Jump to content

Is the soap world asleep?


Recommended Posts

  • Members

There was a time not so long ago, specifically when Hogan Sheffer switched soaps, when I thought "Wow... :mellow: This might be a start of an exciting new era for soaps." There was Hogan, then Pratt, Dena, British writer ghost consulting... Exciting doesn't really equal good, but nonetheless it'd be better than this swamp we're in. As if the whole world is at piece, no wind, the trees don't move, everyone's in mh6rdd.gif mode.

Is it time to admit that some changes didn't work out and that it's, perhaps, time for change?

There are many soaps, if not all, which are in desperate need of a thorough cleansing. GH comes to mind. ATWT — what is Jean Passanante doing there? :unsure: Oh, right — helping Chris turn his ideas into stories.

What is going on? Why is no one trying to "fix" anything? :unsure: Not only is nothing happening, we're seeing a kind of retrograde, anachronistic moves appear from nowhere occasionally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 83
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

I'm all but ready for a soap cancellation. Maybe it will scare the rest of the shows(God's chosen one, Y&R, aside) into doing something fun and drastic. Maybe it will usher in a new soap to network television. Who knows?!

I'm ready for someone to shake the boat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Thank you! I feel the same way. Every week I look in the ratings thread and see posts from people who want all soaps to go up regardless of quality for the "good of the genre" and I cringe. How is embracing mediocrity in the best interest of the genre? How is it for the greater good for the audience to say "It's okay. I have no standards just don't leave me!" That's not loyalty, it's Battered Viewers Syndrome.

I know there are plenty of people enjoying their respective shows right now. Goodness knows every week there's another show "on fire right now!!" But I think even satisfied viewers can agree that all the recycling, whether actors, writers or producers, is detrimental overall. It's like making a Xerox copy of a copy of a copy, eventually it becomes so degraded you can't tell what it was to begin with.

I hold out a tiny glimmer of hope that maybe the stars will line up and a new soap can somehow be born, whether it's network, cable or the internet. There's a lot of lapsed viewers like myself out there: people who want to find a show to love, but we aren't coming back to the same thing we left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

If the freefall of the past 5+ years on many soaps (going back even further than that) isn't enough to shake things up, then I don't think a cancellation would make a difference. Most of these big shocks, like all the other soaps reacting to GH's huge comeback in the late 70s, or the ratings disaster of the OJ trial in 1994 and 1995, or all the soaps trying to copy Jim Reilly's success at DAYS, only decreased soap quality and ratings longterm.

I remember when AW being canceled was supposed to be a brilliant move which would change daytime, usher in a bold new era, and then we got Passions, which got notice for a few years, at most, for camp appeal and bad acting, before fading out of public consciousness. The only trend it may have helped accelerate was dumping actors over 50, which didn't really help any soap, except maybe DAYS.

I don't believe any network would replace a canceled soap with another soap now. We'd probably get another talk show, or pseudo-reality show, or they would just stick reruns of some of their primetime programs into daytime as a cheap way to fill the spot.

The soaps most likely to be canned are soaps I'd want to stay around. The soaps most likely not to go anywhere are soaps like GH which I think are very offensive. The message a cancellation would send would be that turning even further into a soap like GH is the way for daytime to go.

Why don't we fire some of the hacks who run daytime now, and find fresh blood? That would be a way to wake the soap world up. It's when Disney took over ABC, then when Frons was hired, and the changes at P&G's soap department in the mid-90's that began seriously damaging the soaps. Or in B&B's case, when Brad Bell took over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

So, in my non-soap life, I'm always eager to see innovative things that push envelopes. My favorite show on the air these days is Breaking Bad, which I consider to be a COMPLETE soap opera. It has all the melodrama, it has a terrific high concept, excellent performances. But, in the process, it also serves as an intriguing conceptual essay on topics like crime and punishment, on moral reasoning in dire circumstances, on mentorship and friendship, and so on. A supporting character is a terrific young man with cerebral palsy...and I think it is just brilliant how that is woven into the show without really being an issue.

On my Netflix queue are oodles of independent films, many of which make my co-viewers groan ("oh, why always so quirky?", or "can we watch something that is NOT experimental?"). I like shows like Lost or The Office, precisely because they do not hand me cliches, and they keep me on the edge of my seat with unsolvable riddles and uncomfortable character moments.

