OMG

I am saying not a damn thing.

Nelson confirmed on The Envelope that the other West Coast soap undergoing the same scandal is Y&R. Josh Griffith has been rewriting Maria's stuff for months with the help of non-union members.

And ::GASP::, Nelson said he owned Barbara Bloom an apology, because he too thinks Griffith should be fired for this.

As for getting actors to collaborate and rejig stuff so that it is more in the spirit of the character and the show -- I admit it does blur the lines horribly. But I am not 100% against it. Especially if, say, Diane & Alexis are the end result.

Absolutely! Of course the problem with that within the current framework is that it's tainted by agenda and ego. Look at Y&R. Eric Braeden kicks off about stories, allegedly rewrites dialogue etc to keep the character pure. And we're expected to believe he didn't remember his character had had TWO vasectomies? GMAFB. What septegenarian wouldn't want an affirmation of his virility?

Edited July 28, 200817 yr by JamesF

A behind the scenes of DOOL reailty show would get 3 times the ratings that the show is getting! You can't write this kind of drama , Days writers can't anyway!

Nelson confirmed on The Envelope that the other West Coast soap undergoing the same scandal is Y&R. Josh Griffith has been rewriting Maria's stuff for months with the help of non-union members.

And ::GASP::, Nelson said he owned Barbara Bloom an apology, because he too thinks Griffith should be fired for this.

Hmmmmmm.... I'm guessing everyone's hate for Griffith will be tripled now... Should we blame him for the way Y&R was written from March?

I just want him out already.

If you ever read the gay novel "Daytime Drama," you wouldn't even have half the stories of what really goes on behind-the-scenes at your favorite daytime soap operas!

This is how it's done in UK and Australia - there are no veterans and any such divisions. Those writers can kill anybody off. Look at EastEnders and Pauline Fowler.

You're really off base with that assumption, Sylph, to the point of naivety. There are boundaries that no writer would dare cross, by randomly killing off a long serving cast member; It would only serve to alienate viewers and garner a major backlash. Eastenders would never have killed Pauline, if Wendy Richard hadn't of wanted out - she was dissatisfied with her character's direction, and instead of going to the producer and saying something, she chose to quit. And thank God, she did. By that stage, most people were glad to see the back of her. Her issues were with her character moving on from her late husband (who had been dead for 10 years or more) by marrying her love interest, instead of staying stuck in the past, and continuing to be bloody miserable. This would have been keeping the character, the show, and the viewers in a major depressing rut.

If you take June Brown (Dot), she's known for voicing her opinion when she things her character, or the show in general is heading in the wrong direction (where the hell she was during the blunder years (2004-06) I'll never know). All soaps have their newbie cast, and their veterans - its just the divisions are not always as clear as they are with US soaps. Long serving cast are only ever killed off, if the actor wants to leave. Neighbours though, go one step further, as they allow any actor of any status to dictate their contract status - if an actor wants to leave mid-term, then it'll be granted no matter the disruption.

Anyway, so Sylph, are you against this because it breaches rules, or would you still have the same opinion if it were legal?

There is a difference between ad-libbing/changing lines and basically thinking you're a fecking head writer. Changing/re-writing stories is VERY different than changing lines.

Exactly. People should know their place. I don't mind the odd dialogue rewrite, or scene change, or even voicing concerns about the direction, but to actually take that one step further, and rewrite the entire storyline yourself, to suit your, the actor's vision, is wrong.

Ed Scott, should not have allowed actors to rewrite their own stories, nor should the actors have excepted the duty in the first place. All are responsible for breaching the rules and ethics of the job, but somewhere in between, Ken Corday needs to be take responsibility for letting this happen. As the main man, he should've known what was going on under his roof, instead of taking a back seat - and if he isn't, then it sure seems like it is, because this just shouldn't have been allowed to take place, not least because it's just so amateurish. Then there's Dena, who needs a share of responsibility for just being bloody crap.

(I realize that most of this has already been said, but I've arrived late, so ho hum.)

Edited July 28, 200817 yr by Ben

Hmmmmmm.... I'm guessing everyone's hate for Griffith will be tripled now... Should we blame him for the way Y&R was written from March?

I just want him out already.

Yes, we should blame him for all of that because he with the help of his NON-UNION friends were rewriting all of Maria's material.

I knew Griffith was trouble from the start, and I'm glad Bloom recognizes that. Griffith can't be fired soon enough. He and Scott deserve to never grace another soap studio ever in their lives again after this [!@#$%^&*].

Maria was given too much blame for Josh Griffith's underhandedness and agenda-pushing.

I knew Griffith was trouble. The man worked a long time with Latham on the soap.

I can't wait to hear what will happen with DOOL... will Corday convince Dena to stay?

Maria was given too much blame for Josh Griffith's underhandedness and agenda-pushing.

Apologize to Maria! You were the leader of Maria-hatred.

Edited July 28, 200817 yr by Sylph

You're really off base with that assumption, Sylph, to the point of naivety.

No, I'm not. Calling me naive is a pretty nasty and downright offensive thing to do.

Anyway, so Sylph, are against this because it breaches rules, or would you still have the same opinion if it were legal?

I would have the same opinion if it were legal. It should just be forbidden - you don't get to re-write someone just because you don't like their stuff. And it's not his call to make.

Edited July 28, 200817 yr by Sylph

Apologize to Maria! You were the leader of Maria-hatred.

No, she definitely had some blame for how disgustingly slow March to June was and I refuse to apologize for it.

But Josh Griffith definitely was/is the bigger problem.

No, she definitely had some blame for how disgustingly slow March to June was and I refuse to apologize for it.

But Josh Griffith definitely was/is the bigger problem.

And you correctly sensed it.

If absolutely true, then this is an absolute disgrace.

And to make it worse, they sat back and let the Head Writers take the flack and backlash. That's unacceptable. I suspect this is more of an issue with Y&R (as Higley's shortcomings are proven).

I'm not a bandwagon jumper (or so flimsy I blow with the wind) but such destructive influences cannot be good for a show. I almost feel silly for shaking my head whenever Y&RWorldTurner stated (with seemingly irrational hate) that Griffith had to go. Maybe he is 'at one' with Jana's Ouiji Board, and got vibes about Griffith.

As for Ed Scott, his ability as an EP is very good, but maybe this is part of the reason he 'departed' Y&R the first time....

Also, does anyone think Josh Griffth is the reason none of the old Y&R writers were ever brought back? I mean if this has come to light, is it beyond the realms of possibility that Griffith's 'agenda-pushing' meant leaving the past in the past?

Edited July 28, 200817 yr by UK LAW

I remember Sylph constantly trying to take the time before Maria's stuff hits the air, believing that she could do good. Who could have known that Griffith was doing most of the work? Looking back, it kind of makes sense. Being an ex-writer, it's no wonder he wanted to write for the show he was executive-producing. Maybe he wanted to gain control over the show like Latham had? Whatever it is, he needs to go.