Jump to content

Y&R: In Support of Jess Walton!


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Well am I ever relieved if Jess is just in contract negotiations with them and not sick. I have been so worried about losing my favorite Y&R actress. I will definitely e-mail them and voice my opinion.

That said, I do think these actors really need to realize they are going to have to scale back their lifestyle if they want the soaps to survive and have a job period. Ad revenue is down across the board and just the other day I heard most prime time shows are now going to have to cut their production way down from the regular 23 episodes to 12-16. Times are tough but everyone needs to take a cut, not just a few actors.

Jess is Jill period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Gathering some themes from this thread, the previous Y&R threads here, and the spoiler thread.

1. I don't understand why the cuts are always to the "guarantee". Actors want to act. Actors don't want to appear a few times a month.

Why not go to these stars and say, for example, "we need to cut our talent costs by 30%". And then say "We can cut your guarantee 30%, we can cut your rate 30%, or we can cut each by 15%" or whatever.

In the case of Jill, I cannot imagine that MAB and team want to use her LESS. My goodness, she almost disappeared under Smith and LML, so we surely don't want a return to that.

2. I understand that it is a tenet of negotiation that both sides take entrenched positions and then battle. But that really seems to work well, doesn't it? SAG vs. Producers? Israel vs. Palestinians? UAW vs. GM/Chrysler?

We also have relatively recent records of these negotiations leading to dissolutions of productive collaborations, on Y&R (if we don't want to count Diamont and Rowell, what about Heather Tom?), and elsewhere (e.g., Martha Byrne). Why keep repeating something that is not working for anyone?

3. DaytimeFan has told us, in the past, that the Bell family has creative control over Y&R. But now, in today's postings, DF says that Sony does the contracts.

How does this make sense? If creative and financial can't work together, then we're back to more bullsh*t, where one hand doesn't know what the other one is doing.

I'm loaded in questions that can never be answered. Argh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Y&RWorldTurner, as other's have said, I too love your avatar. Isn't that a shot from the hot promo's CBS used to air from the early 90s until Lucy Johnson left? Like the Get it On campaign, Everything is Everything, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Sorry, I want her to be treated respectfully, but this is the real world of recession/depression, skyrocketing unemployment, paycuts etc. If Sony is offering a contract at a reduced salary, then she should consider it and stay on the job until her contract is over. All soaps have had to reduce costs. JW is a solid actress who's had many, many steady years of wonderful employment (at great pay compared to most average americans). She was on Capitol and now Y&R is a plum role. IF she leaves, the soap will surivive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Apologies. I did not see the earlier post.

I thought the money person/negotiator was actually Bill Bell Jr. Which gets awkward here, if that is true, because one assumes he and MAB have to be in agreement on these issues.

I almost liked the Sony-as-villain theory, because then I figured MAB could go to bat for her talent. But if she and her husband are deciding to play hardball...well, then I feel less hope that sensibility might reign here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
I don't want to lose Jess Walton as Jill; they should be cutting salaries across the board not just for a few select ones. For that matter, why keep some of the cast if they aren't even using them; trim the cast. They've proven there are those that could be dealt with and most wouldn't mind if they were gone but that's just not the case here and with most of the vets. I know the newbies don't even make a fraction of what we're talking about here but why not start with the poorest quality? This is not Jess!
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

    • I had forgotten that several Days stars came out strong against Melissa. Good for them!
    • That would have made sense. Did all these characters get dropped when DePriest left or had they already been dropped?
    • The other issue with Missy: in June 2020, she "liked" some social media posts by Candace Owens -- things Candace said that were against Black Lives Matter.  That is described here https://tvline.com/news/melissa-reeves-racism-days-of-our-lives-instagram-controversy-2894568/ I don't know if that was ever resolved.
    • She appeared onscreen not long after Rose Livingston and Sara Montaigne, and we found out that Sara was Rose's estranged daughter. I wonder whether Peggy might have been part of that family group -- or else they were just juggling a few different potential mysteries so that they could develop whatever seemed to be getting the best response from the audience. They didn't do anything much with Rose and Sara really either. Maybe Rose would have become more prominent if Rachel and Mac had split up over Mitch, or if Sara had really flourished. In some ways I can picture Cheryl being affected by MJ's prostitution similarly to how Josie was distressed by finding out about Sharlene. But I can also see that Josie as a Frame being involved with Matthew would have different stakes for Rachel and Sharlene than Cheryl being involved with Scott. I do think the solution for Cheryl would have had to be a badder boy than Scott -- either a real bad boy who would do her wrong, or the kind of bad boy (not Chad!!!) who is essentially misunderstood and other people just don't understand. Cheryl would also have been better off with some friends her own age. Matthew and Josie benefited a bit from having other teenagers to interact with.
    • Sally Spencer was a decent actress, but the writing destroyed the "M.J." that Kathleen Layman had built. Layman had a quiet strength about her, and she and Osburn really felt like sisters. Spencer's character should have been either an unmentioned sister, or maybe Jake's that grew up close to Kathleen, M.J. and the rest, but was away for a few years before joining the force. Kristen Marie was o.k., but I always got a mousier vibe from her. Being pigeon-holed with Scott for most of the run hurt things for her, as well.  The Loves were also underserved between Rhonda Lewin and Philece Sampler. Philece would have been better as Nicole. Thank goodness Anne Heche  showed up for the next round of auditions. Christopher Holder was mediocre as Peter, but given a shot, I think Marcus Smythe could have stuck around for a while.  I would have had Peggy Lazarus be a Frame -- possibly an ex-wife for Vince with an agenda. Smythe and Hollen had  a fun chemistry that could have kept the two around.. Bringing recasts for  Cheryl and Ben back mixing it up with other Frames. Corys, Lawrences at the time might have kept all the families stronger. 
    • shoot...he said in that Locher room with Krista. I think he met her before that---she was doing Broadway and they had mutual friends or an agent maybe?
    • Yes. And I assume he met Mary Ellen Stuart at GL.
    • That's an odd coincidence. Yeah, Roger would turn anything he could to his advantage. At the time, he's just taking the pictures to bank leverage over Reva, Billy or the Lewises.  I'm kinda squeamish about 1986 episodes myself. I'd love to hear the original version of Ross/Vanessa/Dinah, but the Cain story is bad, and I don't want Billy and Vanessa to break up.
    • Eeek. I didn't know this either! I will say, though, even though they skimmed over a lot of Roger's past, I will give them props for not trying to turn him into a hero. Yeah, I was hoping we would get more 1986 episodes than were available on YT before, but now I'm wondering if I really want to see that. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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