Jump to content

CBS cancels Guiding Light


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 392
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

So did I! And you know... I sort of liked the idea compared with the SnoreToria we have now.

But I like the idea of Gina Tognoni better.

ETA: Can you imagine Zimmer and Thad Luckinbill in love scenes? She'd eat him alive!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This is OUTRAGEOUS! :angry:

I cannot believe CBS is cancelling "Guiding Light" and they couldn't find GL another home like on their sister network such as The CW? :angry:

This is NOT happening! CBS Daytime will lose more viewers across the line-up as GL leaves the airwaves. Mark my word that Price Is Right, Y&R, B&B and ATWT will lose millions of viewers. Look at what happened after 1999 when NBC cancelled AW, DAYS and its line-up has not recovered since. :angry:

This is NOT a good day. :angry:

Good-bye CBS! And I mean forever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think the "this is inevitable" attitude is bullshit. You can't tell me that if Curlee or other people of quality had stayed with this show that it would be in this place today. And causal factors like OJ, etc. have been used as crutches by daytime management for years. The fact is that uncurious, uninterested people ran herd on this show or that network, and daytime buckled because too many people in it resented being stuck working in "just daytime." If there was pride in the work, GH, ATWT, AW, GL, etc. would not have ended up as they have. Daytime would evolve, yes, maybe the medium or the execution would change. But it would not be in as dire straits as it is now, and GL's death is on GL's management. Not OJ Simpson, not cable, not the market. If it had worked for itself, if the people who had a say had bothered to maintain its integrity, it would at least have some seat at the table.

Calling it inevitable and a result of merely causal factors is a way to absolve personnel. And I know some posters on the Net with a vested interest in that. I'm sure they'll be back to absolve Chris Goutman, too. I don't mean you, Mark, but I'm sure you know what I mean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Now, Grant Aleksander's return perplexes me. Surely they couldn't be stupid enough to think that his return would get the show to a 1.9/2.0 right out of the gate. Plans to cancel were obviously in the works before his return. I wonder if he was apprised of the cancellation before signing on the dotted line and that is return was based on an agreement to have him eventually go on to direct ATWT. His ultimate goal is to direct, isn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

If AMC was smart..... and I am in no way implying that they are..... they would snatch Jeff Branson back up..... and bring Jonathan back to the canvas....

and fire Cameron Mathison. Jonathan and Amanda :wub:

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

    • 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. 
    • That's what Julie Hanan Carruthers is doing for BTG at the new studio in Atlanta, but JHC is credited. And @errol said JHC is working in a nonproduction capacity at Y&R.
    • I remember when the whole Missy Reeves controversy started in 2012.  She tweeted support of a business that had made homophobic statements. Greg Rikaart (who was on Y&R back then) publicly called her out on it, but was willing to reach out and speak with her. Article here: https://greginhollywood.com/greg-rikaart-talks-about-his-twitter-war-with-fellow-soap-star-melissa-reeves-over-anti-gay-chick-fil-a-73139 That being said, ten years later, on DAYS, in 2022, when they had they double wedding of Leo/CraigWesley and Gwen/Xander, Jack and Jennifer came to the wedding.  At that time, Missy Reeves was only intermittently available for DAYS. Jennifer was living "in Boston" and Cady McClain and Missy were each intermittently appearing as Jennifer, on the specific occasions when the show required a Jennifer to appear. Missy wasn't on contract and she could have said no. But she chose to appear as Jennifer for the gay wedding of Greg Rikaart's character.   So... I mean... I would assume they reached a détente behind-the-scenes. Missy still has her belief system but there's that.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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