Jump to content

Marlena talks about Carolyn Hinsey. This is a MUST READ.


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 29
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Not surprised buy this at all, I've seen (and experienced first had) "soap journalists" do this for years, and rather rude.

I give Connie props for putting her name with it. I may not agree with what she is saying (the love of Mimi Torchin, who in my experience is no better or worse than Carolyn) but she put her name by it and I know she'll stand her telling of the experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Ah, but the walls are crumbling. The line between fans, production people (certain currently unaffiliated writers), and soap press/bloggers is highly porous.

I wonder, in the long run, if this is a good thing. For example, in this thread, Ms. Delacroix's self-defense will undeniably have a chilling effect on open criticism in this forum. Maybe that is a good thing (i.e., people have to be more mindful of what they write)...or maybe that some how "de-democratizes" this open forum. I don't know...but it is just a new world for all of us here, that we're learning to negotiate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This "jinx" person expressed their opinion -- no matter how tacky it might have been, and Connie stood up for herself. That's kind of an every day thing around these parts -- no? I mean, are we supposed to change all because of someone with a "name" in the industry posts here once in a blue moon?

Just asking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Well, I think it just involves a paradigm shift.

This board is very good (partly due to strong rules), but the internet is replete with fans -- um -- not being so charitable about cast and crew.

This is often done because there is an assumption that the persons being critiqued are not reading.

If Amanda Beall were on SON, would you be so direct about her? Maybe you would...'cause you strike me as a direct type :).

But many would alter their posting behavior...if for no other reason, the charity of trying to spare Ms. Beall's feelings.

I have NO PROBLEM with Ms. Passalacqua (sp?) posting here...I welcome it, and I have read her with pleasure for a long time. When she first started reappearing at that other site (forgot the name now), I instantly sent her a fan letter. I doubt I have missed a column since.

It seems to me, though, that this will alter the way in which Ms. P is talked about.

On another soap board, Nelson Branco posts regularly. And it is my observation that there is much less critical rhetoric about him than I have seen at most soap boards. He has been welcomed as a member of that community, and that correspondingly alters the way in which people talk about him as a member of the industry. That is not good or bad...it just happens.

So, the one difference in what happened here is that Ms. P wasn't such a regular poster here. So, just flying in like that created a sense of a more stealthy lurkdom...which again, alters poster behavior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm really of two minds about this. Part of me does wonder along with Mark what effect (if any) insiders posting under their real names would have. The example about Nelson-at-another-board is a PERFECT example of where people alter what they say based on the regularity of someone posting.

But at the same time, you have to know (if you're in the biz) that once you're publicly known, there are people who won't agree with you, will think the least of you, assume the worst in everything you write, and won't like you in the slightest, for whatever reason. I don't know if there's ANYBODY who's one hundred percent liked on the Internet, ESPECIALLY people involved in soaps, whom some fans really paint into black or white circles (and no, I'm not talking about race here).

So part of me really appreciates those-in-the-know posting, but I definitely think if they do, they need to be prepared that some people are going to say really awful things about them. And they can't take it personally. I mean, if they can deal with editors and network notes, why can't they deal with a measly fan saying they don't like them or don't agree with them?

I'm really torn on this one. I can definitely see both sides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

add me to that train...

Mark, I think you're right--both on the attitude towards "insiders" when someone does post on a board, and to remember what can and will be said about your work. IMO I think the fact that a lot of soap journalists are bigger fans is a hindrance, because it colors what you are saying...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I truly hope that no other posters would couch their opinions simply because the Professor took umbrage to what this Thinking Fan thought. To my mind, there's something very disingenuous about someone who is constantly patting themselves on the back for creating the field of soap criticism to have such a vehement reaction towards getting a little of their own.

