Members Vee Posted December 31, 2008 Members Share Posted December 31, 2008 My insane life partner Darn and I often disagree about several things about OLTL of late, but I have not cast him out of my will. You see, he took the time to watch the show, as opposed to people who stopped watching before RC's run began yet still call him a hack. Then there's the whole secret Forbes March conspiracy theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rangethatrover Posted December 31, 2008 Members Share Posted December 31, 2008 You are a delight Vee, I am glad you and Darn have found a way to somehow find a common ground despite your differences of belief where something as important as One Life To Live is concerned. I love to hear all the varying opinions regarding OLTL- from people who actually still watch it. The angry gapers are obvious within the first sentence. When OLTL sucked(in my opinion) I stopped watching- period. When Evangeline and John McBain took over- I loathed the actors and the storylines. It was basically Archer, Williamson, and whathisname. I said "SEE YA!" for a good 2 years. From what I read, the remainder of Higley's reign sounded horrible. WHY WOULD ANY NETWORK HIRE A WRITER THAT WAS FIRED BY DAYS OF OUR LIVES(of all soaps!) FOR NOT BEING GOOD ENOUGH!?!?!?!? AND EVEN BETTER?? THAT SAME SOAP REHIRED THE CHICK!!! I just vented. Totally off topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vee Posted December 31, 2008 Members Share Posted December 31, 2008 We pick up hookers and kill them as a joint activity, it evens out. The nadir of OLTL history for me was "golly-I'm-so-shy" Evangeline singing "Boogie Woogie" on NYE 2007 at Ultra Violet, as Rex, Adriana, Dorian etc all danced like idiot white people and looked on. I was not watching at the time, I tuned in for the holiday, and immediately tuned back out until the following August. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members All My Shadows Posted December 31, 2008 Members Share Posted December 31, 2008 I don't think you got it right for Y&R and AMC. People call Y&R out on its [!@#$%^&*] when it has [!@#$%^&*], for sure. What's good about it outweighs what's bad about, and it outweighs it a LOT, and so that's what makes the difference. Y&R fans, unlike fans of another show (coughALLMYCHILDREN!!!cough), don't take pleasure in poking fun at what's bad, there's actually discussion and glee about what's good about the show. As for AMC, I think your description of an AMC thread is more akin to a DAYS thread. The show can be a vast wasteland of crap, yet if there's a great five minutes in the middle of an episode, DAYS is "gettin' good again!!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members marceline Posted December 31, 2008 Members Share Posted December 31, 2008 Just to keep it straight, "Nash" was a fictional character written by a real person. Nash didn't cause his own death. Nash's death was written by Ron. Nash could no more "cause" his own death than Captain Kirk can do my laundry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members All My Shadows Posted December 31, 2008 Members Share Posted December 31, 2008 I'm aware. And you told me this why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members marceline Posted December 31, 2008 Members Share Posted December 31, 2008 Because by repeating "Nash caused his own death!" twice, in big font, it was unclear whether you understood that. "Nash" didn't cause his own death. Ron wrote a story. There's no reason he shouldn't be judged for that story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members All My Shadows Posted December 31, 2008 Members Share Posted December 31, 2008 Nash caused his own death! was directed to the bitter Nash fans who love to scream from the rooftops that (RC's "pet") Jared and/or Natalie murdered their beloved Nash, sometimes "in cold blood." That had nothing to do with what Ron should or should not be judged by. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SteveFrame Posted December 31, 2008 Members Share Posted December 31, 2008 When did this idea come along of not calling out characters on what the characters do. I have watched soaps for 39 years now and I have always watched them forgetting the fact for that hour that it is fiction. I look at the characters and the story and get lost in it. Now I am not delusional and totally warped in that I would walk up to one of the characters and slap them or spit on them. But when I am watching if I get mad I get mad at Dorian Lord or Todd Manning and not at Ron Carlivati. I mean why are people mad at Todd Manning right now when by the analogy above Todd didn't do anything - Ron Carlivati did it all. I have said it once and I will say it a thousand times - soaps just cannot survive today. There is just a total new way of looking at soaps from them being about couples who are united for life; actors are the character and not the character being the character; and then characters not being responsible for their actions. And then this whole philosophy of not dealing with what is written and fans excusing changes in history when it suits them as to their faves. Writers have developed this idea that they can do whatever [!@#$%^&*] they want to do because fans will accept it - such as undoing deaths or whatever. I say deal with what has been written and go on. All this rewriting history and changing story to suit this fan base or that fan base is getting old. As to Nash - the character did cause his own death - that is the way it happened and that is the reality that is dealt with. When did this idea come along of not calling out characters on what the characters do. I have watched soaps for 39 years now and I have always watched them forgetting the fact for that hour that it is fiction. I look at the characters and the story and get lost in it. Now I am not delusional and totally warped in that I would walk up to one of the characters and slap them or spit on them. But when I am watching if I get mad I get mad at Dorian Lord or Todd Manning and not at Ron Carlivati. I mean why are people mad at Todd Manning right now when by the analogy above Todd didn't do anything - Ron Carlivati did it all. I have said it once and I will say it a thousand times - soaps just cannot survive today. There is just a total new way of looking at soaps from them being about couples who are united for life; actors are the character and not the character being the character; and then characters not being responsible for their actions. And then this whole philosophy of not dealing with what is written and fans excusing changes in history when it suits them as to their faves. Writers have developed this idea that they can do whatever [!