KNOTS LANDING

[DRW50]

[DRW50]

video gone

Edited November 14, 2013 by DRW50

[DRW50]

Around 6:45, Michelle Lee talks about the awesomeness of Star Wars.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivw4WA3W_aw&feature=plcp

[DRW50]

This is from a July 1983 Digest. The first page has something that was on the scanner - I lost the magazine a while back so can't take another, sorry. Anyway, I always loved Ginger, so underrated and ethereally beautiful. Getting rid of her cost the show a lot of its innocence and spirit.

[juppiter]

Thanks for posting that. I always liked Kim Lankford from the interviews I have read with her -- Kenny and Ginger were pretty lame characters and I can't say I was sorry to see them go, but it sucks that it happened to someone who seems as nice as Kim Lankford does.

[YRBB]

Nobody can blame KNOTS LANDING for writing them out, of course. They tried. They really tried. They gave them four years and it never worked.

Even after the kind of reboot and the soapier direction the show took in Season 4, Dunne kept them around and artfully got them involved as much as possible. But it was clear that neither the characters or actors were ever going to work (and they sure did try to make it happen) from the very beginning.

After all, how can you have Gary, Sid/Mack, Richard and... Kenny? The dichotomy is stupendous. Same with Val, Karen, Abby, Laura and Ginger. You compare the first four with the last and its laughable.

[DRW50]

I don't think they really tried, especially not with Ginger. They mostly just had one long story. The last story, with Ciji, had real potential for Ginger. I would have kept her and written Kenny out. I think Ginger could have fit into the middle years of the show. I could have seen her in Cathy's place in the Josh story. Cathy IMO never worked.

[YRBB]

In the meantime, I just watched A Man of Good Will, Lynn Latham and Bernard Lechowick's first episode of KL.

My God, what a weird experience that was!

All of a sudden, you have Karen walking around with a soda can, Michael talking about a game, Mack saying things like "que paso?" and all sorts of "everyday" things that are meant to make the characters look more realistic, yet come off as fake. Totally unnecessary considering that KL was actually pretty good about weaving soapy and everyday things together in scenes.

What was even more shocking, however, was how they were allowed to change the tone of the show! There was freaking "funny" music throughout (horribly reminiscent of DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES)! Most of the scenes were written lightly, humorously, and the drama and soapiness turned down. The ending (a GREAT twist that revealed that Gary was given Empire Valley by Galveston) played, again, for laughs, instead of seriously.

UUUUGH--it reminded me so much of the changes made my Latham on Y&R that I almost gagged. You can see the pattern.

Do they hate drama? I guess they do. The whole episode felt like late 80s KNOTS LANDING set in 1985. Why were they allowed to do this? What is it about these writers that they always manage to take over whatever show they get involved with, always to the show's (eventual) detriment?

Edited May 31, 2012 by YRBB

[DRW50]

Was this when Mack started having barbecues all the time, or had they already been doing that?

[YRBB]

They did try. More than enough.

The fact that they were kept around for four years is evidence enough that they wanted to make it work. Can you name any other show that would have done it?

Ginger was given the same treatment the other three ladies were from the beginning. Each lady had a standalone episode in the beginning that was meant to showcase them and develop them. In Karen, Val and Laura's case (with Let Me Count The Ways, Will The Circle Be Unbroken and The Lie) it was a resounding success. Three of some of the best hours of TV I've ever seen. With Ginger on Constant Companion, a huuuuge, boring failure. Yet, they were given story and involved as much as possible.

However, I agree that the idea of Ginger in the middle years of the show, with Joshua, works for me. But Lankford would have never done well (just like she never did in any of the other seasons) and pairing her against the wonderful Baldwin seems like suicide. But it doesn't matter because Joshua didn't even come in until Season 6. What would Ginger have done in Season 5? And she had a baby too!

I don't even know what to say about the Cathy comment. You've stunned me. She was never the greatest or most complicated of characters but she worked wonderfully. I don't see why you don't like her. But, then again, you also don't like Lilimae? looooool

[YRBB]

I don't think this has happened yet... Or there might have been one. In any case, nothing regular. But it seems exactly the type of Latham nonsense!

[DRW50]

Plenty of shows kept dead weight characters around that long, or people who some might say weren't working. Dynasty kept Steven long after his expiration date, they kept on trying with Claudia, Falcon Crest kept some dead weight like Chase, etc.

I guess I don't see that Ginger didn't work as a character. I liked Constant Companion. I thought it was a good episode, with a good performance from Lankford, and a strong, haunting storyline. I preferred this to the Karen episodes in the first season, which were often very hammy.