I embraced LML at Y&R, because I thought she'd shake the tree and give us some daytime innovation. I'd even argue that, initially, she did.

But on the tail end of her ride to ruin, I had a personal epiphany about daytime, encapsulated by Kay Alden's MIT quote that "Daytime is not an avant garde medium".

She's right! EXISTING soaps are bodies with huge histories. That is their ASSET. So, current storytelling that leverages history is something that daytime can uniquely achieve.

Now, I'm also happy and satisfied and sometimes euphoric because my show is Y&R. I know some disagree, but in my view that is a show that effectively uses the past (actors and characters and situations) to tell new stories. Some of those stories are "homages" to the past, but I do not personally see recycling.

That said, there is a nostalgia motive, and that's okay. When they play old musical cues, it brings genuine pleasure to long-term...especially when it used skillfully to evoke old emotions as well.

I think Y&R fares better than most other soaps because (looking, for example, at ABC) they EMBRACE their history, but they also try to bring on new generations, and tell new stories with them. (For example, the current Sharon-nervous-breakdown is a whole new beat for the actress, and it takes her places she has never been, yet it fits perfectly into her 15-year history on the show). ABC has mostly discarded the legacies of its shows. Add to that largely contrived, sensationalistic storytelling with characters who are not always likeable or relatable...and you have schlocky storytelling ("grief sex", "kidnapping", "mob war", "paternity wrangle", "paralysis", etc.), without any emotional richness.

So, I have come to the conclusion that "old daytime" and "new daytime" need to be held to different standards. Old daytime needs to be judged on the usual aspects (storytelling, acting, production values, etc.), BUT ALSO TO THE EXTENT THAT THE SHOW HONORS THE STORY THREADS THAT BROUGHT IT TO THIS POINT. Most shows forget this latter part...and therein lies their bankruptcy.

On the other hand, I do think there is genuine room for "new daytime". In "new daytime", I would expect envelope pushing...I would welcome it. So, far, there is no appetite to create this. In "new daytime", I would cast a super-dire eye on amnesia and paralysis and switched babies and .... (Or maybe not, if it was done effectively).

I close noting, somewhat tangentially, that Brad Bell gave an interview recently to SOD. And in it, he argued that the "ratings panic" was misguided. (One cannot use old numbers in a less fragmented television landscape to judge today's numbers, he said). He said that--in the daypart--the soaps still MASSIVELY outrate anything cable is pulling in, and soaps continue to offer that niche audience. This is correct. It IS important to contextualize soap viewership in the broader scheme of cable and declining network viewership over all.

But it was Brad's CREATIVE comments that have me thinking. First, he's VERY happy with where B&B is right now. (Can he really believe that? If yes, that explains why his show sucks). Second, though, he reminds us what soaps were meant to be: CHEAP programming, with not-stellar production values, that sold soap.

We gotta sell soap. We've got to appeal to that lowest denominator in all of us...the folks who need mouthwash and pantiliners and detergent and Celexa. We keep imposing these high-falutin' creative expectations of soaps...but they're supposed to be cheap programming (they SHOULDN'T be that much more expensive than the game shows and talk shows they have always been associated with) that brings in soap buyers.

Soap. Not Starbucks. Not Mercedes. Not complex financial instruments. Soap. Deodorant. Ditropan. You need a certain kind of programming to sell that stuff. As much as I love my Breaking Bad, that show pulls miniscule numbers compared to most other shows. They don't advertise for soap on Breaking Bad. They do try to sell cars and movies.

So, in closing, I think I have concluded -- too -- that "new daytime" MUST NOT be in the daytime. The innovation you want needs to play to a different audience. I'm already finding it -- on HBO and FX and AMC and so forth. Our long-running daytime shows are anachronistic survivors of a dead era, and I think their strength and survival DEPENDS on their embracing the traditions that served them so well for so long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You can't expect a positive change on any CBS or ABC soap right now (with Y&R being the exception). What we need is a new wave of soaps. A form of soaps that are going to attract a socially conscious demographic who is looking for dramas that tackle social issues in the way All My Children once did. Stories that are groundbreaking and touching, stories about humanity and love and hate. The stories that make the average viewer forget all about their own problems while getting a look into the complicated yet pretty realistic lives of the people on their television screens.

