daytime television while playing Ashley on NBC’s “Texas.” She eventually wrote herself out of the story. Her staff for “Guiding Light” includes nine writers, among them her husband, Charles Jay Hammer, whom she met while both worked on “Texas.” NBC dropped “Texas” after two seasons, and episodes from the serial currently are being rerun on the Turner Broadcasting System’s cable-TV SuperStation, WTBS. Gail Kobe, who was executive producer of “Texas,” now has the same job on “Guiding Light.” And Beverlee McKinsey, who played Iris Carrington in “Another World” on NBC, and later in "Texas,” will join the Light” cast of the CBS soap in February. Miss Long Hammer is reponsible for the long-term story, which can mean looking ahead 18 months or more. Staff writers deal with specifics, including the scripts for individual episodes. She says she draws on “imagination and instinct” for the “Guiding Light” story. Often, that involves inventing new characters. “‘I look at Vanessa (Maeve Kinkead), one of our leading ladies,” Miss Long Hammer says. "What could make the audience care more about her? “Then I think, ‘Why can’t she find a man she can love, who will also love her?’ Voila, here comes Billy Lewis (Jordan Clarke). “Another example,” she says, “is Alan Spaulding (Christopher Bernau). All of a sudden, he’s got a sister no one ever knew about. “They come complete,” says Miss Long Hammer of the serial’s characters, including the new ones. “We know who they are and where they came from long before the viewer gets all that information. That’s one of the most interesting things about daytime, the complexities of the characters.” The writers make a big effort to keep the show contemporary, and four of the leading players are in their late teens or early 20s Judi Evans, who plays Beth Raines, Kristi Tesreau (Mindy Lewis), Grant Aleksander (Philip Spaulding) and Michael O’Leary (Rick Bauer). “Guiding Light,” longevity notwithstanding, is a moderate success by that ultimate yardstick of the industry; ratings. The show is behind only “General Hospital,” “All My Children” and “One Life to Live,” all on ABC, and CBS’ “The Young and the Restless,” among soaps. And Miss Long Hammer says she’s convinced writing is the key to even greater achievement. “When I say I love the characters, it’s not a light thing,” she says. “I think what the audience senses is an enthusiasm and an energy among the people who do the show.”
    • I initially read this as Marilyn Manson and did a double take.  Thanks for the screen grabs. The outfits are horrible. Somehow Victoria's Miss Piggy dress is the best. Ashley looks like a French madam bent on revenge, and Abby looks like she hot glued lace scraps to her garbage bag.
    • LOL...I do have the vaguest of memories of Katherine driving her and Phillip Sr to his death. But I don't recall Katherine being as over-the-top as Reva. Surprisingly, I don't even think Brenda Dickinson's Jill was---although lord knows Brenda probably is a real-life Reva. I have read the recaps of earlier Roger, and it surprised me that he doesn't love Holly. He had an affair with Hillary (SHOCK, I tell you, SHOCK when I read that one) while married to her.  Thanks to the cast turnover, other than Jerry and Maureen Garrett, there wasn't anyone else he had worked with, that I can recall. It would've been interesting if Mart Hulswit had still been in the role of Ed, how much more they might've let Ed/Roger clash. I really do have a soft spot in my heart for Krista's Mindy.
    • San Bernardino Sun, 21 July 1981 Soap gets a new lease on life By TOM JORY Associated Press NEW YORK (AP) NBC's Texas premiered Aug. 4, 1980, in the toughest time slot in daytime TV opposite top rated General Hospital on ABC and CBS' enduring -Guiding Light As recently as the first of this year, " Texas appeared doomed, a victim of barely measurable ratings. All that has changed, and the show approaches its first anniversary with a new executive producer, a new team of writers, a new look and a new slant on life. Even the ratings have improved a bit, from 14 percent to l5 percent of the audience in the time period in November and December to 15 percent to 16 percent today. "We have Houston like Ryan's Hope has New York City," says Gail Kobe who took over Texas as executive supervising producer in March,"and we feel a real tie with that city. We've got to reflect in the show what's happening in that real town, and I think we're doing that." It was a significant step, taking Texas- its roots in the fictional Bay City of NBC's Another World -to a real-life setting. "I don't think it's got to be  the kind of place that people can't can't find on the map," says Ms. Kobe "I think the audience in daytime is more prepared for reality today." It meant giving the show a recognizable Houston backdrop, a more contemporary sound -country and western performers like Ray Price will appear periodically and a lighting system that would clearly represent the hot, bright Texas sunlight. . Texas faced difficult odds from the start, the competition and the inevitable comparison with CBS' prime-time superhit, Dallas, notwithstanding. There was the problem of introducing a multiplicity of characters, many of them imports from Another World, as well as a story line, in an hour-long format. "It was the first show to start at an hour," says Kobe, a former actress who had been supervising producer for Procter & Gamble Productions, which owns Texas and five other daytime shows. "It's very difficult to fill that much time with a large cast, and not leave the viewer confused. "With a daily show, you have to let the audience know who to root for," she says. ''And if you're trying to begin a story, too, no one's going to keep track." The changes began even before Kobe took the show from Paul Rauch, who had faced the seemingly impossible task of producing both Texas and Another World simultaneously. Beverlee McKinsey, whose generally unpleasant character, Iris, had come to Texas from Another World as a young ingenue, was given back her mean streak.  "She had become a sweet woman,"Kobe says, "and the audience was used to seeing her do terrible things. It just didn't work." In addition, she says, time was spent establishing the identities of the characters. Joyce and Bill Corrington, who had created the show with Rauch, were replaced as head writers in February by Dorothy Purser and Samuel Ratcliffe.  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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