Most of Ginger's story always felt like a B story to me. She was cheated on. She tried to move on but she was pregnant. Then she sat in the background until the Ciji story. I never felt like there was a huge push to make her a big character and that this failed (I think that is more true of characters like Diana). I think she was always the one of the four who was created to fill out the cast, the original "four couples" concept, and they never tried to move her on from this. I liked a lot of the small amounts of story she got. For instance, I really liked her bond with Karen's brother. This type of small, poignant little story is what helped get me hooked on KL. This was around the time I first started watching the show, and it, along with Laura, helped draw me in. I think it's what the show needed. I don't think the show was the same when they became too dominated by the colder, business figures - they still had people like Val who were more everyday, but there wasn't a great balance.

I don't see anything about the Ginger character which could not have transitioned. They transitioned Laura, and Val, who were not exactly suited to a glam format in the show's first years.

Cathy was OK. She sang a lot, and things happened to her. I mostly felt like she was there because the show regretted killing Ciji off. She just did not have the spark Ciji had, and I mostly felt like she was a very passive character. I thought the Joshua story was rushed, and after that ended, they had no idea what to do with her. I did not like the Ben/Cathy story, and I think they should have focused more on the Cathy/Laura relationship, or even Cathy/Gary. Overall I just felt like Cathy was a character created to keep an actress around, not a character the show had plans for.

Edited May 31, 2012 by CarlD2

[YRBB]

I wouldn't use any of those as examples. Steven was a viable character that was hurt by a horrible recast and bad writing. No one on DYNASTY worked after Season 3 anyways. Claudia was great until the writing went South; Chase (in the seasons I've seen) was great and an integral part of the fabric of the show, so I have no idea why he would be included.

Again, this should be put into context. If one looks at the whole cast of KL and compares them to that couple, wow. The difference is jarring. They were missing at least a couple of dimensions as characters compared to others. They were a 5 and the others were 10s. However, they were kept around and treated far better than one would have expected.

Especially after the show took a very different direction in Season 4. One would have expected them to fit in better with that style. I think they kinda did. But the quality of the rest was so high that it would never work.

I guess my question to you is, who was Ginger? What can you tell me about her, except that she was often whiny because her husband was horrible in the beginning (more of a plot than a character thing) and wanted to sing? I can give you lists of things about who Val, Laura, Abby, Karen are... but Ginger? Nothing. Nada. In FOUR years, nothing. THAT is why she didn't work as a character. Constant Companion had a haunting storyline? Ex boyfriend's mother stalking you because of your abortion years ago is haunting? Wow, we really do see things very differently in this regard. There is absolutely no comparison to Karen's stuff (especially her first episode, which handled the matter of a woman growing up so subtly, gently and brilliantly). In the end, what did you learn about Ginger after that? It was just plot. Or maybe we did learn something but it never stuck, I dunno.

Well, she received equal airtime for a long time, until it was clear that other things were working and hers was not. When you know, you know. If they had pushed to make her work then it would have been one of those things we see regularly on daytime soaps, a la Ryan on AMC etc, were they go overboard to push the character and it ends up worse. Great instinct by the writers there, I would say.

I don't recall her bond with Joe but I do recall he and Val created a great bond. Maybe it's slipping my mind. But I am glad you love Laura.

I don't think I would touch the subject of Diana because we disagree on that even MORE! I will never understand the outcry against her because I loved Diana, she worked great and she transitioned easily into the soapier era. Plus, I happen to think she is one of the few TV teenagers that ever was realistic, which is possibly one of the reasons she was hated so much. Lonow is a great actress who, I guess, was just too real for TV, too much, too harsh. I don't think people could handle it. I loved every single moment of her yelling lol. The writers obviously loved writing for her but the audience spoke!

Well, yes, I do agree she transitioned well. She stayed for a whole season! But it just wasn't enough. Well, Val always had the capacity for tremendous soapy storylines (and, boy, did she ever!). Laura... Laura could never be transitioned into anything, that was the great appeal to her! She was who she was, end of story lol

Oh we agree on this! Jacobs (or one of them) have admitted to regretting getting rid of Ciji, it was the only reason the Cathy thing happened. And she really was passive--like you said, things happened to her and she never recaptured the magic of Ciji. But, I wouldn't say their story was very rushed... it was fast, but it's been almost the whole season and marriage just came up now. Karen and Mac were married 15 episodes after they met lol As for them not having plans for her, that doesn't ring true at all. From her reintroduction and scheme with Abby, to her affair with Gary, to Ray's return, to the singing, to her relationship/abuse by Joshua... she was kept pretty busy. But it would have been nice if she was a bit less passive.