As much as it leaves a bad taste in my mouth to say this, the only broadcast network that I believe has the ability to bring us a new groundbreaking daytime drama is NBC. Now before everyone freaks out and brings up what NBC has done in the past I have a few things to say.

I pick NBC here because the only soap left on their network is Days. Now let's be realistic, I don't see Days sticking around much longer, not matter how long they can keep their 3rd place in the HH rating. NBC will still pick it a part next year and it's bye-bye. NBC also tries to bring in a really young audience. Well soaps need to have a multi-generational audience. You create socially relevant shows on an already youth oriented network and once those young viewers get hooked, they will stick with the show as it grows with them and then they pass it on and so forth.

I know NBC doesn't have the space at the moment with the two hour extension of the Today show, but since their daytime lineup consists of one soap, it would make sense for them to have two new ones produced, two new ones that they don't mess with and destroy, new ones that they allow to grow and promote. With patience I think it could build up a pretty decent audience. It would also make the other networks realize something as well. Success doesn't happen over night!

As someone else pointed out above, P&G's mid-90s changes really hurt their soaps. Disney taking over ABC also really hurt their soaps. We all know who is responsible for Days. The bottom line is, someone has to make a change and I think that change should take place on a network with minimal daytime programming. A network who is skewing a younger audience that can keep them entertained with real stories. Especially on the network that has the leading morning news show, NBC. Even those viewers who may be older than what NBC usually targets for their "soap," they can contribute to the audience of a new drama. I know it's a long shot, but, you never know.

Notice I didn't say cancel the lowest rated soaps on CBS and ABC and replace them with new soaps because no matter how low a current soap may be, it still has decades of history to explore. By a third network, NBC making a comeback, they will make it more competitive for ABC and CBS to step up and fix with they have done to their current soaps. That is something that can help the genre as a whole as opposed to canceling a soap now to make the networks understand what has been done.

I can't believe I just wished for NBC to create a groundbreaking daytime drama lineup. :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

LOL. Leave it to the TeleNext Cheerleader to assume I was explicitly talking about ATWT and GL.

You've absolutely taken the words out of my mouth. We've all said it before and we've beaten the horse to death. I think, for the most part, people have come to accept mediocrity instead of aiming higher. Lord knows I embrace every great nugget I get from B&B these days. But I'd like to think I'm pretty realistic when it comes to how absolutely awful the show is. I know the show can be better, we all know the show can be better. But pretending that it HAS to be this way is kinda sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think GL's made a positive change over the past 6 months, although they have a long way to go and I know they could backslide. Right now, on the good days, I think it's some of the best on any soap.

I don't think any network right now will allow socially conscious, groundbreaking soaps. There's such a conservative and shallow mindset across the networks, and even much of cable. They're so afraid of pressure groups, or when they aren't afraid of them, they go the other way and are obsessed with being trashy and tawdry to get attention. I wish that HBO or Showtime or even Cinemax would invest in a soap that could air a few days a week and have adult themes as well as adult stories. I know people will say that the dramas on some of those channels are like soaps, but I think the more continuous production method, airing at least 2 or 3 days a week every week, is what truly helps develop and tell these types of groundbreaking storylines. That's what soaps should be about. That's what Doug Marland did, that's what Agnes Nixon did.

Doug Marland also managed to write believable, popular teens while still showcasing veterans and elderly actors. That's something which many writers and producers don't get. They think it has to be either/or. They also think young people need to see mindless pap. If TV didn't assume their viewers were brain dead, where would we be right now?

I also think the ABC soaps would immediately improve if Brian Frons were fired. Even with Disney still in the picture. I know by saying that I'm tempting fate that he will be replaced by some scourge, but I don't even care anymore. Frons and the writers he's put on those shows have ABC Daytime in such a chokehold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

But really, how many more decades can these soaps limp on? Even IF the economy gets better, GL will continue to get slashed. It will never be a studio creation again with three wall sets, etc.

