For 20 years I was convinced that it was Teri Austin playing Sally's Friend on the phone.  It wasn't until I read an interview with Lar Park Lincoln on a Knots website that I found out that it was Lar.  I never would have guessed that.  I also never understood why they wasted an actess of Lynne Moody's caliber and gave her little to no story during her last year.

2 hours ago, Soaplovers said:

I kind of bought Gary with Kate only because he was in grief and she had been in the twins life for a year or so.. with Val being a refuge for Kate like how she had been a refuge for Olivia in the past.

If they were going to go there with Gary a part of me wishes it had been with Olivia, to show how far gone he was without Val and to make viewers question whether or not Olivia was genuine or scheming. And when Val returned, she would have been repulsed.

2 hours ago, Marco Dane said:

I'm disappointed that Pat didn't have a romantic storyline with Gary, or that Frank didn't pursue Val. It would have created some interesting early 90s drama. I feel like Pat deserved more complex storylines than the ones she was given.

There was so much they could have done and should have done with Pat. Maybe I should be surprised lily-white Knots even brought Frank and Pat in.

I don't mind Frank just being friends with Val. They had a nice bond and anything that meant less Karen/Val was good for me.

I can't remember who said it (most likely JamesFromLondon from Telly Talk), but Season 14 is the year where Gary, Karen, and Mack's second winds wear off. They're not as rich as they used to be. They're not as skillful as they used to be. And they're not as young as they used to be.

3 hours ago, Soaplovers said:

Had Paulson or Dunne been helming season 10.... they would have probably played up the fall out of the Jill story with Val coming to terms with almost losing her kids again due to Jill, maybe some hidden resentment for Gary/Karen for not believing her yet again, and maybe she could have focused back on her writing (with the Jill saga a perfect inspiration for a book.. which would cause conflicts with Gary, etc).

For some reason, I can't see Peter Dunne or even David Paulsen doing what amounted to a Lifetime Original Movie-esque storyline for Jill.  Dunne, in particular, seemed above doing cheap, exploitative stories where one woman goes psycho because she's lost her man to another woman.  But I definitely agree that they would've played the fallout more than the Lechowicks did.

7 minutes ago, Franko said:

I can't remember who said it (most likely JamesFromLondon from Telly Talk), but Season 14 is the year where Gary, Karen, and Mack's second winds wear off. They're not as rich as they used to be. They're not as skillful as they used to be. And they're not as young as they used to be.

I've always looked at that as KNOTS recognizing that the '80's and all their excesses were over, and that their characters, like much of the country, had to readjust to the scaled-down, more down-to-earth '90's.

10 minutes ago, Khan said:

I've always looked at that as KNOTS recognizing that the '80's and all their excesses were over, and that their characters, like much of the country, had to readjust to the scaled-down, more down-to-earth '90's.

I'm picking on low-hanging fruit, but you just know that Dallas or Dynasty wouldn't have had the guts to be so realistic if they were still on the air at that time.

31 minutes ago, Franko said:

I'm picking on low-hanging fruit, but you just know that Dallas or Dynasty wouldn't have had the guts to be so realistic if they were still on the air at that time.

That's certainly true for DYNASTY, lol.  In rewatching the final season, I noticed that reduced budgets and changing times kinda forced David Paulsen and his team to try and dig deeper into the characters, but the problem was that DYNASTY's characters had become so one-dimensional, and the general acting style had become SO stylized, that even attempting to bring some substance into a show that had become so damaged after several years of bad or no storytelling was just impossible.  If DYNASTY really wanted to last into the '90's, then it needed to be gutted and revamped.

Similarly, if KL had any chance at all of lasting beyond 1993 - which I don't think was possible even under the best circumstances - then it needed to redefine itself for the new decade.  It needed to get away from the "big business" storylines that had defined the Lechowicks' era, and maybe even needed to do away with characters like Gary and Greg as well.  It needed to get more personal, and possibly bring more of a procedural element into the storytelling, such as having a major character work as a cop or doctor at a local hospital.

Edited January 1Jan 1 by Khan

The story of Gary and Val was done by the end. I like your ideas - I would have rebuilt the show around the Mackenzies and a new set of neighbors. David Jacobs was considering that (plus the Ewings, which I think would have been a mistake) but didn’t pursue it.