[DRW50]

From what I've seen, Chase just doesn't fit in to the best parts of the show. He's stuffy and self-righteous, and way too earnest.

I think we know as much about Ginger as we did about Karen and Laura. Ginger was naive and vulnerable. Ginger was emotionally scarred from the abortion she regretted. Ginger was emotionally scarred from a distant relationship with her mother.

I do think that Constant Companion was a haunting episode. Ginger had a lot of regrets and pain, and this was brought to the forefront by her ex's mother. She met this woman (played beautifully by Priscilla Pointer) and this was the closest she could probably get to saying goodbye to this past. I liked that it was subtle. The Karen episodes in the first season often had a lot of LOL moments which didn't necessarily seem to be intended, like the OTT scene where she reacted to having a miscarriage, or the scene where Karen Allen called Karen a whore and Sid slapped her on the face, or when Karen Allen and Diana were staggering around drunk. Don't get me wrong, I did enjoy those episodes, I think the first season was something to be proud of, but with Karen there was often this DRAMA DRAMA THIS IS A DRAMA!!! atmosphere. I prefer the quieter stuff in the early seasons.

To me, it just didn't seem like equal airtime. I felt like the closest to this was in the first season, but even then, she and Laura were the supporting players to Karen and Val. After this, Ginger had even less to do.

I agree she was realistic, I just thought she was unpleasant and grating to watch. I think there was way too much of her throwing fits and the character became one-note. I much preferred Karen's relationship with Eric, which sadly, the show never had a lot of interest in.

I guess the way I see it is that Knots had the budget in the early-mid 80's to keep some people on even if they weren't the main players. I would have kept Ginger on and used her in that way - as a supporting player who sometimes had a big role in a story. I don't think it would have been trying something which hadn't worked. I think that they just never truly tried to identify her as a character outside of Kenny. Kenny was the drag, although I thought James Houghton did a good job.

As for Lillimae, she just got on my nerves. I thought she was fake and sanctimonious. I liked her better when she was called out on this in her first episode. I think Val accepting her back just weakened Val's character. Julie Harris was a good actress, a great actress, and there were some funny little moments I enjoyed, I just don't think she should have been a permanent character.

Edited May 31, 2012 by CarlD2

[YRBB]

You see, I thought he fit perfectly. He was the perfect opposite to Angela's villain. He was the good guy but without being boring or angelic. He had his flaws, like being self-righteous and stuffy but that was an acknowledged character trait, not accidental. I tend not to moralize characters' traits (especially on soaps!) but instead observe them, so negative traits such as those don't bother me.

I don't agree, at all. What we know is some skin deep info--she was scarred by an abortion (not really a character trait, must be noted) and she didn't have a good relationship with her mom. What did they ever do with that? What drama did that ever produce except for one episode?

Instead, Karen and Laura's characters and past fused to produce tons and tons of drama. So maybe Ginger was naive and vulnerable. So what? You can't build an exciting character with just that. Karen and Laura had so many sides to them they sparked drama easily; Ginger's had to be fabricated.

Well, this is purely a matter of opinion: Whether one enjoys it or not is up to them. Maybe I'll watch it again to see what I think of it now. Pointer was indeed chilling and it was far from the worse KL episode. But it just didn't resonate with me. Karen could get a bit over the top, that's true, but that was as much Lee's fault as the writing's (if not more). Her... theatrical qualities would come out, almost always to the scenes' detriment.

No argument from me here! Diana was really grating, although for me it was in a good way.

I think what the show decided to do was just cut its loses and I don't blame them for that. You seem to like Ginger so I see your point of view but she didn't seem all that popular in general. Why try to establish her after four years when every other attempt (however small or large) had failed? I think it deserves to be taken into account that she really wasn't that great of an actress, let's be honest.

LOL It's ridiculous how differently I feel about this. She was probably one of their more brilliant characters; so wonderfully complicated, realistic and hard to watch at times. However, there was never anything fake about her. She was what sooooo many people are: A hypocrite, religious and often very harsh on other people. She was an often annoying older woman, who had made many mistakes but desperately tried to make up some of them eventually. There is absolutely no validity to Val's character being "weakened." Why would that weaken her? It was completely IN character for Val to eventually forgive her and find the strength to try and make it work. It spoke VOLUMES about Val's capacity for forgiveness, her desire to be loved, looked after, to have a mother, etc AND it brought a lot of drama. A LOT. When you have a relationship like theirs AND two actresses like Van Ark and Harris, you would have to be crazy not to write for them with every single opportunity! Have Lankford stick around but not Harris? Good Lord!