What's wrong with just letting go, especially when you've told all the stories you can tell?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I love your posts but sorry I disagree. ATWT is a trainwreck. The 2 one punch of Pissy and Goutman just totally wrecked this show! At least GL has somewhat stepped on the brakes. Too bad their production values still suck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I agree it has made a positive change, but, is that enough for CBS? A while back I remember reading an article someone posted on here with a CBS exec saying "One soap isn't even treading water, it's sinking" or something to that affect. Is GL's 1.6 to 1.7 HH rating enough for CBS or will they pull the plug? And if so will Telenext retaliate and take ATWT with them? It's not the same case with Y&R where it has been the undisputed number 1 daytime drama for 20 years.

I used to think that as well, but sometimes you have to consider this: maybe Disney wants a person like Frons to control their daytime in that fashion. I believe that if Frons were given the boot and new producers and writers came to ABC and fixed what has been done, yes, ABC would bounce back to a highly competitive position, but Disney may not want someone to change what has been done.

That's why I believe another network coming in to shake things up would help. This whole conservative way needs to go. The interest groups need to go. Writers should be left to mend their craft in a way that is informative and serves the public not just for the entertainment aspect but for things that give them insight into what's really going on in the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Because sometimes just pulling the plug isn't the best solution. If CBS cancels GL, ATWT may follow it, that's a 2 hour hole that CBS has to fill. What if they don't have something right now to replace it with. Now they are in a struggle with the affiliates over the time periods who will insist syndicated programming is more profitable. If CBS puts a new soap on long after those shows are gone, it's highly unlikely many affiliates outside the O&O stations will carry it. Historically, CBS is the last of the big 3 networks to hand over time to the affiliates. When they become less reluctant in doing so, that's not a good sign. It means they've given up, so there goes the genre.

As far as GL goes, it could end tomorrow for all we know, but with less competition from other soaps and networks, there is no longer any hope that another drama will replace GL. When the longest running program in broadcast history is replaced with a syndicated talk or game show, don't doubt the remaining will soon follow that path.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Years ago I read an interview with Oprah where she said that there were only 7 different topics for her show and that hard work lay in presenting each topic in interesting every time. This is the challenge that the soaps face and most of them are failing woefully. I do think that Y&R is the best of the lot though I do not think that the show is as good as some people say. Y&R has saved itself and stemmed the ratings loss over these past months by tapping into its history and recasting old stories in a new light. I love how Y&R has incorporated flashbacks of the doctor telling Hope and Victor that Adam was genetically predisposed to lose his vision. Contrast that with GH which only has disdain for its history. GH does tell the same mob story over and over, but it is never told interestingly and it always has the same ending, Sonny and Jason win. Even when GH goes for a social story like Robin having PPD, it devolves into a puddle of goo. No wonder the audience is drifting away. I still think that most of the soaps aren't going to be around in 10 years, but I no longer think it is inevitable. The soaps can save themselves, but it will take hard work from creative minds willing to tell interesting and meaningful stories.

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

    • What a wonderful photo! It really is a shame that Peacock will not show those early years. I know I'd love to see them!
    • With the death of Days and GH actress, Denise Alexander, someone posted this in the Days thread, a '60s-era photo of some of the cast, which lists the names. In the upper left, is a young Susan Flannery, who obviously ended up playing Stephanie Forrester on B&B, who was one of a few actresses to play Dr. Laura Horton [mother to Mike and Jennifer Horton] on Days. Here is a link to the photo: https://boards.soapoperanetwork.com/topic/38014-days-behind-the-scenes-articlesphotos/?do=findComment&comment=2022200  
    • https://parade.com/news/days-of-our-lives-star-susan-seaforth-hayes-pays-heartfelt-tribute-to-denise-alexander-a-friend-to-treasure