I stand behind my opinion that some Hedda Hopper wannabes grinding their axes against some Louella Parson wannabe, who may or may not have stolen their lunch or looked at them crosseyed in the SOW copy room a decade ago, does anything to enhance their reputations. I also feel the "TRUTH" is a mighty small shield to hide behind, considering the puff pieces and network approved innuendo which passed for journalism before, during and, most likely, after the Digest Dames. It's the nature of the beast, and the cynic in me believes that they all have a vested interest in not telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

That said, this squabble isn't much more than a footnote in the history of soaps or journalism and no different than the petty office politics that takes place in thousands of workplaces everyday. It's just that soaps attract fans of drama, and they find it, or invent it, where they can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think this whole issue stands to strip away another layer of the soap genre's escapism. The outings, the lack of "true" journalism is for the lingering soap fans to realize- the people in the industry don't even believe in what they are selling. The lingering soap fans aren't watching for the stories anymore- they are watching to get what they want, watch someone get fired, see who does a bad performance, a good performance, and who isn't getting what they deserve. Who's watching for the stories anymore?

And I loved the drama that took place recently- it was better than anything happening in the soaps. A modern day "Swimming with Sharks".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • To me, that made no difference. The point stands whether Eva wants to be a Dupree or not. Anita was 110% on top of things. Also it's a logical inference that Eva might be interested in having a place in her supposedly real family. Frankly though I wonder if Eva knows how to feel ... yet. She could really be confused.
    • Does Jack ever dress in drag during that early '00s period where he was trying to get Jennifer back...or does he just fake being gay around then?
    • Here you go, by special request! https://www.instagram.com/p/DJlXDnWJImW/ DAYS 9-26-90 Matt Ashford as Jack Deveraux in drag
    • Concluding 1976... Raymond Schafer arrives in Springfield and begins an extensive probe into Malcolm’s death, puzzling Ed, who wonders why most of Schafer’s question sessions keep turning back to Rita’s involvement with Malcolm. Ed assures the man that Rita’s only connection with Malcolm was as his nurse; he is unaware that Schafer knows a great deal more about Rita than he does. Just to protect Rita, Ed has Mike check on Schafer’s credentials, and learns that he’s a  well-respected criminal attorney. The waitress at the restaurant where Malcolm suffered his stroke tells Schafer that the woman who was with him reacted very professionally to the sudden emergency, as if she were a nurse. Realizing that her little sister has fallen hard for Tim, Rita warns him that she’s very vulnerable and innocent, but Tim tells Rita her advice isn’t necessary. But Tim then receives a plum job offer to be chief neurological resident at a prestigious Philadelphia hospital and can’t pass up the opportunity. Evie is crushed by the news and spends the next several days at home crying. Joe Werner, fully recovered, has accepted a post as a medical aide in a destitute village in India and leaves alone, with Sarah to follow him later. Justin asks Sarah to consider a partnership with him in private practice, but she explains that she thrives on the hospital atmosphere. When a call comes from India that Joe has had another massive attack, Sarah leaves on the next available flight and arrives only moments before he dies. The painful news is relayed back to Cedars at once. Sara returns from India a heartbroken woman, but the day-to-day involvement of raising T.J. and of her career seem to be her salvation. Justin shows a surprisingly compassionate and understanding side to Sara, but, ironically, Justin’s ex-wife, Jackie, arrives in Springfield with her diabetic father, who is suffering from a heart attack. In the process of consulting with Justin on her father’s condition, Jackie comes face to face with Sara for the first time since their college days. Evie’s heartbreak at Tim’s departure turns to fury and hatred when she inadvertently discovers a letter which Tim wrote to Rita just after he left. In it he concedes that Rita was right about Evie’s vulnerability where he was concerned but reminds Rita that he badly hurt her in the same way she feared Evie would suffer. Evie is now sure that Rita somehow forced Tim to leave town and is livid at the idea that Tim was Rita’s lover. She insists she’s cutting off her relationship with Rita and will pay her back for any help she’s received in the past. Ben and Hope’s wedding plans are off, as Ben, while still insisting he’s innocent, won’t explain why the robbery evidence points to him. Hope feels his unwillingness to tell her the truth makes marriage to him impossible, but confides to Ann that she is miserable without him. Ben has echoed these sentiments to Mike but won’t confide in him, either as Hope’s father or as an attorney.   Holly is trying very hard to build a life without Ed, but since she sees him virtually every day at work,she’s unable to put him out of her mind. She accepts a date with a member of the hospital administration staff but is unable to avoid making comparisons between Ed and this young man and winds up alone, sadly holding Ed’s picture and recalling how much she loves him. Believing that the hospital board’s conclusions on Grainger’s death have settled the question once and for all, Rita has regained her self-confidence, and her romance with Ed is growing daily. They admit their love for each other, and Ed confides that he intentionally  held back with Rita for fear of making another mistake. Rita then tells Ed she has never married because for her marriage must be forever. Rita’s mother realizes that Rita is truly in love when she confides in her that she doesn’t understand why she’s been so lucky in having him love her and how she wants to be the very best person she can be for him. Ed proposes marriage to Rita and gives her time to think about it before answering. Rita painfully realizes that her past could, if it rose again against her, make a life with Ed a lost dream. But Raymond Shaefer has been quietly but efficiently carrying on his investigation and has learned that Grainger argued with Rita at her apartment. He presents the evidence he’s compiled to District Attorney Eric Van Gelder, who decides the case warrants further investigation. Rita goes to Ed’s office to tell him she loves him but can’t marry him, that she doesn’t deserve him and “can’t do it to him.” As she turns from a confused Ed to leave, she finds the district attorney and a police officer outside Ed’s door, waiting to arrest her. Ed, insisting that a serious mistake has been made, calls Mike to help her as Rita, shocked and humiliated, is taken under arrest through the hallways of the hospital in which she works. Mike manages Rita’s release on bail only after she has had to submit to the degrading booking procedure. Mike sees her alone at her apartment, explaining he can help her only if she tells him the whole truth. Rita equivocates until Mike mentions Texas, indicating to Rita that he knows at least some of the story. Van Gelder has, in fact, let Mike see the bulk of evidence in the case against Rita, to convince him her arrest wasn’t a capricious whim. Rita explains to Mike that Malcolm believed she intentionally vilified him to his father, to do him out of his rightful inheritance, and then wanted his father dead to collect her money. Mike expresses his appreciation of Rita’s honesty, promising to help her. But Rita’s tormented dreams confirm that she hasn’t yet told all the truth, and after Peggy visits, expressing firm support, Rita tells Roger she has to reveal his part in the story. Roger painfully tells Rita about his being Christina’s father to show her that if Ed knew, it would end Rita’s chances with him forever. Rita, who was ready to tell Ed the whole story, now realizes how risky that would be. Adding to Rita’s pain is her forced leave of absence from the hospital until she’s cleared and the embarrassment of seeing her name in the headlines.
    • Please register in order to view this content