23 hours ago, Khan said:

That's certainly true for DYNASTY, lol.  In rewatching the final season, I noticed that reduced budgets and changing times kinda forced David Paulsen and his team to try and dig deeper into the characters, but the problem was that DYNASTY's characters had become so one-dimensional, and the general acting style had become SO stylized, that even attempting to bring some substance into a show that had become so damaged after several years of bad or no storytelling was just impossible.  If DYNASTY really wanted to last into the '90's, then it needed to be gutted and revamped.

Dynasty dated itself so quickly with all that style. At one point there were actual, complex issues between Alexis, Blake, and their children. But that goes away and it’s all women quickly walking towards an exit, turning while putting on a fur, and throwing down some drag queen level shade at the other people in the room before actually leaving. Later era Dynasty, Thirtysomthing and China Beach airing at the same time on the same network (IIRC all ABC) is so fascinating. The culture switches to introspection for that generation as storytelling so decisively and with that a move away from high style.

14 hours ago, titan1978 said:

Later era Dynasty, Thirtysomthing and China Beach airing at the same time on the same network (IIRC all ABC) is so fascinating. The culture switches to introspection for that generation as storytelling so decisively and with that a move away from high style.

I agree.  Brandon Stoddard, who ran ABC throughout the latter part of the '80's, was responsible for that move away from the sort of glossy programming that had defined the network in the '70's and early '80's, largely because he saw how NBC had become #1 by focusing more on shows that had more substance than ABC's.  Plus, as much as some folks say they prefer their entertainment to be more escapist, I think it's hard to lose oneself in a frothy little show like DYNASTY, when so many people you know and care about are dying of a disease (like AIDS) that their own government refuses even to acknowledge, let alone find a remedy for.  (Sound familiar, ladies and gents, lol?)

The thing is, DYNASTY was a more complex show in its' first season, but were the Shapiros up to the challenge of writing that kind of show?  Honestly, I have my doubts.

Edited January 2Jan 2 by Khan

5 hours ago, Khan said:

Brandon Stoddard, who ran ABC throughout the latter part of the '80's, was responsible for that move away from the sort of glossy programming that had defined the network in the '70's and early '80's

Brandon Stoddard goal was to get Aaron Spelling hit factory off ABC and Robert Iger was the one who did so.

Primetime soaps peaked Fall 1982-Spring 1985 then tanked Fall 1985 and were creatively exhausted by Spring 1988.

 

I've read that John Forsythe refused to play any storyline where Blake would cheat or be seen in a negative light so that storlines would need to cater to those demands. Were there any such limitations on KL? Did any of the cast refuse to do certain things? I can only imagine a handful of them had the power to have such demands. 

2 hours ago, chrisml said:

I've read that John Forsythe refused to play any storyline where Blake would cheat or be seen in a negative light so that storlines would need to cater to those demands. Were there any such limitations on KL? Did any of the cast refuse to do certain things? I can only imagine a handful of them had the power to have such demands. 

Mack was supposed to cheap on Karen with Anne during her first run but Michele Lee put a stop to it and Anne was written off. Other than that, the only thing I can think is Donna Mills changing the baby story which had her kidnapping the babies.

Something that always makes me chuckle is Joan Van Ark's dislike of Lynn Latham and Bernie Lechowick turning Val into "the village idiot." She mentioned wanting to talk to them but they did not allow any communication with the cast.

This is dumb but amused me...and I had never heard of this promo (the real one).

39 minutes ago, Chris B said:

Mack was supposed to cheap on Karen with Anne during her first run but Michele Lee put a stop to it and Anne was written off. Other than that, the only thing I can think is Donna Mills changing the baby story which had her kidnapping the babies.

In a way, Mack cheating on Karen would've been too predictable.  On the other hand, circumstances forcing Karen to cheat on Mack...?  Now, that, I think, would've been interesting!

Gary and Anne were supposed to have an affair during Val's "brain virus" storyline, but Michelle Phillips went to Co-EP Lawrence Kasha and asked him to nix it, saying Anne can't be someone who just goes from man to man.  As Tommy Krasker points out in his blog, however, Anne Matheson WAS the type who'd go from man to man.  After all, she once was a spoiled heiress who was desperate not to end up poor (or worse, middle class).  That's why I wanted them to bring back John Pleshette at some point and have Richard and Anne end up together, but that's a different fanfic, lol.

41 minutes ago, Chris B said:

Donna Mills changing the baby story which had her kidnapping the babies.

I remember a Donna Mills interview where she said that Abby becoming a kidnapper would make her irredeemable to the audience. There's also the conflict of Abby being a kidnapper when her own children were once kidnapped.