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Sorry, there must have been a error, while creating the file. I redone it and it has audio
    • Tamara Tunie was on a local CBS affiliate in Baltimore the other day talking about a few things she had going on, BTG amongst them: "Beyond the Gates" star Tamara Tunie is in Baltimore for the Reginald F. Lewis Museum's 20th anniversary
    • Kobe/Long had their own template and pretty much gutted the cast. As soon as contracts were up established characters were dropped. They needed to free the budget for the new characters. Going back to Ann,I wonder why the Dobsons renewed her contract around 78? After her initial story she became supporting and they didn't seem to want to pursue a romance with Mike. Maybe the feedback was that viewers blamed her indirectly for Leslie's death. If Mike hadn't taken on her case etc. Did she decide not to disrupt her son's life? Seems odd after everything she didn't claim him back. 1976 continues... Joe Werner is just not bouncing back after his recovery as he should, and Sarah, concerned about his sometimes morbid-seeming depression, consults Justin Marler. They agree that Joe is becoming a “cardiac cripple,” and know this kind of overcompensation for illness and overprecaution can not only be a permanently depressed condition but can actually cause a setback for him physically.  Marler releases Joe into Sarah’s care, but it’s soon apparent that just being out of the hospital hasn’t done anything to boost Joe’s spirits about his return to a normal existence. Marler finally lays it out to Joe—the choice has to be his. He can choose to lead a normal, productive life as a doctor and as a husband to the best wife he could have, or he can choose to become an invalid and live on the outside looking in for the rest of his days, sentencing Sarah to the same fate. Realizing the selfishness of what he’s doing to —Sarah as well as the narrowness of the confinement he’s set for himself, Joe begins to see his preoccupation with his illness as the self-pity it really is and decides he’s ready to return to the hospital for a one hour shift each day. Sarah is overjoyed by his turnabout, but full happiness is hers on the day she overhears Joe telling a fearful patient that the world is beautiful and worth any. effort to get back into it. Steve and Adam are thrilled to learn that Cedars has been the recipient of the Levy Grant for expansion of hospital property. But they have learned, as they report to Ed, that the land they were hoping to build the new research facility on, the land immediately adjacent to the hospital, has been purchased by Dr. Justin Marler. Both Adam and Steve feel that Justin is expanding a power base at Cedars and the land purchase is just one more block in Justin’s power play. When Ed asks Marler why he purchased this particular parcel of land, Marler explains that he bought it with the express intention of someday building his own offices and facilities convenient to the major facilities of Cedars. When the subject of the hospital’s needing the land arises, Marler meets with Adam, and they agree that he should realize a fair profit from his property and that an unbiased assessor should be engaged to evaluate the market value of the land so they can agree on a selling price. When Sarah comments on the fact that Marler is to realize a profit on the land, he bitterly replies that no matter what he’s done since coming to Cedars to prove that he has changed. since she last knew him, she refuses to see him as anything but what he was all those years ago. Sarah insists this isn’t true. But Marler then calls Adam for a meeting and informs him that the land is not for sale at any price. As Adam begins to grow alarmed, Marler continues that the site for the new building will be his personal donation to the hospital. As Adam expresses profuse thanks and appreciation, Marler wryly notes that the tax deductions he’ll realize on this contribution to a charitable institution will benefit himself almost as much as Cedars. When Steve Jackson learns that Marler is to be elected head of the research wing that will be built on his property, he expresses the conviction that this was the exact intention of the gift. Adam, however, assures Steve that the donation wasn’t a factor in the hospital  board’s decision, they were concerned only with Dr. Marler’s reputation as a doctor. | After lengthy consultations and meetings. with the hospital  staff, Ed assured by the head nurse that her nurses performed commendably despite the added pressure of the train wreck, presents his findings to the hospital review board. Steve arrives at two possible explanations for the facts. Either Grainger, more active than usual due to the previously delayed medication, reached for the writing pad and inadvertently disconnected the breathing tubes, or he was in a state of extreme upset because of the delayed medication and.in the excitement a surge of adrenalin within his system caused his brain aneurism to start hemorrhaging. " Upon learning that the review board has ruled out negligence in Grainger’s death, Ed tells Rita, who takes her first free breath in a long time. But Ed hasn’t thought to tell Rita that he’s been in touch with Grainger’s attorney, Mr. Schafer, who, knowing that a woman was at the base of Grainger’s investigation, is coming to Springfield to