@#$%^&*] they want to do because fans will accept it - such as undoing deaths or whatever. I say deal with what has been written and go on. All this rewriting history and changing story to suit this fan base or that fan base is getting old. As to Nash - the character did cause his own death - that is the way it happened and that is the reality that is dealt with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members All My Shadows Posted December 31, 2008 Members Share Posted December 31, 2008 I totally agree, Steve! I was unclear as to what marceline was talking about for a second, and was gonna actually question why everything is supposed to be put on writers and writers only. I mean...damn...I'm watching a fictional TV show, I would like to at least pretend that I'm in their world for a while. I don't want to be "I can't believe TPTB did that!" while watching. Nash did cause his own death. Ron wrote Nash causing his own death. Nash caused his own death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vee Posted December 31, 2008 Members Share Posted December 31, 2008 I think Nash and Jared's (and Natalie's, and Dorian's) actions all led to a simple, horrible accident. No one meant for it to happen but they all have a degree of culpability. Doesn't make them bad people, doesn't mean I did not cry for Nash, doesn't mean I don't love Jared and Natalie (and Dorian). The problem with the Nash thing is for some people, they decide there had to a dastardly meta reason for Nash to die. Back in the '70s or '80s, characters like Meredith or Samantha or Tony or Vinnie or Joe died, and it was very sad, but it was good drama and it was just the way life was sometimes. The audience cried and wailed and gnashed teeth, but accepted it and the story was a memory cherished. Today people decide there has to another reason Nash was "cruelly slaughtered." He has to have been hated by TPTB; RC has to secretly hate Jessica (despite watching her grow up as a longtime viewer) and he and FV have to have been plotting to fire poor family man Forbes March. It can't just be that sometimes on soaps, good people have bad things happen to them. But that's the way it is. It's about drama and telling a story. The BE shareholders meeting is already one of my immortal OLTL moments, and Nash's death, which was heartbreaking, is a huge part of that. I liked the guy but would I trade him back alive if it meant losing that? Hell no, it was a brilliant culmination to an amazing storyline. And I see a lot of people online and offline who feel the same. People on soaps die for good drama; Phillip Chancellor, Stone Cates, Megan, BJ, you name it. It happens. We live with it and the memory endures. Like BJ or Stone or Meredith, Nash's death may have been tragic and senseless to his family, but its function in story was far from pointless or exploitative. It meant something and it gives Nash's character a power it would never otherwise have attained. Yet people want to act like it's a conspiracy and the Nash outcry is so big and amazing compared to lots of other beloved characters killed for story over the years, that what should really happen is Nash should go on making wine in his non-Californian vineyard. Bitch please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rangethatrover Posted December 31, 2008 Members Share Posted December 31, 2008 Did we like Nash? Was he popular/a good actor?? I came back to OLTL in June- he was already dead... Why did the show kill him- for storyline purposes?? From what I saw post June it certainly got stories cooking... Did this happen under Gary Tomlin's non union writing??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members marceline Posted December 31, 2008 Members Share Posted December 31, 2008 The way you watch soaps is just that: the way you watch soaps. When I watch Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, I judge "Maggie" and "Brick" but I also judge Tennessee Williams' writing. I also judge the actors portraying those characters. When I watch Heroes I wonder WTF Tim Kring was thinking, not Nathan Petrelli. It's not all or nothing. Look at this thread. Marlena didn't criticize Todd or Marty or Nash. She criticized Ron. That's what started all this. Out of an essay looking back at a year's worth of soaps, she devoted a few sentences to how Ron isn't all that and it brought the Carlivatians out with their pitchforks sharpened. Ron is responsible for what is on screen right now. Just like Tennessee Williams was responsible for Cat on a Hot Tin Roof and James Frey is responsible for A Million Little Pieces. A writer is judged by what they write. Not what they might have written if only people were "cooler." When people like the show they say how great Ron is, so shouldn't he get the blame when someone thinks it sucks? And you're right: soaps cannot survive today. Allow me to add, that they shouldn't. It's adapt or die. They refused to do the former when it might have made a difference, so the latter is inevitable. That's the reason I'm fine with Ron as OLTL's HW. The show's gone in 2-3 years anyway and the people watching now might as well get their rocks off. Plus he spent what...ten years as a bridesmaid? He might as well go out as a bride. If people want to worship Ron so what? But attacking anybody with a differing opinion makes it look like his work can't stand on its own. And I don't think it can so that's fine with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vee Posted December 31, 2008 Members Share Posted December 31, 2008 Ron Carlivati wrote Nash's death; it happened shortly after the end of the strike. To my understanding, it was a combination of nothing more than budget concerns and story choices. I will add that despite the lame Tess repeat afterwards (which may or may not have been the show's idea, judging by some of the press announcements at the time), as of today I find Jessica (in St. Anne's, with Brody) more compelling now as she struggles to battle her own mind than she has been in a good five or six years. Not that your point about writer ownership is invalid, dear, but why the hell should anyone care what you have to say about judging the man's work when you told us months ago that you stopped watching OLTL the day of Asa's funeral in August 2007 - before RC's writing team took over? Let me guess - you read transcripts? "I keep tabs?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SteveFrame Posted December 31, 2008 Members Share Posted December 31, 2008 Wonderful post Vee. I totally agree. It was just like Irna Phillips wrote in her letter after she killed off Kathy Roberts in 1958. She basically said that death is just part of life. It is part of life that has to be dealt with. There have been many many other wonderful characters on OLTL alone who were killed off without all the drama that has been extended Nash who was not even a character that long. As you said they were done for storyline purposes and it has been a wonderful part of the history of the show. I just dread the day that someone comes along and undoes it due to the outcry over his death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.