         
    • Yes, but the stories are all pretty awful Seeing Victor rehashing his hatred of the Abbotts  when he married one of them and has a daughter that is half Abbott as well as walking around with Traci's daughter's heart keeping him alive makes him look worse than he already is. And I remember he and Jack chatting amicably in the past few years. Victor interfering in Kyle/Claire is just repeat of Billy/Victoria. Sharon, Nick,Phyllis etc are around but again the stories are lacking.
    • I think Kevin's 1996 Emmy was fair enough. He barely appeared for his second. I don't think anyone else on the list is that deserving but I might have gone with Moore as he did try with the whole Keesha AIDS story. @alwaysAMC Thanks to slick jones' cast list I was able to see that Nikki Rene played Tina. Not much on her, as you mentioned. Tap and a few Broadway listings (it doesn't help that a younger actress with a similar name is in a lot of roles). Nikki Rene: Credits, Bio, News & More | Broadway World https://onceonthisisland.fandom.com/wiki/Nikki_Rene Nikki Rene - IMDb
    • Thank you. That does ring a bell. I remember Theresa and Julian's drunk, giggly fake wedding (with Julian asking "Whassup?" to the minister). Was Bruce tricking the pair as a prank, or did somebody put him up to it? I especially liked Katherine recalling how dashing young Alistair was when he'd pick up Rachel for dates, and how she wished she could be her sister, then feeling guilty once Rachel had her boating accident ...
    • And Kevin Mambo beat Shemar Moore for those two Emmys. I chalk up the wins to the voters not wanting Jonathan Jackson to eventually end up with a five peat (he won 1995, 1998, 1999). These were the 1996 and 1997 Younger Actor races. 1996: Nathan Fillion, Jonathan Jackson, Kevin Mambo (winner), Shemar Moore, Joshua Morrow 1997: Steve Burton, Jonathan Jackson, Kevin Mambo (winner), Shemar Moore, Joshua Morrow
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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