try to find out who the woman - was who walked out on Grainger when he collapsed —in the restaurant. Peggy, learning that Rita’s “forgetting” to deliver Holly’s message was instrumental in their divorce ‘being finalized, tells Ed that Holly wanted to reach him to stop the divorce. Immediately after, Peggy is torn by doubts, wondering if she did the right thing.She confides in Barbara, who then discusses the situation with Ed. He tells her he and Holly have discovered a new closeness now that they are building their separate lives. Barbara quickly contradicts him: Holly is not building a new life. Barbara gently cautions Ed, saying, “People change, feelings change, and what seems right now may not be right a year from now. No decision is irrevocable.” Ed agrees with this. Now that Ben has declared his love for her, Hope finds herself apprehensive, fearing that she might be making a mistake, as she did a few years ago, when she was sure she was in love with her college professor. Explaining that she doesn’t want to make another mistake, she asks Ben to be patient, and he agrees. When Mike expresses his disapproval of Ben’s overstated independence, his need to be beholden to no one, Hope quickly jumps to Ben’s defense, and Mike apologizes. But Ben, surprisingly, accepts Mike’s assessment as constructive criticism. Later Hope, examining her feelings and desires, tells Ben she does love him and wants to belong to him. Later that evening, after they’ve made love, Ben asks Hope to marry him.And, delighted, she replies that she will. At Hope’s instigation, Bert has a family dinner to which Ben is invited, and Hope announces their intention to marry over glasses of wine. Mike politely offers best wishes while Bert thrills the couple with her offer to' make a Christmas wedding for them. Bert later tells Mike he must accept this engagement with good spirits for Hope, and later, seeing the joy she’s feeling, he gives his daughter his approval. But Ben finds another problem on his very own doorstep: his brother Jerry, who announces he’s left home after several bad fights with their parents. He refuses to tell Ben what they were fighting about. As Ben is showering, Jerry borrows his car and goes out for an hour. The phone rings, but Ben can’t hear it. Shortly after, two uniformed officers visit Mike at home to tell him that his late wife’s car has been involved in a delicatessen robbery earlier in the evening. Since Ben bought Leslie’s car, Mike accompanies the officers to Ben’s apartment. Ben curtly informs the police that he had nothing to do with the robbery and makes it clear that he feels they wouldn’t be there if he didn’t have a record and that his exoneration doesn’t prevent his being hassled like any ex-con,as they tell him he has to go to the police station for questioning. Hope tells Ben she called him earlier, and when he replies that he must have been in the shower, she accepts his word unhesitatingly.Jerry finally returns to Ben’s place and under questioning from Ben admits that he robbed the store,explaining that he has debts. Ben is now in a quandary,as he feels he must protect his brother but doesn’t want to be unfair to Hope. He tries to ease the situation by withdrawing $185 from the joint checking account he opened with Hope and repaying the delicatessen owner. He then sends Jerry out of town to stay with a friend. His relief at having solved the problem is short-lived, however, when Mike informs him that, despite the reparations, the robbery was a felony and the police will continue to investigate. Hope is badly upset to learn while making a deposit that Ben withdrew’a sum which Mike tells her is equal to the amount stolen. This shakes her belief that he _was really home when she called, and she goes to him, asking for an answer to put her mind at rest. Ben can’t betray Jerry and asks Hope to trust him, promising she will have the whole story eventually. But Hope can’t accept this; she needs complete honesty and openness in her relationship and without it cannot goon. She painfully tells her father that the wedding is off despite her love for Ben, and tells Bert to stop preparations. Mike goes to Ben, reminding him that half the money in the account is Hope’s and she has the right to an answer. But Ben won’t say any more and refuses Mike’s offer to represent him legally, again stating that he doesn’t need a lawyer, because he’s done nothing wrong.     
    • And not since. I recall it was quite small for a house that size. And I don't know why you would walk down a narrow corridor to get to the main living area. I hate when the sets on soaps don't have a logical layout! As for Andre his clothing is fashion forward and suitable for his character.He ain't gonna wear no blazer!
    • The last I remember seeing Ben, he was divorcing Amanda. He came to tell Evie that he still loved her, but was leaving town so that Amanda wouldn't blame Evie for his divorcing her. I'm not exactly sure when, but Evie doesn't leave town until sometime after Nola and Quint's engagement ball. I'm not sure if she leaves before or after Justin leaves in Sept(?) of '83. I grew to like Helena when she became friends with Vanessa, once she's edging her way out of Quint's life.
    • Please register in order to view this content

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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